Speaker 1: This is a podcast from BFM 89.9. The Business Station.
Speaker 2: Hello and welcome to Beyond the Ballot box. I'm Du Johan.
Speaker 2: We're talking about statelessness again today because it really is
Speaker 2: crunch time right now. The Home Minister Dato Sri Saif
Speaker 2: Na has said that the proposed amendments to the Federal
Speaker 2: Constitution on citizenship matters will be presented to the cabinet
Speaker 2: on the eighth of March which is this Friday.
Speaker 2: The cabinet will then decide if the bill is ready
Speaker 2: to be tabled in parliament.
Speaker 2: So what are stateless people and the NGOS working with
Speaker 2: the stateless concerned about? Well, the proposal by the whole ministry,
Speaker 2: a mixed bag. One brilliant step forward, several worrying steps
Speaker 2: back with severe consequences, but it's not too late to
Speaker 2: stop this. On today's show, I'm joined by an expert
Speaker 2: in statelessness at an international level. She's associate professor,
Speaker 2: professor rather go from the Peter mcmullin Center on statelessness
Speaker 2: at the University of Melbourne. She also wrote a chapter
Speaker 2: on women in the book called Nationality and Statelessness Under
Speaker 2: International Law, which is what we are going to be
Speaker 2: focused on in this episode. As always, the show is
Speaker 2: available as a podcast. You can find us on the
Speaker 2: BFM APP, Spotify or where we get your podcast from.
Speaker 2: Rather welcome to the show. Thanks Dash. It's a pleasure
Speaker 2: to be here. Thank you very much for having me.
Speaker 2: Um Let's start with an overview of the current landscape
Speaker 2: of statelessness among women at an international level. How severe
Speaker 2: is the situation? So, it's an excellent question bin because
Speaker 2: uh the short answer is we don't know. And the
Speaker 2: simple reason for that is that statelessness is a bit
Speaker 2: of a hidden human rights issue.
Speaker 2: Uh And one of the reasons it's hidden is that
Speaker 2: states or governments don't tend to collect statistics on statelessness,
Speaker 2: much less disaggregate them. So what that means is that
Speaker 2: while the international community has a broad idea of how
Speaker 2: many stateless people there might be and that is um
Speaker 2: you know, anywhere between four and 10 or 15 million
Speaker 2: people globally, we really don't know the true number and
Speaker 2: we really don't know how many of those people would
Speaker 2: be women.
Speaker 2: So it's difficult to know how severe the problem is.
Speaker 2: If you also look at some of the reasons why
Speaker 2: statelessness exists, uh The main root cause of statelessness is
Speaker 2: discrimination and that is usually discrimination on the basis of
Speaker 2: race or on on the basis of ethnicity. So again,
Speaker 2: it doesn't really give you a good idea of how
Speaker 2: many women will be affected there is. However, the separate
Speaker 2: issue of gender discrimination and nationality laws and that's something
Speaker 2: that we can discuss further.
Speaker 2: So before we get to that, including some of the
Speaker 2: root causes, because it is so difficult to really see
Speaker 2: how prevalent the situation of steepness involving statelessness is. But
Speaker 2: we do know it is serious, it impacts a lot
Speaker 2: of people, millions of people. Could we study trends? Are
Speaker 2: there notable trends? Do you get a sense that things
Speaker 2: are getting better or worse perhaps over the past several decades?
Speaker 2: How do you see that?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's uh looking back, particularly say over the last
Speaker 2: 1020 even up to 50 years, you know, you definitely
Speaker 2: see uh spikes um in particular parts of the world
Speaker 2: or in particular situations. Of course, you have legacy issues
Speaker 2: of statelessness that have existed for a long time now.
Speaker 2: Um including, for example, because of the dissolution of certain States,
Speaker 2: like the former Soviet Republic or the former Yugoslavia when
Speaker 2: those states dissolved and became new states, a lot of
Speaker 2: people fell through the cracks and we're still looking at
Speaker 2: are those legacy situations of statelessness. But if we look
Speaker 2: at trends, say over the last 10 or 20 years,
Speaker 2: we do see that those trends where we've seen increases
Speaker 2: in the number of statelessness uh is because of discrimination,
Speaker 2: particularly racial or ethnic discrimination. And a couple of examples
Speaker 2: that I can point to, for example, include
Speaker 2: uh people of Haitian descent in the Dominican Republic who
Speaker 2: were left stateless after a court decision in 2003. Um
Speaker 2: and that was very much motivated by uh the ethnicity
Speaker 2: of these people who had lived in the Dominican Republic
Speaker 2: for generations who had previously been entitled to Dominican Republic nationality,
Speaker 2: but then who were stripped of it. And perhaps even
Speaker 2: more recently, if you look at 2019 as close to home. Well,
Speaker 2: I'm in Australia but as close to home as India
Speaker 2: um in the state of Assam, we saw an exercise
Speaker 2: which is called the updating of the national register of citizens.
Speaker 2: Uh a register of citizens for that state which uh
Speaker 2: after having been updated, left out 1.9 million people whose
Speaker 2: status right now remains a little unclear but could be
Speaker 2: said to be stateless because there is no state that
Speaker 2: is recognizing them currently as their nationals.
Speaker 2: I think that's a very interesting point that doesn't get
Speaker 2: stressed enough. How would you contextualize the root causes of
Speaker 2: statelessness before we dive into, you know, women specifically? Because
Speaker 2: when we look at, let's say the refugee situation, right?
Speaker 2: I think sometimes it's
Speaker 2: a little bit easier to grasp what is going on
Speaker 2: because you see either countries getting bombed by foreign invasion
Speaker 2: or there is a civil war that causes this displacement
Speaker 2: of millions of people who are fearing persecution and they
Speaker 2: are looking for asylum in other countries. How do you
Speaker 2: look at the root causes of statelessness? Is it more
Speaker 2: towards just discriminatory laws within each nation state.
Speaker 2: Uh It's a, it's an excellent point you make and
Speaker 2: you're right, it is somehow easier to conceptualize of who
Speaker 2: a ref refugee is. If you look at the definition
Speaker 2: of a refugee, it in law, it actually talks about
Speaker 2: um the fact that to be a refugee, you need
Speaker 2: to have been persecuted. So it already gives you a
Speaker 2: sense of what the cause might be. Um When it
Speaker 2: comes to statelessness, the definition doesn't really give you any clues.
