All Citizens are Created Equal,but Some are More Equal Than Others

Nationality is the legal bond between a person and a state that connotes full and equal membership of the political community. Yet, in the practice of states, not everyone who is admitted as a national enjoys the full package of rights attached, nor the same security of status. The phenomenon of inequality among citizens is particularly apparent when examining the question of how protected the legal bond itself is: citizenship by birth is more secure than citizenship acquired otherwise—such as by naturalisation—and mono citizens are less prone to withdrawal of nationality than persons with dual or multiple nationality. As nationality revocation gains new attention from states as a tool to counter terrorism, prompting much political, public and academic debate, the reality that this measure often applies only to particular sub-groups of citizens demands closer scrutiny. This article explores how law and practice on citizenship deprivation is to be evaluated against contemporary standards of international law. While states justify unequal application of citizenship deprivation measures by invoking the duty to avoid statelessness, this article shows that the application of other international standards such as non-discrimination and the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality calls into question the legitimacy of citizenship stripping as a security instrument. Finally, the article reflects on the broader implications of the current trend towards greater inequality of citizenship status as a reaction to the perceived threat that terrorism poses to the integrity of the state, discussing how the creation of different classes of citizen is in fact likely to have a deeper and more lasting impact on the foundations of liberal democracies.

     

Double Nationality in the EU: An Argument for Tolerance

Currently the Member States' nationalities, short of being abolished in the legal sense, mostly serve as access points to the status of EU citizenship. Besides, they provide their owners with a limited number of specific rights in deviation from the general principle of non‐discrimination on the basis of nationality, and—what is probably more important for the majority of their owners—trigger legalised discrimination in the wholly internal situations. Viewed in this light, the requirement to have only one Member State's nationality enforced in national law by 10 Member States seems totally outdated and misplaced. This paper focuses on the legal analysis of this controversial requirement.     

承认双重国籍:印度国籍立法的重大变化

印度由坚持单一国籍的政策转为承认双重国籍,目的是为了借力海外,吸引海外印度人(印度侨民和外籍印度人)的资金和技术。印度宪法中关于单一国籍的条款的修正得到了印度上下及海外印度人的拥护和支持。不过,印度实行双重国籍的范围却是相当有限的。     

Owning up to our Agendas: On the Role and Limits of Science in Debates about Embryos and Brain Death

The ethical issues integral to embryo research and brain death are intertwined with comprehensive views of life that are not explicitly discussed in most policy debate. I consider three representative views – a naturalist, romantic, and theist – and show how these might inform the way practical ethical issues are addressed. I then consider in detail one influential argument in embryo research that attempts to bypass deep values. I show that this twinning argument is deeply flawed. It presupposes naturalist commitments that are at issue in the embryo research debate, and exhibits a blindness to alternative philosophical viewpoints. By considering the work of Hans Driesch, the discoverer of the facts of embryology integral to the twinning argument, I show how the twinning facts are compatible with romantic and theistic accounts that affirm full moral status for the early embryo. While these alternative interpretations might have a tenuous status in current scientific debate, they should be respected in ethical and policy debate.     

Remedying the Inequalities of Economic Citizenship in Europe: Cohesion Policy and the Negative Right to Move

European supranational citizenship draws the boundaries of a community of citizens, sharing the status of economic actors in the single market. The specter of inequality threatens however the resulting promise of shared membership: economic citizens face profoundly different opportunities for economic involvement, depending on their nationality and residence within the Union. Free movement rights open up a narrow way out of inequality by enabling European citizens to relocate; however, they cannot alone solve the inequality problem that economic citizenship poses. In the quest for alternative remedies to this problem, this article explores the potential of European cohesion policy. It argues that cohesion policy, by addressing gaps in wealth throughout the Community, draws the traits of a negative right to move, which adds to the protection of European economic citizenship. Through the cohesion lens, the premises are laid for a renewed assessment of the project of shared economic citizenship.     

Thick, Thin and Thinner Patriotisms: Is This All There Is?

The ‘reinvention’ of nationhood in theory and thereform of British naturalization rules in praxis have been unableto address satisfactorily the issue of unjust exclusion andto make naturalization law and citizenship more compatible withdemocratic ideals. This has much to do with the fact that thediscourse of new patriotism and the reconfiguration of nationalcitizenship have inbuilt limits. In examining the ‘new’discourse of patriotism in its various shades, I argue thatit is inconsistent and unpersuasive. Neither the rehabilitationof civic nationalism under ‘republican patriotism’,nor ‘constitutional patriotism’, nor ‘rootedpatriotism’ succeed in transforming the nationality modelof citizenship in order to render it more compatible with contemporarydevelopments and with cultural pluralism. Similarly, the threemodels of citizenship developed by the literature, namely, postnational,transnational and multicultural citizenship remain rooted withinthe civic nationalist trajectory. Instead of arguing for theliberalization of naturalization requirements and the ensuingpluralization of citizenship, I put forward an argument as tohow the nationality model of citizenship might be transcendedby developing a model of civic registration. By contrastingthis model with the Labour Government’s reforms in thefields of naturalization and citizenship, I argue that the Nationality,Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 places too much emphasis onsocial cohesion, thereby overlooking that a sense of belongingto community develops with inclusion in society and politicsrather than as a result of citizenship ceremonies and languageproficiency tests.     

