Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Changed utterly? continuity and change in the regulation of Irish identities McNamee, Ciaran 2006

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2007-0188a.pdf [ 6.1MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0077731.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0077731-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0077731-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0077731-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0077731-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0077731-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0077731-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0077731-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0077731.ris

Full Text

CHANGED UTTERLY? CONTINUITY AND CHANGE IN THE REGULATION OF IRISH IDENTITIES by  CIARAN MCNAMEE LL.B., Queen's University of Belfast, 2003  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF LAWS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November 2006 © Ciaran McNamee, 2006  ABSTRACT  The Supreme Court decision of A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice [Lobe] and the Irish Citizenship Referendum of 2004 had the cumulative effect of restricting both the rights associated with Irish citizenship and the class of persons entitled to possess it. This thesis considers the dynamics underpinning those restrictions.  The history of the regulation of Irish identities is not simply a story of ever tightening border controls. The Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Ireland in 1998 seemingly widened the class of person entitled to call themselves Irish. Moreover, the Republic of Ireland's membership of the European Union has reduced the state's ability to exercise control over its borders and narrowed the distinction between Irish citizens and those of other EU countries.  I argue that recent developments in the regulation of Irish identities demonstrate the Janus-like nature of modern law. Accepting the arguments advanced in Lobe and the Citizenship Referendum necessitates the embrace of contradiction, not rationality. They illustrate both continuity and change in the conception of what it means to be Irish. Measures to reduce perceived "abuse" of Irish citizenship seek to preserve a particular concept of Irishness and yet simultaneously serve to transform it. However, with its adherence to the creed of modernity - reason, objectivity, and the rejection of ambiguity - modern law cannot acknowledge these tensions.  ii  TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CHAPTER ONE 1.1 Introduction 1.2 The Restriction of Citizenship: A Wider Context 1.3 Citizenship, Sovereignty and the Nation 1.4 Why Examine Lobe and the Citizenship Referendum Together? 1.5 The Citizenship Referendum: A Party Political Issue? 1.6 Border Control: A Global Issue 1.7 A Note on Terminology CHAPTER TWO 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Defining a Citizen 2.3 Citizenship 2.4 Challenges to Citizenship 2.5 Sovereignty 2.6 Models of Sovereignty 2.7 Classic Sovereignty 2.8 Liberal Sovereignty 2.9 Cosmopolitan Sovereignty 2.10 A Critique of Held's Model of Sovereignty 2.11 The Decline of Sovereignty? 2.12 Cosmopolitanism and Exclusivity 2.13 The Nation 2.14 The Ethnic Nation 2.15 The Nation as a Modern Phenomenon 2.16 The Impossibility of Nation 2.17 Law and Nation 2.18 The Cosmopolitan Nation 2.19 Conclusion CHAPTER THREE 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Ireland and Sovereignty 3.3 Irish Citizenship 1922 - 1937 3.4 Irish Citizenship: 1937 - 1998 3.5 The Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Ireland 3.6 Irish Sovereignty and the Rights of the Family 3.7 Challenges to State Sovereignty 3.8 Conclusion CHAPTER FOUR 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Was a Citizenship Referendum Necessary?  •  ii iii v 1 1 3 5 6 8 11 13 15 15 16 17 19 .•••23 24 24 25 27 29 31 33 36 37 40 45 46 47 52 53 53 54 57 61 65 71 83 86 88 88 89  4.3 The Contradiction of the Citizenship Referendum 4.4 Judicial Interpretation of Article 2 4.5 Conceptions of Irishness 4.6 The Yes Campaign 4.7 Other Voices 4.8 The No Campaign 4.9 Legislative Changes Following the Referendum 4.10 Conclusion CHAPTER FIVE BIBLIOGRAPHY  ....91 94 97 99 106 113 117 119 121 127  iv  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Catherine Dauvergne and second reader Dr. Ljiljana Biukovic for their support and enthusiasm - despite many missed deadlines throughout my time at the University of British Columbia. I owe a huge debt to the Faculty of Law in general, and in particular to Professors Susan Boyd, Gordon Christie, Michelle LeBaron, Wes Pue and Steve Wexler, all of whom I had the pleasure of studying under. I would like to thank Professors Margaret Hall and Doug Harris for whom I worked as a Teaching Assistant for two years and Professor Ian Townsend-Gault who provided moral (and vehicular) support on many occasions. I would also like to thank the Administrator of the Graduate Law Program, Joanne Chung for all her help during my time in Vancouver.  *  I must extend thanks to my friends and family for their encouragement to apply to UBC. In particular I would like to thank my mum, dad, brother Johnny, auntie Ethne, Vicky Conway, Miriam Crozier and Gareth Mulvenna. I would like to thank all my friends in Vancouver for contributing to a wonderful chapter in my life. In particular, the students of the Graduate Law Program, Cindy Baldassi, Jessica Otte, Kevin Park and Robert Russo.  I would also wish to thank Eileen Fegan, George Pavlakos and Rory O'Connell at Queen's University Belfast for providing me with the references to undertake graduate study and to Siobhan Mullally whose generous decision to allow me to read early transcripts of her work was invaluable to my own study.  CHAPTER ONE  1.1 Introduction  In the last decade, the regulation of Irish citizenship has become more restrictive. In A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice [Lobe]?  the Supreme Court upheld an appeal  against a change in policy by the office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to assert tighter control of Irish borders. It held that refusing to let the nonnational parents of a dependent child-citizen remain in the state did not violate the rights of that citizen. Following the 1990 case of Fajujonu v. Minister for Justice? the Republic of Ireland had allowed non-nationals with dependent citizen children to remain in the state. Fajujonu ruled that child citizens had a prima facie right to reside in Ireland with their non-national parents, subject to the exigencies of the public good. In Lobe, the Supreme Court held that the state had the right to deport the nonnational parents of Irish child citizens, even if that meant that, as a consequence, the children would have to leave the state.  The second restriction was effected by the approval of the Twenty-Seventh Amendment to the Constitution of Ireland, and subsequent introduction of the Irish Nationality  and Citizenship  Act 2004  [the 2004 Act].  