Speaker 2: The legal definition is a person who is not recognized by,
Speaker 2: as a citizen,
Speaker 2: by any country under the operation of its laws. Um
Speaker 2: But if you dig deeper and you look at the
Speaker 2: situation uh that has led to statelessness, there are actually
Speaker 2: multiple root causes. I mean, the most prevalent of them
Speaker 2: is discrimination, be it on the basis of ethnicity, religion
Speaker 2: or race. Um But there are other root causes as well.
Speaker 2: So for example, um statelessness can result, as I mentioned
Speaker 2: earlier as a result of state succession. So um where
Speaker 2: a state um either dissolves and becomes new states or
Speaker 2: combines with another territory to form a new state. Um
Speaker 2: that can be a cause of statelessness when people don't
Speaker 2: get the nationality of the new states that have been formed.
Speaker 2: Um It can also happen because of a lack of
Speaker 2: what we call safeguards in nationality laws. So for example,
Speaker 2: you have a situation where sometimes Children unfortunately are abandoned
Speaker 2: at birth or when they're very young for multiple reasons. Um,
Speaker 2: but sometimes it's very difficult to establish, um, who their
Speaker 2: parents are.
Speaker 2: And in that case, um, it's recommended that countries have
Speaker 2: safeguards in their nationality laws to say, well, ok, if
Speaker 2: I find an abandoned child or a foundling that child absent,
Speaker 2: their parents should immediately acquire the nationality of a state because,
Speaker 2: uh, getting a nationality is really important for accessing other rights.
Speaker 2: But the fact of the matter is that more than
Speaker 2: a third of states around the world don't have this
Speaker 2: fundamental safeguard in their nationality laws. So lack of lack
Speaker 2: of safeguards can be another root cause of statelessness. Another
Speaker 2: cause can be um lack of proper birth registration or
Speaker 2: birth certification. Now, having a birth register, having your birth
Speaker 2: registered or, or your birth certified in and of itself
Speaker 2: is not akin to giving, being given nationality.
Speaker 2: But what birth registration does is it records who your
Speaker 2: parents are and where you were born. And those two
Speaker 2: factors are really important for determining, determining which nationality you're
Speaker 2: entitled to acquire. So if you don't have a birth
Speaker 2: certificate or if your your your birth has not been registered,
Speaker 2: then those key pieces of information are missing. And it's
Speaker 2: much easier then for authorities to say, well, you know,
Speaker 2: you don't have your
Speaker 2: proof of which nationality you should be acquiring. You, you know,
Speaker 2: you're not entitled to our nationality. So that can be
Speaker 2: another root cause. And the list can go on, there
Speaker 2: are actually quite a few uh different root causes, but
Speaker 2: I would go back to the fact that the main
Speaker 2: one is discrimination.
Speaker 2: So with that in mind, when it comes to women,
Speaker 2: women who are stateless in particular, um what are the
Speaker 2: root causes of this when it comes to women in particular?
Speaker 2: And I'm wondering if there are legal and cultural barriers
Speaker 2: that impact women's nationality rights across the world.
Speaker 2: So it's, it's a really good question. And you know,
Speaker 2: on the one, on the one hand, I would say
Speaker 2: that there's not been enough research done to know whether
Speaker 2: there are specific root causes that impact on women more
Speaker 2: than they do on men. Um
Speaker 2: It's, it's hard to say that, you know, uh discrimination
Speaker 2: on the basis of race affects women more than men,
Speaker 2: it would affect both sexes equally. However, there are some
Speaker 2: specific examples of where women might be more vulnerable to statelessness.
Speaker 2: And let me give you those. Um you can take
Speaker 2: the example of say a nationality law which says that
Speaker 2: if you acquire your spouse's nationality, you immediately lose your
Speaker 2: previous nationality.
Speaker 2: But then the nationality law is silent on what happens when,
Speaker 2: let's say, for example, you get divorced from that man
Speaker 2: and the nationality law law of the husband says that
Speaker 2: upon divorce, um you know, uh a foreign woman immediately
Speaker 2: loses that nationality, that she acquired from her husband.
Speaker 2: So in that case, unless the, the nationality law of
Speaker 2: the woman of the woman's country has a safeguard mechanism
Speaker 2: that says, you know, this woman will reacquire her nationality,
Speaker 2: then she will be left stateless. We also have examples
Speaker 2: and this is getting a little bit technical of nationality
Speaker 2: laws that say, um you know,
Speaker 2: in order to acquire another nationality of another person, you
Speaker 2: first need to renounce your, your original nationality. Now, we've
Speaker 2: had situations of women where they have said that they
Speaker 2: are going to get married to a man from a
Speaker 2: different country, they want to acquire that man's nationality, they
Speaker 2: renounce their original nationality, but then the marriage never happens
Speaker 2: for whatever reason
Speaker 2: and then they're stuck in limbo because they can't actually
Speaker 2: reacquire their original nationality. So in this case, women are
Speaker 2: more impacted than men, but it's quite, it's quite a
Speaker 2: specific example.
Speaker 2: And on to your question about how um both in
Speaker 2: terms of legal and cultural terms, um women might, women's
Speaker 2: nationality rights might be, might be more affected. Um Certainly
Speaker 2: in terms of a legal matter, what we do tend
Speaker 2: to see is that nationality laws which discriminate when it
Speaker 2: comes on the basis of sex. Uh in terms of
Speaker 2: women being able to pass their nationality on to their
Speaker 2: spouses or to their Children.
Speaker 2: Um, as a sort of legal matter, many of these
Speaker 2: uh nationality laws that prevail in 24 countries uh in
Speaker 2: the case of women who can't pass nationality equally to
Speaker 2: their Children as men, is that in many cases, these
Speaker 2: are hangovers from the time that these countries were colonized.
