Comparative Citizenship and Aliens’ Rights

  • Atsushi Kondo
Part of the Migration, Minorities and Citizenship book series


Every country has its own unique history of migration policy and a specific context within which migration has taken place. For example, some countries have had colonies (Japan, France, UK and the Netherlands) and some countries have themselves been colonies (Australia, New Zealand and the USA). In the past some countries have been emigration states (Japan, Germany, Sweden and the UK). In recent times, we can classify states into classical immigration states (Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA),1 European immigration states (France, the UK, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany) and states with only modest levels of immigration (Japan). Table 11.1 shows the size of the foreign populations and foreign-born populations in the countries analysed in this book. Generally, foreign populations and foreign-born populations grew in the 1990s except in the Netherlands, where the foreign population fell due to high rates of acquisition of citizenship after the amendment of the administration of naturalisation practice.


Asylum Seeker Permanent Resident Global World Permanent Residence Foreign Population 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See United Nations, International Migration Policies (New York: United Nations, 1998), pp. 67–80.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ibid., p. 54; Virginie Guiraudon, ‘Citizenship Rights for Non-Citizens,’ in Christian Joppke (ed.), Challenge to the Nation-State (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 297–301.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    See Sarah A. Adams, ‘The basic right of citizenship: a comparative study,’ Backgrounder, Nos. 7–93 (Washington, DC: Center for Immigration Studies, 1993), p. 2.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Peter H. Shuck and Rogers M. Smith, Citizenship without Consent (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    See T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Between Principles and Politics: The Direction of U.S. Citizenship Policy (Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1998), p. 10.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    David A. Martin, ‘Membership Without Consent: Abstract or Organic?’ in The Yale journal of international law 11 (1985), pp. 283–4.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    See SOPEMI, Trends in International Migration — Annual Report 1994 (Paris: OECD, 1995), p. 160, table III. 2; United Nations, op. cit., note 1, p. 31, Box 1.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    Tomas Hammar, Democracy and the Nation State: Aliens, Denizens and Citizens in a World of International Migration (Aldershot: Avebury, 1990), p. 76.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    See Rainer Bauböck, Transnational Citizenship: Membership and Rights in International Migration (Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 1994), p. 32;Google Scholar
  10. Stephen Castles and Mark J. Miller, The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World 2nd edn (New York: Guilford, 1998), p. 241;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chikako Kashiwazaki, ‘Jus sanguinis in Japan: The Origin of Citizenship in a Comparative Perspective’, International Journal of Comparative Sociology vol. 39, no. 3 (1998), p. 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 11.
    Paul Weis, Nationality and Statelessness, 1956 (Westport: Hyperion, 1979), p. 3.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    See Allan Rosas and Markku Suksi, ‘Finland’ in Bruno Nascimbene (ed.), Nationality Laws in the European Union: Le droit de la nationalité dans l’union européenne (Milano: Butterworths, 1996), pp. 267–8;Google Scholar
  14. Allan Rosas, ‘Citizenship as a Process: The Concept of Nordic Citizenship’ in Siofra O’Leary and Teija Tiilikainen (eds), Citizenship and Nationality Status in the New Europe (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1998), pp. 53–62.Google Scholar
  15. 13.
    Saïd Bouamama, ‘Réinventer la société’, in Saïd Bouamama et al. (eds), La citoyenneté dans tous ses etats (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1992), pp. 325–6;Google Scholar
  16. C.W. de Wenden, Citoyenneté nationalité et immigration (Paris: Acantère, 1987), pp. 72–3.Google Scholar
  17. 14.
    J.P. Gardner, ‘What Lawyers mean by Citizenship’ in Commission on Citizenship (ed.), Encouraging Citizenship (London: HMSO, 1990), p. 71.Google Scholar
  18. 15.
    See Yasemin Nuhoglu Soysal, Limits of Citizenship (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994), p. 139;Google Scholar
  19. Peter H. Schuck, Citizens, Strangers, and In-Betweens (Oxford: Westview, 1998), p. 202.Google Scholar
  20. 16.
