Does Whitehall think the Irish are stupid…
Interesting the BBC have the news that UK ID Cards (if they ever see the light of day) will offer Irish nationals in Northern Ireland a ‘personal’ rather than a ‘national’ ID card… One key difference as Pete points out below is that the national card at least has the utility of being a travel document, whereas a personal card does not. Travel cards can only be issued by the citizen’s own government. Straightforward enough? You’d think so. Except, that the vast majority of Irish citizens in Northern Ireland are already covered by their British citizenship. Just as the vast majority of British citizens in Northern Ireland could receive travel documents from the Dublin government, since, under the jus soli principle (constitutionally enshrined in the Belfast Agreement), that group is substantially the same. At the heel of the hunt all people born in Northern Ireland are both British Citizens (unless renounced by lodging a declaration made to the Home Secretary) and Irish Citizens (unless renounced by lodging a declaration with the Minister for Justice). That won’t stop a lot of people rushing for the cards that don’t allow you to travel… If Mr Johnson gets enough time and space to force it into legislation…
And then there is the civil liberties argument about what any government should legitimately know about the business of its citizens. This from the General Secretary of NO2ID:
The report (ID cards will not display Union Flag, 30 July) that the Government is being “sensitive” to the feelings of Irish nationalists by issuing a UK identity card with a shamrock on it and a notionally
nationality-free version for Irish citizens, would be merely laughable if it did not at the same time insult the intelligence of those same nationalists.The card is near irrelevant. It is the registration on the National Identity Register database that comes with it that matters, all the information recorded on it, and all the duties your will acquire to report your whereabouts and personal circumstances to it. That will be for life if you are British, and for all the years of your residence in Britain if you are Irish – provided are ever coerced or conned into “volunteering”.
Perhaps Whitehall thinks the Irish are stupid.
How many Irish nationalists does the Home Secretary suppose want to make the British Home Office the sole authority for their identity, whether that comes prettified with a shamrock or not? Given that they have an absolute right of residence, and he cannot force them to join his Register through their passport applications as he intends to do with British citizens from 2012, he is on a loser there. The interesting question is how many Brits he would be encouraging to discover an Irish grandparent and take up Irish nationality rather than submit to the scheme, when the time comes to renew their passport. Millions could.
Mr Johnson is not calming Irish nationalism; he’s creating a whole new cause of it.
Yours faithfully,
–
Guy Herbert
General Secretary, NO2ID
Box 412, 19-21 Crawford Street
LONDON
Purely symbolic, as things stand at the moment k… So symbolic I doubt there are many people who have even contemplated such a move…
Its better to have 2 passports anyway as I have, both an Irish and a British one, one for the Falls, one for the Shankill
During the 2nd world war the good folks of Northern Africa hung portraits on the wall, so when the warring soldiers came blazing through, they could turn the portrait of Hitler/Churchill around to suit.
A besoke solution and a true story !
Mick
“I’m aware this is getting ridiculously pendantic, but where is the statute that outlines this process?”
There’s no process involved with a birthright. It’s there when you emerge from the womb just as British citizenship is and as Pete points out, because you can get two passports, so is dual citizenship.
A marvellously imaginative and Irish solution to the whole thing – thinking outside the womb you might say, though it did disappoint me that it’s taken 10 years for everyone to cop on.
Top marks to FIFA for getting there before the DUPers.
In other words, ‘Magic thinking’… Thank you and good night!!
Ulick
I don’t doubt that it’s an “imaginative” solution.
One might suggest it’s an “imaginative” fudge.
But you miss the point that applying for one nationality does not, in itself, negate the other.
“Aren’t you missing something? Persons born in the north aren’t stateless so you’re article as no bearing, the GFA has as it is directly relevant.” – Ulick
On the contrary, you’re missing the point:
[i]Ireland’s un-amended Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act granted citizenship on the basis of jus soli, declaring that “Every person born in Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth.” That is no longer the case. However, if you were born in Northern Ireland, you have an automatic entitlement under the amended Article 2 of the Irish constitution and under the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004 to seek Irish nationality if you want it. Under Section 6 of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act “…every person born in the island of Ireland is entitled to be an Irish citizen… if… he or she does any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do…”
The fact that someone born in Ireland has not done “any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do” does not give rise to a presumption that that person is a stateless person or is not entitled to enjoy the privileges of Irish citizenship. Article 1(1) of the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, it is declared that “Contracting States shall grant their nationality to persons, otherwise stateless, born in their territory.” Someone born in Northern Ireland is covered by lex soli under British nationality law.[/i]
You, as a citizen of Northern Ireland, are born with the default nationality of British. That is not affected by the quirk in Irish nationality law that requires someone born in Ireland to do “any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do” before they become an Irish citizen. In effect, the onus is on the individual born on “the island of Ireland” to assume Irish citizenship under the amended Act, rather than that being the birthright (which requires no such action). The ‘birthright’ then is an entitlement to Irish citizenship rather than Irish citizenship itself. This would mean that everyone born in Ireland is born stateless unless or until they do “any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do.”