Speaker 2: So they're not the sort of original laws of the,
Speaker 2: of the country that we're speaking of, but they're rather
Speaker 2: uh laws that have been passed on over time, including
Speaker 2: when
Speaker 2: those countries were colonized. So they reflect a bit of
Speaker 2: a bygone era in terms of the fact that the
Speaker 2: colonizing state may have actually changed its own laws to
Speaker 2: become gender equal. But the newly independent state has kept
Speaker 2: a previous law that was gender discriminatory.
Speaker 2: So that, that we can see it as having an
Speaker 2: impact both legally in terms of women's rights. But also
Speaker 2: in terms of the cultural practice where, for example, the
Speaker 2: new elites in the country will insist that actually um
Speaker 2: the gender discrimination is not actually a colonial hangover, but
Speaker 2: is actually part and parcel of the state religion or
Speaker 2: is actually um a cultural norm, which is in fact
Speaker 2: not the case. Uh It's something that has been inherited.
Speaker 2: So
Speaker 2: I want to know what is the impact of being
Speaker 2: stateless towards the people who are stateless and also like
Speaker 2: what is the impact in general? And I know both
Speaker 2: stateless men and women face harsh challenges that impact cuts across.
Speaker 2: Like you said, if it's, you know, if people are
Speaker 2: stateless because of their ethnicity, then, you know, regardless whether
Speaker 2: you're a man or a woman.
Speaker 2: Um You know, you are going to be impacted by,
Speaker 2: by the situation, but just looking at it through an
Speaker 2: intersectional lens, what are, what is the distinct challenges or
Speaker 2: impact that stateless women go through?
Speaker 2: Thanks very much for that question. And again, it's a
Speaker 2: good one and I think it's an area in which
Speaker 2: a lot more research needs to be done.
Speaker 2: Um But just speaking, you know, in general terms, uh
Speaker 2: uh Hannah Arendt who's a famous philosopher, um who was
Speaker 2: a survivor of the Holocaust once said that nationality is
Speaker 2: the right to have rights. Now, we all know that
Speaker 2: universal human rights exist and that they should exist regardless
Speaker 2: of whether or not you have a citizenship. But in
Speaker 2: practical matters, um if you don't have citizenship, it can
Speaker 2: affect your access to other basic rights, like right to education,
Speaker 2: right to healthcare.
Speaker 2: Um And for stateless people, this can be really devastating
Speaker 2: because it means that they often can't access the very
Speaker 2: simple services that others can. Um And it has a
Speaker 2: direct impact on their lives in terms of their livelihoods,
Speaker 2: in terms of their ability to earn
Speaker 2: uh a decent living in terms of them to access
Speaker 2: healthcare when they're sick in, in terms of their ability
Speaker 2: to even move freely within a country or beyond its borders.
Speaker 2: Um So it really, really strips away at kind of
Speaker 2: what it means to exist. Um as a as a
Speaker 2: full human being, in terms of being able to function
Speaker 2: uh in just a very normal fashion.
Speaker 2: Now, when it comes to women, uh and the specific
Speaker 2: impacts that that women face, there are some particular examples
Speaker 2: where if you look at it from an intersectional lens,
Speaker 2: you can see that women are more impacted. One of
Speaker 2: the one of the impacts of being stateless is that
Speaker 2: you're not considered to be a legal person before the law.
Speaker 2: And in fact, many stateless people will be very uh
Speaker 2: nervous to approach law authorities. Um because in some cases
Speaker 2: without paperwork, without an indication of why they are on
Speaker 2: the territory,
Speaker 2: they face detention or imprisonment simply for existing basically.
Speaker 2: Um And you can imagine a situation uh in certain
Speaker 2: communities as with any communities where for example, domestic violence
Speaker 2: exists and domestic violence is generally perpetrated by men against women.
Speaker 2: Uh across the board, you can end up with a
Speaker 2: really bad situation where um women simply have nowhere to turn.
Speaker 2: They cannot go to law authorities, they cannot seek any
Speaker 2: kind of redress um because they are so fearful and
Speaker 2: this is something that would obviously impact women more than
Speaker 2: it would impact men.
Speaker 2: Um I think in other circumstances, um we see in
Speaker 2: different parts of the world where women take on a
Speaker 2: larger burden of, of child rearing. Um as is often
Speaker 2: the case, um all of those issues that affect Children
Speaker 2: who are stateless, the woman has to kind of compensate
Speaker 2: for that much more. Um So for example, I've seen
Speaker 2: situations where women because they want to ensure that their
Speaker 2: Children are able to access an education and often that
Speaker 2: might mean an education that's private
Speaker 2: pay for, take on ridiculous amounts of work, 34 jobs.
Speaker 2: Um Simply to ensure that their Children are on a,
Speaker 2: you know, close to a level playing field with their
Speaker 2: citizen counterparts. So it's the woman who's kind of having
Speaker 2: to make all these additional compensations, not to say anything
Speaker 2: of the, you know, emotional distress of having to see,
Speaker 2: for example, a child who's injured and not be able
Speaker 2: to take them to the hospital or receive appropriate medical care.
Speaker 2: Um But as I said, a lot of this is anecdotal.
Speaker 2: Um and I think that if a proper study was
Speaker 2: conducted into the intersectional kind of, as you say, um
Speaker 2: looking at the impact of stateless statelessness through an intersectional lens,
Speaker 2: I think we might uncover many, many more impacts um
Speaker 2: that are specific to women.
Speaker 2: What are the long term consequences of being stateless? Because
Speaker 2: even in Malaysia and in other countries, you sometimes come
Speaker 2: across examples of people who have been stateless across generations.
Speaker 2: You know, their parents don't have
Speaker 2: a sort of officially formal documents to say they are
Speaker 2: a citizen of X country or Y country, then they
Speaker 2: give birth and their Children grow up stateless as well.
Speaker 2: And their Children might then have Children who also grow
Speaker 2: up stateless. What is the impact of this?
Speaker 2: So I think that we can look at impacts at
Speaker 2: three levels. That's the impact on the individual who, whose
Speaker 2: family might have been, you know, stateless for generations. There's
Speaker 2: the impact on the stateless community itself. And then there's
Speaker 2: the impact on the, on the state or the government
Speaker 2: in which um these people are living.
Speaker 2: Um So I might discuss those quickly each in turn.