4  The Twenty-Seventh  Amendment was billed as a "Citizenship Referendum." It was portrayed as a  1  2  3  4  A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice, [2003] 1 IR 3 [Lobe]. Fajujonu v. Minister for Justice, [1990] 2 IR 151 [Fajujonu]. Ibid at 162. Irish National and Citizenship Act 2004 (I.) 2004, c.38.  1  necessary precursor to the introduction of legislation to restrict entitlement to Irish citizenship through birth - a right previously enjoyed by anyone born in the island of Ireland. The Government claimed that Article 2 of the Constitution of Ireland had 5  raised the entitlement to Irish citizenship through birth to a constitutional right.  6  This study considers why the Republic of Ireland restricted both the class of persons entitled to claim Irish citizenship and the rights associated with possessing it. Others have already claimed that the decision in Lobe and the restrictions introduced by the 2004 Act  are indicative of social change in Ireland. I agree with them, however, I  argue the restrictions do not signal a fundamental change either in the regulation of Irish citizenship or the dominant national narrative of the Republic of Ireland. I examine the continuities as well as the changes between the regulation of Irish citizenship before and after the recent developments.  Moreover,  Lobe  and the  Citizenship Referendum cannot be characterized as simply part of an increasingly restrictive border control campaign. The European Union [EU] has to some extent curtailed its member states' ability to exert control over their national borders, at least in the case of EU nationals, and reduced the distinctions between citizens of different member states.  Article 9.2.1 of the Constitution of Ireland 1937 now states "Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution^ person born in the island f Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, who does not have, at the time of the birth of that person, at least one parent who is an Irish citizen or entitled to be an Irish citizen is not entitled to Irish citizenship or nationality, unless provided for by law. The provision is limited to those born after it was enacted by Article 9.2.2.  2  1.2 The Restriction of Citizenship: A Wider Context  The decision of the Supreme Court in Lobe was in many ways unremarkable. Whilst the factual scenario which led to the Lobe case is rare in a European context, this is indicative of how anomalous citizenship laws in the Republic of Ireland were prior to 2005. The Republic of Ireland was the only EU state to award citizenship to persons simply because they were born within a prescribed jurisdiction. The rarity of such a scenario in a European context makes a comparison with Lobe difficult. However, outside the EU, among states which award citizenship on the basis of a person's place of birth, the right of the state to control non-nationals within its borders is typically privileged over the right of the child citizen to remain in the state.  7  Considered on an international level, the Irish Supreme Court decision in Lobe cannot be seen as particularly harsh either. The decision stressed that the Irish children were not being deported. Rather, their leaving the state was an indirect consequence of the deportation of their non-national parents. The Supreme Court stated that the children had the right to return to the state when they ceased to be dependent upon their parents.  The rights of the Irish child-citizen in the wake of Lobe compare  favourably with British citizens born to non-national parents. Caroline Sawyer points  "Citizenship Referendum: The Government's Proposals," online: Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform <http://www.iustice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/flJUSO5ZJF5Cen/$Fi le/Govtproposals ,pdfi>. Siobhan Mullally, "Citizenship and Family Life in Ireland: Asking the question 'who belongs?'" (2005) 25(4) Legal Studies 578 at 593. Lobe, supra note 1 at 75, Murray J. 7  8  3  out that a British citizen has no right against expulsion, either in domestic or European law.  9  Indeed, it is because the recent restrictions enacted by the Republic of Ireland in regard to citizenship law are common-place throughout the world that they are interesting. I argue that measured against the values modern law purports to uphold, the current Irish citizenship regime is unjust. In Lobe, the Supreme Court drew a distinction between the rights enjoyed by children born to non-national parents and those born of Irish citizens; as such, it is difficult to see all citizens as equal before the law.  During the Citizenship Referendum, the restriction of entitlement to Irish  citizenship was justified by depicting non-nationals with Irish children as lazy, workshy, selfish parents by virtue of their non-Western cultural background. The use of such rhetoric to describe an entire class of persons is again contrary to the values of equality that law claims to promote.  Many of the difficulties with the current regime were present, albeit less conspicuously so, under its predecessor, the Irish Nationality 1956 [the 1956 Act}}  0  and Citizenship Act,  The category of persons entitled to Irish citizenship under the  1956 Act was very broad. It allowed anyone born in the island of Ireland to become an Irish citizen by virtue of the place of their birth.  11  The class of persons able to  claim citizenship was widened further by allowing those of Irish ancestry to claim  Caroline Sawyer, "Not Every Child Matters: The UK's Expulsion of British Citizens" (2006) 14 Int'l J. Child. Rts. 157 at 160. . Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (I.) 1956, c.26. Ibid. s.6(l) 9  10  n  4  citizenship regardless o f where they were b o r n .  12  Granting a person citizenship on  the grounds o f their place o f birth or lineage does not, o f itself, seem unjust. However, as international migration becomes more common and the defence o f national  borders more  fierce,  the  shortcomings  o f determining  the  right  to  membership o f a political community, in this way are exposed.  Despite the seemingly generous definition o f Irish citizenship provided by the 1956 Act, it was unable to deal with many o f the more complex claims to belong to a national community.  Irish citizenship law prior to the introduction o f the 2004 Act  entitled a larger class o f persons to claim Irish citizenship than it does today. However, it was not demonstrably fairer. Both regimes entitled the citizen to rights denied to the non-citizen and distinguished the citizen from the non-citizen on narrow and arbitrary criteria.  1.3 Citizenship, Sovereignty and the Nation  Establishing criteria to determine who is a citizen poses a dilemma for modern law. Modern law purports to cherish values such as equality, objectivity and rationality, and yet for the majority o f persons within a state, the criteria used to determine their status is not the strength o f their claim to be part o f that community, but whether they were born in the right place or to the right person.  However, the difficulty in  reconciling citizenship with the tenets o f modernity i n no way detracts from the important role that it plays in sustaining modern law. Citizenship is central to the  12  Ibid. s.6(2)  5  l a w ' s c l a i m to l e g i t i m a c y i n the exercise o f p o w e r .  