So, you can see that default nationality is not conferred by national law but by international law (Ireland is a signatory to the relevant conventions on stateless persons).The criteria for becoming an Irish citizen is, however, subject to Irish law. Those born in Ireland (not Northern Ireland) would be born stateless and so they would default to the conventions which confer nationality to “persons, otherwise stateless, born in their territory.” That does not apply to those born in the UK who are not born stateless because they are subject to British nationality law which confers British nationality on them, and are not subject to the amended Irish nationality law.
That is part of the “island of Ireland” agenda which avoids declaring that the citizens of a foreign sovereign jurisdiction are Irish while granting those who are part of the Irish nation in that foreign sovereign jurisdiction the option of claiming the Irish nationality that they agreed was no longer to be conferred upon them as a birthright. Instead, the birthright is the right to apply to the Irish state for Irish nationality. Now, under the new dispensation, you can only be Irish if you act accordingly. Even if you act accordingly, you only become Irish from the time of the action, and your default British nationality is not affected unless you act to renounce it.
Incidentally, new Article 2 of the Irish constitution doesn’t confer Irish nationality; it merely recognises that Irish nationality is to be determined by national law. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 provided for an entitlement to citizenship either by birth in Ireland. However, the old Article 2 declared that the national territory of Ireland consisted of the whole island of Ireland, so that meant that anyone born in Northern Ireland was born Irish. That is what the unionists wanted changed, and that is what was duly changed. There is no claim made now that anyone born in Northern Ireland is born Irish.
That was the whole point of the change, remember? To remove the extraterritorial claim to the citizens of a foreign state. If you think it is still there, then that is down to the brilliance of Martin Mansergh. It, however, is well and truly gone. You’re born British, not Irish, and that’s that.
I think we need a lawyer…
Have you taken leave of your senses, Mick?
Lawyers should be shunned except in hanging cases.
Pete, you’re missing the point that you don’t have to apply for one or other nationality and there’s no need to negate the other.
Let me put it another way.
Just as a person born in Britain is automatically bestowed one nationality, being born here is exactly the same (‘process’ if that helps Mick understand) only you are bestowed three – Irish|British|Irish&British;. Which one you choose to accept is purely and utterly down to you.
The situation may be unique, but it overcame the problem with the ineffective old Irish Articles 2&3 which couldn’t really bestowed nationality on people in another jurisdiction. However as the British have agreed to this new situation with the Irish, then it’s all perfectly legal and above board.
Ach Dave, I’m sorry it’s too late to be going round that again. There is no such thing as “default nationality” and if there is… ach read my other posts, it’s late and I still have work to do.
Mick
Mick
Although the twisting is clearly forcing itself the other way too. Thus the almost farcical story above. Yet I suspect these moves are designed to clear the legalese hurdles of the Belfast Agreement… in order to get to Schengen.
In one sense it is a step forward because even 15 years ago the difficulties or otherwise of Irish nationalists with such a scheme would not have been considered. There is clearly some civil service time somewhere that has went into att least thinking on the issue.
The problem is with the complete shallowness of it all. I am generally not favourable to Dave’s continuous ranting on Nordies are all dupes / x is an attack on Irish sovereignty / repeat for four pages. But he does remind us that there are matters of import here. And it is being reduced down to tedious trivia. Symbolism can be important, and Pete for example would tend to dismiss it far too readily. But if it’s all you got, and all you talking about then you are in big, big trouble. And it is not simply the British government who are guilty of this type of thinking. Far from it.
What the hell are the SDLP and SF doing without any serious attempt to oppose this? It is honestly like nationalism of the First World War period failing to oppose conscription. It’s not simply on the grounds that its the British Government seeking to track a hell of a lot of information on Irish citizens, which should be worrying enough in itself, but on a pure republican standpoint, what the hell is anyone doing asking for it. It’s a huge dropped ball.
Ulick
There is de facto, and de jure, dual nationality – thanks, as Dave suggests, to the generosity of the Irish government – and the British government.
Both passport options remain available regardless of any initial application.
What we have in practice is a fudge to cover the blushes of the psychotic.
Yeah, Ken, I tend to dismiss such things “far too readily”.
*shakes head*
Pete
Yeah, Ken, I tend to dismiss such things “far too readily”.
*shakes head*
Simply my honest impression form your blogging. Last time I checked, I had absolute rule over what I thought in my own head.
Pete
Oh and by the by
There is de facto, and de jure, dual nationality – thanks, as Dave suggests, to the generosity of the Irish government – and the British government.
The Irish citizenship rights stated in the Constitution is not in the gift of the Irish Government to give or take away however generous it may or may not feel. It is a statement of will from the Irish people, Pete, and if said people had a split whereby that was threatened, then there would be somewhat bigger problems for Northern Nationalism.
