Udlændinge- og Integrationsudvalget 2016-17
UUI Alm.del Bilag 105
Offentligt
1714165_0001.png
==
AKT 116035
==
Dokument
1
==
[
Østrig svar pa hor1ng ]
=:c:
Begerundelse + § 32, stk 2
Udenrigsministeriet ([email protected])
EKN ([email protected]), Vienna, All (INTERNAL DL ([email protected]), Vienna ([email protected]), Stine Højlund
Hansen ([email protected]), Rasmus Nexø Jensen ([email protected]), Mette Nørgaard Dissing-Spandet ([email protected])
Fra: Udenrigsministeriet ([email protected])
Titel: Amb. Wien - SVAR PÅ INSTRUKTION - andre landes holdning til ændring af FN's konvention af 1961 om
begrænsning af statsløshed
Sendt: 24-08-201614:43:46
Til:
Cc:
Amb. Wien - SVAR PÅ INSTRUKTION - andre landes holdning til ændring af FN's konvention af
1961 om begrænsning af statsløshed
JTFM's instruktion af 30. juni 2016
Der har i Østrig for to år siden været drøltelser i relation til spørgsmålet om statsborgerskab og FN­
konventionen. Vinklen var Imidlertid spørgsmålet om
fratagelse
af østrigsk statsborgerskab for personer,
der rejste til udlandet for at kæmpe i væbnede konflikter (foreign fighters). Det østrigske
udenrigsministerium har udarbejdet vedh�ede tekst (f 2015), som opsummerer overvejelserne samt
udkommet ilt. national lovgivning - essensen er, med henvisning til FN-konventionen samt European
Convention an Nationality, at østrigske statsborgere ikke kan fratages statsborgerskab i forbindelse med
deltagelse i væbnet konflikt i udlandet, såfremt dette måtte gøre dem statsløse.
Kompetencen i�½.
tildeling
af statsborgerskab Hgger på delstatsniveau (die Bundeslander), og ambassadens
samtalepartnere er ikke bekendt med, at der skulle have været sager, der har givet anledning til debat i stil
med den danske debat.
Fra østrigsk side opfatter man det ikke som muligt at suspendere tildeling af statsborgerskab tit personer,
som måtte være omfattet af FN-konventionen.
Fra østrigsk side er man umiddelbart indstillet på en nærmere dialog med ligesindede lande vedr.
fortolkning/mulig ændring af konventionen, men først og fremmest ilt. vinkler vedr. fratagelse af
statsborgerskab i forbindelse udrejse til væbnet konflikt eller fx hvor statsborgerskab måtte være tilkendt
på baggrund af bevidst afgivne urigtige oplysninger (svindel).
Amb. Wlen - Mads Weck Hansen
2. Foreignfighters, withdrawal ofAustrian citizenship
Like citizens of other European countries, a number of Austrian citizens have recently departed to forei
gn
countries in order to join groups involved in anned contlicts in these countries. Austria is seriously concerned
about this phenomenon, the so-called "foreign fighters", and has taken action against it. In this context, draft
legislation was prepared by the Ministry of the lnterior in close cooperation with the Forei
gn
Ministry providing
for the withdrawal of the Austrian citizenship from "forei
gn
fighters". While such withdrawal does not pose any
problem under international law as far as persons with dual nationalities are concerned, this would not be the same
concerning persons possessing only Austrian citizenship, in which case the withdrawal would make them stateless.
In that case, Austria 's obligations as party to the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness
f l J
and the
European Convention on Nationalityl2�½ had to be taken into consideration.
According to Article 8 ofthe UN Convention, a contracting state shall not deprive a person ofits nationality
if such deprivation would render him stateless. Upon its accession to this Convention in 1972, Austria declared to
retain the right to deprive a person of his nationality, if such person enters, on his own free will, the military
service of a forei
gn
state. This declaration corresponds to a traditional provision of the Austrian Citizenship Aet
and was thus in confonnity with Article 8(3) of the Convention which allows states to retain the right to deprive a
person of his nationality, if such right was based on grounds existing in its national law at that time of si
gn
ature,
ratification or accession.
According to Article 7 of the European Convention, a state party may not provide in its internat law for the
loss of its nationality if the person concemed would thereby become stateless ( unless the nationality was acquired
 UUI, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 105: Kopi af IFU alm. del - supplerende svar på spm. 8 om, hvorfor ministeren ikke – end ikke i fortrolig form – ønsker at oversende kommunikationen med ni lande, som regeringen har konsulteret om mulige ændringer eller omfortolkninger af statsløsekonventionen af 1961, fra udlændinge- og integrationsministeren
1714165_0002.png
fraudulently). Upon its ratification ofthe Convention in 1998, Austria made a reservation to this article declaring
that it retains the right to deprive a national of its nationality if such person voluntarily enters the military service
ofa foreign state.
A possibility discussed only theoretically to ensure that the Austrian citizenship can be withdrawn from
foreign fighters even ifthis would make them stateless would have been to denounce the two conventions, to
change the Austrian legislation and to accede to the conventions with a new declaration and a new reservation.
However, since this procedure would have been problematic from a rute of law perspective and would have met
with criticism from other states, it was not further explored.
Instead, it was examined more closely whether it could be explained through an interpretative declaration
that the object and purpose of Austria's declaration and reservation of 1972 and 1998 respectively was to sanction
Austrian citizens taking part in military activities abroad. While this traditionally took the form of joining the
military service ofa foreign state, nowadays non-state actors have increasingly become involved in armed conflicts
and foreign fighters are frequently joining non-state organized armed groups. In that case, Austria's declaration
and reservation of 1972 and 1998 could possibly be interpreted as covering also the withdrawal of the Austrian
citizenship from such foreign fighters. The feasibility of such an interpretative declaration was discussed at a
meeting ofthe international law working group ofthe Council ofEurope (CAHDI) on 18./19 September 2014 and
not pursued in view of the result ofthat discussion.
Consequently, the foliowing proposal for a new Section 33 (2) of the Citizenship Aet, taking account of
Austria's obligations under the two conventions, was submitted by the Federal Govemment to Parliament:
,,(2) The citizenship ofa citizen who voluntarily and actively participates, in support ofan organized armed
group, in hostilities taking place abroad in the framework of an armed conflict, is to be withdrawn if such
withdrawal does not make him stateless."
The explanatory report of the govemment billf3l specifies
inter alia
that the wording "organized armed
group" is to be understood in accordance with its meaning under international humanitarian law and that it may
also include the participation in hostilities of members of private military companies, but excludes activities
undertaken in the context ofpeacekeeping and peace supporting operations. It also explains that the j urisprudence
of the European Court ofJusticer-11 requires a proportionality analysis to be undertaken ifthe Austrian citizenship
to be withdrawn is the only citizenship of an EU member state of the person concemed and its loss would
therefore entail the loss of EU citizenship.
The amendment was adopted by Parliament in December 2014 and entered into force on I January 2015[51.
[I] Federal Law Gazelle 538/1974.
[I J Federal Law Gazelle III 39/2000.
[I J Govcmmcnt bill RV 35 I BlgNR XXV. GP.
[I 1 See in particular the
Roumann
case, C-135/08.
[I] Federal LawGazettc I 104/2014.
[1
J
Federal Law Gazelle 538/1974.
[2
I
Federal LawGazelle III 39/2000.
(J)
Govemment bill RV351BlgNRXXV. GP.
[-1 J
See in particular the
Rollmann
case, C-135108.
[ 5
I
Federal Law Gazelle I I04/2014.