1 3  In liberal democracies, l a w  t y p i c a l l y derives its authority f r o m a c l a i m to act i n the n a m e o f its c i t i z e n s . F o r e x a m p l e , the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland states that it w a s enacted and adopted b y a n d f o r the p e o p l e o f I r e l a n d .  14  F u r t h e r m o r e , the concept o f e q u a l i t y b e f o r e the l a w demands  that o n e b e able to k n o w w h a t the l a w is. T h e b o r d e r e d n a t i o n serves to p r o v i d e the l o c a t i o n for the l a w .  Lobe and the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m serve to illustrate a p a r a d o x that challenges the premises u n d e r p i n n i n g m o d e r n l a w . It m a y n o t b e p o s s i b l e to allocate a n d enforce the rights associated w i t h c i t i z e n s h i p i n a manner consistent w i t h the values m o d e r n l a w purports to stand.  T h e arbitrary d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n c i t i z e n a n d n o n - c i t i z e n  appears to b e b o t h necessary f o r the existence o f m o d e r n l a w a n d i r r e c o n c i l a b l e w i t h the p r i n c i p l e s for w h i c h it purports to stand.  1.4 W h y E x a m i n e ' Lobe and the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m Together?  I feel it i s appropriate to c o n s i d e r Lobe a n d the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m  together  because they each c o n s i d e r the issues o f c i t i z e n s h i p l a w , m i g r a t i o n l a w a n d border c o n t r o l . T h e o p i n i o n s o f the Irish Supreme C o u r t Justices and the debate s u r r o u n d i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m b o t h e x p l o r e the extent to w h i c h the status o f c i t i z e n bestows l e g i t i m a c y u p o n a c l a i m to group m e m b e r s h i p . B o t h illustrate the d i f f i c u l t y  For a general introduction to contract theories of the state see Richard Tuck, "Thomas Hobbes: the skeptical state" and John Dunn, "John Locke: the politics of trust" in Brian Redhead ed., Plato to Nato: Studies in Political Thought (Penguin Books, 1995). Preamble to the Constitution of Ireland 1937. 13  14  6  modern law has in reconciling the values it purports to espouse with its claim to exert legitimate control over the national territory. They are linked by concerns about the legitimacy and enforceability o f state sovereignty.  Having argued that it is appropriate to consider Lobe and the Citizenship Referendum together, it is important to acknowledge that each addresses different aspects o f the debate surrounding the legitimacy o f state sovereignty. Lobe considered the rights that could be invoked on behalf o f a child-citizen born to non-national parents. The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a child-citizen had an absolute right to remain i n the state and whether the rights o f the family, recognized in the Constitution o f Ireland as "superior to all positive l a w , " included the right o f a child 15  citizen to the care and company o f its parents in the state.  The Citizenship  Referendum addressed the issue o f who should be entitled to the legal status o f Irish citizen. In it, the Irish Government asked the people to approve a proposal affirming the right o f the Irish Parliament [Oireachtas] to enact legislation restricting the application o f the jus soli principle. W i t h the approval o f the proposal, the "default" position i n Irish citizenship law changed from one i n which citizenship was granted to anyone born in Ireland to excluding them unless certain criteria were met.  In the  wake o f the Citizenship Referendum, the Irish Government passed the 2004 Act. Today, save for a few statutory exceptions, Irish citizenship is now only be bestowed upon those who, at the time o f their birth, had at least one parent who was, or was entitled to become, an Irish citizen.  15 16  16  Constitution of Ireland Article 41.1.1. The criteria are set out in s.6 of the 1956 Act as amended by s.3 of the 2004 Act.  7  1.5 The Citizenship Referendum: A Party Political Issue?  The Citizenship Referendum was held on 11 June 2004, the same day as local and European elections. The Government announced that doing so would maximize voter turnout  and ensure that it was not just those with strong opinions regarding  immigration who participated i n the referendum.  17  A number o f opposition parties  questioned the motives underpinning the Government's choice o f date. O n 12 March 2004, Enda Kenny, the leader o f the largest opposition party, Fine Gael, warned that holding a referendum on such a sensitive issue during an election campaign risked 18 feeding racism.  Pat Rabbitte, leader o f the Labour Party was more explicit,  announcing "it makes my stomach sick to see [Mary Harney, Progressive Democrat leader] lend her party as a cover to Fianna Fail in a transparent ploy to exploit the immigration issue i n an election atmosphere." Sargent  19  The Green Party leader, Trevor  stated, "This is all about political opportunism and the  elections."  forthcoming  20  I do not believe it is particularly accurate or illuminating to view the Citizenship Referendum as a party political issue. In a 1996 study, "Ireland: the Referendum as a Conservative Device?" Michael Gallagher examined the character o f referenda in the Republic  o f Ireland.  27  Whilst  Gallagher's  study  pre-dates  the  Citizenship  "ibid. Ibid. "Citizenship referendum sparks furore" Editorial, Irish Times (8 April 8 2004). Senan Molony, "Green Party attacks the 'opportunism of coalitions citizen vote," Irish Independent (17 May 2004). Michael Gallagher, "Ireland, the Referendum as a Conservative Device?" in Michael Gallagher and Pier Vincenzo Uleri ed., The Referendum Experience in Europe (Basingstoke, 1996) 86. 18  19  2 0  21  8  Referendum, it serves to contextualize it.  It does not support the claim that the  Citizenship Referendum was held for reasons o f political opportunism or the Government parties exploiting the issue o f immigration.  Gallagher contends that  since the implementation o f the Constitution o f Ireland i n 1937, each referendum can be grouped into one o f four issue areas: "institutional," "European," "moral" and "technical." He suggests the nature o f referendum campaigns in Ireland depend upon two key factors: the extent to which the issue corresponds to the structure o f the Irish party system and the salience o f the issue in the eyes o f the p u b l i c .  22  H e argues that  only a small number o f referenda have been fought along the lines drawn by traditional party divisions. H e states this is due i n part to the unique party structure in Ireland; there is very little policy difference between the two largest political parties, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. Additionally, referenda in the Republic o f Ireland tend to occur on issues o f constitutional significance rather than economic matters i n which a left-wing or right-wing position can be taken.  Gallagher argues that Irish referendum campaigns typically take on one o f four types. Firstly, quasi-elections in which the issue is fought along party lines and the electorate is interested i n the issue.  