The citizens have a right to determine who will govern them and, sometimes, to decide the form which their government should take. The extent of the rights accorded to citizens varies considerably from country to country.
Because citizens are the building-blocks, as it were, of the State, and because in most States the right to vote and stand for public office is reserved to citizens, every State must specify who its citizens are and the extent of their rights and duties in relation to the government.
This should be done in the constitution because if it is left to ordinary legislation, the government may be tempted to deprive citizens of their citizenship, and hence of their vote, if it thinks they will vote for the opposition. Citizenship is too important and fundamental to be left to ordinary legislation: the rules by which people acquire and lose citizenship should be set out in the constitution itself.
History of Citizenship
Zimbabwe’s history will almost certainly affect the way in which the new constitution deals with citizenship. Between 1891 and 1948 everyone in this country was a British subject, and after 1948 they were citizens of the self-governing colony of Southern Rhodesia.
There was no such thing then as equal citizenship: Black citizens were not given the vote until 1961, and then only partially, and other restrictions imposed on Black citizens were so onerous that their citizenship meant very little.
At Independence full citizenship was given to:
• everyone born in Zimbabwe, whether before independence or after independence, other than children of foreign diplomats, enemy aliens, illegal immigrants, or foreign residents;
• everyone born outside Zimbabwe, if his or her guardian parent was a citizen (but not if the guardian parent was a citizen by descent) or an non-citizen resident of Zimbabwe;
• everyone who acquired citizenship by registration (i.e. became a naturalised Zimbabwean).
Dual or multiple citizenship was specifically allowed — that is to say, people could be citizens of Zimbabwe as well as of a foreign country. This was generally regarded as a sop to Whites, most of whom were citizens of Britain or South Africa. But as subsequent events showed, it applied also to Zimbabweans of Mozambican, Zambian and Malawian origin.
The right to dual citizenship was removed from the Constitution in 1983 and Zimbabweans who were dual citizens were required to renounce their foreign citizenship if they wanted to remain citizens of Zimbabwe. This proved difficult for the many Zimbabweans who were descendants of Mozambican, Zambian and Malawian migrant worker.
So from 1990 to 2005 they were given a special dispensation so that they could vote even though they had lost their citizenship. They were deprived of this right, however, when it seemed likely that they would vote for the opposition. Since then the Citizenship of Zimbabwe Act has been amended to allow them to “confirm” their citizenship and regain the right to vote [though how they can confirm something which has been taken from them is a mystery].
One thing this history makes clear is that citizenship should not become a plaything for politicians, to be granted, taken away and restored at a political whim. It must be protected by the Constitution itself.
Responsibilities
Citizenship is a bundle of rights and duties reflecting the relationship between an individual and a State. The nature and extent of these rights and duties vary from country to country.
Because of Zimbabwe’s history, citizenship issues are likely to be contentious when the new constitution is prepared, particularly the issue of dual citizenship. To enable informed decisions to be made on these issues, it may be helpful to examine the rights and duties attaching to citizenship, and to see how far they extend to non-citizens.
The following are the main ones:
Citizens are entitled to protection from their State when they are within its borders and when they travel outside it. The State protects them by maintaining public order and ensuring that its laws are properly enforced. In a country like Zimbabwe where fundamental human rights are guaranteed by the Constitution, the State must ensure that those rights are respected. When its citizens are in foreign countries, the State must do what it can to uphold their rights in those countries.
The State’s duty to protect its people extends to non-citizens within its borders. The police, for example, have just as much a duty to investigate or prevent a crime committed against a Zambian or a South African as they have in regard to a crime committed against a Zimbabwean. The citizenship of the victim is immaterial. And the Constitution confers on citizens and non-citizens alike the fundamental rights to life, liberty, property and the protection of law.
Right to vote
Most modern States give their citizens the franchise, and some (Australia, for example) impose a duty on citizens to cast their votes in national elections. It should be noted, though, that not all citizens are allowed to vote: children and lunatics cannot do so, and some countries (Zimbabwe for example) deprive long-term prisoners of the right to vote.
Some countries (again Zimbabwe is an example) impose residence qualifications on the right to vote so that citizens living outside the country usually cannot vote in elections.
It should also be noted that while the right to vote in national elections is usually reserved to citizens, some countries allow non-citizens to vote in local authority elections. Zimbabwe used to, but does not now.
Who should be a citizen?
Obviously, everyone who is a citizen of Zimbabwe before the new constitution comes into force must continue to be one afterwards. This is a point that was ignored when the citizenship provisions of the present Constitution were replaced by Amendment No. 19. Existing rights of citizenship were not preserved, thereby throwing into doubt the citizenship of all prior citizens from President Mugabe downwards. Such an absurd result cannot have been intended, but it shows how important it is for the new Constitution to preserve existing rights.
Citizens by birth – Everyone born in Zimbabwe should be a citizen by birth under the new constitution, irrespective of the nationality of his or her parents. The only restriction might be that at least one of the parents should be lawfully resident in the country. This would avoid the possibility of people coming here from another country to have a child, just so that the child can be a citizen of this country (which happens regularly in the United States).
Citizens by descent – A person born outside Zimbabwe, either of whose parents is a citizen of Zimbabwe.
Citizens by registration – should be available to anyone who has lawfully resided in Zimbabwe for a minimum qualifying period. The qualifying period should not be excessive; five years is more than sufficient (this is the period currently laid down in the Citizenship of Zimbabwe Act).
Clearly there must be other qualifications, such as a clean criminal record, not being a burden on the State, and so on.
Foreign spouses of Zimbabwean citizens should be entitled to registration as citizens, perhaps after a reasonable qualifying period and provided that the State cannot show that the marriage is one of convenience.
Children who are found abandoned in Zimbabwe and whose parents cannot be identified should be accorded Zimbabwean citizenship by birth because, as mentioned above, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child requires our law to make provision for this.
Multiple citizenship
The new constitution should not deprive Zimbabwean citizens of their citizenship solely on the ground that they are citizens of foreign countries. There are too many people born and bred in this country who through no choice of their own are citizens of neighbouring countries, for us to be exclusive in our citizenship.
Some of the unforeseen problems that arise when dual citizenship is abolished have been mentioned earlier, and these problems will increase in future because the children of Zimbabweans living abroad will acquire the citizenship of their countries of birth as well as Zimbabwean citizenship by descent.
If we allow dual or multiple citizenship we shall be following the lead of some at least of South Africa, Namibia and Zambia. – Veritas makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied
Post published in: Politics