Proportionality of terrorism-based deprivation of citizenship under the ECHR

The article tackles the problem of the proportionality of terrorism-based deprivation of citizenship under the ECHR. The author analyses ECtHR cases concerning deprivation of citizenship on such grounds, as well as other cases involving citizenship in various contexts. The approach of the Court to such cases embraces the analysis of arbitrariness and the consequences of denationalisation. Nevertheless, the article outlines that the exact content of these two fragments of the standard is rather obscure. Apart from Article 8 ECHR – being the most frequently used in citizenship litigation – Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 3 of Protocol No. 4 are also included in the analysis. This allows elaboration of the criteria that should be used for assessment of the proportionality of denationalisation. Finally, some remarks are made as to the legitimacy of denationalisation from the standpoint of the principle of proportionality intertwined with the irreversibility of such a sanction.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The International Journal of Human Rights
Published
2026-08-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2026.2711674
Primary Topic
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Proportionality of terrorism-based deprivation of citizenship under the ECHR

Emil Śliwiński
The International Journal of Human Rights
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
article

Proportionality of terrorism-based deprivation of citizenship under the ECHR

Emil Śliwiński
article en

Abstract

The article tackles the problem of the proportionality of terrorism-based deprivation of citizenship under the ECHR. The author analyses ECtHR cases concerning deprivation of citizenship on such grounds, as well as other cases involving citizenship in various contexts. The approach of the Court to such cases embraces the analysis of arbitrariness and the consequences of denationalisation. Nevertheless, the article outlines that the exact content of these two fragments of the standard is rather obscure. Apart from Article 8 ECHR – being the most frequently used in citizenship litigation – Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 3 of Protocol No. 4 are also included in the analysis. This allows elaboration of the criteria that should be used for assessment of the proportionality of denationalisation. Finally, some remarks are made as to the legitimacy of denationalisation from the standpoint of the principle of proportionality intertwined with the irreversibility of such a sanction.

The International Journal of Human Rights
University of Warsaw (PL)
Narodowym Centrum Nauki
Reduced inequalities, Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.