Divided loyalties?: Double trouble for dual national lawmakers
Voting in favour of April 12 resolution may be treasonous towards their alternative homelands.
KARACHI:
Parliamentarians holding dual nationality enjoyed the best of both worlds. Now, they could face the wrath of both.
As the Supreme Court of Pakistan disqualifies them and revokes their memberships of assemblies, legal experts say foreign countries may also try them for treason since all parliamentarians, including those who hold foreign nationalities, voted in favour of a resolution against the interests of Western countries.
Experts say their support to such a resolution is blatant violation of the loyalty they committed and swore to while taking citizenship oaths for the US, the UK and other countries.
These parliamentarians may face arrest orders when they visit these countries, and their assets may be confiscated on charges of disloyalty to the state.
According to legal experts, who spoke to The Express Tribune, the one event that could, in particular, be considered treasonous by the part of foreign governments would be the lawmakers’ voting in favour of the April 12, 2012, resolution that was unanimously passed by a joint session of parliament. The relatively strong-worded resolution demanded that the US tender an apology for Salalah incident, stop drone attacks and called for a ban on supply of arms to Afghanistan through Pakistan.
While the resolution may not have had any effect on the ground as such, it may clash with the oath taken by American nationality-holding parliamentarians who swore, among other things, that they “hereby declare, on oath, that [they] absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which [they] have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that [they] will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic...”
Other citizenship oaths, likewise, also demand absolute fidelity to the state, and therefore make dual nationality problematic, especially for public office holders who are privy to sensitive decision-making processes of a state.
The assets and businesses of these dual nationality holding lawmakers in foreign countries may also be under threat of confiscation, for going against vested interests of their alternative homelands.
Though the Supreme Court disqualified 11 legislators that admitted to being dual nationals, a large number of Pakistani parliamentarians are believed to be holding dual nationality. Dual nationals are not allowed to hold public office in Pakistan, but parties, across the political divide, are in the process of pushing through legislation that would negate this bar.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 5th, 2012.
Parliamentarians holding dual nationality enjoyed the best of both worlds. Now, they could face the wrath of both.
As the Supreme Court of Pakistan disqualifies them and revokes their memberships of assemblies, legal experts say foreign countries may also try them for treason since all parliamentarians, including those who hold foreign nationalities, voted in favour of a resolution against the interests of Western countries.
Experts say their support to such a resolution is blatant violation of the loyalty they committed and swore to while taking citizenship oaths for the US, the UK and other countries.
These parliamentarians may face arrest orders when they visit these countries, and their assets may be confiscated on charges of disloyalty to the state.
According to legal experts, who spoke to The Express Tribune, the one event that could, in particular, be considered treasonous by the part of foreign governments would be the lawmakers’ voting in favour of the April 12, 2012, resolution that was unanimously passed by a joint session of parliament. The relatively strong-worded resolution demanded that the US tender an apology for Salalah incident, stop drone attacks and called for a ban on supply of arms to Afghanistan through Pakistan.
While the resolution may not have had any effect on the ground as such, it may clash with the oath taken by American nationality-holding parliamentarians who swore, among other things, that they “hereby declare, on oath, that [they] absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which [they] have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that [they] will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic...”
Other citizenship oaths, likewise, also demand absolute fidelity to the state, and therefore make dual nationality problematic, especially for public office holders who are privy to sensitive decision-making processes of a state.
The assets and businesses of these dual nationality holding lawmakers in foreign countries may also be under threat of confiscation, for going against vested interests of their alternative homelands.
Though the Supreme Court disqualified 11 legislators that admitted to being dual nationals, a large number of Pakistani parliamentarians are believed to be holding dual nationality. Dual nationals are not allowed to hold public office in Pakistan, but parties, across the political divide, are in the process of pushing through legislation that would negate this bar.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 5th, 2012.