The case involve Mr. Abdulla Jaziri, a person of Kurdish origin and with Turkish citizenship is born and spent almost 21 years of his life in Berlin, Germany. Before coming to Germany, his parents were both born and lived for most of their lives in Van, a city in eastern Turkey. When Abdulla is born in Germany his parent apply for Turkish passport from Turkish consulate. At the age of 21, Abdulla decides to apply for German nationality. However there is one condition of German naturalization which is renunciation of Abdulla’s prior nationality. Although this condition can be exempted on a ground where it is hard for a person to renounce his prior nationality.
Abdulla contacts the Turkish consulate to renounce his Turkish nationality and never …show more content…
One of the theory of dual nationality is that, a state cannot apply diplomatic protection to one of its nationals who is also a national of another country. In other words, no government has the right to put an Individual under diplomatic protection against his/her state. This is also provided in Article 4 of the Hague Convention of 1930, which states that: “A State may not afford diplomatic protection to one of its nationals against a State whose nationality such person also possesses”. Whenever between two or more States, there is a dispute in an international court to determine the nationality of a claim, who has dual nationality, international reference should consider the domestic law of beneficiary states as well as factors including the major centres, the language spoken by family members, usual place of residence, acts of personal, social, political, economic and etc. This theory is called dominant …show more content…
Abdulla’s case, who had Turkish nationality for 21 years and at the age of 21 he tried to renounce his Turkish nationality to acquire German nationality. However, Mr. Abdulla did not get any reply from Turkish authorities of his renunciation of Turkish nationality and with that he gets German nationality. Now applying the legal provisions and Nottebohm case judgement, it can be said that Abdulla’s dominant and effective nationality is German. Considering the factors mentioned in the Nottebohm case, Mr. Abdulla had his habitual residence in Germany, further Mr. Abdulla had stronger factual and family ties with Germany, and according to fact patter he never went to Turkey before, which shows that he had a public life in Germany. As ICJ statute in Article 3 provides that a person with dual nationality shall be deemed a national of the state where ordinarily he exercises civil and political rights. By acquiring the German nationality Mr. Abdulla was able to enjoy his civil and political rights under German law. Although Turkey did not replied to his application of renunciation, but Mr. Abdulla did tried to quit his Turkish nationality as a condition to acquire German
Abdulla contacts the Turkish consulate to renounce his Turkish nationality and never …show more content…
One of the theory of dual nationality is that, a state cannot apply diplomatic protection to one of its nationals who is also a national of another country. In other words, no government has the right to put an Individual under diplomatic protection against his/her state. This is also provided in Article 4 of the Hague Convention of 1930, which states that: “A State may not afford diplomatic protection to one of its nationals against a State whose nationality such person also possesses”. Whenever between two or more States, there is a dispute in an international court to determine the nationality of a claim, who has dual nationality, international reference should consider the domestic law of beneficiary states as well as factors including the major centres, the language spoken by family members, usual place of residence, acts of personal, social, political, economic and etc. This theory is called dominant …show more content…
Abdulla’s case, who had Turkish nationality for 21 years and at the age of 21 he tried to renounce his Turkish nationality to acquire German nationality. However, Mr. Abdulla did not get any reply from Turkish authorities of his renunciation of Turkish nationality and with that he gets German nationality. Now applying the legal provisions and Nottebohm case judgement, it can be said that Abdulla’s dominant and effective nationality is German. Considering the factors mentioned in the Nottebohm case, Mr. Abdulla had his habitual residence in Germany, further Mr. Abdulla had stronger factual and family ties with Germany, and according to fact patter he never went to Turkey before, which shows that he had a public life in Germany. As ICJ statute in Article 3 provides that a person with dual nationality shall be deemed a national of the state where ordinarily he exercises civil and political rights. By acquiring the German nationality Mr. Abdulla was able to enjoy his civil and political rights under German law. Although Turkey did not replied to his application of renunciation, but Mr. Abdulla did tried to quit his Turkish nationality as a condition to acquire German