38 unconstitutional. Section 5(1)(g) of the Namibian Citizenship Act required her to formally reject foreign citizenship in order to become a citizen by naturalization while section 26 of the Namibian citizenship Act prohibited dual citizenship. The applicant was challenging the constitutionality of the statutory provisions which required her to renounce her South African citizenship before she could take up Namibian citizenship. The applicant argued that under article 4(5) of the Constitution the formal rejection provisions had to fall within the category of health, morality, security or legality of residence in order for them to be valid and they were not in those categories. According to the applicant, those were the categories under which conditions for the grant of citizenship could be set. The respondents’ submissions The respondent argued that the formal rejection of citizenship provision complained of were not inconsistent with the Constitution. The respondent stated that no conflict between those statutory provisions and any constitutional right, criteria or requirement was demonstrated. Summary of judgment • Under article 4(5)(c) of the Constitution, Parliament had power to lay down criteria pertaining to health, morality, security or legality of residence in order for a person to acquire citizenship by naturalisation. Under article 4(9) of the Constitution, Parliament had powers to make laws, that were not inconsistent with the Constitution, to regulate loss of Namibian citizenship. • The court noted that loyalty to the Namibian State could be assumed for Namibian citizens tied to the country by birth or blood but others should be required to demonstrate their loyalty and allegiance to Namibia by formally rejecting foreign citizenship and taking an oath of loyalty to Namibia. Namibian State could be assumed for The court therefore held that the demand for loyalty to Namibian citizens tied to the country a single State was not unknown to the Constitution but by birth or blood but others should be required to demonstrate their loyalty conformed to the spirit of the Constitution, it did not run and allegiance to Namibia by formally counter to the citizenship scheme in the Constitution but rejecting foreign citizenship and taking an oath of loyalty to Namibia was expressly envisaged in certain instances. The court also concluded that the word security as used in the phrase “pertaining to health, morality, security or legality of residence” in article 4(5)(c) of the Constitution could apply to the security of the State. • The court explained that unwavering loyalty and obedience to Namibia and a willingness to sacrifice – if required – even one’s life for Namibia was clearly one of the most important underlying reasons for the citizenship requirement in the Act. Persons serving in the Force could not be persons with divided loyalties more so if foreign countries threatened the territorial or internal security of Namibia. The court CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY RIGHTS CASE DIGEST