Secondly, referenda in which the electorate is  interested but the argument is conducted along ambiguous party lines; some parties, but not all, have an official stance. Thirdly, referenda in which the issue matters to voters but either all parties endorse the proposal or the referendum is fought along "divided party" lines. Fourthly, there are referenda where the party line is indifferent;  9  party stance m a k e s little i m p a c t u p o n the vote because the p u b l i c is uninterested i n the issue.  E x a m i n i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m t h r o u g h the lens p r o v i d e d b y G a l l a g h e r , it appears to fit m o s t c o m f o r t a b l y into the s e c o n d category o f r e f e r e n d u m . T u r n o u t w a s h i g h ; i n d i c a t i n g that the electorate w a s interested i n the issue.  The  Government  c o a l i t i o n o f F i a n n a F a i l and the P r o g r e s s i v e D e m o c r a t s a d v o c a t e d a " Y e s " vote.  A  n u m b e r o f parties - L a b o u r , the G r e e n P a r t y and S i n n F e i n - e n c o u r a g e d the p u b l i c to vote " N o . "  T h e largest o p p o s i t i o n party, F i n e G a e l , s i d e d w i t h the  c o a l i t i o n but d i d not c a m p a i g n o n the issue itself.  Government  T h e parties that endorsed a Y e s  vote are t y p i c a l l y p e r c e i v e d as centre-right parties, w h i l s t those that  encouraged  voters to vote N o are o f te n c o n s i d e r e d left-wing. H o w e v e r , I b e l i e v e it is a m i s t a k e to v i e w the Y e s and N o c a m p a i g n s as a left-right i d e o l o g i c a l struggle. In chapter t w o I d r a w u p o n literature that illustrates w h y the merits o f o p e n or c l o s e d b o r d e r p o l i c i e s do not e a s i l y fit into the left-verses-right p o l i t i c a l s p e c t r u m . F u r t h e r m o r e , as chapter f o u r e x p l a i n s , the rhetoric o f v o t i n g Y e s or N o obscures the c o m m o n a l i t i e s o f the referendum campaigns.  T h e t w o options presented to voters w e r e not d i a m e t r i c a l l y  o p p o s e d to each other. T h e Y e s c a m p a i g n sought to restrict, rather than a b o l i s h , the right o f those b o r n to non-nationals to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p .  C o n v e r s e l y , n o n e o f the  m a i n s t r e a m N o c a m p a i g n e r s advocated w i d e n i n g entitlement to I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p or the a b o l i t i o n o f borders d u r i n g the r e f e r e n d u m c a m p a i g n .  10  Another reason I believe that it is a mistake to view the Citizenship Referendum as an election ploy b y the ruling coalition is that, i f it was, it did not work. The results o f the local and European elections suggest that the stance taken b y parties i n regard to the Citizenship Referendum had little correlation upon their success i n local and European elections. Support for the referendum did not increase electoral support for the parties that endorsed it. Although 80% o f those participating voted Yes, each o f the Government coalition parties lost seats i n the local elections.  23  Fianna Fail lost  two seats i n the European Parliament while the Progressive Democrats have yet to return an M E P .  2 4  Labour, the Green Party and Sinn Fein all gained seats i n the local  elections despite endorsing a N o vote. the European elections.  25  The Labour Party did not make any gains i n  The Greens lost two seats.  M E P i n the Republic o f Ireland.  26  Sinn Fein returned their first  It is therefore necessary to consider alternative  explanations for the restriction o f entitlement to Irish citizenship.  1.6 Border Control: A Global Issue  The past decade has seen widespread concern about the ability o f the Republic o f Ireland to control inward - as opposed to outward - migration voiced for the first time. However, the increased prominence o f the issue o f border control i n the political arena is not merely a local phenomenon.  Lobe and the Citizenship Referendum are  Caroline O'Doherty, "Resouning Yes for citizenship change" Irish Examiner (14 June 2004). Mark Brennock, "Fianna Fail suffers worst election results for 80 years" Irish Times (14 June 2004)See the "Election 2004," online: the Irish Times <http://www.ireland.com/focus/localelection2004/local_graphic.html> for a breakdown of the breakdown of the 2004 local elections in Ireland. Sinn Fein also secured one seat in Northern Ireland. 2 3  2 4 25  2 6  11  local manifestations  o f a global "moral panic" about international migration.  Chapter two considers the reasons for the rise i n concern surrounding migration. It explores the concepts o f citizenship, sovereignty and the nation and argues that these terms cannot be neatly defined. Drawing upon the work o f scholars in each o f these fields I suggest that the Republic o f Ireland's recent preoccupation with border control is a product o f trends that have not merely increased the number o f migrants to the Republic o f Ireland, but have also prompted states to conceive o f migrants and themselves differently.  Chapter three seeks to contextualize the Lobe case and Citizenship Referendum by examining the legislative history o f Irish citizenship law and Irish case law surrounding the rights o f Irish citizens born to non-nation parents. It suggests Irish citizenship laws have always been used as a form o f migration law. I argue that while the increase i n numbers o f people traveling to the Republic o f Ireland has raised concerns about the state's ability to assert sovereignty, the Republic o f Ireland has never been able to exert sovereignty as it is traditionally understood.  Consequently,  the regulation o f Irish citizenship has always been o f key importance to the state's claim to sovereignty.  In chapter four I examine the arguments advanced for and against the proposal to restrict entitlement to Irish citizenship through birth. I argue that decision to hold the Citizenship Referendum was based upon two contradictory premises. Consequently,  Catherine Dauvergne, "Sovereignty, Migration and the Rule of Law in Global Times" (2004) 67(4) Mod. L. Rev. 588 at 588. 2 7  12  in a positivistic legal sense, it was unnecessary. advanced  during  the  Citizenship Referendum  B y examining the arguments campaign  and  the  legislation  subsequently introduced to restrict entitlement to Irish citizenship through birth, I suggest that the Citizenship Referendum is best seen as an expression o f the Republic of Ireland's sense o f national identity in the early 2 1 century. st  Chapter five reflects upon modern law's seeming inability to provide convincing answers to the issues raised by global migration. In particular, it considers the tension between law's claim to universality and its distinction in its treatment between citizens and non-citizens and, perhaps more worryingly, citizens born to nonnationals. I argue that through the lens provided by the issue o f border control we see exposed the contradiction at the heart o f modern law.  