Unraveling the myth around dual citizenship

UNRAVELING THE MYTH AROUND DUAL CITIZENSHIP

I am baffled by the widespread press and public misunderstanding of the difference between Dual Citizenship and the Negro clause in the Liberian Constitution. Since H.E Madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, President of the Republic of Liberia, addressed the Nation in January 2015, there have been reports and calls on various talks about the President’s proposal to the Legislature to pass a law that will allow Liberians hold dual citizenship. Most of the callers and talk shows hosts as well as newspaper editors insinuate and or tend to show some level of ignorance about the difference between dual citizenship and the Negroes and Non-negro descent clause in the Liberian Constitution.

According to article 27b of the Constitution of Liberia,

‘in order to preserve, foster and maintain the positive Liberian culture, values and character, only persons who are Negroes or of Negro descent shall qualify by birth or by naturalization to be citizens of Liberia’ (Liberian Constitution 1986, Article 27b).

This "Negro Descent Clause" in the Liberian Constitution is far different and divorced from the issue of dual citizenship that is not a constitutional matter. It is the Alien and Nationality Law (a legal statute) that prevents dual citizenship. According to the Alien and Nationality Law of Liberia (approved 15 May 1973 with Amendments approved 9 May 1974)

‘a person who is a citizen of Liberia whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his   citizenship by

(a)    Obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application, upon the application of a duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization of a parent having legal custody of such person; provided that citizenship shall not be lost by any person under this section as the result of the naturalization of a parent or parents while such person under the age of 21 years, unless such person shall fail to enter Liberia to establish a permanent residence prior to his twenty-third birthday; or

(b)   Taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof; or

(c)    Exercising a free choice to enter or serve in the armed forces of a foreign state, unless, prior to such entry or service, such entry or service is specifically authorized by the President;

(d)   Voting in a political election in a foreign state or voting in an election or plebiscite to determine the sovereignty of a foreign state over foreign territory; or

(e)    Making a formal renunciation of Liberian nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of Liberia in a foreign state in such form may be prescribed by the Secretary of State.’

(Alien an Nationality Law 1974, pp. 188-189)

This statute (the Alien and Nationality Law 1974) can be repealed by the National Legislature, and it is that statute that the President has requested the National Legislature to repeal. It is therefore advisable for those who are for or against the President’s proposed bill to lobby the Liberian Legislature to achieve their desires. Simply put, the question of dual citizenship does not require a constitutional amendment, and it is not linked with the Negro clause in the Liberian Constitution.

The Liberian Constitution does not stop dual citizenship. Article 28 of the Liberian Constitutions states that

‘any person, at least one of whose parents was citizen of Liberia at the time of the person's birth, shall be a citizen of Liberia; provided that any such person shall upon reaching maturity renounce any other citizenship acquired by virtue of one parent being a citizen of another country. No citizen of the Republic shall be deprived of citizenship or nationality except as provided by law; and no person shall be denied the right to change citizenship or nationality’.

In view of the above, the media needs to first understand the difference between dual Citizenship and the Non-Negro clause barring Whites from becoming citizens of Liberia. It is this understanding that would allow the press to propagate the rightful analysis in their reportage and editorials. Remember that, among other things, the press can inform, entertain, educate, analyze and report.

Tom Kaydor

thkaydor@gmail.com

Critique and Analysis of John Quiggin's Blog Article

Report on blog post by John Quiggin

<http://johnquiggin.com/2014/04/28/stratification-in-tertiary-education/>.

