Abstract

ABSTRACTIn line with studies of dual citizenship that point to the need for in-depth understanding of the reasoning behind this legislative change, this study provides an analysis of the discourse that lawmakers parlayed during the debate that resulted in the passage of the Philippine citizenship retention and reacquisition law in 2003. Because of the constitutional prohibition against dual allegiance, legislators constructed a narrative with emotive force to justify emigration as well as naturalization in the destination, the latter act portrayed as devoid of political love that Filipinos supposedly reserve for the homeland. Emblematic of affective citizenship even while the state actually instrumentalized it, the passage of the law affirmed a traditional notion of exclusive singular citizenship, while concomitantly providing indirect tolerance of dual, nonexclusive citizenship for conationals overseas.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.