I suggest that i n order to  address the issues raised by international migration it is necessary to consider the use o f non-legal as well as legal strategies.  1.7 A Note on Terminology  I use the term "Republic o f Ireland" to refer to the 26 county state, officially called "Ireland." In doing so, I attempt to avoid confusion when referring to the Irish state, as distinct from "the island o f Ireland" referred to in Article 2 o f the Constitution o f Ireland. "The island o f Ireland" includes both the Republic o f Ireland and Northern Ireland. M a n y o f the sources I have relied upon in the course o f this work use the term "Ireland" to refer to the 26 county state. Unless the distinction between the Irish  13  state and the island o f Ireland is both unclear and directly relevant to the point under discussion I have not altered the wording o f other writers.  "Northern Ireland" has been a contentious term since the state was established by the Government o f Ireland A c t , 1920.  28  A s I explain i n more detail i n chapter three, Irish  Nationalists have historically denied, or at least questioned, the legitimacy o f Northern Ireland.  This is reflected i n Nationalist terminology i n which Northern  Ireland is referred to as "the North" or "the Six Counties" rather than by its official title. Unionists are generally more accepting o f the term Northern Ireland, although some refer to the state as "Ulster," the name o f the historic province o f Ireland i n which Northern Ireland is located.  A s three o f the counties o f historic Ulster are  located i n the Republic o f Ireland, this term is not strictly accurate. The Agreement o f 1998 was accepted b y voters i n both jurisdictions on the island o f Ireland i n separate referenda.  29  A s the Agreement recognized "the legitimacy o f the people o f Northern  Ireland with regard to its status"  30  [my emphasis] I feel it is the least contentious o f  the possible terms for the state. I w i l l therefore use the term Northern Ireland i n the course o f this study.  Government of Ireland Act, 1920 (U.K.), 10 &11 Geo. V., c.67, s.l. The Agreement of 1998 has no name. It is known variously as the Belfast Agreement, the Good Friday Agreement, the Stormont Agreement, the British-Irish Agreement, or simply the Agreement. See Brendan O'Leary, "The Nature of the Agreement," 22 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1628 for greater discussion of the name of the Agreement. The Agreement (1998), Constitutional Issues, section 1(1). 2 8  29  30  14  CHAPTER TWO  2.1 Introduction  This chapter locates the issue of the restriction of Irish Citizenship within a discussion of three inter-related concepts: citizenship, sovereignty and the nation. Each featured in Lobe and the Citizenship Referendum as the Irish courts and law makers sought to determine legitimate claims to Irishness, the rights bestowed by Irish citizenship and the measures the state could employ to protect its borders. I consider each concept in turn. As will become apparent, they are contested. Whilst I attempt to sketch a description of each, my focus is upon why there is a lack of certainty as to their meaning, rather than attempting to define them.  I argue that an adequate definition of each concept is impossible. Definitions assume concepts to be rational. Those who purport to define a concept attempt to reduce it to an essence. However, the definitions of citizenship, sovereignty and the nation that have been offered have proved inadequate; they do not include all the qualities associated with the concepts; nor are the qualities described exclusive to them. I suggest that rationality is unable to define these concepts because they are borne out of contradiction rather than reason.  Conceptual uncertainty is integral to their  existence. It cannot be overcome by simply refining definitions. Consequently, attempts to justify the restriction of entitlement to Irish citizenship or the rights associated with Irish citizenship by appeals to reason are based on the mistaken  15  premise that the criteria that define citizenship, sovereignty, or membership o f nation are rational.  2.2 Defining a Citizen  In the majority o f Western states, citizenship laws are based either on the principle o f jus  soli or jus  sanguinis,  or comprise some hybrid o f the two.  There are also  naturalization processes, but that is not m y focus here. Irish citizenship law is imbued with both jus soli and jus sanguinis principles.  31  The jus soli principle - literally " o f  the s o i l " - is historically a feature o f common law jurisdictions. It uses the criteria o f birth within a state to determine whether a person is entitled to citizenship. The jus sanguinis principle awards citizenship to those with a "blood relationship" to the state.  The origin o f jus  sanguinis principle has been attributed to the spirit o f  nationalism and fraternity among the French following the 1789 revolution.  Although awarding citizenship on the basis o f a person's place o f birth or their descent is not manifestly unjust o f itself, neither the jus soli nor the jus  sanguinis  principle have the capacity to deal with the multi-faceted and complex claim to belong to a community.  Joseph H . Carens highlights the potential difficulties faced  by a non-citizen, resident in a state from shortly after his or her birth, that do not  31  3 2  Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956. James Brown Scott, "Nationality: Jus Soli or Jus Sanguinis" (1930) 60 A.J.I.L. 58 at 61.  16  trouble a citizen.  The non-citizen who commits a crime, unlike their citizen  counterpart, faces the threat o f deportation. A citizen guilty o f the crime may be sent to j a i l for a long time, but he or she cannot be removed from the state. Carens argues that the longer a person resides i n a state, the greater moral claim he or she has to be considered a member o f the national community, even i f they do not possess the legal status o f citizen. Conversely, the greater the length o f time a person has been resident in the state, the more the community should view that person's illegal actions as "their problem" rather than something to be dealt with by the person's country o f origin.  34  However, the jus soli and jus sanguinis principles are not concern with the  reasons w h y someone may claim to belong to a community. Instead they distinguish the citizen from the non-citizen on grounds beyond that person's control.  2.3 Citizenship  I now turn to the concept o f citizenship itself.  Broadly speaking, citizenship  incorporates three related components: membership, rights and duties o f members and participation. these notions.  35  However, theorists differ in the emphasis they place upon each o f  36  Joseph H. Carens, "Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Immigration: False Dichotomies and Shifting Presuppositions" in Ronald Beiner & Wayne Norman ed., Canadian Political Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2001) 17 at 20-25. /fe/. Catherine Dauvergne, "Beyond Justice: The Consequences of Liberalism for Immigration Law" (1997) 10(2) Can. J.L. & Jur. 323 at 324. Marco Martiniello, "Citizenship in the European Union," in T. Alexander Aleinikoff & Douglas B. Klusmeyer eds., From Migrants to Citizens: Membership in a Changing World, (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2000) 342. 