GUWonder

Let's take a theoretical dual US-Danish citizen born in the US with no other citizenship claims than the mentioned. At or after 18 years of age but before hitting say 20 or 21 years of age, they can pay big bucks to renounce US citizenship and keep Danish citizenship even if they have zero Danish stay history and zero Danish language skills before and after surrendering US citizenship.

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?

oliver2002

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?

CPH-Flyer

Based on the Italian or German citizenship they would still be allowed to move freely to Denmark. They are not being barred from entering, it is a matter of cintizenship, so Denmark mights say no-go on remaing Danish, but still welcome as a German.

GUWonder

That may be the argument the Danish government tries to use. Yet the fact is jointly this: that Danish citizens returning to Denmark have a different set of rights than German or Italian citizens returning to Denmark and that the Danish citizens' freedom of movement under EU treaties is undermined by a Danish residency requirement to have the right to transmit citizenship to a child born in another EU country beside Denmark. Denmark has an EU treaty opt-out related to citizenship too, but that's been relegated to irrelevance.

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.

I'm very aware of the Indian restrictions on dual-citizenship, both in general practice and otherwise. I deliberately chose it as an example, based on some very detailed exposure about how general enforcement in practice sometimes has run counter to legal policy as a whole and how the Indian Law and Home Ministries have sort of known this and thus the squeakiest wheels get the grease -- but that is tied to the Indian parent(s) not acting as if their foreign-born child is a citizen of the country of birth. The GoI isn't required to recognize the citizenship claim of foreign jurisdiction over Indian citizens born under a foreign jurisdiction.

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?

FT Guest xyzpdq

Regardless there is still freedom of movement - and yes having citizenship provides special previligies - that non-citizens do not have. Sort of the point.

GUWonder

The freedom of movement is compromised when the government de facto says you are to be made into a second class citizen of sort, even in the absence of any demonstration of having violated any laws, for using such right/freedom.

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.

Arctifox

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.

FT Guest xyzpdq

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

GUWonder

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.

CPH-Flyer

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.

GUWonder

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.

FT Guest xyzpdq

This has absolutely nothing to with freedom of movement what so ever. There may be other elements in your case - but it is not related to freedom of movement as intended and governed by the EU. There is no such thing as a EU citizenship.

GUWonder

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.

ksu

And of course one has the complication, that citizens of certain countries emphatically do not hold EU citizenship, but still have (nearly) all the rights of EU citizenship

CPH-Flyer

Though ECJ did actually allow Germany to strip Rottmann of his citizenship, and made no judgement of whether that should require Austria to reinstate his Austrian citizenship, as that should initially be left to the Austrian courts...