Shifting responsibilities and security threats by depriving foreign terrorist fighters of their nationality

Abstract

Abstract One of the ways in which States of nationality have responded to the potential security threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters (FTFs) and their family members who travelled to Syria and Iraq, is by stripping them of their nationality. This practice constitutes a form of ‘buck-passing’, as States shun their responsibilities and export the problem to other States or actors like the Syrian Democratic Forces. When a State strips its nationality, the depriving State is no longer responsible to take back its former national, while another State of nationality is now responsible to admit the FTF or family member and subsequently prosecute, re-integrate, rehabilitate, and monitor her or him if necessary. Furthermore, when the person concerned poses a possible security threat, it is not only a responsibility over the person that is exported to other States but also a risk of terrorism as well as a burden to counter that risk. The practice of nationality deprivation has extensively been scrutinized from a human rights perspective, with a focus on its consequences towards the individual concerned. This article, however, takes a different approach and looks at this practice from the perspective of inter-state relations, focusing on how it affects other involved States or actors. Thus, instead of focusing on international human rights law, this article looks at the inter-state perspective to nationality deprivation and examines public international law’s position towards this practice of buck-passing by examining other rules and obligations.