Weaponised Citizenship: Should international law restrict oppressive nationality attribution?

Citizenship is generally considered an aspirational status that entitles its holder to a set of rights to be secured and perfected, including through prudent deployment of international law instruments and institutions relating to human rights. But what when citizenship, and its international counterpart, nationality, is wielded not as a shield that protects the dignity and personhood of its bearer but rather as a sword that states can command to harm or to oppress? Nationality attribution can be oppressive for both individuals and states. In the former case, it serves to denude an individual of rights they would have enjoyed but for the attribution. In the latter situation, it functions as a weapon to threaten or destabilise vital interests of other states. Should international law continue to refrainfrom intervening in a status the attribution of which is regarded as a sovereign prerogative? In her lead essay for this GLOBALCIT forum Neha Jain argues that international law should do more in situations of oppressive nationality. The ten contributors to this debate exploring the “dark side” of citizenship and potential remedies in international law include Jelena Džankić, Eleanor Knott, Lindsey Kingston, Ramesh Ganohariti, Timothy Jacob-Owens, Bronwen Manby, Peter Spiro, Rainer Bauböck, Noora Lori and Lior Erez.