Indfødsretsudvalget 2019-20
IFU Alm.del Bilag 6
Offentligt
2089775_0001.png
Court of Justice of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No 26/19
Luxembourg, 12 March 2019
Press and Information
Judgment in Case C-221/17
Tjebbes and Others v Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken
EU law does not preclude the loss of the nationality of a Member State and,
consequently, the loss of citizenship of the EU, where the genuine link between the
person concerned and that Member State is durably interrupted
However, the principle of proportionality requires an individual examination of the consequences of
that loss for the persons concerned from the point of the view of EU law
A number of Dutch citizens possessing a second nationality of a non-EU country brought
proceedings before courts in the Netherlands following the refusal of the Minister of Foreign Affairs
to examine their applications for renewal of their national passports.
The Minister’s
refusal was
based on the Law on Netherlands nationality, which provides that an adult loses that nationality if
he also possesses a foreign nationality and if, after attaining his majority, he has his principal
residence for an uninterrupted period of 10 years outside the Netherlands and the EU. However,
that 10-year period is interrupted if the person concerned has his principal residence in the
Netherlands or in the EU for a period of no less than one year. Similarly, the period is interrupted if
the person concerned applies for the issue of a declaration regarding the possession of
Netherlands nationality, a travel document (passport) or a Netherlands identity card. A new 10-year
period starts to run as from the date of issue one of those documents. Furthermore, a minor loses,
in principle, his Netherlands nationality if his father or mother loses that nationality.
The Raad van State (Council of State, Netherlands), before which those disputes have been
brought, is uncertain as to the discretion that Member States enjoy in laying down the conditions
governing loss of nationality and has referred a question on that subject to the Court of Justice. It
asks, in particular, whether the loss of Netherlands nationality by operation of law, which also
entails the loss of citizenship of the EU, is compatible with EU law.
In
today’s
judgment, the Court recalls that it has previously held that Article 20 TFEU confers on
every individual who is a national of a Member State citizenship of the EU, which is intended to be
the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States. Accordingly, the situation of citizens of
the EU who, like the applicants in the main proceedings, are nationals of one Member State only
and who, by losing that nationality, are faced with losing the status conferred by Article 20 TFEU
and the rights attaching thereto falls, by reason of its nature and its consequences, within the ambit
of EU law.
The Court notes that the Netherlands legislature sought to introduce a system to avoid, inter alia,
the undesirable consequences of one person having multiple nationalities. The Netherlands
Government specified in that regard that the objective of the Law on nationality is, inter alia, to
preclude persons from obtaining or retaining Netherlands nationality where they do not, or no
longer have, any genuine link with the Netherlands. The provisions of that legislation relating to
minors are intended, in turn, to restore unity of nationality within the family.
In that regard, the Court considers that a criterion based on the habitual residence of Netherlands
nationals for an uninterrupted period of 10 years outside the EU may be regarded as legitimate
because it is an indication that there is no such link. In addition, that legitimacy is supported by
international provisions providing, in similar situations, for loss of nationality of the country
concerned, provided that the risk of statelessness is precluded, which Netherlands legislation does
in the present case. It is further supported by the fact that the issuing of a declaration regarding the
www.curia.europa.eu
 IFU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 6: Orientering om behandlingen af ansøgninger om bevis for bevarelse af dansk indfødsret efter EU-Domstolens dom i sag C-221/17, Tjebbes, fra udlændinge- og integrationsministeren
2089775_0002.png
possession of Netherlands nationality, a travel document or a Netherlands identity card is sufficient
for considering that the person concerned intends to retain a genuine link with the Netherlands.
Nevertheless, the loss of the nationality of a Member State by operation of law would be
inconsistent with the principle of proportionality if the relevant national rules did not permit at any
time an individual examination of the consequences of that loss for the persons concerned from
the point of view of EU law. According to the Court, the competent national authorities and courts
must be in a position to examine, as an ancillary issue, the consequences of the loss of that
nationality and, where appropriate, to have the person concerned recover his or her nationality
retroactively in the context of an application by that person for a travel document or any other
document showing his or her nationality.
The Court adds that, as part of that examination of proportionality, it is, in particular, for the
competent national authorities and, where appropriate, for the national courts to ensure that the
loss of nationality is consistent with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and
specifically the right to respect for family life, in conjunction with the obligation to take into
consideration the best interests of the child.
As regards the relevant circumstances of that examination, the Court mentions, inter alia, the fact
that the person concerned would be exposed to limitations when exercising his or her right to move
and reside freely in the territory of the Member States, including, depending on the circumstances,
particular difficulties in continuing to travel to the Netherlands or to another Member State in order
to retain genuine and regular links with members of his or her family, to pursue his or her
professional activity or to undertake the necessary steps to pursue that activity. Also relevant are,
first, the fact that the person concerned might not have been able to renounce the nationality of a
third country and, secondly, the serious risk that his or her safety or freedom to come and go would
deteriorate because of the impossibility for that person to enjoy consular protection.
Provided that the competent administrative and judicial authorities are in a position to carry out that
individual examination of the situation of the person concerned in the light of all the relevant
circumstances, EU law does not preclude the loss of nationality of a Member State in the
circumstances laid down in the Netherlands legislation.
NOTE:
A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes
which have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of
European Union law or the validity of a European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the
dispute itself. It is for the national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s
decision, which is similarly binding on other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.
The
full text
of the judgment is published on the CURIA website on the day of delivery.
Press contact: Jacques René Zammit
(+352) 4303 3355
www.curia.europa.eu