QUESTIONS TO GUIDE VIEWEING - ANSWERS 1. Why is becoming stateless comparable to a social death? Explain by naming at least three critical consequences of becoming stateless that Jawad mentioned during his lecture. Three of the following: • • • • • When a stateless person has a child, this child also becomes stateless at birth. This showcases that nationality deprivation has an immediate effect on the next generation. Stateless people lose the right to work, because they do not have a legal residence. Stateless people lose the right to use certain services that were available to them before, such as health care and pension. Stateless people are unable to travel, as they will not be allowed to return to Bahrain. Being stateless has other collateral damages such as the loss of right to an identity, loss of a sense of security and loss of access to basic services like housing and education. 2. • • In 2013, the anti-terrorism law was amended to allow for nationality deprivation as a punishment for ‘terrorist acts’. In 2014, the scope of activities classified as ‘terrorist acts’ was widened, now including activities such as expressions of free speech or protest against the government. The amendments therefore showcase that laws in Bahrain are deliberately being modified to give more power to the government to strip citizens of their nationality. 3. • • • What do the two amendments that were made to the Bahraini nationality laws in 2013 and 2014 showcase about the country’s citizenship stripping powers? Which sequence of human rights violations caused by nationality deprivation as a legal process does Jawad Fairooz describe? Arbitrary arrest (no justifications provided) Torture (during the arrest) Unfair trial and forced deportation 4. According to Jawad Fairooz, in Bahrain, nationality is most often deprived through the courts. What does this indicate, and why is it important to tackle this aspect of the issue in particular? The fact that the majority of citizenship stripping cases are decided through the courts indicates that the amendments that were made to local jurisdiction led to a growing power of the courts to strip people of their nationality. Although in 2019, 551 nationalities have been reinstated, which is a positive indication, this can be misleading as the issues surrounding the courts are still not resolved. The government can continue to use their power to revoke the nationalities of citizens arbitrarily. No amendments to nationality revocation laws are being made, which is why it is important to continue to tackle this issue.