Speaker 2: So I think at the individual level, you know, you
Speaker 2: can imagine that if your mother has not had the
Speaker 2: benefit of going to school and your mother's mother has
Speaker 2: not had the benefit of going to school and your
Speaker 2: mother's mother's mother has not had the benefit of going
Speaker 2: to school. Um This has a trickle down
Speaker 2: effect on you as an individual in terms of your
Speaker 2: sense of self worth, in terms of any aspirations you
Speaker 2: might have in terms of uh your sense of hope
Speaker 2: and perhaps in some cases, the value you might put
Speaker 2: on uh certain things like education because it's just not
Speaker 2: something that you have had access to.
Speaker 2: Um And so I think likewise, um there have been
Speaker 2: some more recent studies done that have also looked at
Speaker 2: um the the mental health of individuals who have been
Speaker 2: intergenerationally stateless if I can put it that way. And
Speaker 2: it's devastating because Children have seen their parents grow up
Speaker 2: with little hope and likewise, um previous ancestors. Um and
Speaker 2: that sense of um uh hopelessness about the future um
Speaker 2: is really quite devastating um at the end,
Speaker 2: individual level. And it could also mean that even if
Speaker 2: uh the solution to statelessness, which technically is the grant
Speaker 2: of nationality does happen um in the near future, it's
Speaker 2: very unreasonable in that case to expect most people who
Speaker 2: have been deprived for so long of their rights to
Speaker 2: suddenly say, well, now I have this gateway, right? Let
Speaker 2: me go and access all these things when people have
Speaker 2: not had any um uh experience of doing that before.
Speaker 2: So it means that the ability to act
Speaker 2: those rights that are opened up as a result of
Speaker 2: having nationality is also diminished. And I think that, you know,
Speaker 2: we talk a lot of the idea of a second
Speaker 2: class citizen. I think that what statelessness does at the
Speaker 2: individual level is create a second class human. Um you know,
Speaker 2: a person who is really kind of um deprived in
Speaker 2: many ways, if you look at the community level, you
Speaker 2: can see this expanding this kind of sense of um exclusion,
Speaker 2: marginalization at the community level, which means that it can
Speaker 2: be harder to integrate over time.
Speaker 2: Um And it can be harder for at a community level,
Speaker 2: for even even if the solution of nationality is granted
Speaker 2: for this community to really integrate and become a cohesive
Speaker 2: part of, of society um I think it can also
Speaker 2: lead to intercommunal conflict. And we've seen this happen in
Speaker 2: different parts of the world where you have one part
Speaker 2: of the community that's living side by side with the
Speaker 2: citizen community. Um And they can see the, the vast
Speaker 2: discrepancies in, in their treatment and this, you know, can understand,
Speaker 2: kindly bubble over into conflict um or even in some cases,
Speaker 2: violence and then at the state level, you know, over time,
Speaker 2: if you have a large uh stateless population that has
Speaker 2: been stateless over time again, you have those same issues
Speaker 2: um of, of potential conflict.
Speaker 2: But if you look at it from the state's perspective
Speaker 2: as well, you really have a situation of what I
Speaker 2: would call multidimensional poverty where you've got people who are
Speaker 2: living in a situation where they're economically poorer, where they're
Speaker 2: less healthy, where they are less educated and this impacts
Speaker 2: the state ultimately. Um also in terms of its own
Speaker 2: development goals. Um and potentially even looking at things like
Speaker 2: uh tax revenue
Speaker 2: and so forth. So I think that the um the
Speaker 2: consequences of of being stateless over many generations is really
Speaker 2: very serious and quite underestimated on the show with me
Speaker 2: today is Associate Professor Radar Govi from the Peter mcmullin
Speaker 2: Center on statelessness at the University of Melbourne. We will
Speaker 2: continue our conversation after the break. Keep it here on
Speaker 2: beyond the ballot box. BFM 89.9.
Speaker 2: Welcome back to be on the ballot box, I'm Dustin Johan.
Speaker 2: And on the show with me today is Associate Professor Rada,
Speaker 2: go from the Peter mcmullin Center on statelessness at the
Speaker 2: University of Melbourne and we are talking about women and
Speaker 2: statelessness at an international level. This
Speaker 2: conversation will also be available as podcasts. You can look
Speaker 2: up beyond the ballot box on the BFM app, Spotify
Speaker 2: or where we get your podcast from. If you're listening
Speaker 2: to this on Spotify, do give us a follow and
Speaker 2: drop us a review, it would be really, really helpful.
Speaker 2: So rather, you wrote a book on Statelessness with Alice Edwards.
Speaker 2: And indeed, you told a story about a Lebanese mother.
Speaker 2: Um Mali, could you tell me about what she went
Speaker 2: through what you learned, you know, researching and following her story.
Speaker 2: So this was one of the first times that I
Speaker 2: had met women who were particularly affected by the issue
Speaker 2: of gender discrimination in nationality laws and in particular,
Speaker 2: um gender discrimination which prevents women from passing nationality to
Speaker 2: their Children on an equal basis as men or discrimination
Speaker 2: which prevents women from acquiring or changing uh or retaining
Speaker 2: their nationality on an equal basis as men.
Speaker 2: And Lebanon is one of those countries that has some
Speaker 2: of the most severe restrictions on an an ability of
Speaker 2: a woman to, to transfer her nationality. And in this case,
Speaker 2: um um Ali was, I think she was about 50
Speaker 2: years old. Um And she had been married to an
Speaker 2: Egyptian man. Um And she had seven Children with this man.
Speaker 2: Uh but for one reason or another, um the her
Speaker 2: husband had not completed the procedures that were necessary for
Speaker 2: him to register his Children as Egyptian
Speaker 2: as a Lebanese woman. Under the law of Lebanon, she
Speaker 2: was not permitted to pass her nationality on to any
Speaker 2: of her Children, but her husband could have passed his
Speaker 2: uh Egyptian nationality on, but he needed to, you know,
Speaker 2: complete all the procedures because they were living out of
Speaker 2: the country, they were living in Lebanon. Um But he
Speaker 2: didn't do so. And unfortunately he died. Um And then
Speaker 2: what she went through was, was nothing short of catastrophic
Speaker 2: because uh what she subsequently learned was that her husband's
Speaker 2: brother had actually sought custody of her seven Children
Speaker 2: and she did not want to hand them over to someone.