    Fritz Franz, ‘Renaissance des Niederlassungsrechts’ ZAR (1985), p. 14;Google Scholar
  21. Fritz Franz, ‘Der Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung zur Neuregelung des Ausländerrechts’, ZAR 1/1990, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar
  22. 17.
    Atsushi Kondo, Gaikokujin sanseiken to kokuseki [The Aliens’ Voting Rights and Citizenship] (Tokyo: Akashi Shoten, 1996), p. 18;Google Scholar
  23. Atsushi Kondo, ‘Gaikokujin’ no Sanseiken: Denizenship no hikaku kenkyu [A Comparative Study about Denizenship] (Tokyo: Akashi Shoten, 1996), pp. 12–13.Google Scholar
  24. 18.
    Tomas Hammar, ‘Legal Time of Residence and the Status of Immigrants’, in Rainer Bauböck (ed.), From Aliens to Citizens (Aldershot: Avebury, 1994), p. 189.Google Scholar
  25. 19.
    Rainer Bauböck, Immigration and the Boundaries of Citizenship (Centre for Research in Ethnic Relations University of Warwick, 1992), p. 8;Google Scholar
  26. Rainer Bauböck, ‘Changing the Boundaries of Citizenship’, in Rainer Bauböck (ed.), From Aliens to Citizens (Aldershot: Avebury, 1994), p. 226.Google Scholar
  27. 21.
    See Kay Hailbronner, Einbürgerung von Wanderarbeitnehmern und doppelte Staatsangehörigkeit (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1992), pp. 100–101.Google Scholar
  28. 22.
    Ruth Donner, The Regulation of Nationality in International Law, 2nd edn (Irvington-On-Hudson: Transnational, 1994), p. 214;Google Scholar
  29. Europarat, ‘Zweites Protokoll zur Änderung des Übereinkommenes über die Veringerung von Mehrstaatigket und die Wehrpflicht von Mehrstaatern’ in Klaus Barwig et al. (eds), Vom Auslander zum Burger (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1994), pp. 411–12.Google Scholar
  30. 23.
    Appendix: European Convention on Nationality and Explanatory Report, in Síofra O’Leary and Teija Tiilikainen (eds), Citizenship and Nationality Status in the New Europe (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1998), pp. 211, 243.Google Scholar
  31. 24.
    Hans van Amersfoort, ‘Migration Control and Minority Policy: The Case of the Netherlands’ in Grete Brochman and Tomas Hammar (eds), Mechanism of Immigration Control (Oxford: Berg, 1999), pp. 138–9.Google Scholar
  32. 25.
    Rupert Scholz and Arnd Uhle, ‘Staatsangehörigkeit und Grundgesetz’ NJW no. 21 (1999), p. 1515.Google Scholar
  33. 29.
    See Jonas Widgren, The Key to Europe (Stockholm: Fritzes, 1994): SOU 1994: 135, p. 70.Google Scholar
  34. 30.
    There is another case in Hungary. Kees Groenendijk et al., Security of Residence of Long-Term Migrants: A Comparative Study of Law and Practice in European Countries (Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 1998), p. 99.Google Scholar
  35. 33.
    William Rogers Brubaker, ‘Membership without Citizenship: The Economic and Social Rights of Noncitizens’, in William Rogers Brubaker (ed.), Immigration and the Politics in Europe and North America (Lamham: University Press of America, 1989), p. 156.Google Scholar
  36. 34.
    See Jens Magleby Sorensen, The Exclusive European Citizenship: The Case for Refugees and Immigrants in the European Union (Aldershot: Avebury, 1996), p. 60.Google Scholar
  37. 35.
    Thomas Faist, ‘Immigration, Integration, and the Welfare State’, in Rainer Bauböck et al. (eds), The Challenge of Diversity (Aldershot: Avebury, 1996), p. 257.Google Scholar
  38. 36.
    Hans van Amersfoort. ‘International Migration and Civil Rights: the Dilemmas of Migration Control in an Age of Globalisation’ in Elspeth Guild (ed.), The Legal Framework and Social Consequences of Free Movement of Persons in the European Union (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1999), p. 76.Google Scholar
  39. 38.