Pete,
“There is de facto, and de jure, dual nationality – thanks, as Dave suggests, to the generosity of the Irish government – and the British government.”
I have already acknowledged that there is dual nationality as a birthright. There is also Irish nationality as a birthright and British nationality as a birthright for those born in the north.
Dancing around in circles here isn’t achieving anything. All I can say is that none of it has been tested in the courts, but when it got close, the FIFA legal department obviously agreed with my position and from the (non) reaction of the IFA, they concur.
This issue is two baldy men fighting over a comb. Whatever the debate there will be a work around that suits everyone. We all get issued with a National Insurance number which says we pay our contributions to the British Exchequer and that has always been the case. Even at the height of the troubles the most diehard Northern Republicans were still issued with National Insurance cards & numbers AND it didn’t raise much arguement. As an Irish Nationalist I am not losing too much sleep. Like the passport & football/soccer international topic those professing their Irishness will be accommodated. You can’t tell impose an identity on people who want no part of it EXCEPT Unionists of course who are just silly misguided Irish people….according to Ali G.
Ulick, I’m sorry again to disappoint you but only 12 million out of a global population of 7 billion are stateless. That’s because of default nationality. Maybe in your world, everyone is born stateless and can pick their nationality off the rack like a smart suit but not in the real world.
Anyway, here is the relevant part of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004:
[i]PART II
6.—(1) 16 Subject to section 6A (inserted by section 4 of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004), every person born in the island of Ireland is entitled to be an Irish citizen.
(2) 17 (a) Subject to subsection (5), a person who is entitled under subsection (1) to be an Irish citizen shall be an Irish citizen from the date of his or her birth if—
(i) he or she does any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do, or
(ii) in the case of a person who is not of full age or who is suffering from a mental incapacity, any act is done on his or her behalf that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do.
(b) The fact that a person so born has not done, or has not had done on his or her behalf, such an act shall not of itself give rise to a presumption that the person is not an Irish citizen or is a citizen of another country.
(3) A person born in the island of Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth if he or she is not entitled to citizenship of any other country.
[(4) 18 repealed]
(5) A person born in the island of Ireland who has made a declaration of alienage under section 21 shall remain entitled to be an Irish citizen, but shall not be an Irish citizen unless, in the prescribed manner, that person declares that he or she is an Irish citizen; and such person shall be an Irish citizen from the date of the declaration.[/i]
Notice that you have an “entitlement” to be an Irish citizen that is subject to action on your part? That’s very different from declaring that you are an Irish citizen, and that no action is required on your part. It should not, as I said, give rise to a presumption that someone born in Ireland (not Northern Ireland) is born stateless and does not enjoy Irish citizenship until he or she does any act that he or she must do to be an Irish citizen (and even if it did, they would default to Irish citizenship under international law. That does not apply to someone born in Northern Ireland who will default to British nationality.
It’s very simple: if you are entitled to another nationality, then you must do something that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do before you are granted Irish nationality. Since you are born in Northern Ireland, you are entitled to British nationality and that is your default nationality (jus soli). If, however, you were born in Ireland and you are NOT entitled to another nationality, then your default nationality is Irish (see Section 3 above). That is simply to avoid statelessness. So, you are not required to do “any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do” if you are born in Ireland because that is the default nationality under international law.
Can you still not see that you are not born Irish because you are born in Northern Ireland and are therefore entitled to another nationality at birth (which requires you to act to assume Irish nationality), whereas someone born in Ireland may have no such entitlement to another nationality and will therefore default to Irish nationality irrespective of whether or not he or she does any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do?
If you don’t like it, then you shouldn’t have voted for the GFA. At any rate, you are born with an entitlement to Irish citizenship and not with Irish citizenship itself. Since you agreed that Ireland should renounce its claim to sovereignty over Northern Ireland, it is right and proper that Irish citizenship is not imposed on those who are born on British soil and who do not regard themselves as Irish (and who won’t do any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do).
That’s the fact of the matter, so you can either accept it or not.
“The Irish citizenship rights stated in the Constitution is not in the gift of the Irish Government to give or take away however generous it may or may not feel. It is a statement of will from the Irish people…” – Kensei
You might be surprised to discover the Irish Supreme Court declared that citizenship derives from legislation and not from the Constitution. As I said: “Incidentally, the new Article 2 of the Irish constitution doesn’t confer Irish nationality; it merely recognises that Irish nationality is to be determined by national law.” So, it is up to the Irish government to decide the criteria under the relevant Act. The Constitution confers no right of citizenship whatsoever.
Here is what Mr Justice Hardiman of the Supreme Court said:
[i]Modern Irish citizenship stems from the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1956, as amended. This provides, at s. 6(1) that “Every person born in Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth”. Citizenship can also be acquired by descent. Article 2 of the Constitution, dating in its present form from 1998, provides as follows:-
“It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.”
