Daily Times

It is without any doubt the right of any state which decides the fate of its dual nationals. The state may permit dual citizenships to its nationals, but it still may not recognize the other citizenship of its nationals in relation to national service, duty to vote, etc.

This brings an immense amount of confusion among the public with respect to the rights of dual nationals and their participation in the internal governance systems.

Conceptually the word nationality should be a matter of international dealings, and the citizenship should be primarily focused on the internal political sphere.

Unfortunately the concepts of nationality and citizenship are often used interchangeably, blurring the fine distinction between the two different concepts.

Turning back to its historical perspective, in the laws of more than half of the countries of the world nationality continues to be based primarily upon place of birth (jus soli). Whereas in the laws of the remaining countries it is based primarily upon descent (jus sanguinis).

In ancient times, the concept of nationality was beheld as an assortment of tribes, essentially related, the tribes being comprised of clans, and the clans of families (jus sanguinis).

However the concept of nationality has evolved with time under which all individuals, with certain limited exclusions, born within the jurisdiction of a specific geographical territory are said to owe allegiance to it (jus soli).

In contrast, the concept of citizenship, more or less, has remained the same over time. This concept states a reciprocal relationship of the citizen to the state, accepting the duties of the individual, no less than his or her rights. The only indispensable thing to be determined in this relationship is the good faith with which the responsibilities of citizenship are fulfilled.

Regrettably using the notion of nationality interchangeably with citizenship, the problem will continue to exist, to the confusion of the persons concerned and the aggravation of the foreign offices of the countries whose protection they pursue or whose demands they attempt to evade, unless a solution is reached by the concerned authorities.

The politics and economic development are long separated in Pakistan. Dual national Pakistanis are although permitted to work in a private sphere, but same individuals are not allowed to be engaged in the mainstream politics

One of the misconceptions about dual nationals remains their allegiance to their countries. A popular myth of brain drain phenomenon has played a critical role in creating and substantiating this misconception.

The short-term interaction between non-resident citizens and their countries of origin has created a rift in terms of their allegiance. The decision of the best and the brightest young people moving abroad is considered synonymous with depleting the stock of human capital of developing countries and lowering their prospects of economic development.

Interestingly, the policy makers in the developing countries have advertently or inadvertently neglected the long-term interaction between emigrants and their countries of origin which has a huge potential for the development of poor, migrant-sending countries.

Young people who immigrate to developed countries, acquire education and experience, can return home to augment the stock of human capital and to provide national services in their home countries.

A Chinese model can be adopted in this case, where its government has attracted the emigrants back by proposing a talent plan which is matched with the economic plan.

The dilemma with Pakistan is its political elite.

The recent political governments have completely failed to safeguard the country from economic stability as politicians’ personal well-being have completely superseded the interests of the poor.

More recently the corporate elite has also become a major force in politics, either by funding political parties or by seizing control of the government by participating in politics.

The politics and economic development are long separated in Pakistan. Dual national Pakistanis are although permitted to work in a private sphere, but same individuals are not allowed to be engaged in the mainstream politics.

The situation would have been less intense if the governance structure in Pakistan was aligned with international governance standards.

Breaking the system of political elite in Pakistan through dual national participation in the electoral process can be considered as a valuable option.

By allowing dual national Pakistanis to contest elections will create a big diversity in the parliament, because it really is important that people see themselves represented.

The poor governance model and the corrupt political system calls for an early intervention where dual-nationals should be allowed to participate in the public domain, be it participating in the electoral process.

The recent cabinet decision of allowing dual national Pakistanis to contest elections is a step forward, and certainly not a step backward.

The writer is a PhD student at the University of Waterloo and is a graduate of the University of Waterloo School of Environment, Enterprise, and Development