This essay reports on John Quiggin’s blog (http://johnquiggin.com/) where, on 28 April 2014, he posted ‘stratification in tertiary education’. In this post, Quiggin (2014) argues that those calling for Australia’s adoption of the US’ highly stratified tertiary educational system are advocating for increased stratification in Australia’s tertiary educational system. He notes that the Ivy League universities (like Harvard and Princeton) in the US provide undergraduate education to only a tiny proportion of young Americans (about one per cent). Hence, should Australia adopt similar system, each ‘Australian Ivy League’ would only absorb about a thousand students annually, and this could deny thousands of students the opportunity to obtain university education from institutions of their choice. Quiggin points out that tertiary education systems reflect and reconstruct the society to which they belong; as a result, the highly stratified systems in the US and UK, signify and strengthen ‘a class-bound society in which the best thing one can do is to choose the right parents’.  Although Quiggin acknowledges Australia’s less stratified education system, he opposes increased stratification, which could widen the gap between the group of eight and the rest of the universities in the country. He therefore recommends that the country should reduce stratification in the education system, and calls on policymakers to consider tertiary education like other public services provided to all.

Indeed, university education should be treated like other social services that a state must provide to its citizens without discrimination.  According to Jeffrey Haynes (2008), ‘the people are the real wealth of a nation’, hence the achievement of the basic objective of their development requires the creation of an enabling environment for them to live longer, healthier and creative lives (p. 12). Equal access to quality education creates that enabling environment and breeds a more productive society. Support for quality education like other social services is therefore an investment in the human capital of a country (Gans et al. 2013). This increases productivity of the labour force and its income, thereby leading to economic growth and prosperity. Consequently, countries should not stratify educational systems, because this hinders citizens’ access to equitable education. The ability of a citizen to get quality university education should depend on his or her ability to enrol and complete a university.

Stratified tertiary education is not unique to the US, UK and other developed countries. It also exists in developing countries.  In Liberia, for example, the free American slaves who founded the nation set up the then singular state owned Liberia College in 1862, which later became University of Liberia (UL) in 1951, to train state elites and their children.  Indigenous Liberians (95 percent of the population) were not allowed to enrol at the University of Liberia up to the 1960s, unless they were servants of the elites, and changed their indigenous names to western ones (Wreh 1976). Graduates from the UL were given preferential employment in the public and private sectors. This stratified educational system perpetuated illiteracy amongst the majority indigenous tribes. Lack of tertiary education meant lack of employment opportunities for the majority. This also meant that 95 per cent of the country’s population remained illiterate and could only engage in subsistence farming to feed themselves, but could not promote economically beneficial ventures.  This system entrenched a minority elitist aristocracy in Liberia for 133 unbroken years, undermined productivity and stalled economic growth amidst enormous natural resources, thereby increasing poverty (Sawyer 1991). Suppression of the indigenous majority led to the over throw of the Liberian oligarchy on 12 April 1980 by 17 illiterate non-commissioned army officers from the indigenous tribes; thus the beginning of the two decades civil unrest in Liberia (Youboty 2004).

Tertiary education is linked with one of the ten lessons from economics, ‘a country’s standard of living depends on its ability to produce goods and services’ (Gans et al. 2013, p. 13).  The variation in the standard of living across countries is a function of divergent levels of productivity. Educational standards and productivity are fundamentally linked. The better educated a country’s population, the more productive its citizens, and the better living standard they enjoy. Therefore, making tertiary education equitable means affording all citizens equal access and opportunity to quality education. Quality education will improve living standard, hence policymakers need to raise productivity by ensuring that workers are well educated and equipped with the requisite tools and technology required to produce goods and services.

References

Gans, J, King, S, Stonecash, R & Mankiw, G 2013, Principles of Economics, China Translation and Printing Services, Beijing, China.

Haynes, J 2008, Development studies: short introductions, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.

Sawyer, A 1992, The emergence of autocracy in Liberia: tragedy and challenge, ICS, San Francisco, California. 

Wreh, T 1976, The love of liberty … the rule of President William V.S. Tubman in Liberia 1944-1971, C Hurst and Company, London, UK.

Youboty, J 2004, A nation in terror: the true story of the Liberian Civil War, USA.

<http://johnquiggin.com/2014/04/28/stratification-in-tertiary-education/>.