This form of words involves and perhaps elides the two concepts of nationality and of citizenship. All persons born in Ireland are, by s.6 of the Act of 1956, citizens of Ireland. What the first sentence of Article 2 acknowledges is their entitlement “…to be part of the Irish Nation”. The concepts of Irish nationality and of citizenship of Ireland are distinguished in the first two sentences of Article 2. This corresponds to the distinction drawn in the Constitution between “the Nation” and “the State”. [b]It is not clear to me that, as regards citizens, the first sentence of Article 2 confers, as opposed to acknowledges, any right.[/b] Since, by Article 9.2 all citizens are said to have a fundamental political duty of fidelity to the nation, it could hardly have been denied (even before Article 2 took its present form) that such citizens are “…part of the Irish Nation”. Having regard to the statutory provision mentioned above, the question of whether being part of the Irish Nation necessarily involves a right to citizenship does not arise in this case. In the third sentence of Article 2 it is the Nation, and not the State, which has a “…special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.” This relationship clearly does not imply citizenship or a right to it. On the other hand the phrase “…otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland” in the second sentence of the Article is (at least if one ignores the statutory provision for citizenship) not easy to understand without an implication that the condition of being “…part of the Irish Nation” entitles one to citizenship.
Neither the “entitlement and birthright” mentioned in the Article’s first sentence, nor the “special affinity” mentioned in the third, requires for its existence that the persons enjoying them should have been reared or educated in Ireland or should have resided here. Irish birth alone is the precondition of the first. Even that is unnecessary for the “special affinity” which the State cherishes. A person who may never have visited Ireland may enjoy this special affinity if he or she is of Irish ancestry and shares Ireland’s cultural identity and heritage.
It may also be noted that the “entitlement and birthright” referred to is an option open to a person meeting the condition of Irish birth, and not an intrinsic characteristic. [b]The Article does not for example seek to claim that a British subject born in Ireland is thereby automatically “part of the Irish Nation”[/b] or liable to the duty set out in Article 9 of “fidelity to the Nation and loyalty to the State”. [b]It is an option, personal to him and to be exercised at his discretion.[/b][/i]
Just as a person born in Britain is automatically bestowed one nationality, being born here is exactly the same (‘process’ if that helps Mick understand) only you are bestowed three – Irish|British|Irish&British;. Which one you choose to accept is purely and utterly down to you
As the Nationality Act I mentioned earlier hasn’t been repealed you’re wrong; if you choose not to accept your automatic British citizenship, you need to write to the UK Home Secretary to ask him revoke it. Any child born in Northern Ireland entitled to UK citizenship under the terms of Nationality Act of 1981 is automatically a British Citizen. That fact was not changed by the Belfast Agreement
Re Your faith in FIFA’s role as an international determinant of nationality and citizenship, in their ruling they also suggested that players born in the Republic (with no family connection with Northern Ireland nor the rest of the United Kingdom) would be entitled to play for Northern Ireland. Whilst Northern Ireland remains a part of the United Kingdom does that mean anybody born in the ROI now automatically also has right to United Kingdopm citizenship at birth?
Thanks Dave and oneill. That seals it for me. It was Sammy who invoked the higher constitutional court of FIFA (‘the king of distraction’)…
I know this seems like a really arcane debate, but none of this seems to be publicly understood by many people.
And I have to admit, it is not something I had given a lot of thought to: why would anyone, it’s SO obscure.
But it’s a useful antedote to the magical thinking that’s gone on around the Belfast Agreement.
Re the original subject of the thread – the ID card. The whole thing is a nonsense and everyone should vote Conservative at the next General Election to kill it
But, Dave, a person born in Northern Ireland could not be declared “otherwise stateless” since there already exists a state (the Republic of Ireland) which will, indeed must, accept him as a citizen by virtue of its own constitution which bestows such favour as his birthright.
Mick,
re. King of distraction.
U talking to me? If so a short review of the posts would show I didnt introduce the FIFA angle – you Princess of distortion.
But it is hardly a ‘distraction’ to introduce a ruling (whether football related or not) which is based on an interpetation of the rules governing nationality as covered in the GFA etc which underpins what is being discussed.
Dave
Thanks for the info. But you are a bit off here, I think.
Having regard to the statutory provision mentioned above, the question of whether being part of the Irish Nation necessarily involves a right to citizenship does not arise in this case.
So you can’t conclude what you have just done. The judge speculated but does not rule.
What is being spoke on is the In the third sentence of Article 2. The special affinity does not imply citizenship.
It is simply impossible for a republic not to outline citizenship rights in its constitution. If they are no explciit then they are inferred. The consequences of saying that it is based solely on the 1956 Act is that the government of the day could exclude any group it wishes, inside the 6 counties or out, from citizenship. Let’s pick those of African descent. The Constitution simply wouldn’t stand for it.
