Rachel Chandler, the Chinese-born child of a Chinese citizen and a Canadian citizen, was rendered stateless by an amendment of the Canadian Citizenship Act. Rachel’s Canadian father was born abroad in Libya to an American mother and a Canadian father who was himself born in Ireland. The change in Canadian citizenship law deprived Rachel’s father of the right to pass his citizenship down to his child. China does not recognize children born out of wedlock, like Rachel, as citizens.
The problem is that without a legal citizenship, there was no country responsible for protecting Rachel’s rights. She could not legally board an airplane without documentation. She had no right to schooling. Rachel legally did not exist.
According to the news reports, the Canadian government was unhelpful. Fortunately, Rachel was eligible to obtain Irish citizenship through her paternal grandfather, an Irishman who naturalized as a Canadian.
I’m curious as to the outcome of another, even more tragic case of a child being rendered stateless through no fault of her own: Alexandra Austin, a Romanian girl who lost her Romanian citizenship when she was adopted by a Canadian couple. Her adoptive parents then adopted an infant girl and simply sent Alexandra back to Romania in 1991. Although reclaimed by her birth mother, Alexandra was denied access to an education and health services and her mother had no parental rights over her. As of 2005, she was attempting to sue the Canadian couple who had abandoned her.
That is really interesting (the first story, I mean). Rules about citizenship always seem so Byzantine to me. I know that they’re there for a reason, but there are no rooms for exceptions, which leads to cases like these.
I’ve always been slightly bitter about the fact that I never got US citizenship. I got a green card when I was 11 but then my parents moved us to Korea when I was 13 and I lost the green card. Really, through no fault of my own. Culturally I’m pretty much American and English is my first language. I think there’s a law that states you can keep your green card if you can prove that you were detained against your will from being physically present in the US. Which I totally was, but my parents didn’t exactly keep me locked up in a cage, so I guess that doesn’t count.
As for the second story, if it is true, then it is an outrage. Children are not TVs. You can’t just send them back because you don’t like them. I hope she wins her case.
I can understand your annoyance, but at least you have citizenship in one civilised country.
Similarly, I’m slightly annoyed about U.K. citizenship rules: if my mother had been my father (and vice versa, of course), I would be a dual U.K.-Australian citizen. However, back then, the rule was (and still is) that the child of a U.K.-born U.K.-citizen father was a U.K. citizen, but not the child of a U.K.-born U.K.-citizen mother.
But fortunately statelessness is fairly rare these days: it was much more common in the 1940s among refugees from countries that ceased to exist or disowned some of those born within their boundaries as a result of WW2. I think that every country should have a rule that a child born within its territory who is not eligible for any other citizenship should have citizenship of their birthplace, but unfortunately some countries (e.g., Libya and Romania) don’t have such a rule. (Of course, the U.S. doesn’t need such a rule, given that almost anyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen.)
This was kind of a dick move on Canada’s part, since they’re a party to the UN Treaty on the Reduction of Statelessness, and China isn’t.
If Canada’s laws stripped a person of their Canadian citizenship and thus rendered her stateless after she was born, they should have granted her citizenship on application. If she was stateless at birth, that falls under the “has always been stateless” category and they also should have granted her citizenship.
I am not alleging they weren’t legally justified in rejecting the application (I don’t know if they were or weren’t), but, like I said, dick move.
Giles are you sure?
It looks as though you would have right of abode and may be able to register as a British citizen, but the site isn’t exactly easy to understand.
Yes, I could get the right of abode if I wanted to reside in the U.K. – but it’s not the same thing as U.K. citizenship. In addition, my children have the right to live and work in the U.K. based on their grandmother’s birth and citizenship – and one of them is currently doing that.
