The SAS | EuroBonus Forum Kafé
#4261
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Let's take a theoretical dual Indian-Danish citizen born in Malaysia with no other citizenship claims than the mentioned Indian and Danish citizenship. At or after the age of majority in India but before hitting say 20 or 21 years of age, they can make sure to get noted as not being Indian and keep Danish citizenship even if they have zero Danish stay history and zero Danish language skills before and after surrendering Indian citizenship.
If the objective is to retain dual-citizenship, then it gets a bit more complicated. But the Danish government has rejected issuing Danish passports to some who had valid Danish passports due to their valid birthright citizenship ending up invalidated due to the lack of "extensive" "ties". I am also sure that some have engaged in fraud with the population register systems at times and that could give the appearance of "ties" sufficient to be taken as having met the retention requirements. Of course most of that registration fraud isn't related to wanting to retain Danish citizenship.
On a lighter note, when are the SAS lounges scheduled for closing during the summer holiday period?
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 21, 2017 at 4:01 pm
#4262
Moderator: Lufthansa Miles & More, India based airlines, India, External Miles & Points Resources
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MUC
Programs: LH SEN
Posts: 48,313
Just FYI to example above: India doesn't allow you to hold two citizenships, and starts enforcing this at age <21 yrs.
Wouldn't this Danish requirement violate the EU freedom of movement principle? Lets say a Dane moves to Italy or Germany (has happened, will happen again), gets children there, who can be Italian/German & Danish by birth. 21 years later the Danes say 'sorry, never lived here, so bye bye'. This would be a clear violation of their EU obligation to allow free movement of people all thru the EU?
Wouldn't this Danish requirement violate the EU freedom of movement principle? Lets say a Dane moves to Italy or Germany (has happened, will happen again), gets children there, who can be Italian/German & Danish by birth. 21 years later the Danes say 'sorry, never lived here, so bye bye'. This would be a clear violation of their EU obligation to allow free movement of people all thru the EU?
#4263
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,387
Just FYI to example above: India doesn't allow you to hold two citizenships, and starts enforcing this at age <21 yrs.
Wouldn't this Danish requirement violate the EU freedom of movement principle? Lets say a Dane moves to Italy or Germany (has happened, will happen again), gets children there, who can be Italian/German & Danish by birth. 21 years later the Danes say 'sorry, never lived here, so bye bye'. This would be a clear violation of their EU obligation to allow free movement of people all thru the EU?
Wouldn't this Danish requirement violate the EU freedom of movement principle? Lets say a Dane moves to Italy or Germany (has happened, will happen again), gets children there, who can be Italian/German & Danish by birth. 21 years later the Danes say 'sorry, never lived here, so bye bye'. This would be a clear violation of their EU obligation to allow free movement of people all thru the EU?
#4264
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Can't say I'm a fan of the "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than other animals" when it comes to a person's right to transmit citizenship to her/his own children.
Just FYI to example above: India doesn't allow you to hold two citizenships, and starts enforcing this at age <21 yrs.
Wouldn't this Danish requirement violate the EU freedom of movement principle? Lets say a Dane moves to Italy or Germany (has happened, will happen again), gets children there, who can be Italian/German & Danish by birth. 21 years later the Danes say 'sorry, never lived here, so bye bye'. This would be a clear violation of their EU obligation to allow free movement of people all thru the EU?
Wouldn't this Danish requirement violate the EU freedom of movement principle? Lets say a Dane moves to Italy or Germany (has happened, will happen again), gets children there, who can be Italian/German & Danish by birth. 21 years later the Danes say 'sorry, never lived here, so bye bye'. This would be a clear violation of their EU obligation to allow free movement of people all thru the EU?
About the Danish example you note, expect more citizenship cases in court in many places. The proportion of the public that gets hit by this kind of border control policy has been rising as family backgrounds become more diverse, planes get increasingly treated like flying buses, and cross-border lifestyles somewhat more convenient and affordable.