Wiki suggests:
The effect of the Twenty-seventh Amendment was not to immediately remove the right to citizenship by birth but rather that it would cease to be a constitutional right. After the amendment the right to citizenship by birth still existed in law and it remained for the Oireachtas (parliament) to pass ordinary legislation that would remove it. Furthermore the amendment did not remove the constitutional right to citizenship by birth from everyone. Today a constitutional right to citizenship still exists for anyone who is both:
* Born on the island of Ireland (including its islands and seas).
* Born to at least one parent who is, or is entitled to be, an Irish citizen.
I suggest they are closer to the mark here, as and until Article 2 goes through any further clarifications, they are ont he money here. But this is simply another convulted hoop to stop unduly pissing off Unionists.
And this remains a pointless agrument, so escaping while I can.
“Thanks Dave and oneill. That seals it for me.”
Mick there is nothing in any of their posts which refutes my contention. Dave just doesn’t get what I’ve been saying and oneill hasn’t posted anything of relevance to the debate.
As for FIFA being a distraction, can you deny that this has been the only time this notion has been tested and that they agree persons born on the north can be automatically Irish from birth? Of course that is relevant to the debate. Just has I have heard all of Daves claims before when it comes to the crunch, the GFA offers just what I have contended.
I got dizzy following the in /out of citizenship-
I thought the point was that irish citizens in N would have no need (or wish for) of a UK ID card? and could avoid the whole issue.
Ulick,
On the substantive issue, as the proposed bill treats Irish people, whether from the North or South in exactly the same way i.e. as Irish not British citizens it is to be welcomed.
One thing I may be misreading – is that the DUP have been complaining about the absence of the Union flag as a sop to Nationlaists – is the Union flag just ‘missing’ from the EU Nationals version (ie the ‘Irish’ version) or from the normal British version – if the latter, which I understand to be the case, then surely Nationalists would have no interest as to whether it had the unions flag or not?
Fast forward 15 years. We live in the United States of Europe. To travel around this country we use our national ID cards, not our passports. In this scenario of course plenty of nationalists will end up getting ID cards saying that they are British citizens. It won’t make them unionists, but they will still do it.
Look at the current situation in NI. Plenty of unionist pensioners get Irish passports because they are free. They have not had a great conversion to nationalism, they just realise that the Irish passport is more convenient to obtain.
When national ID cards become the main way of travelling around Europe (and lets face it they already are on most of the continent) the opposition to this will fade away.
Here’s my take on the citizenship issue. Following the 2004 referendum it makes clear in Article 9 of the Constitution that “citizenship shall be determined in accordance with law”.
The relevant legislation is the Nationality and Citizenship Act.
(2) (a) Subject to subsections (4) and (5), a person born in the island of Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth if he or she does, or if not of full age has done on his or her behalf, any act which only an Irish citizen is entitled to do.
(b) The fact that a person so born has not done, or has not had done on his or her behalf,
such an act shall not of itself give rise to a presumption that the person is not an Irish
citizen or is a citizen of another country.
The limitation states that “a person born in the island of Ireland shall not be entitled to be an Irish citizen unless a parent of that person has, during the period of 4 years immediately preceding the person’s birth, been resident in the island of Ireland for a period of not less than 3 years or periods the aggregate of which is not less than 3 years.”
So under Irish law, it seems to me that everyone on the island is a citizen.
Ulick,
Do you have a link to Fifa’s ruling on this other than Blatter’s comments? It seems you might be reading an awful lot into very little from that webpage.
Blatter is quoted as saying, “As the Fifa legal committee understood the issue, the situation in Northern Ireland is such that all Northern Irish players could opt to play for both Association teams, given that they have a birthright to an Irish passport.”
Nobody seems to be denying that all Northern Irish people have a birthright to an Irish passport, but that isn’t the same as saying that we are born conferred with automatic Irish citizenship. It seems to me to be only in potential, and Dave’s posts showing the relevant legislation confirms this.
Even if Fifa have decided one way or another on the issue of who a player can represent, I’d be pretty wary of drawing a definitive conclusion to this citizenship debate. In fact it is probably meaningless.
You claim that Dave doesn’t get you. I’ve read this thread with great interest and rather I’d suggest he has pretty convincingly refuted your position and oneills posts have been relevant.
I’ll add that this I’m basing this on what I’ve read in this thread.
If you can convince me of your position, I’ll be happy to say so.
George,
There’s a slight piece of metaphysics in there…
“…that a person so born has not done, or has not had done on his or her behalf, such an act shall not of itself give rise to a presumption that the person is not an Irish citizen or is a citizen of another country.”
Does this imply a kind of legalistic ‘Limbo’?