3 3  34  3 5  3 6  17  One description o f modern citizenship which is often cited is that offered by T . H . Marshall.  37  Marshall identifies three distinct components - political, judicial and c i v i l  citizenship - which he fuses together.  38  The political aspect invokes a "self rule"  principle; citizenship demands the people participate i n ruling as w e l l as being ruled. That requirement can be achieved by citizens becoming involved i n the law-making process directly or b y electing representatives to make laws on their behalf. A second aspect o f Marshall's account is the judicial conception o f modern citizenship.  It  grants the status o f legal personhood which makes persons subject to the law and gives them rights which may be enforced in court.  Thirdly, the c i v i l aspect o f  citizenship creates a sense o f identity as a member o f an exclusive group for those granted the status o f citizen.  Marshall's description proceeds on a number o f assumptions. Firstly, his conception of citizenship is founded upon the liberal premises o f the Enlightenment.  It  necessitates a conceptual "flattening out" o f society that is i n contrast with the hierarchical structures o f pre-modern societies.  Marshall states, "In feudal society  status was the hallmark o f class and the measure o f inequality. There was no uniform collection o f rights and duties with which all men...were endowed by virtue o f their membership o f the society. There was, in this sense, no principle o f the equality o f citizens to set against the principle o f the inequality o f classes."  39  Secondly, Marshall  See, for example, Jean L. Cohen, "Changing Paradigms of Citizenship and the Exclusiveness of the Demos" (1999) 14(3) International Sociology 245, Miriam Feldblum, "Reconfiguring Citizenship in Western Europe," in Christian Joppke ed., Challenges to the Nation State (Oxford University Press, 1998) 321, and Roel de Lange "Paradoxes of European Citizenship" in Peter Fitzpatrick ed., Nationalism, Racism and the Rule of Law (Dartmouth, 1995) 97. T.H. Marshall & Tom Bottomore, Citizenship and Social Class (1992, Pluto Press) at 8. 3 7  3 8  18  assumes the emergence o f c i t i z e n s h i p is a n e v o l u t i o n a r y process.  H e p r e s u m e s that  each o f the c o m p o n e n t s o f c i t i z e n s h i p fuse together h a r m o n i o u s l y .  Finally, his  account also associates c i t i z e n s h i p w i t h the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the nation-state.  Key  aspects o f M a r s h a l l ' s d e s c r i p t i o n , s u c h as p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the l a w - m a k i n g process a n d the sense o f i d e n t i t y d r a w n f r o m group m e m b e r s h i p , infer a degree o f e x c l u s i v i t y .  2.4 C h a l l e n g e s to C i t i z e n s h i p  Challenges  to  each  o f these  assumptions  have  raised  questions  appropriateness o f M a r s h a l l ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p f o r the 2 1 challenges have b e e n theoretical.  s t  about  century.  the Some  M a r s h a l l l i n k s the concept o f c i t i z e n s h i p to the  m o d e r n era. A s s u c h , he i n v o k e s the creed o f m o d e r n i t y , w h i c h Peter F i t z p a t r i c k characterizes as the rejection o f m y t h , the embrace o f r a t i o n a l i t y a n d o b j e c t i v i t y . T h e late 2 0  t h  40  century s a w the emergence o f p o s t m o d e r n c r i t i q u e s , w h i c h disputed the  premises u p o n w h i c h the E n l i g h t e n m e n t  project w a s based.  A l a n Hunt  states,  " P o s t m o d e r n i s m ' s critique o f the E n l i g h t e n m e n t i s o f a f a i l e d rationalist project w h i c h has r u n its course but w h i c h continues to e n c u m b e r c o n t e m p o r a r y thought w i t h i l l u s i o n s o f a rational route to k n o w l e d g e , a f a i t h i n science a n d i n p r o g r e s s . " Postmodern  thought  brings  into  question  Marshall's  c i t i z e n s h i p is the inevitable product o f progress.  assumption  that  41  modern  Instead, it contends that m o d e r n  c i t i z e n s h i p i s t e m p o r a r y a n d contingent u p o n the exercise o f p o w e r i n m u l t i p l e  41  Peter Fitzpatrick, Mythology of Modern Law, (Routledge, 1992) at. 1-3. Alan Hunt, "The Big Fear: Law Confronts Postmodernism" (1990) 35 McGill L.J. 515 at 515.  19  decentralized sites.  42  Even before Marshall articulated his description o f citizenship,  the tension between the universal judicial aspect o f citizenship and the exclusive political aspect was noted b y Hannah Arendt.  43  Arendt noted the disparity between  the claim to respect the rights o f man - a universal principle - and its more limited application within the boundaries o f the state witnessed i n Revolutionary France. However, while Arendt attempted to resolve the tension b y suggesting that citizenship itself was a universal right, more recent thinkers have challenged the assumption that the tension can be resolved.  44  Jean L . Cohen notes that the difficulty migration poses for liberalism is not that the logic o f liberalism points to open or closed borders but rather it points to both. She argues that the difficult relationship between non-citizens, or child citizens with nonnational parents, and the state is born out o f the contradictions o f liberal citizenship. The political component o f liberal citizenship is inclusive, i n the sense that it emphasizes participation, but it is participation o f a particular group to the exclusion o f others.  In contrast, the judicial conception o f citizenship has the capacity for  universal inclusion, but that is achieved at the expense o f a collective identity o f the demos. She states it was the hegemony o f the liberal model that led to the component parts o f citizenship being perceived as complimentary.  This model is now being  challenged as the impact o f globalization makes apparent the state's lack o f ability to control developments affecting its members' lives  4 2  4 3  4 4  4 5  4 5  Gerald Turkel, "Michel Foucault: Law, Power and Knowledge" (1990) 17(2) J.L & Soc'y at 170. Hannah Ardent, The Origins of Totalitarianism, (Harcourt Brace and Company, 1973) at 230-31. Cohen, supra note 37 at 254. Cohen, supra note 37 at 252.  20  Other challenges to Marshall's description o f citizenship have emerged from more practical developments.  In Marshall's account, the state acts to guarantee uniform  and equal rights to citizens. The Maastricht European U n i o n [EU] citizenship.  46  Treaty o f 1992 [Maastricht] created  E U citizenship challenges both the presumption  that the nation-state is the sole guarantor o f rights and that rights must be applied uniformly and equally among citizens.  