Are there any closures scheduled for the SK lounges at ARN, CPH, OSL this summer?
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 22, 2017 at 2:50 am
#4265
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,935
Regardless there is still freedom of movement - and yes having citizenship provides special previligies - that non-citizens do not have. Sort of the point.
#4266
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
A class of law-abiding citizens being subjected to worse terms for passing on citizenship to their progeny is a way in which a country enacts an "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than other animals" policy. The Danish government acts as if not all Danish citizens are equal to all Danish citizens, and this is a form of that. This is a situation of special privileges for a group of law-abiding Danish citizens being denied to another group of law-abiding Danish citizens. So much for Janteloven/Jantelagen.
#4267
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: CPH
Posts: 106
I don't think that this has anything to do with the "Freedom of Movement", as this is more related to countries/companies not being allowed residence, work, etc. due to their citizenship. So if a Dane wants to work in Spain they are not allowed to be denied because they are Danish, for example. Citizenship laws, in my understanding, have nothing to do with that.
#4268
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,935
Citizenship grant your certain rights for that country above and beyond the freedom of movement. But again has absolutely nothing to do with right of free movement.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyour...FTU_2.1.3.html
#4269
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Has nada to do with freedom of movement. Freedom of movement is that you as a EU citizen you are free to live and work in any EU country - irespective of which EU citizenship you hold. A pretty remarkable feet that many take for granted (as the UK is slowly realizing these days :-))
Citizenship grant your certain rights for that country above and beyond the freedom of movement. But again has absolutely nothing to do with right of free movement.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyour...FTU_2.1.3.html
Citizenship grant your certain rights for that country above and beyond the freedom of movement. But again has absolutely nothing to do with right of free movement.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyour...FTU_2.1.3.html
An EU citizen losing EU national citizenship due to exercising the freedom of movement right is covered under EU treaty rights.
The freedom of movement and citizenship rights/benefits/losses due to such exercise have much to do with each other, as ECJ case law has already indicated. It's also explicitly indicated in this directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...77:0123:en:PDF .
This kind of situation is going to come up at the ECJ, unless and until there are EUxits and/or EU treaty changes pulling the rug out from under the feet of potential plaintiffs/appellants. I guess time could perhaps prove me wrong, but I doubt it will on this unless and until there are the mentioned sort of EU treaty changes pulling the rug out from those who find themselves being second class citizens of a sort -- even if it's due to progeny of a citizen being treated as second or third class citizens.
From the Rottmann case and forward, things got more interesting -- the notion of EU citizenship has become a limit on the power of the EU Member States to deprive people of their EU Member State nationality.
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 22, 2017 at 2:32 pm
#4270
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,387
An EU citizen losing EU national citizenship due to exercising the freedom of movement right is covered under EU treaty rights.
The freedom of movement and citizenship rights/benefits/losses due to such exercise have much to do with each other, as ECJ case law has already indicated. It's also explicitly indicated in this directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...77:0123:en:PDF .
This kind of situation is going to come up at the ECJ, unless and until there are EUxits and/or EU treaty changes pulling the rug out from under the feet of potential plaintiffs/appellants. I guess time could perhaps prove me wrong, but I doubt it will on this unless and until there are the mentioned sort of EU treaty changes pulling the rug out from those who find themselves being second class citizens of a sort -- even if it's due to progeny of a citizen being treated as second or third class citizens.
From the Rottmann case and forward, things got more interesting -- the notion of EU citizenship has become a limit on the power of the EU Member States to deprive people of their EU Member State nationality.
The freedom of movement and citizenship rights/benefits/losses due to such exercise have much to do with each other, as ECJ case law has already indicated. It's also explicitly indicated in this directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...77:0123:en:PDF .
This kind of situation is going to come up at the ECJ, unless and until there are EUxits and/or EU treaty changes pulling the rug out from under the feet of potential plaintiffs/appellants. I guess time could perhaps prove me wrong, but I doubt it will on this unless and until there are the mentioned sort of EU treaty changes pulling the rug out from those who find themselves being second class citizens of a sort -- even if it's due to progeny of a citizen being treated as second or third class citizens.