Dave et al
This might be of interest, with respect to the 1956 Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_nationality_law
In regard to international law, Ó Caoindealbháin states that, although it is the attempt to confer citizenship extraterritorially without the agreement of the state affected that represents a breach of international law (not the actual extension), the 1956 Act “co-exists uneasily with the terms of the Agreement, and, by extension, the official acceptance by the Irish state of the current border. While the Agreement recognises that Irish citizenship is the birthright of those born in Northern Ireland, it makes clear that its acceptance is a matter of individual choice. In contrast, the 1956 Act continues to extend citizenship automatically in the majority of cases, thereby, in legal effect, conflicting with the agreed status of the border and the principle of consent
The point about it being a breach of international law is that, all else being equal, the British would be within their rights to refuse to recognize the Irish citizenship of someone born in Northern Ireland. Of course under The Agreement they do explicitly recognise the Irish citzenship of anyone born in NI, who holds it. But those entitled to the citzenship of other juristictions (e.g. children of immigrants) may find that their ‘home’ country refuses to recognise their Irish (but not their British) citizenship..
Dave,
“Blatter is quoted as saying, “As the Fifa legal committee understood the issue, the situation in Northern Ireland is such that all Northern Irish players could opt to play for both Association teams, given that they have a birthright to an Irish passport.”
Nobody seems to be denying that all Northern Irish people have a birthright to an Irish passport, but that isn’t the same as saying that we are born conferred with automatic Irish citizenship. It seems to me to be only in potential, and Dave’s posts showing the relevant legislation confirms this.
Even if Fifa have decided one way or another on the issue of who a player can represent, I’d be pretty wary of drawing a definitive conclusion to this citizenship debate. In fact it is probably meaningless.”
I don’t have time to go into it in detail right now but you have to take into account FIFAs stance in the context of their rules on eligibility. In short there are two parts to their eligibility criteria:
1. If you are a natural born citizen of a country you can play, no questions.
2. If you have dual nationality or have changed nationality then there are all sorts of conditions you have to make.
Now what Mick, Mike and Dave are arguing (to different extents) is the same as what the IFA originality said i.e. people born here fall under the second section and therefore would have to satisfy all of the conditions which FIFA had laid down – grandparent, age, where you’ve lived etc… You see the three lads there are saying that we all bestowed with British citizenship at birth, so that would put us all into FIFAs second category if we wanted to play soccer for the south.
But that is not how FIFAs legal team see it. They say there is no need for a ruling to be made on northern born players going south because, they fall into the first category i.e. the GFA entitles them to be solely Irish from birth if they so wish, not dual citizens if they do not wish and not British if they do not wish.
Kensei
I certainly agree with you that the SDLP + Sinn Fein could do a lot more to oppose this or at least amend it.
Frankly Pete – I wish you would just piss off.
I’m used to your blatent anti Sinn Fein (or just anti Nationalist) prejudice. One can either ignore it or argue against it.
However, this time you’re going too far. Neither you nor Mick or any other Unionist has the right to dictate to me or any other Nationalist what nationality we are.
Frankly, I’m sick of both of you telling me the legal interpretation of what Nationality I am (or am entitled) to be. What legal qualifications do you have?
Were you part of the UK or Irish govt team that negotiated the GFA? – No, I thought not.
The whole thing is ambiguous – and deliberately so. The UK govt want the option left clearly open to Irish Nationalists in the North to be Irish if they so wish and for Unionists to be British if they so wish (as respected by the Irish govt).
For example I have lived in Australia for 4 years. I an obliged to observe and respect Auatralian laws – no problem but it does NOT make me an Australian citizen.
Like in NI, currently it’s part of the UK. No problem with that – however, living there does NOT make you an automatic UK citizen – any more than I’m an Australian citizen.
No choice in nationality/citizenship has to be made unless one wishes to do so. In that case, it’s down to what passport one applies for.
However, until that choice is made, people are entitled to live in NI as long as they observe the laws as I do in Australia without having to declare Irish or British citizenship.
Pete I’m not suprised at but Mick I am. If you want to be British – good luck to you and that’s your right.
However, do you really need to try and ram so-called British citizenship down the throats of people who don’t want it?
Isn’t it enough for you that the Britisg citizenship you crave is yours by right and no argument with that?
Or won’t you be happy unless you try to force it down the throats of people who don’t want it.
PS Dave,
“as saying that we are born conferred with automatic Irish citizenship”
Again, you aren’t understanding what I’m saying. I’m not saying we are born with automatic Irish citizenship. What I saying is that we are all born with an enumerated nationality, which can be either Irish or British or Irish and British. You cannot have no nationality or any nationality outside these three options. This is very different from everyone having dual citizenship or later renouncing a citizenship.
Billy:
“If you want to be British – good luck to you and that’s your right.
However, do you really need to try and ram so-called British citizenship down the throats of people who don’t want it?
Isn’t it enough for you that the Britisg citizenship you crave is yours by right and no argument with that?”
I’m interested in only one thing: finding out what the national status of those of us born in Northern Ireland after partition actually is.