Speaker 2: She did not know she did not want to lose
Speaker 2: custody of them. So she decided to remain in Lebanon
Speaker 2: despite the fact that this would have meant that her
Speaker 2: Children would not acquire any nationality um at all. Um
Speaker 2: And she went through a real struggle because she had
Speaker 2: to get her Children through school. Um She uh part
Speaker 2: of her story was talking about how one of her
Speaker 2: Children had a bad accident and actually broke his arm
Speaker 2: and she had to make a call as an unqualified
Speaker 2: medical person as to whether it was severe enough to
Speaker 2: afford to go to a private hospital, hospital to get
Speaker 2: the bone set. Um And she made a decision that
Speaker 2: it was perhaps um you know, something that, that would
Speaker 2: heal adequately without that level of care. Um But she
Speaker 2: also saw a lot of difficulties once her Children became adults.
Speaker 2: So one of her Children actually married a Lebanese man
Speaker 2: but could not acquire his nationality. Um And
Speaker 2: furthermore, uh another one of her Children actually married a
Speaker 2: Lebanese woman and couldn't acquire the nationality from her either.
Speaker 2: So her Children were really stuck in this situation um
Speaker 2: of statelessness. And one of the things I remember she
Speaker 2: also told me was that she actually owned some property.
Speaker 2: And as a Lebanese woman, she could not pass her national,
Speaker 2: could not pass um this property on to her own Children.
Speaker 2: And she was really worried about what would happen to
Speaker 2: this property, this, you know, wealth that was in the
Speaker 2: family once she died because there was no one then
Speaker 2: for her to pass the property onto. And she did
Speaker 2: not want to take the risk of putting it in
Speaker 2: the name of a friend lest that arrangement not work
Speaker 2: out and it not be used for the benefit of
Speaker 2: her Children. So she went through a lot of mental anguish.
Speaker 2: Um and it seemed when I met her that that
Speaker 2: anguish was continuing because she could not see a way
Speaker 2: of getting her Children
Speaker 2: um out of the situation and she really felt very
Speaker 2: guilty about the fact that she'd had Children at all
Speaker 2: because she had not realized at the time that she'd
Speaker 2: had them, that they would not, they would be in
Speaker 2: this situation of statelessness. And she said she would not
Speaker 2: wish that on anyone.
Speaker 2: Is there? What do you know what her situation is
Speaker 2: right now? Is, does she, you know, has she managed
Speaker 2: to overcome the situation or do you have any context
Speaker 2: about that?
Speaker 2: Unfortunately, I don't, I have not kept in touch with her.
Speaker 2: Um Also by the way, her name has been changed
Speaker 2: just to predict her identity. But um that was quite
Speaker 2: a number of years ago that I, I met her
Speaker 2: and unfortunately, I don't know her current situation or that
Speaker 2: of her Children.
Speaker 2: What does international law rather say about statelessness? Are there
Speaker 2: any international human rights principles in which countries should sort
Speaker 2: of strive to adhere to?
Speaker 2: Uh yes, there are. So uh there's actually a whole
Speaker 2: international legal framework set up to address statelessness and central
Speaker 2: to that are two international conventions that are specifically designed
Speaker 2: to address statelessness. The first is the 1954 convention relating
Speaker 2: to the status of stateless persons. And that convention deals
Speaker 2: with what provides firstly, the legal definition of who a
Speaker 2: stateless person is, but also sets out key protections um
Speaker 2: in terms of basic rights that are to be afforded
Speaker 2: to people who
Speaker 2: are stateless And then the second convention is the 1961
Speaker 2: convention on the reduction of statelessness, um which is focused
Speaker 2: on reducing statelessness by preventing it. And it includes, um
Speaker 2: you know, certain provisions that states are encouraged to adopt
Speaker 2: to, for example, include those safeguards that I spoke about
Speaker 2: earlier to prevent childhood statelessness, such as that um uh
Speaker 2: provision related to foundlings uh who should acquire a nationality
Speaker 2: upon being being discovered. Um So these two conventions are
Speaker 2: sort of the central part of the international framework. The
Speaker 2: problem is that for a long time,
Speaker 2: uh being some of the earliest kind of international conventions.
Speaker 2: After the Second World War, the uptake was quite limited.
Speaker 2: We have seen an increase in the number of states
Speaker 2: becoming parties to these two conventions. But as we stand
Speaker 2: at the moment, the 1954 convention has approximately
Speaker 2: 100 states um signatory to it. So that's half of
Speaker 2: all the states in the world and the 1961 convention
Speaker 2: even less. Um So that's not a high rate of ratification,
Speaker 2: um which would indicate sort of the level of support
Speaker 2: that we would like to see.
Speaker 2: However, it's not all gloom and doom. As I said,
Speaker 2: these conventions are attracting um uh new signatories, which is excellent,
Speaker 2: which shows that states still see their relevance. Um But importantly,
Speaker 2: those two conventions have been complemented by other Human Rights treaties.
Speaker 2: Um And amongst these, uh maybe I'll highlight too,
Speaker 2: uh one is the convention on the rights of the child,
Speaker 2: which has been um, ratified by virtually every state in
Speaker 2: the world by the US. Um, and that, uh, convention
Speaker 2: is really important for protecting the right, uh to a
Speaker 2: nationality for a child. Article seven and article eight
Speaker 2: of that convention are specifically devoted to looking at the
Speaker 2: child's right to a nationality, including where a child would
Speaker 2: be left stateless. Um, so those are really important. And
Speaker 2: then getting back to our topic of, you know, um
Speaker 2: women and nationality rights. The other convention is the convention
Speaker 2: on the elimination of discrimination against women.
Speaker 2: Um Article nine of that convention has again, safeguards which
Speaker 2: say that, you know, states must not discriminate against women
Speaker 2: in nationality matters and must ensure that women have equal
Speaker 2: rights with men to confer their nationality, um both to
Speaker 2: their spouses and to their Children. So that's really important
Speaker 2: as well. And that convention also has a high number
Speaker 2: of state signatories. So that's good.
