Ius Soli Basis in the Acquisition of Nationality by Birth
Hande ÜnsalPeople who gained citizenship at birth continue to make up a predominant part of the global population. Therefore, the principles and procedures for the acquisition of nationality by birth are critical for both individuals and states. The two fundamental principles for acquiring nationality by birth are ius sanguinis (descent, lineage, and blood basis) or ius soli (birthplace and soil basis). In the traditional sense of ius soli, being born on the territory of a state is sufficient to acquire the nationality of that state. However, in the post-World War II period, ius soli became increasingly engaged in preventing statelessness and attributing nationality to second- and third-generation immigrants. Regarding the “statelessness preventive function” of ius soli, children who cannot acquire the nationality of any state due to their parents and/or who have been “found” in the country are given the nationality of their birth place. In the use of ius soli for the attribution of nationality to second- or third-generation immigrants by birth, some conditions regarding the mother/father are sought in addition to the fact that the child was born in that state’s territory. The study’s primary goal is to investigate these three applications of ius soli. In this context, problems that have arisen or may arise in practice are examined alongside regulations in international and national laws and general global trends.
Doğum Anında Vatandaşlığın Kazanılmasında Ius Soli Esası
Hande ÜnsalVatandaşlık bireyler bakımından, “hak”, “genellik” ve “eşitlik” mülahazalarıyla gündeme gelirken, devletler bakımından, “hükmedilecek topluluğu” belirleme yetkisi nedeniyle egemenliğin önemli bir veçhesi olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. Göç hareketlerindeki artışlara koşut olarak, devletler, vatandaşlığın sonradan kazanılmasına ilişkin imkanları genişletmektedirler. Buna rağmen vatandaşlıklarını doğum anında kazanan kişiler, halen dünya nüfusunun ağırlıklı bir kısmını oluşturmaktadır. Bu nedenle doğum yoluyla vatandaşlığın kazanılması konusunda benimsenen ilke ve usuller hem bireyler hem de devletler bakımından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Doğumla vatandaşlığın kazandırılması hususunda başvurulan iki temel esas ius sanguinis (soybağı esası, kan esası) veya ius soli (doğum yeri esası, toprak esası)’dir. Çalışmanın konusunu oluşturan ius soli esası kapsamında çocukla devletin bağının kurulmasında “doğum yeri” belirleyici unsur olmaktadır. Ius soli’nin geleneksel kullanımında bir devletin ülkesinde doğmuş olmak o devlet vatandaşlığının kazanılması için yeterli olmaktadır. Bununla birlikte, II. Dünya Savaşı sonrası dönemde ius soli, giderek yaygınlaşan bir şekilde, vatansızlığı önleme ve ikinci ve üçüncü kuşak göçmenlere vatandaşlık kazandırma işlevini de üstlenecek şekilde kullanılmaya başlamıştır. Ius soli’nin vatansızlığı önleyici işlevinde, ülkede doğmuş ve ana-babasına bağlı olarak herhangi bir devletin vatandaşlığını kazanamayan çocuklara ve/veya ülkede bulunmuş çocuklara o ülke devletinin vatandaşlığının doğumla izafesi sağlanmaktadır. Ius soli’nin görece yeni bir kullanımı olan ikinci/üçüncü kuşak göçmenlere doğum anından itibaren vatandaşlık izafesini sağlayıcı işlevinde ise çocuğun ülkede doğmuş olmasının yanı sıra ana/babasına ilişkin bazı koşullar da aranmaktadır. Çalışma temel olarak ius soli’nin anılan bu üç işlevinin incelenmesi amacına hizmet etmektedir. Bu bağlamda uygulamada ortaya çıkan ve çıkması muhtemel sorunlar, uluslararası ve ulusal hukuklardaki düzenlemeler ve dünya çapındaki genel eğilimlerle birlikte inceleme konusu yapılmaktadır.
In parallel with the increase in cross-border mobility, states are expanding the possibilities for naturalization. Nevertheless, people who acquired their nationality by birth still constitute a predominant part of the world’s population. In other words, the person’s will does not play a role in the nationality acquired by birth. Despite this, nationality significantly impacts a person’s flow of life. However, a person can be born without the nationality of any state, that is, become stateless. The statelessness status,which has negative consequences for the child who requires state services during his/her developmental period, can also have a negative impact on his/her adulthood. Therefore, we can argue that the provisions of the nationality laws regarding the acquisition of nationality by birth play an important role in an individual’s life course.
According to the established rule of international law, each state is free to choose who its nationals will be. Two basic principles, namely ius sanguinis and ius soli, have long been engaged to attribute nationality by birth. However, as the practices reveal, adhering solely to one of these principles in nationality laws may lead to situations such as the child having a different nationality from her/his parents or being stateless. As a result, nationality laws generally use one of these principles as the primary foundation and the other as a complementary one. In this context, using ius soli as a supplement has become very common for children who cannot acquire the nationality of any state because of their parents. In addition, ius soli has become an established provision of international agreements on preventing or reducing statelessness. Although the widespread use of ius soli has not been sufficient to eliminate the statelessness by birth, its adoption plays a crucial role in reducing the number of statelessness status for children who cannot acquire nationality relying on their parents.
The complementary use of ius soli is also utilized to cover children who have been “found” in the territory of the state in question. The birth in the territory of that state is a sine qua non condition for attribution of nationality via ius soli. However, in many cases, definitive birthplace proof is impossible for foundlings. For this reason,additional provisions (presumption of birth in the state’s territory) stating that the foundling to be considered “born in the country” are an important part of international agreements and nationality laws. However, these regulations may differ significantly from one another. These distinctions are particularly relevant to the proof of the presumption of birth in the country and the age of the foundling. Nevertheless, the wordings of the presumption of being born in the country are sometimes criticized for causing the person to ambiguity and damaging the principles of legal security and continuity of nationality.
In contrast, one can say that the basis that a state has preferred may change over time. States enacts nationality laws to determine the community of people affiliated to them and approaches in defining this community may change. For example, states that encourage migration due to population decrease may accept ius soli to allow the children of immigrants to integrate into society more quickly, but if they want to control migration flows over time, they may abandon or restrict the use of ius soli in favor of the ius sanguinis basis. Furthermore, the states’ approaches to these two bases are affected not only by their policies but also by the general developments in the world. The ius soli basis, which was once associated with the feudal regime and accepted as a reactionary method due to its connection with the land, is now described as a “liberal” method because it allows children to acquire a nationality independent of their parents’ nationality. Especially in the last century, in parallel with the increase in cross-border movements and migration flows, ius soli is considered advantageous in terms of providing nationality to second- or third-generation migrants by birth, thus serving more effectively for the child’s acceptance as a member of society.
Hence a relatively new use of ius soli, which could also be referred to as “new generation ius soli,” become widespread, especially in the last 30 years. In this use of ius soli, nationality is attributed to the child born in the country in certain conditions. These conditions are frequently related to the parents, such as having a permanent residence permit or having lived in the country for a certain period. In terms of nationality laws, the use of “new generation ius soli” reveals progressive and inclusive practices. Thus, the laws that include such provisions are qualified as “liberal citizenship laws.” However, it should not be ignored that for a nationality law to be called “liberal,” the other law provisions in question, such as dual nationality provisions, should also be considered.
There are also criticisms of using the ius soli, particularly the traditional use of the ius soli. The critics focus on the fact that ius soli encourages “birth tourism,” causing the child to acquire the nationality of a state other than the one into which he or she will eventually integrate. As a result, states with more developed social state aspects find the use of ius sanguinis over the use of ius soli to keep the population they are responsible for under control.
The study is divided into four chapters: The first chapter, titled “An Overview of the Concept of Nationality and Acquisition of Nationality by Birth” examines the function of the concept of nationality, its place in social life, and its significance to the individual before discussing methods of acquiring nationality at birth. The goal of the first chapter is to sketch out the theoretical framework. The second chapter of the study, titled “Historical Overview of the Development and Applications of the Ius Soli Basis,” examines the emergence and development of the ius soli and its changes, as well as the pros and cons of this basis. The third chapter is titled “The Basic Element of the Ius Soli: Territory.” The indispensable condition for attribution of nationality on ius soli basis is the birth of the person in question on the territory of the state whose nationality is in question. However, the term “territory” could be interpreted differently in practice. Within the scope of the chapter, the concept of territory will be examined with examples from national laws and practice. The fourth and last chapter of the study is called the “Usages of Ius Soli.” It examines three different usage patterns of ius soli in depth. The study is completed with a conclusion that includes suggestions and a general evaluation.