I am not interested in obscuring it with magical thinking of any description. What nationality I hold or crave does not come into it. And so long as it remains my own personal business it stays my own business.
And really, you of all people certainly understands the no ad hominem rule. There is a growing group of people who think that goes for everyone except Pete. So back off Tiger!
Billy,
However, this time you’re going too far. Neither you nor Mick or any other Unionist has the right to dictate to me or any other Nationalist what nationality we are.
Frankly, I’m sick of both of you telling me the legal interpretation of what Nationality I am (or am entitled) to be. What legal qualifications do you have?
I’ve tried my best with Ulick to no avail, hopefully you can understand what this piece below means (and it concerns “citizenship” not “nationality” nor indeed how much value you place in “Britishness”):
http://tinyurl.com/mrzeme
BRITISH NATIONALITY ACT 1981 CHAPTER 61
An Act to make fresh provision about citizenship and nationality, and to amend the Immigration Act 1971 as regards the right of abode in the United Kingdom.
[October 30, 1981]
Notes:
Act amended by British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990 (c.34), s. 2(1), British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990 (c.34), s. 2(1); extended by British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983 (c.6), s. 3(1); restricted by British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983 (c.6), s. 3(2) and amended by S.I. 1983/1699, art. 2(1)
UK ST 1981 c 61 (Refs & Annos)
Amendment as at: June 1, 2003
PART I BRITISH CITIZENSHIP
ACQUISITION AFTER COMMENCEMENT
s 1 Acquisition by birth or adoption.
(1) A person born in the United Kingdom after commencement, or in a qualifying territory on or after the appointed day, shall be a British citizen if at the time of the birth his father or mother is–
(a) a British citizen; or
(b) settled in the United Kingdom or that territory.
I interpret that as a meaning anyone born in Northern Ireland is automatically at birth a British Citizen. If you or anyone else can prove to me that this Act was revoked at the time of the Belfast Agreement, then fair enough.
Based on the 1956 Act, it looks like you are entitled to claim Irish citizenship on the same terms as a citizen born in the south if you declare that you are / wish to be an Irish citizen (e.g. ticking a box in a government form), but it isn’t foisted on people who don’t wish it.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1956/en/act/pub/0026/index.html
6.—(1) Every person born in Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth.
7.—(1) Pending the re-integration of the national territory, subsection (1) of section 6 shall not apply to a person, not otherwise an Irish citizen, born in Northern Ireland on or after the 6th December, 1922, unless, in the prescribed manner, that person, if of full age, declares himself to be an Irish citizen or, if he is not of full age, his parent or guardian declares him to be an Irish citizen. In any such case, the subsection shall be deemed to apply to him from birth.
oneill,
it must be possible to have 2 pieces of conflicting legislation and as Britian does not have a written constitution then it is a matter of legal interpetation as to which is ‘correct’.
So if the legislation sorrounding the GFA alters the citizenship rules then FIFA (dont go crazy Mick) or any other interested party may decide to take the latest legislation as the most accurate position e.g. Nationlaists (if they so desire )are ONLY Irish citizens.
Hmm.. The above (by me) is incorrect Sections 6 and 7 were replaced under Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 2001 (the sub-sections mentioned by George above ammend this and not the 1956 Act).
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0015/index.html
6.—(1) Every person born in the island of Ireland is entitled to be an Irish citizen.
(2) (a) Subject to subsections (4) and (5), a person born in the island of Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth if he or she does, or if not of full age has done on his or her behalf, any act which only an Irish citizen is entitled to do.
(b) The fact that a person so born has not done, or has not had done on his or her behalf, such an act shall not of itself give rise to a presumption that the person is not an Irish citizen or is a citizen of another country.
(3) A person born in the island of Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth if he or she is not entitled to citizenship of any other country.
(4) A person born in the island of Ireland—
(a) to a non-national who at the time of that person’s birth was entitled to diplomatic immunity within the State, or
(b) to a non-national on a foreign ship or in a foreign aircraft,
shall not be an Irish citizen unless, in the prescribed manner, that person declares, or if not of full age has declared on his or her behalf, that he or she is an Irish citizen; and such person shall be deemed to be an Irish citizen from the date of birth or the date of coming into operation of this section, whichever is the later.
(5) A person born in the island of Ireland who has made a declaration of alienage under section 21 shall remain entitled to be an Irish citizen, but shall not be an Irish citizen unless, in the prescribed manner, that person declares that he or she is an Irish citizen; and such person shall be an Irish citizen from the date of the declaration.
7.—(1) A person is an Irish citizen from birth if at the time of his or her birth either parent was an Irish citizen or would if alive have been an Irish citizen.
(2) The fact that the parent from whom a person derives citizenship had not at the time of the person’s birth done an act referred to in section 6(2)(a) shall not of itself exclude a person from the operation of subsection (1).