Speaker 2: And beyond that, we also see that there are other
Speaker 2: conventions um including at the regional level, which is something
Speaker 2: that should not be forgotten that um different regions of
Speaker 2: the world have also adopted instruments uh to protect the
Speaker 2: right to a nationality. So when you combine all of
Speaker 2: this together, you actually see that there is quite a
Speaker 2: strong network um of international legal norms uh to protect
Speaker 2: the right to a nationality and to avoid statelessness.
Speaker 2: How effective have these international instruments been in safeguarding women's
Speaker 2: nationality rights? Do these instruments actually have teeth on the ground?
Speaker 2: So, um, well, it depends on whether you want to
Speaker 2: look at it from a half, a glass, half full
Speaker 2: or a glass, half empty perspective. Um, you know, as
Speaker 2: I said, the, the key convention, when it comes to
Speaker 2: protecting women's nationality rights is the convention on the elimination
Speaker 2: of discrimination against women or Cedar. Um, and it has
Speaker 2: these two very specific provisions that deal with sort of
Speaker 2: two key ways in which women are treated unequally often
Speaker 2: in their ability to confer nationality.
Speaker 2: Um 10 years ago, there were 27 states globally that
Speaker 2: did not give women equal rights with men to confer
Speaker 2: nationality to their Children and almost 60 states that actually
Speaker 2: didn't allow them to confer their nationality or acquire it, um,
Speaker 2: from their male spouses on an equal basis. Um, what
Speaker 2: we've seen in the last 10 years is that number,
Speaker 2: particularly where it comes to women, being able to confer
Speaker 2: their nationality to their Children has dropped from 27 to 24.
Speaker 2: So that means that three states have reformed their laws. Now,
Speaker 2: I take a glass half full approach because I recognize
Speaker 2: that to change some of these laws is really a
Speaker 2: herculean effort. Um These laws are not just laws, they
Speaker 2: are embedded in society. Um It requires attitudes and hearts
Speaker 2: and minds to change these laws and that is not
Speaker 2: something that is easy to achieve. Um So I think
Speaker 2: the fact that um
Speaker 2: Madagascar Liberia and Sierra Leone, which are the three countries
Speaker 2: that have taken this step is something really massive. Um
Speaker 2: Particularly when you consider that some of these discriminations which
Speaker 2: existed in the law were actually in those countries, constitutions.
Speaker 2: So the constitutional change is pretty tough to achieve, uh
Speaker 2: particularly given that, you know, it does require um some
Speaker 2: serious attitudinal changes. Um
Speaker 2: On the other hand, you know, there are still 24
Speaker 2: countries with these discriminatory laws. Um We're really sort of
Speaker 2: hopeful in the international community that that number will soon
Speaker 2: come down to 23. If Malaysia is able to pass
Speaker 2: an amendment that would see um women, Malaysian women being
Speaker 2: able to confer their nationality to their Children on an
Speaker 2: equal basis as Malaysian men.
Speaker 2: Um But I think that uh uh you know, one could,
Speaker 2: I would say that this instrument has been, you know,
Speaker 2: important because without it, I don't think we would have
Speaker 2: seen these uh reforms take place.
Speaker 2: Um But that being said, I think that whenever I've
Speaker 2: talked to anyone about the fact that there are 24
Speaker 2: countries in the world with this kind of discrimination, everyone
Speaker 2: is shocked, everyone thinks that in this day and age,
Speaker 2: there is absolutely no excuse for a woman not to
Speaker 2: be able to have the same rights as men when
Speaker 2: it comes to nationality.
Speaker 2: Um, so I guess on that side and that if
Speaker 2: you take that reaction as sort of, um, something to, to, to, uh,
Speaker 2: create a benchmark with, then yes, you know, these instruments, uh,
Speaker 2: should be much more well known and applied by states. Um,
Speaker 2: unfortunately there is no sort of mechanism at the UN
Speaker 2: level or the global level to force the state to
Speaker 2: do this.
Speaker 2: But certainly the committee on the elimination of discrimination against women,
Speaker 2: which is sort of the treaty body for that particular
Speaker 2: convention has made a lot of statements to that effect.
Speaker 2: And certainly as part of the Universal Periodic Review, which
Speaker 2: is another sort of a process by which states can
Speaker 2: kind of comment on each other's human rights track records.
Speaker 2: There have been a lot of statements made by states
Speaker 2: towards those that still maintain discriminatory provisions, encouraging them to
Speaker 2: change it. So I think that
Speaker 2: um there is a much higher level of awareness and
Speaker 2: the fact that we are continuing to see countries make
Speaker 2: these changes is very positive
Speaker 2: before we talk about Malaysia. Is it fair to look
Speaker 2: at this through a class prism as well? Because all
Speaker 2: over the world, including here in Malaysia, we see popular footballers, celebrities,
Speaker 2: the professional class and big investors move from one country
Speaker 2: to another and gain citizenships sometimes
Speaker 2: very quickly without any problems, right? Some are even citizens
Speaker 2: of multiple countries. But at the same time, there are
Speaker 2: millions of impoverished people who are stateless, despite them being
Speaker 2: born in a particular country and living there for decades.
Speaker 2: How do you see this problem?