Maastricht  established a series o f rights common to all E U citizens: The right to free  movement and residence in member states ; the right to vote i n local and European 47  AO  elections in the member state o f residence ; the right to diplomatic protection in a third country ; the right to petition the European Parliament and appeal to the 49  European Ombudsman. the Amsterdam  50  The rights o f E U citizens were subsequently enhanced by  Treaty o f 1997 [Amsterdam] : 51  an anti-discrimination clause and  articles seeking to better protect human rights and fundamental liberties were adopted.  52  The rights o f E U citizenship are enforceable throughout the E U . They are  not contained by the boundaries o f a particular nation-state.  Whilst Maastricht created the category o f E U citizen, from its earliest incarnation, the E U has sought to maintain distinctions between member states, rather than forge a  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  Maastricht Treaty, O.J. C 191, 29 July 1992 [Maastricht]. Ibid. Article 8A Ibid, Article 8B Ibid. Article 8C Ibid. Article 8D. Amsterdam Treaty, O.J. C 340 10 November 1997 [Amsterdam]. Ibid. Articles 7 and J. 1.1.  21  c o l l e c t i v e E u r o p e a n identity. H a n s L i n d a h l observes, " W h i l e the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f the U n i t e d States... k i c k s o f f w i t h ' W e the p e o p l e , ' the p r e a m b l e t o the Treaty of Rome defines E u r o p e a n integration i n terms o f ' a n ever c l o s e r u n i o n a m o n g the peoples o f Europe.'"  5 3  Amsterdam a f f i r m s this c o n c e p t i o n o f the E U , stating that E U c i t i z e n s h i p  supplements, rather than replaces, n a t i o n a l c i t i z e n s h i p .  A t present, the rights  associated w i t h E U c i t i z e n s h i p r e m a i n dependent u p o n p r i o r m e m b e r s h i p o f a member state.  54  T h e rights associated w i t h E U c i t i z e n s h i p are not n e c e s s a r i l y a p p l i e d u n i f o r m l y . T h i s is demonstrated b y the restrictions that exist r e g a r d i n g the v o t i n g rights o f E U c i t i z e n s resident i n another m e m b e r state. T h e p o s s e s s i o n o f E U c i t i z e n s h i p entitles a p e r s o n resident i n a m e m b e r state to vote i n l o c a l and E u r o p e a n elections e v e n i f they are not a c i t i z e n o f that country.  H o w e v e r , i f the n u m b e r o f non-nationals resident i n a  m e m b e r state amounts to 2 0 % o f those o f v o t i n g age, that state m a y restrict v o t i n g rights f o r those w h o have l i v e d there f o r less than f i v e years.  M a r t i n i e l l o states,  " E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n s l i v i n g i n a m e m b e r state other than their o w n are c o n s i d e r e d to be equal to E U c i t i z e n s l i v i n g i n their o w n m e m b e r state, b u t they are a b i t less equal than t h e m . "  EU  5 5  c i t i z e n s h i p therefore  simultaneously  challenges  the t r a d i t i o n a l  c i t i z e n s h i p a n d r e a f f i r m s its l i n k w i t h the territorial state.  notion o f  W h i l s t the state w a s  Hans Lindahl, "European Integration: Popular Sovereignty and a Politics of Boundaries" (2000) 6(3) Eur. L.J. 239 at 239. Amsterdam, .supra note 51, Article 9 Martiniello, supra note 36 at 364. 53  5 4 55  22  p r e v i o u s l y p e r c e i v e d to be the c i t i z e n ' s o n l y guarantor o f rights, the c i t i z e n c a n n o w also turn to the E U .  A d d i t i o n a l l y , as E U c i t i z e n s , non-nationals w i t h i n a nation-state  c a n c l a i m a n u m b e r o f rights p r e v i o u s l y reserved f o r f u l l m e m b e r s o f the p o l i t i c a l community.  However,  it is not p o s s i b l e to see the rights associated w i t h  c i t i z e n s h i p s i m p l y as n a t i o n a l c i t i z e n s h i p w r i t large.  EU  T o the extent that the E U  has  f o r g e d a p o l i t i c a l i m a g i n i n g , it has done so b y reference to the u n i o n o f the m e m b e r states. In d o i n g so, r e a f f i r m s the l e g i t i m a c y o f those states.  2.5 S o v e r e i g n t y  T h e issue o f c i t i z e n s h i p is c l o s e l y l i n k e d to the concept o f state  sovereignty.  S o v e r e i g n t y relates to a c l a i m to have the right to exercise p o w e r l e g i t i m a t e l y . B e y o n d that, the term is a m b i g u o u s and disputed. M a r x and W e b e r suggested that i n order to be s o v e r e i g n a state m u s t h o l d supreme and absolute p o w e r w i t h i n a territory.  56  T h i s d e f i n i t i o n has been w i d e l y a c k n o w l e d g e d to be inadequate.  R o s a s states " t h i s state, o f course, is not any s t a t e . "  57  Alan  In response, s o m e theorists  have sought to s h o w that s o v e r e i g n t y is an e v o l v i n g concept rather than f i x e d one. Others have suggested that sovereignty is an outdated concept that is i n d e c l i n e .  In  this s e c t i o n I argue that the uncertainty o f the concept o f s o v e r e i g n t y poses a c o m m o n p r o b l e m to b o t h these approaches: because the themes associated w i t h s o v e r e i g n t y do not c o n f o r m to a linear pattern there is n o rational p r o g r e s s i o n , n o r c o n c l u s i v e d e c l i n e , o f sovereignty.  5 6  Jurgen Habermas, The Inclusion of the Other (Polity Press, 1999) at 108.  23  2.6 M o d e l s o f S o v e r e i g n t y  D a v i d H e l d suggests that since the advent o f the nation-state, three m o d e l s o f sovereignty c a n b e d i s c e r n e d : " c l a s s i c , " " l i b e r a l " and " c o s m o p o l i t a n . " H e states that the c l a s s i c m o d e l w a s d o m i n a n t f r o m the sixteenth century u n t i l the twentieth century.  It e m e r g e d f o l l o w i n g the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 [Westphalia]  as a n  attempt to ensure p o l i t i c a l s t a b i l i t y f o l l o w i n g a p e r i o d d o m i n a t e d b y a series o f religious wars.  T h e c l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y m o d e l p o s i t i o n e d a l l alternative sites o f  p o w e r , s u c h as r e l i g i o u s o r c u s t o m a r y c o m m u n i t i e s , subordinate to the p o w e r o f the state.  T h e m o d e l e n v i s a g e d b y theorists o f c l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y g a v e the s o v e r e i g n  "the u n d i v i d e d and u n t r a m m e l e d p o w e r to m a k e and enforce the l a w " w i t h i n a state or p o l i t i c a l c o m m u n i t y .  5 8  2.7 C l a s s i c S o v e r e i g n t y  C l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y has b o t h a n " i n t e r n a l " a n d a n " e x t e r n a l " d i m e n s i o n .  Internally,  the s o v e r e i g n c l a i m e d absolute and f i n a l authority. Non-state actors that d i s p u t e d the p o w e r o f the s o v e r e i g n w e r e d e e m e d i l l e g i t i m a t e . T h e external d i m e n s i o n o f c l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y d e n i e d the l e g i t i m a c y o f a n y h i g h e r p o w e r to w h i c h a p e r s o n i n s i d e the territory m i g h t appeal.  