(3) Subsection (1) shall not confer Irish citizenship on a person born outside the island of Ireland if the parent through whom he or she derives citizenship was also born outside the island of Ireland unless—
(a) that person’s birth is registered under section 27, or
(b) the parent through whom that person derives citizenship was at the time of that person’s birth abroad in the public service:
Provided that the Irish citizenship of a person who, after 1 July, 1986, is registered under section 27 shall commence only as on and from the date of such registration.
(4) Nothing in this section shall confer Irish citizenship on a person not an Irish citizen immediately before its coming into operation, nor deprive of Irish citizenship a person who immediately before its coming into operation was an Irish citizen.”.
See 6.3 – Nordies are entitled to British Citizenship, so I guess that doesn’t mean them..
The 2004 act adds the following..
“(a) Subject to subsection (5), a person who is entitled under subsection (1) to be an Irish citizen shall be an Irish citizen from the date of his or her birth if—
(i) he or she does any act that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do, or
(ii) in the case of a person who is not of full age or who is suffering from a mental incapacity, any act is done on his or her behalf that only an Irish citizen is entitled to do.”,
So you become an Irish citizen as soon as you exercise Irish citizenship (e.g. apply for a passport, run for President etc)..
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0038/print.html
The Duke of Wellington had it bang on…
Wellesley was born in Dublin, the fourth son of the 1st Earl of Mornington. He always denied being Irish, however, saying that being born in a barn does not make someone a horse.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/wellington_01.shtml
it must be possible to have 2 pieces of conflicting legislation and as Britian does not have a written constitution then it is a matter of legal interpetation as to which is ‘correct’
Sammy etc
In terms of actual “citizenship” where does the Belfast Agreement come into conflict with the 1981 Nationality Act?
And I’d have a lot more confidence in the constitutional lawyers of both the UK and ROI govt in this matter than Sepp Blatter or FIFA- e.g. nobody’s yet answered my earlier point about FIFA suggesting ROI-born players with no family connections with the UK now being able to play for NI. NI is part of the UK, technically then is FIFA saying that they should also qualify for UK citizenship?
Have we agreed on what we disagree on yet?
Not quite yet, Mick;) that “both” regarding citizenship in Article 1 of the B.A is the clincher. Not to worry, the ID card isn’t going to happen anyway…and I’m off for a pint now!
(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.
Admin/Mick
“I’m interested in only one thing: finding out what the national status of those of us born in Northern Ireland after partition actually is”
I’m not into quoting massive paragraphs of legal jargon that can be interpreted any way people wish.
I seem to remember that the GFA clearly allowed anyone born in the North to declare themselves as Irish Ctizens or British Citizens or both.
That seems clear enough to me.
If one was born in the North and lived there for 100 years without actually applying for a passport/specific citizenship – then one is legally eligible to claim to be an Irish citizen or British citizen or, indeed, both.
There are many people in the North, Catholic and Protestant, whose lineage entitles them to dual nationality if they wish it.
Anyway, you seem to be claiming that anyone born in the North is British unless they specifically renounce it and take out Irish Citizenship.
That is NOT what the GFA says. If you’re born in the North, you can classify yourself as whatever you want – you don’t have to either renounce or claim anything.
This only changes when, in the case of someone who is not entitled to dual nationality, they decide to make a specific choice between Irish and British.
As I said, I’m not interested in taking anyone’s Britishness anyway from them. However, 11 years after the GFA, there are people on this thread whose purpose seems to be telling Catholics/Nationalists that they are British from birth unless they specifically renounce it.
That’s crap – it’s not what the GFA says nor was that it’s intention.
I have a feeling the precise nature of Nordies relationship to Irish citizenship would nee dreference to Schrödinger’s Cat.
Give the roughly zero percent chance of the present situation changing, and the argument si roughly over whether you are born an Irish citizen or just the right to have Irish citizenship from, can someone please explain to me the purpose of the bloody argument other than
1. pedantry
2. winding people up
Ulick,
I think you have your names mixed up there! I wrote that last bit that you replied to, not Dave.
Kensei,
It might be pedantic, but it is interesting to try and get a legal understanding of a probably necessary political fudge.
Pete H
oneill,
Of ‘Unionist Lite’ I hope?
Ken,
3 Clearing up the actual basis for citizenship in Northern Ireland.
Billy,
If you look at the post, you’ll see that’s not quite where I started, but it is where we’re headed, I think.
As (a) Nordie(s), whether you/I assert your/my birthright to Irish citizenship or not, you’re/I’m still a Brit unless you/I tell the British Home Secretary you’re/I’m not.
Right lads, have a good one… I’ll check in tomorrow and see we can hit 200… :-0
Mick
3 Clearing up the actual basis for citizenship in Northern Ireland.
Article 2 and the relevant legislation. We past that point ages ago. The question has now devolved to the number of angels on the head of a pin.
More relvant question, Mick: to what purpose?