Speaker 2: Oh, I think it's absolutely an issue of class. I mean,
Speaker 2: I think there are so many different lenses you can
Speaker 2: apply but I think that that class is right up
Speaker 2: there because, uh, what you actually see is as with poverty,
Speaker 2: a widening gap between those who are citizenship rich and
Speaker 2: those who are citizenship poor. Um In fact, you will see,
Speaker 2: you know, wealthy people may have 234 citizenships. Um You know,
Speaker 2: it's only, you know, it it's amazing to see that
Speaker 2: in certain countries, you can buy
Speaker 2: citizenship. It's actually marketed as in citizenship by investment, you
Speaker 2: invest in a country and bang you get the citizenship,
Speaker 2: you get the passport. I mean, this is being done
Speaker 2: for tax purposes. Um You know, it's no uh no
Speaker 2: wonder that people have unusual citizenships of small island states
Speaker 2: where they to get tax breaks. Um So of course
Speaker 2: there are, there's the citizenship poor but on the other hand,
Speaker 2: you have uh so you have the citizenship rich, but
Speaker 2: on the other hand, you have the citizenship poor who
Speaker 2: are the state
Speaker 2: who are rendered, you know, voiceless, who do not have
Speaker 2: that standing within their country, let alone another country who
Speaker 2: cannot travel, who have no means of alleviating their poverty,
Speaker 2: that has been afflicting them for generations who don't have
Speaker 2: the access to edu education, which is often the way
Speaker 2: out of that poverty um who are really kept in
Speaker 2: this place and quite physically. So because in some places
Speaker 2: they're not even given the freedom to move. Um So
Speaker 2: I think it is definitely
Speaker 2: something that is class based. Um and something that is
Speaker 2: perpetuated on the basis of class and something that is imposed,
Speaker 2: in fact by those who are the elites and the
Speaker 2: ruling who very much want to keep um particular populations,
Speaker 2: perhaps even scapegoat certain populations by keeping them stateless. So
Speaker 2: talking about the Malaysian situation, um which you um you know,
Speaker 2: touched on just a moment ago, basically, what's happening right
Speaker 2: now is that
Speaker 2: the government has come up after being pushed by, you know,
Speaker 2: many NGO S such as family frontiers and many others
Speaker 2: to change the very sexist law we have in our
Speaker 2: constitution where, you know, it's a father with a, who
Speaker 2: married a foreign foreigner and has a child overseas, they
Speaker 2: get to confer their citizenship. But if a mother marries
Speaker 2: a foreigner and has a child overseas, they can't confer
Speaker 2: their citizenship.
Speaker 2: So the push has been to change the word father
Speaker 2: to parent, which the government has finally agreed to do. So. Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: what they have put up is, you know, this whole
Speaker 2: bundle of changes that they want to make. And essentially
Speaker 2: they are saying, if you want to
Speaker 2: and this particular change, you must also accept, you know,
Speaker 2: 6 to 7 other changes where it is going to
Speaker 2: perpetuate statelessness for a lot of other categories of people,
Speaker 2: you know, foundlings, Children of born out of wedlock and
Speaker 2: things like that. You were in care last week to
Speaker 2: speak about this issue, to have discussions on this issue.
Speaker 2: What is your take on
Speaker 2: the, the government's trajectory and the, and the proposal when
Speaker 2: it comes to the nationality laws in Malaysia? So, first
Speaker 2: of all, can I just sort of start out by
Speaker 2: saying that the effort particularly by civil society in Malaysia?
Speaker 2: And I would also say, you know, affected mothers outside
Speaker 2: Malaysia to bring this issue into the limelight and to
Speaker 2: campaign so relentlessly and to have so much courage to
Speaker 2: sort of um see the this particular issue brought to
Speaker 2: court
Speaker 2: um is really something to admire and, and really kind
Speaker 2: of learn from. Um it shows how we're sustained community
Speaker 2: pressure by those who are affected,
Speaker 2: um can really deliver real change. And I really do
Speaker 2: hope that this one particular amendment which is a good
Speaker 2: amendment to, as you say, change the word father to
Speaker 2: parent and equalize the ability of both parents to confer
Speaker 2: nationality is really something the government should be commended for.
Speaker 2: And I hope it does pass um as for the
Speaker 2: other amendments, you know, uh as someone who's worked in
Speaker 2: this field for a while, at least for me, it
Speaker 2: came a little bit out of the blue
Speaker 2: and it really sort of in a way leaves a
Speaker 2: bitter taste in the mouth because on the one hand,
Speaker 2: you have this really remarkable amendment that really seeks to right,
Speaker 2: a historical wrong against women. Um, sort of being overshadowed
Speaker 2: if you like by uh these amendments that do
Speaker 2: you know, if, if passed will result in many, many,
Speaker 2: many Children in particular being left stateless. Um, and, you know,
Speaker 2: Malaysia is a, is a party to the convention on
Speaker 2: the rights of the child. Um It has, it has
Speaker 2: committed to ensuring that, you know, a child has the
Speaker 2: right to a nationality. Um And the other thing that
Speaker 2: I would say is that these, these sort of regressive steps,
Speaker 2: particularly when it comes to
Speaker 2: Children are really quite unprecedented. When you look at other states,
Speaker 2: both in the region and globally, states are not doing this,
Speaker 2: they're not taking regressive action to increase the number of
Speaker 2: Children who might be stateless or left at risk of state.
Speaker 2: In fact, we're seeing the opposite. So states, you know,
Speaker 2: in general, as I said, we could see a lot
Speaker 2: more action in this area, but if states are changing
Speaker 2: their laws, they are changing them for the better.
Speaker 2: So this is what makes Malaysia's kind of step in
Speaker 2: this regard really kind of um out of kilter with
Speaker 2: what's going on
Speaker 2: in the rest of the world. And it's also quite
Speaker 2: unclear the motivations and the evidence for making this kind
Speaker 2: of change, which would, you know, potentially render more Children
Speaker 2: stateless is also very unclear. There, there's been some discussion
Speaker 2: about how this sort of um addresses a national security issue,
Speaker 2: but what that issue actually is has not been spelled out.
Speaker 2: And I think that in, in, in all of these situations,
Speaker 2: you have to balance, you know, um
Speaker 2: what is actually a right for a child and given
Speaker 2: the impact that this will have on Children uh in
Speaker 2: terms of their ability to access other rights, it really
Speaker 2: is a very much a backwards move. And I do
Speaker 2: hope that um parliamentarians when they come to looking at
Speaker 2: these amendments and discussing them will, will take a good
Speaker 2: long look at Malaysia's,
Speaker 2: you know, international obligations, but also what's good for the
Speaker 2: country because these Children are going to remain in the
Speaker 2: country um will just be without um uh the kinds
Speaker 2: of rights that will allow them to flourish and be
Speaker 2: integrated citizens uh in a way that that will ultimately
Speaker 2: help the country itself. Are there any countries that are
Speaker 2: handling
Speaker 2: the issue of statelessness? Well, especially when we look at
Speaker 2: around the region, but of course, at an international, you
Speaker 2: can look at various continents and so on and so forth.