National Limits to Democratic Citizenship

The author claims that the national community's right to self-definition regarding membership finds some limits in its commitment to a liberal democratic order. Among these is the ultimate exclusion of permanent resident aliens from the sphere of civic equality. To the extent that access to the equal enjoyment of rights is connected to national citizenship as a membership status, the argument goes, permanent resident aliens should be granted the nationality of the country of residence automatically and unconditionally. The author also explores some objections that can be raised against this claim from a concern with the preservation of both a fair scheme of distribution of burdens and benefits within the state and the integrative capacity of liberal democracies.     

The Argument from Transnational Effects II: Establishing Transnational Democracy

This article continues with a discussion of what the author calls the argument from transnational effects. It says that supranational or transnational forms of integration, in particular market integration, are desirable on account of democracy itself. National democracies find themselves thereby forced to confront and to internalise the externalities that they cause for each other. A fortiori, democracy becomes supposedly emancipated from the confines of the nation state. This article examines the argument critically at a general level. The situation under consideration concerns all cases in which, regardless of whether there is movement or not, the acts of one democracy adversely impact on the interests of others. The article tries to identify instances where the harm is tied to a failure of representation in a transnational context and not caught by the harm principle, broadly understood. In order to calibrate the argument's scope the article resorts to the principle of universalisation. The guiding intuition is that so long as the act of one democracy is morally justified on the basis of this principle, the argument from transnational effects does not apply. Hence the argument is of no avail where the impact of one democracy on another is perfectly legitimate. This would be the case, for example, when the effects are too insignificant to require any debate. Determining the range of legitimate impact is a core question of transnational constitutional law. Any such determination presupposes mutually shared interest definitions. More often than not, however, the relevant interest definitions underlying universalisation are debatable. Therefore, it appears to be inevitable, at first glance, to have relations of transnational interdependency matched by transnational democratic processes. The article then goes on to identify three different types of universalitation with reference to what can be regarded as their respective anchor. Simple universalisation is based upon shared interest definitions. Reflexive universalisation involves common views of oneself (and others). Self‐transcending universalisation is grounded in the desire to live in a free society. Reflexive universalisation requires to extend mutual sympathy. From this perspective, transnational democratic processes are tantamount to nation‐building. However, one would commit a sentimentalist fallacy if one were to conclude that mutual sympathy in and of itself engenders an expansion of mutual responsibility. The article argues that with regard to the third type of universalisation the institutionalisation of transnational democratic procedures cannot be justified. It would threaten to undermine various conceptions of a free society. It is argued that for the sake of the realisation of equal citizenship the argument from transnational effects actually needs to endorse the existence of bounded democratic communities. Unbounded transnational democracy would exercise an adverse effect on citizenship. It also turns out that the argument from transnational effects, in its uncorrected form, remains haunted by the dilemma that the type of democracy that is envisaged by it becomes easily absorbed by administrative processes. The article concludes that the argument from transnational effects, correctly understood, has a more modest import than its proponents would have us believe. Rather than supporting the release of democracy from its national bounds, it helps to explain why the co‐existence of bounded democratic polities remains essential to equal citizenship. More forceful versions of transnational integration graft onto political societies elements that are not genuinely democratic and strangely reminiscent of different forms of rule. These are forms of rule that Aristotle would not have called ‘political’, for they do not involve the exercise of power by equals over equals.     

Judicial Responses to Bright Line Rules in Social Security: In Search of Principle

This article considers judicial responses to the use of 'bright line' rules in social security law. It analyses, within the framework of judicial deference, the receptiveness of the judiciary to an argument by the executive that a rule is justified as being administratively convenient to operate. The article questions the proposition that the judiciary is at its most deferential when complex issues of socio-economic policy or resource allocation are raised in the context of social security law. A contrast is drawn between cases involving an issue of statutory interpretation and those applying a proportionality test. The article tests the presumption that a difference in approach should be discernable in these two situations. It concludes by criticising the courts for failing to articulate clearly the values at stake and by arguing for the need for greater transparency and a broader public debate concerning the use of bright line rules.     