From the Rottmann case and forward, things got more interesting -- the notion of EU citizenship has become a limit on the power of the EU Member States to deprive people of their EU Member State nationality.
The case of becoming stateless will also not happen, as the law (albeit currently) states that people will not be allowed to become stateless. I don't think there is a true risk of this provision being changed.
Then there are the cases of dual EU/non-EU citizenship. They would be relevant for Rottmann, but not a discussion of restrictions on free movement within, but rather free movement to the EU.
I wonder how common it is for applications of children of Danish citizens born and raised outside Denmark, to have the application to retain Danish citizenship turned down.... One for Google on a not busy day.
#4271
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
But the example of someone having lived exclusively in say Germany until 21 having German Citizenship as well and then being denied a Danish citizenship, would not be deprived of a EU citizenship. So Rottmann would not apply. Nor would it impeed free movement, as the German citizen would be able to move freely to Denmark.
The case of becoming stateless will also not happen, as the law (albeit currently) states that people will not be allowed to become stateless. I don't think there is a true risk of this provision being changed.
Then there are the cases of dual EU/non-EU citizenship. They would be relevant for Rottmann, but not a discussion of restrictions on free movement within, but rather free movement to the EU.
I wonder how common it is for applications of children of Danish citizens born and raised outside Denmark, to have the application to retain Danish citizenship turned down.... One for Google on a not busy day.
The case of becoming stateless will also not happen, as the law (albeit currently) states that people will not be allowed to become stateless. I don't think there is a true risk of this provision being changed.
Then there are the cases of dual EU/non-EU citizenship. They would be relevant for Rottmann, but not a discussion of restrictions on free movement within, but rather free movement to the EU.
I wonder how common it is for applications of children of Danish citizens born and raised outside Denmark, to have the application to retain Danish citizenship turned down.... One for Google on a not busy day.
For a court case to apply in whole or in part to another situation doesn't require that the circumstances between one case and another situation be completely alike in just about every way. That's just not a given in these kind of matters.
If wanting to google this for some experiences of those born abroad to a Danish parent and having problems due to the Danish citizenship retention requirements for such Danes born abroad, then look for those who don't have -- or who have had problems getting -- a Danish statsborgerretsbevis or indfřdsretsbevis for use at or around 21/22+ years of age. But given that 3 months of being in CPR prior to age 22 is enough for retain Danish citizenship and that it's illegal for Denmark to make its citizens stateless, there aren't a whole lot of people in a world of hurt because of this to such degree as to really care too much about it.
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 22, 2017 at 10:58 pm
#4272
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,935
Rottmann applies as it includes the concept of EU citizenship and turned it into a vehicle limiting EU member states from stripping member state nationality. This concept and ECJ jurisdiction over member state's stripping citizenship is not limited to just circumstances whereby a person becomes stateless or would be entirely stripped of EU citizenship as a result of a loss of EU member state nationality. It also applies to the freedom of movement across borders within the EU, to the EU or from the EU.
For a court case to apply in whole or in part to another situation doesn't require that the circumstances between one case and another situation be completely alike in just about every way. That's just not a given in these kind of matters.
If wanting to google this for some experiences of those born abroad to a Danish parent and having problems due to the Danish citizenship retention requirements for such Danes born abroad, then look for those who don't have -- or who have had problems getting -- a Danish statsborgerretsbevis or indfřdsretsbevis for use at or around 21/22+ years of age. But given that 3 months of being in CPR prior to age 22 is enough for retain Danish citizenship and that it's illegal for Denmark to make its citizens stateless, there aren't a whole lot of people in a world of hurt because of this to such degree as to really care too much about it.
For a court case to apply in whole or in part to another situation doesn't require that the circumstances between one case and another situation be completely alike in just about every way. That's just not a given in these kind of matters.