Speaker 2: Um What are the best frameworks for handling the issue
Speaker 2: of statelessness? Are there any countries that the likes of
Speaker 2: Malaysia can learn from? Yes. So we have seen so
Speaker 2: many strong champions in the last 10 or so years,
Speaker 2: who've taken very positive action
Speaker 2: to address statelessness. I mean, starting with, I suppose the region,
Speaker 2: you know, uh and I suppose the region more more broadly,
Speaker 2: if you look at the broader Asia Pacific region, um
Speaker 2: the the country that has sort of achieved the most
Speaker 2: in terms of numbers uh is Kyrgyzstan uh in Central
Speaker 2: Asia which has actually in 2019 announced that it actually
Speaker 2: resolved all of its hundreds of thousands of cases of state.
Speaker 2: These were legacy cases from the breakup of the US
Speaker 2: sr and the work that it did to address statelessness
Speaker 2: um was really, really remarkable and it was able to
Speaker 2: conclude all the existing cases. Now, of course, statelessness doesn't
Speaker 2: remain resolved forever. There may be new cases bubbling up
Speaker 2: but they are proactively addressing those which is very
Speaker 2: positive to see um closer to the sort of Southeast
Speaker 2: Asia region. I think that um some standout examples include
Speaker 2: um uh the Philippines, which has taken a very proactive
Speaker 2: approach to addressing statelessness um both within its territories, but
Speaker 2: also in recognition of the fact that there are um
Speaker 2: uh Filipino migrants who are working in neighboring countries. Um
Speaker 2: So there's been a really proactive push to try and
Speaker 2: ensure that um they grant their nationality where appropriate to, to,
Speaker 2: to those people. Um But I think it's also taken
Speaker 2: the matter seriously in terms of setting up a committee
Speaker 2: within the government that is focused on statelessness, recognizing that
Speaker 2: it's an issue
Speaker 2: um and developed a national action plan to sort of
Speaker 2: plan the steps needed to address the the problem. So
Speaker 2: I think that that's also um a really strong example,
Speaker 2: we also see um
Speaker 2: in the region. Uh States like Vietnam and Thailand, which
Speaker 2: have also, you know, recognized that they have an issue
Speaker 2: of statelessness. Uh Again, different causes there, the background of
Speaker 2: stateless communities in those two countries being on the basis
Speaker 2: of their ethnicity. Um But I think this real acknowledgement
Speaker 2: that um while it might take time and you know,
Speaker 2: for example, Thailand, they have
Speaker 2: hundreds and thousands of cases of stateless people who live
Speaker 2: in the hill tribe regions. Recognizing that while it might
Speaker 2: take time to resolve statelessness, there's still kind of a
Speaker 2: positive and a forward momentum, not this sort of stepping
Speaker 2: back progressively uh kind of approach. So I think that
Speaker 2: inspiration can be drawn from, from those countries for sure.
Speaker 2: And certainly, when you look at the issue of gender
Speaker 2: discrimination in the nationality laws, as I mentioned, there are
Speaker 2: these three African states that have taken very positive steps.
Speaker 2: Um and it would be really good to see other
Speaker 2: countries including Malaysia follow suit. Rather, it's been a very
Speaker 2: fascinating conversation before we wrap up. Would you have a
Speaker 2: final message for us with regard to the issue of statelessness,
Speaker 2: especially um you know, how and how it impacts women.
Speaker 2: So I think that, you know, I've, I've worked on
Speaker 2: this issue for quite a number of years now and I've,
Speaker 2: you know, been very fortunate to um meet people who
Speaker 2: have been stateless and hear from them about their stories. And, um,
Speaker 2: you know, I think one thing that I've been struck
Speaker 2: by is that statelessness. Even the word sounds a bit
Speaker 2: cold and technical.
Speaker 2: But when you actually meet someone who's stateless and you
Speaker 2: see the kind of impacts that they have on it
Speaker 2: have on in their life, there is no way that
Speaker 2: you would want to wish that on anyone. And what
Speaker 2: stateless people are asking for is nothing unusual. They're not
Speaker 2: asking to be made into millionaires. They're not asking to
Speaker 2: live in the fanciest houses. They're basically being asked,
Speaker 2: you know, they're asking for an opportunity to live normal
Speaker 2: lives and to basically be equipped to take advantage of
Speaker 2: the very basic rights that we all enjoy. And I
Speaker 2: think that when you meet someone who is stateless and
Speaker 2: you see what they're living through and given that it
Speaker 2: happens over the course of their entire life, particularly for women,
Speaker 2: uh you realize that the toll that this can take,
Speaker 2: it's almost like an ongoing emergency. It's not sort of
Speaker 2: a day to day or I just live my life
Speaker 2: like this and sometimes it's difficult and sometimes it's not,
Speaker 2: it's really hard all the time and the toll that,
Speaker 2: that takes and the resilience that these people show, um in,
Speaker 2: in the face of, you know, uh such deprivation is
Speaker 2: really something uh that, you know, the whole world should
Speaker 2: understand
Speaker 2: and there should be a lot more action to resolve it.
Speaker 2: It's not that difficult. Certainly, in the case of sex
Speaker 2: discrimination in the nationality laws, while it does require a
Speaker 2: change of attitude in communities, it can be done and
Speaker 2: countries are showing that it, it, it has been done
Speaker 2: and successfully. So, um and so I would just say
Speaker 2: that I think that if,
Speaker 2: if much more could be done to just um see
Speaker 2: this issue as something that is allowing humans to be
Speaker 2: human beings and fulfill um just the basic capacities that
Speaker 2: we all want to enjoy. Um That would take us
Speaker 2: forward in terms of not seeing this as some, some
Speaker 2: uh step that's too big to jump. It's a very,
Speaker 2: very simple step that needs to be taken to drastically
Speaker 2: improve the lives of um quite a lot of people
Speaker 2: around the world.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for joining me today. Thank you
Speaker 2: very much. That was associate professor rather go from the
Speaker 2: Peter mcmullin Center on Statelessness University of Melbourne. I'm Dain
Speaker 2: Johan and this has been beyond the ballot box BFM 89.9.
Speaker 1: You have been listening to a podcast from BFM 89.9
Speaker 1: the business station for more stories of the same kind.
Speaker 1: Download the BFM app.