Development of the Nationality Law of China

With the deepening of globalization, many provisions in the Nationality Law of China promulgated in 1980 are already out of time and some provisions are easy to trigger dual nationalities. Consequently, while sticking to the basic principle of the Nationality Law, certain provisions of the Nationality Law of China should be gradually improved according to the present situation of international and domestic development, and the implementing guidelines for the Nationality Law should be introduced to construct a relatively complete legal system to adjust and regulate various relationships of nationality. Song Xixiang, majoring in international law, Hong Kong and Macao law, is a professor of law and the dean of Law School of Shanghai International Studies University. Now, he is also a doctoral candidate of Wuhan University. Meanwhile, Prof. Song is an executive director of the China Society of Private International Law and of the China Society of International Law and of the China Society of International Economical Law, etc. Moreover, he is a vice chairman of Hong Kong and Macao and Taiwan Law Association.     

论坚持“一人一籍”原则

国籍是自然人隶属于一个国家的法律资格与身份，也是国际法学领域中一个重要且复杂的问题。在全球化时代背景下，越来越多的国家开始承认或容许双重国籍，但笔者基于国情，从多方面论证後认为中国仍应坚持“一人一籍”原则；只有在此原则指导下，改革并完善现行的出入境管理法律制度，才能满足新时代华人华侨的要求，切实维护国家和公民的合法利益。     

European Citizenship: Towards a European Identity?

Questions of political identity and citizenship, raised by thecreation of the `new Europe', pose new questions that politicaltheorists need to consider. Reflection upon the circumstances ofthe new Europe could help them in their task of delineatingconceptual structures and investigating the character ofpolitical argument.

Does it make sense to use concepts as `citizenship' and`identity' beyond the borders of the nation-state? What does itmean when we speak about `European Citizenship' and `EuropeanIdentity'?

It is argued that the pluralism that has led theorists tooffer a conception of citizenship based upon principles of right,rather that the common good, applies even more strongly at thelevel of the European political order. Developing a contractariantheory of federation, an account of the basis of a Europeancitizenship will be offered in which federalism emerges out of anoverlapping consensus of European citizens on the terms of theirpolitical association.

`European Citizenship' and `European Identity' are discussedin the context of the so-called `European Union', and not in thewider context of Europe `as a whole', or for that matter on aneven broader `cosmopolitan' scale. However, the gist of the articleis that arguments for concepts of `citizenship' and `identity'that go beyond borders of nation-states and that are applied tothe `European Union', could have implications for an even widerapplication.

Finally, and in conclusion, the (empirical) context will beelaborated in which the normative concept of shared liberalcitizenship identity should be realized on a pan-national,European level.

     

What’s Wrong with Penal Populism? Politics,the Public,and Criminological Expertise

This article discusses “penal populism” and its conflict with criminological expertise. It considers the proper balance between professional expertise and community sentiment in the formulation of crime control and penal policy—especially in respect of policy measures where moral rather than instrumental considerations are involved. It raises theoretical questions about the nature of “public opinion”—does it exist other than as an artifact of survey instruments?—and its proper role in a democratic polity. And it considers the professional responsibility of criminological experts in relation to policy formation and political debate. The performance of public health experts during the COVID pandemic is presented as an instructive case in point. Can criminology establish itself as a credible form of social scientific knowledge worthy of public trust? And how should criminologists comport themselves when engaging with questions of public policy and political controversy?

     

Beat patrol deployment in Hong Kong

This article addresses critical policy issues raised in the SB vs. DB debate. How should such a policy debate be resolved? What are the pros and cons of both patrol deployment measures? More importantly, what immediate and effective remedial steps can be taken to secure the front line police officers’ desire for safety and security without compromising the public's legitimate expectation for order and service. This article provides the HKP community — policymakers, operational managers and front line officers — with relevant research literature and pertinent empirical data to understand the issues involved and help resolve the debate in an informed and reflective manner. In the end, the article argues that education and training are more important than patrol deployment in reducing risk of injury to police officers in the line of duty. Removal of side arms and demilitarization of the HKP is also suggested.     

Gender Equality, Citizenship, and the EU's Constitutional Future

Abstract:  While gender equality has been a matter of some concern for EU law and policy makers over the past half century, this concern has tended, at least historically, to focus upon equal treatment in employment and has not yet materialised into the delivery of a broader package of civil, political, and social rights for women. Taking the concept of EU citizenship as a framework within which to view the promotion of gender equality, this article assesses the debate on the constitutional future of the EU. This is with a view to examining the possible amelioration of women's social position through the exploitation of opportunities that the constitutionalisation of EU law presents. Looking at women's citizenship through the lens of political rights to participate in the debate on the EU's future, together with examining substantive aspects of the Constitutional Treaty for their gender equality content, the article suggests that a more comprehensive endeavour by all institutional actors to engage in gender mainstreaming is needed in order to give effect to a broader form of equality between women and men.     