    Peter Broeder and Guus Extra, ‘Language’ in Hans Vermeulen (ed.), Immigrant Policy for a Multicultural Society. A Comparative Study of Integration, Language and Religious Policy in Five Western European Countries (Brussels: Migrant Policy Group, 1997), pp. 93–4.Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    Thomas Faist, Social Citizenship for Whom? (Aldershot: Avebury, 1995), pp. 41–2.Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    Astrid Auer, Civil Services in the Europe of Fifteen (Maastricht: EIPA, 1996), pp. 40–41;Google Scholar
  42. Matthias Niedobitek, ‘Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes in den Mitgliedstaaten der EG’, in Siegfried Magiera and Heinrich Siedentopf (eds), Das Recht des öffentlichen Dienstes in der Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Gemeinschaft (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1994), pp. 59–62.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ronald G. Landes, The Canadian Polity 4th ed. (Ontario: Prentice-Hall Canada, 1995), p. 352. However, pursuant to section 23 of the Constitution Act 1867, British subjects may be appointed to the Senate.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Peter J. Hanks, Constitutional Law in Australia (Sydney: Butterworths, 1991), pp. 43–53.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Report of the Royal Commission on the Electoral System, Towards a Better Democracy (1986), p. 232.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    In the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, although electoral rights had been granted to resident aliens in many states in the USA, such alien’s vote were abolished by the rise of nationalism. See Gerald L. Neuman, ‘“We are the People”: Alien Suffrage in German and American Perspective’, Michigan Journal of Law vol. 13 (1992), p. 303;Google Scholar
  47. Jamin B. Raskin, ‘Legal Aliens, Local Citizens: The Historical, Constitutional and Theoretical Meanings of Alien Suffrage’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review vol. 141 (1993), pp. 1462–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    92-308 DC (9.4.1992) and 92-312 DC (2.9.1992) in Louis Favoreu, Recueil de jurisprudence constitutionnelle 1959–1993 (Paris: Litec, 1994), pp. 500, 508.Google Scholar
  49. 51.
    Jörg Sennewald, ‘Kommunalwahlrecht für Ausländer?’ Verwaltungsrundschau 1981, p. 83Google Scholar
  50. 52.
    It is forbidden in France for EU citizens to be a deputy mayor or participates in the Senate election. As to German states, see Katarina Barley, Das Kommunalwahlrecht für Ausländer nach der Neuordnung des Art. 28 Abs. 1 S. 3 GG (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1999), pp. 121, 140.Google Scholar
  51. 54.
    See Tomas Hammar, Invandrarkandidater i 1979 års kommunara val (Stockholm: EIFO, 1982), p. 37; Hammar, op. cit., note 9, at 181; Statiska Central-byrån, Tema Invandrare ‘(Stockholm: SCB, 1991), p. 114;Google Scholar
  52. Tomas Hammar, ‘Participation politique et droits civils en Suede’ in Andrea Rea (ed.) Immigration et racisme en Europe (Brussels: Interventions, 1998), p. 157;Google Scholar
  53. Henry Back and Maritta Soininen, ‘Invandrarna, demokratin och samhället’, Föevaltingskolans (Göteborg) rapporter no. 2 (1996), pp. 57, 63. Furthermore, Table 11.5 is based on the information from Tomas Hammar.Google Scholar
  54. 55.
    Rinus Penninx et al., The Impact of International Migration on Receiving Countries: the Case of the Netherlands (The Hague: NIDI, 1994), p. 215. In the elections of 1986 approximately 25 aliens were elected in municipal councils. In the elections of 1998 more than 50 aliens were elected in the municipal councils. SeeGoogle Scholar
  55. Kees Groenendjk and Paul Minderhoud, ‘The Netherlands’ in Rainer Bauböck et al.Rechtliche Instrumente der Integration von Einwanderern im Europäischen Vergleich (Wien: European Centre, 2000) p. 337.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Atsushi Kondo 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Atsushi Kondo

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations