THE BOUNDARIES OF DISCRIMINATION IN CITIZENSHIP REVOCATION: LEGAL AND ETHICAL DILEMMAS FOR NATURALISED IMMIGRANTS

In recent years, hundreds of individuals have been stripped of their citizenship under the guise of safeguarding national security. As the threat of terrorism looms large, Western governments have increasingly resorted to this drastic measure as part of their counter-terrorism strategies, prompting debates about its compatibility with international law and its implications for fundamental human rights. Despite extensive discussions, significant uncertainty persists about whether citizenship revocation complies with international legal standards, including States erga omnes obligations. This article argues that while States have a legitimate interest in national security, such measures often risk contravening human rights and eroding international legal norms. Particular attention is given to the precarious position of naturalised immigrants, who are disproportionately targeted and often lack the same legal protections as birthright citizens, rendering them especially vulnerable to rights violations. Drawing on international legal instruments, case law, and scholarly perspectives, this article critically examines citizenship revocation’s legal and ethical dimensions and evaluates its alignment with international human rights obligations.