Fundamental Rights and Citizenship of the Union at a Crossroads: A Promising Alliance or a Dangerous Liaison?

The reinforcement of the protection of fundamental rights at the European level and the emergence of the status of Union citizenship are two closely connected phenomena. European citizenship has been and continues to be one of the central arguments in favour of the extension of the scope of EU fundamental rights. This argument arises out of a sentiment that vindicates equality at the core of the citizenship of the Union as a fundamental status. Against this background, this paper examines the different possibilities of interconnection between the traditional doctrine of EU fundamental rights and the jurisprudential construction of the citizenship of the Union. Particularly, it will be discussed whether fundamental rights should be placed at the core of the formula that protects the ‘genuine enjoyment of the substance’ of the rights conferred by EU citizenship, inaugurated by Ruiz Zambrano, already latent in Rottmann and substantially refined in an ever‐growing case‐law (McCarthy, Dereci, O. and S., Ymaraga and Alokpa). It will be argued that this formula carries the very valuable potential to reinforce citizenship of the Union as an independent source of rights able to overcome problems such as reverse discrimination. For these purposes, this formula could be considered to encompass not only the absolute deprivation of the ‘genuine enjoyment of the substance of citizenship rights’, but also the existence of serious obstacles thereto.     

A Fine Line Between Pleasure and Pain: Would Decriminalising BDSM Permit Nonconsensual Abuse?

The increasing social visibility of Bondage/Domination, Discipline/submission and Sadism/Masochism (BDSM) within Western society has placed pressure on the criminal law to account for why consensual BDSM activities continue to be criminalised where they involve the infliction of even minor injuries on participants. With moralistic and paternalistic justifications for criminalisation falling out of favour, one key justification that is gaining traction within international commentary on BDSM is the “bogus BDSM argument”. The bogus BDSM argument contends that BDSM activities should be criminalised because otherwise false claims of BDSM will be used by defendants to excuse or minimise their criminal liability for nonconsensual abuse. This article refutes this argument by showing how it relies on premises that are unjustifiable, illogical and irrelevant. This article concludes that the decriminalisation of BDSM would not permit nonconsensual abuse so long as legal officials were equipped with sufficient knowledge about the norms and conventions of BDSM culture.

     

The Aporia of EU Citizenship

EU citizenship finds itself in but a deadlock. Certainly no longer being just a symbol of European integration but still far away from a meaningful status of its holders, Union citizenship fails to find its place in the legal landscape of the EU. Having sketched out the current state of EU citizenship and some of its outstanding problems, this article suggests to analyse Union citizenship anew and free from the constraints of legal methodology. In order to do that, this piece employs the works of Jacques Derrida and, on the background of his views on Europe, deconstructs EU citizenship unravelling its aporia.

     

European Citizenship and the Right to Reside: ‘No One on the Outside has a Right to be Inside?’

This paper deals with the question: Who ought not to be excluded from the enjoyment of European citizenship rights? Recently, the Court of Justice has ruled that, in exceptional situations, the ‘genuine enjoyment of the substance of rights attaching to European citizenship’ can be invoked in order to also extend legal protection to specific categories of third country nationals. I will argue that the ‘genuine enjoyment’ formula is not only setting an innovative jurisdictional test concerning European citizenship rights, but that it is also highlighting how the traditional account of citizenship (from status to rights) can be conceptually reversed. This happens in threshold cases, where the tenability of the schema of distribution of rights, agreed within a political community, depends on the possibility to readjust the boundaries of political membership.     

30个InDel位点在华东汉族和畲族人群的法医学应用

目的 评估Investigator（R） DIPplex试剂盒中30个插入/缺失（insertion/deletion,InDel）多态性位点在华东汉族和畲族人群的法医学应用价值.方法 采用Investigator（R） DIPplex试剂盒对华东地区565名汉族和119名畲族无关个体进行分型检测,统计分析30个位点的等位基因频率和群体遗传学参数.结果 在华东汉族人群中平均Ho为0.413 3,平均DP为0.551 1,平均PIC为0.320 0.在畲族人群中平均Ho为0.389 6,平均DP为0.543 3,平均PIC为0.3100.30个位点在汉族、畲族人群中均符合Hardy-Weinberg平衡（P＞0.05）.结论 Investigator（R） DIPplex试剂盒包含的30个位点在华东汉族和畲族中多态性良好,在特殊亲权鉴定案件中可作为良好的补充体系.