FIG 3.3 DEPRIVATION OF NATIONALITY ON GROUNDS OF DISLOYALTY: PROCEDURE, 2022 no deprivation ground deprivation based on disloyalty or treason 56 countries 134 countries 7 127 127 95% deprivation by decision sions became the subject of criticism and they were amended in 2020.38 The amendment revoked the renunciation clause, while the citizenship cessation clause was amended in such a way that citizenship is only be lost at the moment when the determination of cessation is made by the authorities. A further question that is of importance to understanding how deprivation powers are applied in practice and how any room for discretion might be used, is who holds the power to take the decision to strip an individual of citizenship.39 For instance, is this the executive or judicial branch of the state? For 121 out of the 127 states that actively withdraw nationality by decision (see Section 3.4), the body responsible for deprivation of citizenship could be derived, either from the legislative provisions directly pertaining to deprivation or from related documents – as shown in Figure 3.4. A greater extent of knowledge on matters of citizenship may be found in dedicated committees, such as the “Citizenship Commission” in Romania43 or the “National Citizenship and Immigration Board” in Uganda44, which hold the power to deprive in six states. In four countries,45 such dedicated committees are not directly responsible for deprivation of nationality, but rather serve as an advisory body to the authority that is ultimately in charge of deprivation. For example, the 2011 Kenyan Citizenship and Immigration Act states that “the Cabinet Secretary may, where there is sufficient proof and on recommendation of the Citizenship Advisory Committee, revoke any citizenship acquired by registration”.46 FIG 3.4 DEPRIVATION OF NATIONALITY ON GROUNDS OF DISLOYALTY: RELEVANT AUTHORITY, 2022 deprivation based on disloyalty or treason 56 countries 134 countries 127 7 95% deprivation by decision 47% 60 32% 41 11% 14 5% automatic loss Government / Head of State Minister Court 5% 6 Dedicated committee 5% 6 Unclear In half of these states, the Head of State or Government, or another government body, is in charge of decision-making on nationality deprivation. In 30 countries, it is the Head of State or Government; and in 30 other countries it is another government body – either the Cabinet, or another central or even decentralised government authority. On aggregate, ministers from various ministries are responsible in 41 states, equating to around a third of countries where deprivation happens by decision. As shown in Figure 3.5, authority is commonly bestowed on ministers of Internal Affairs, Migration, Justice, and National Security. In 14 countries, however, however, while providing that 'the Minister' shall be responsible for deprivation of citizenship, no specification as to which minister is appointed to exercise this task is provided. The Tanzanian Citizenship Act, for example, defines the minister that is responsible for deprivation in Article 3(1) as “the Minister for the time being responsible for matters relating to citizenship of the United Republic”.40 No further information as to the responsible 20 automatic loss minister is provided, however, in either the relevant legislation nor on the government website.41 Overall, given the sectors of specialisation of different ministers, it is not obvious that they will necessarily possess extensive knowledge on the matter of citizenship. This is also problematic when considering that, in an additional 29 countries, nationality is withdrawn by other bodies on the recommendation or advice of a minister. For instance, in Oman, the 2014 Citizenship Law provides in Article 7 that “Omani citizenship may only be granted, renounced, reacquired, withdrawn or lost by virtue of a Royal Decree at the recommendation of the Minister [of the Interior]”.42 3.5 WHICH AUTHORITY HOLDS THE POWER TO DEPRIVE? no deprivation ground 7 5% Courts and judicial bodies play a far more marginal role in deprivation processes. Just 14 countries provide for deprivation of citizenship to be ordered directly by a Court. In two additional countries, the Court performs a 'check' on the decision to deprive nationality before it takes effect. For instance, Article 25 of the French Civil Code provides that “an individual who has acquired the French nationality may be declared, by decree adopted after assent of the Conseil d’Etat, to have forfeited French nationality”.47 It is important to note, however, that this picture does not take into account the possibility for deprivation decisions to be appealed after the fact, before a court, or other remedies that may be available to a person subsequent to the decision. FIG 3.5 DEPRIVATION OF NATIONALITY ON GROUNDS OF DISLOYALTY: RELEVANT MINISTER, 2022 Deprivation decision 41 countries Minister 14 countries (34%) Minister (Unspecified) 14 countries (34%) Ministry of Internal Affairs 6 countries (15%) Ministry for Migration 5 countries (12%) Ministry of Justice 2 countries (5%) Ministry of National Security