To what extent, do EU Member States preserve the competence to regulate, grant and withdraw Nationality, and consequently EU Citizenship?
Subquestions 1. What is the relation between nationality and EU Citizenship? 1.1 What exactly is the competence of Member States in matters of EU Citizenship? 1.2. Where do we find the legal basis awarding this competence?
2. How has the CJEU's interpretation of this competence changed over the years? 2.1. How has it been tweaked throughout jurisprudence?
3. What are the consequences of the rulings of the CJEU in regards MS competence? 3.1. What is the scope of EU law after this ruling? 3.2. Could it be deemed that the CJEU has overstepped this competence?
Introduction The treaties support
…show more content…
It is for each member state to lay down the criteria for acquisition of Nationality, which is the only way to access EU citizenship, therefore, I believe, the contradiction between that competence of the Member State and the actions of the CJEU in matters of EU citizenship is a very important and interesting topic of research.
Although it is obvious that matters of nationality affect individuals directly, and the court's activity is key, surpassing its obligations and what is established by the treaties and what is agreed between the MS and the EU is to say the least, arguable.
Chapter 1:
The Competence of Member States to regulate Matters of Nationality 1. How are Nationality and EU Citizenship related? 1. 1. What is exactly the competence of MS in matters of EU Citizenship? 1.2. Where do we find the legal basis awarding this competence?
In this chapter I intend to elaborate over the competence of the states in matters of nationality. I will begin by explaining the relationship between both concepts, nationality being the only way to acquire citizenship of the Union. Later, I intend to explain both the sources and what they state in order to then follow through in the next chapter on how I believe the CJEU, in its rulings, contradicts what is stated in the treaties.
Sources:
Treaty on the European Union: Article
Irene Bloemraad. The North American Naturalization Gap: AN Institutional Approach to Citizenship Acquisition in the United States and Canada. Retrieved from https://courses.ryerson.ca/@@/CF12EBC688315C67DED46723CFC1F310/courses/1/pog100_w14_01/content/_2488288_1/Bloemraad2002.pdf
One of the issues in Canada is Quebec’s campaign for independence. Quebec is one of the Canadian states. Quebecers mostly speak French and make up 25 per cent of population of Canada. Quebecers consider as they are one of the nations because they have been living there since 1608 but in contrast, Canada was founded in 1867. Since the 1960s till now campaign for Quebec’s sovereignty has been a big issue in Canada. However, Canada crossed the movement. Also Canada’s alliance, the United States views this issue with its own notions. They keep insist that there are no meanings and benefits Quebec become one of the sovereign nations. Quebecers oppose the notion, of course, and state there are meanings and evidences Quebec can be independence. Quebec can be sovereign nation because they have powers and skills to survive as one nation. They keep arguing and seeking for independence still. This essay will talk about opinions of Canada’s opposition, notion of Canada’s alliance, the United States, and thoughts and evidences that state Quebec can be sovereign country.
The steps to becoming a Canadian citizen are comprised of several components. The fact of the matter is that citizenship does not end when an individual obtains the documents that enable them to participate within civic duties and responsibilities. Based on the evidence of expert T.H. Marshall, within his academic essay entitled “Citizenship and Social Class”, the formation of social citizenship “promised greater economic equality, improvements in social welfare, services and education, and the opportunity for individuals to "share to the full in the social heritage and … live the life of a civilized being according to the standards prevailing in the society” (Marshall 1964). Social citizenship is also attributed as the basis of all forms of citizenship, yet is often debated whether it is currently possible and exercised by those of who it would benefit. According to the principles of T.H. Marshall’s literary work, social citizenship is active, as demonstrated through: the four core aspects citizenship, the basis of social policy, and the resulting actions taken by governing bodies.
A Path to Citizenship “What makes someone American isn’t just blood or birth but allegiance to our founding principles and faith in the idea that anyone from anywhere can write the next chapter of our story.” - President Barack Obama. The United States is the melting pot of the world. The great American country was built on immigration. Look around, so many people have ancestors that risked everything to come to the United States to make something of their lives, and the lives of their children.
Although there were numerous movements in promoting the unity of the European, but it seems to have failed. Robertson indicates the unity principle’s outcome is less than what is desired. Thereby, as Murat notes, the court will invariably grant a leeway to the state in deciding the cases namely, the ‘Margin of appreciation’. This maxim owes it genesis from a French term ‘marge d’ appreciation’ that deemed as a doctrine which gives way to a state’s discretion in their governance.
A Democratic Deficit in the EU The question over the legitimacy of the EU has been a nearly continuous debate and many commentators appear to agree that the EU suffers from a severe ‘democratic deficit’. There are many reasons why this perception is so widespread. As a multinational body it lacks the grounding in common history and culture upon which most individual polities can draw.
In order to understand why a commitment to human rights includes a commitment to open borders, we must understand why the right to migrate is a human right. This can be proven with a simple logical syllogism. We must first assume that all individuals have equal natural rights in the state of natural law, or the very primitive sense of man before government was formed. Locke defines the state of natural law as “a state of equality… all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one h...
...: Reassessing Legitimacy in the European Union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40 (4), pp. 603-24.
The territory of the European Union (EU) hosts roughly 500 million people. Are they all equal in their rights? Definitely not. One of legal dividing lines lies between the nationals of EU Member States (Citizen) and third-country nationals (TCNs) whose citizenship belongs to a non-EU country. Nationality therefore does matter in EU law: it confers different statuses.
In order to do that, first, the essay will define what understand by “jurisdiction” and the elements of the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Next, it analyses some key decisions and advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice and the European regional system in order to prove that extraterritoriality jurisdiction is already applicable and therefore, if the State fails to guarantee the rights contemplated in the human rights treaties, it incurs in international responsibility. Lastly, the essay will sum up the analysis and make some final remarks.
The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is a document which brings together all of the Fundamental Human Rights together in one, single document. Before the inception of EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the member states of the European Union had many conflicting opinions on what exactly a human right entailed, therefore the need for a single, codified document outlaying the basic Fundamental Human Rights was great. The Charter was issued in 2000 and at this time, according to Jesse Norman, The Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for Industry and Energy, ‘The charter was then described as a ‘solemn proclamation’ and was designed to strengthen the EU’S political legitimacy, containing rights and freedoms as well as strengthening the rights of
Gaining membership to the European Union (EU) has been a frustrating process for Turkey. The Near East nation began its campaign for EU membership nearly 30 years ago under the EU’s predecessor, the European Economic Community. In 2005, 18 years after beginning the application process, Turkey was finally invited to enter accession negotiations. The protracted delay was a result of unfavorable economic conditions in Turkey as well as Turkey’s tumultuous relationships with EU members Greece and Cyprus. Yet, the question remains: why hasn’t Turkey been granted membership to the EU?
Before we delve deeper into this topic, it is imperative to properly provide a definition of sovereignty and lay down some foundation on this topic. There are four different definitions of sovereignty – international legal sovereignty, Westphalia sovereignty, domestic sovereignty and interdependence sovereignty. International legal sovereignty deals with “the practices associated with mutual recognition, usually between territorial entities that have formal juridical independence” (Krasner 4). The main definition of sovereignty that this paper will use is the ...
whether they come or not will have a big impact on the EU. There are
...n. In this assignment I have covered the rights and responsibilities that the treaty contains and an explanation of the differences in wordings and I have also contextualised my understanding of the differences of wording against the Maori Worldview and the Declaration of Independence.