If wanting to google this for some experiences of those born abroad to a Danish parent and having problems due to the Danish citizenship retention requirements for such Danes born abroad, then look for those who don't have -- or who have had problems getting -- a Danish statsborgerretsbevis or indfřdsretsbevis for use at or around 21/22+ years of age. But given that 3 months of being in CPR prior to age 22 is enough for retain Danish citizenship and that it's illegal for Denmark to make its citizens stateless, there aren't a whole lot of people in a world of hurt because of this to such degree as to really care too much about it.
#4273
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Article 20 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: "Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union."
And the ECJ has been making it more and more clear that there is such a thing as EU citizenship and it has a meaning, including in relation to the freedom of movement.
While EU citizenship doesn't exist in the absence of being a citizen of an EU member state, EU citizenship exists, is a different citizenship than EU member state citizenship, and provides for a different set of rights (and provides for rights in a different way) than member state citizenship itself does. Rottmann isn't the only ECJ case that has made this increasingly clear to more and more people. The ECJ's citizenship-realted case law on EU citizenship is what it is -- even if some don't like what it may mean for an EU member state.
I find it sort of amusing to having this discussion with Danish citizens, especially when Denmark has the Faroe Islands situation and what all that means with regard to the EU and even EU citizenship. Are you a Danish citizen resident in the Faroe Islands? Then I could see what you mean by saying there is no such thing as EU citizenship. But for Danish citizens resident in and around Copenhagen -- whether in Denmark or not -- they are both EU citizens and citizens of Denmark.
The ECJ and EU Member States have all legally acknowledged that there is such a thing as EU citizenship.
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 26, 2017 at 3:56 am
#4274
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KSU (Kristiansund N, Norway)
Programs: SAS EBD/ *G
Posts: 2,163
#4275
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,387
There is such a thing as EU citizenship, and it does have to do with the freedom of movement.
Article 20 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: "Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union."
And the ECJ has been making it more and more clear that there is such a thing as EU citizenship and it has a meaning, including in relation to the freedom of movement.
While EU citizenship doesn't exist in the absence of being a citizen of an EU member state, EU citizenship exists, is a different citizenship than EU member state citizenship, and provides for a different set of rights (and provides for rights in a different way) than member state citizenship itself does. Rottmann isn't the only ECJ case that has made this increasingly clear to more and more people. The ECJ's citizenship-realted case law on EU citizenship is what it is -- even if some don't like what it may mean for an EU member state.
I find it sort of amusing to having this discussion with Danish citizens, especially when Denmark has the Faroe Islands situation and what all that means with regard to the EU and even EU citizenship. Are you a Danish citizen resident in the Faroe Islands? Then I could see what you mean by saying there is no such thing as EU citizenship. But for Danish citizens resident in and around Copenhagen -- whether in Denmark or not -- they are both EU citizens and citizens of Denmark.
The ECJ and EU Member States have all legally acknowledged that there is such a thing as EU citizenship.
Article 20 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: "Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union."
And the ECJ has been making it more and more clear that there is such a thing as EU citizenship and it has a meaning, including in relation to the freedom of movement.
While EU citizenship doesn't exist in the absence of being a citizen of an EU member state, EU citizenship exists, is a different citizenship than EU member state citizenship, and provides for a different set of rights (and provides for rights in a different way) than member state citizenship itself does. Rottmann isn't the only ECJ case that has made this increasingly clear to more and more people. The ECJ's citizenship-realted case law on EU citizenship is what it is -- even if some don't like what it may mean for an EU member state.
I find it sort of amusing to having this discussion with Danish citizens, especially when Denmark has the Faroe Islands situation and what all that means with regard to the EU and even EU citizenship. Are you a Danish citizen resident in the Faroe Islands? Then I could see what you mean by saying there is no such thing as EU citizenship. But for Danish citizens resident in and around Copenhagen -- whether in Denmark or not -- they are both EU citizens and citizens of Denmark.
The ECJ and EU Member States have all legally acknowledged that there is such a thing as EU citizenship.