More generally, over 80% of the 190 countries covered in this survey make it possible to withdraw nationality where it has been acquired by fraud or misrepresentation, as shown in Figure 2.3. This means that fraud is a far more prevalent ground for nationality deprivation than disloyalty or the other overtly security-related grounds that this As a corollary, a person can be deprived of report focuses on. As such, it is more widely nationality in certain countries if it is later available to governments seeking to exclude discovered later that these security-relat‘undesirable’ citizens and there are instances ed preconditions were violated, as this can in which this power has been instrumentalbe perceived as acquisition of nationality ised to actively target certain populations by fraudulent means or misrepresentation that have been identified through a securiof facts. In these cases, it is argued that a tised lens. For example, within operations person’s malevolent acts or intentions were ‘Janus’ and ‘Second Look’, initiated respecconcealed and that nationality would not tively under the Obama and Trump adminishave been granted if these acts or intentrations in the United States to review immitions were revealed during the acquisition gration case files in order to retrospectively process. A well-known example is provididentify potential fraud in the naturalisation ed by the European Court of Justice case process, “the Department of Justice indicated Janko Rottman v Freistaat Bayern, involving that it will prioritise cases based on the country a man who acquired German nationality of origin of the target”.52 The so-called “spewhile concealing proceedings against him cial interest countries” that were to be given for criminal acts in Austria and as a consepriority accordingly are a “fluctuating catquence was deprived of German nationalegory of countries ‘that are of concern to the ity.50 It is difficult to determine the extent national security of the United States’”.53 The of these practices, as the language of the depth of impact is also significant, with the relevant provisions is usually too generic to administration estimating that these operations are expected to determine whether they can be used as such. A rare example of deliver “at least several thousand”54 denaturalisation cases. The an explicit provision can be found in Russia, where nationality case study of Bosnia and Herzegovina shows an even more direct can be revoked if a person who acquired Russian nationality “did re-purposing of deprivation grounds relating to fraud to achieve not intend to bear the obligations established by the legislation of securitised objectives. These types of practices demonstrate that the Russian Federation for nationals of the Russian Federation, and it can be a false assumption to consider “that fraud-based denathe purpose of acquiring nationality of the Russian Federation was tionalisations are […] inherently corrective to carry out activities that pose a threat in nature and operate differently from othto the fundamentals of the constitutional FIG 2.3 DEPRIVATION OF NATIONALITY ON GROUNDS OF ACQUISITION BY FRAUD OR MISREPRESENTATION, AS % OF COUNTRIES, 2020 er forms of denationalisation, for example order of the Russian Federation”. In this those justified as protecting the ‘vital intercase, the acquisition of nationality is ests of the state’”.55 considered to be fraudulent, as the provision states that the person “knowingly Acquisition by fraud providing false information regarding the 89% obligation to comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the legislation of the Russian Federation”.51 for someone who has been convicted for a crime with a prison sentence of at least three years or for activities related to the practice of terrorism, or who is considered a danger or threat to security or national defence.49 Some countries have (elaborate) lists of grounds for refusal of citizenship in their nationality laws, noting national security interests and terrorism separately. For example, according to articles 9 and 10(1) of the Mongolian citizenship law, citizenship shall be refused if a person (1) committed a crime against humanity, (2) conducted an activity against the national security or vital interests of Mongolia, (3) has been claimed as a member of an international terrorist organisation, (4) has been determined by court to be a dangerous criminal, (5) is serving a sentence, (6) has been deported from the territory of Mongolia, and (7) when the person advertises a religion that inconsistent with the Mongolian national customs and law. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA: ACQUISITION AND LOSS OF CITIZENSHIP FOR ‘FOREIGN FIGHTERS’ During the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1992 to 1995, “the atrocities carried out against Bosnian Muslims served to galvanize not only local Bosnian Muslims to action, but foreigners as well”.56 Several thousand foreign fighters – known as mujahideen – entered the country, where many were incorporated into the regular Bosnian army. Following the cessation of hostilities, the Dayton Peace Accords stipulated the withdrawal of foreign fighters from the country. To circumvent this, then-president Alija Izetbegovic offered them citizenship, in recognition of their military services and this led many to choose to stay.57 Following the 9/11 attacks in the United States in 2001, Bosnia became a focus of counter-terrorism discussions. Two of the 9/11 hijackers had trained and fought in Bosnia and an individual described as the 'principal engineer' of the attacks was also found to have trained there. Following the 9/11 attacks, some former mujahideen also called for their followers to support jihad around the globe and there was evidence of terrorist training camps being established on Bosnian territory.58 The international community pressured Bosnia to respond, seeing any continued presence of the mujahideen as a security threat. After passing a law to criminalise terrorism and terrorist financing in 2003, Bosnia enacted further counter-terrorism measures in the following years. In 2005, the Law on Citizenship was amended to task the Bosnian Citizenship Review Commission with reviewing “the status of persons who acquired the citizenship through naturalisation” since 1992.59 According to the terms of this law, citizenship could be 13