It envisaged a c o m m u n i t y o f states w h i c h w e r e n o m i n a l l y  Alan Rosas, "The Decline of Sovereignty" in Jyrki Livonen ed. The Future of the Nation State in Europe (Edward Elgar Publishing Co, 1993) 130 at 131. David Held, "Law of States, Law of Peoples: Three Models of Sovereignty" (2002) 8 Legal Theory 1 at 3. 5 7  58  24  equal; no state had a right to interfere in the internal affairs o f another. H e l d does not suggest that power imbalances between states did not influence international relations during this period. Rather, he argues it meant that the manner in which the ruler o f a state secured power internally had no bearing on its legitimacy when dealing with other states. legitimacy.  Whether one wielded effective power was the only measure o f  59  2.8 Liberal Sovereignty  Liberal sovereignty placed restrictions upon the sovereign's right to exercise absolute power within its borders. Held states that this model began to emerge as the number of democratized states increased during the nineteenth and early twentieth century. It became dominant following W o r l d War II during which the failings o f the classic sovereignty model became  apparent.  international community has  become  The measure o f legitimacy among whether  the  the  sovereign can demonstrate  adherence to the principles o f democracy and human rights. A s a consequence o f the shift to the liberal sovereignty model, the actions o f states are now curtailed by international agreements on a wide range o f issues. H e l d cites examples o f areas i n which the legitimacy o f state actions is now dependent upon an adherence to common principles. These include, but are not limited to, the development o f common rules o f warfare, the responsibility o f individuals to adhere to certain norms during conflict, a  Ibid, at 5.  25  c o r n m i t m e n t to h u m a n rights and the rights o f m i n o r i t i e s a n d , i n c r e a s i n g l y , issues r e g a r d i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t .  60  L i b e r a l sovereignty, H e l d contends, has h a d s o m e success i n c u r t a i l i n g the excesses p o s s i b l e under the c l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y m o d e l . d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h l i b e r a l sovereignty.  H o w e v e r , he i d e n t i f i e s a n u m b e r o f  O n e p r o b l e m is that the v a l u e s espoused b y  l i b e r a l s o v e r e i g n t y are not a l w a y s h a r m o n i o u s .  It  is not d i f f i c u l t to  imagine  c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h the electorate o f a state endorses a p o l i c y that is advantageous to those w i t h i n the state but has a detrimental effect u p o n the e n v i r o n m e n t b e y o n d state borders. S u c h a scenario places l i b e r a l s o v e r e i g n t y ' s endorsement o f d e m o c r a c y i n c o n f l i c t w i t h its support f o r the concept o f "the c o m m o n heritage o f m a n k i n d , " w h i c h has d e v e l o p e d i n regard to e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues i n the  last 4 0  years.  P r o p o n e n t s o f the h y p o t h e t i c a l p o l i c y can appeal to the d e m o c r a t i c mandate that endorsed that p o l i c y .  H o w e v e r , the w i d e s p r e a d i m p a c t o f s u c h a p o l i c y raises  questions about the true a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f state p o w e r .  A s H e l d remarks, "[PJolitical  arrogance has been r e i n f o r c e d b y the c l a i m o f the p o l i t i c a l elites to derive their support f r o m that m o s t v i r t u o u s source o f p o w e r - the demos.  D e m o c r a t i c princes  c a n energetically pursue p u b l i c p o l i c i e s . . . b e c a u s e they f e e l , a n d to a degree are, m a n d a t e d to do s o .  60  61  6 1  Ibid at 20-23. Ibid.aX 21.  26  2.9 Cosmopolitan Sovereignty  H e l d argues that i n order for new sites o f power to become truly accountable it is desirable to work towards a framework o f universal law.  H e calls this cosmopolitan  sovereignty. In a sense the cosmopolitan model builds upon liberal sovereignty; Held characterizes cosmopolitanism as "those basic values that set down standards or boundaries that no agent, whether a representative o f a government, state, or c i v i l association, should be able to cross."  63  The values themselves are also familiar: equal  worth and dignity; active agency; personal responsibility and accountability; consent; collective decision making through voting procedures; inclusiveness; avoidance o f serious harm and the amelioration o f urgent need.  To give effect to cosmopolitanism, Held proposes four institutional requirements. "Legal cosmopolitanism" would establish fundamental legal rights at a global level. It would place all persons under a basic law that embodies fundamental values and give them rights that may be enforced by the courts.  In an effort to ensure effective  political participation, "political cosmopolitanism" would increase the importance o f regional and global representative institutions. parliaments  would diminish.  Conversely, the role o f national  "Economic cosmopolitanism" envisages  political  intervention i n the economy i n order to ensure that the basic values outlined above are safeguarded.  62  63  It does not view intervention as a goal i n itself, rather as a necessity i n  /to/.at38. Ibid.dX 23.  27  order to bridge.the gap between the aspiration o f equality and the danger posed by substantive inequality and sectional interests.  Finally, "cultural cosmopolitanism"  acknowledges that identities are not fixed and need not be confined by national borders.  Where cosmopolitan sovereignty differs from liberal sovereignty is i n loosening the link between membership o f a territorial state and the right to participate i n decision making. The measure o f one's right to participate becomes whether one is affected by the outcome o f that decision rather than whether one has been deemed a member o f a fixed geo-political group. Held argues that the Social Chapter o f Maastricht compatible with the concept o f cosmopolitan sovereignty.  64  is  However, he does not  claim that the creation o f E U citizenship amounts to cosmopolitan sovereignty. Rather, it offers a framework that could be built upon.  A t present, the rights  associated with E U citizenship remain dependent upon prior membership o f a member state.  The proposal to detach sovereignty from the territorial state demands a departure from the way in which sovereignty has traditionally been understood.  The  cosmopolitan sovereignty envisaged by Held far is much more radical than the challenge to the nation-state posed by the creation o f E U citizenship. Both the classic and liberal models rely upon state borders to ensure formal equality before the law. They anticipate that the power o f the sovereign, exercised through the law, w i l l apply evenly throughout the state.  Cosmopolitan sovereignty proposes that the formal  28  e q u a l i t y a c c o r d e d b y earlier m o d e l s b e c o m e subservient to substantive  equality  a m o n g those affected b y the exercise o f p o w e r .  2.10 A C r i t i q u e o f H e l d ' s M o d e l o f S o v e r e i g n t y  W h i l s t H e l d ' s account o f the e v o l u t i o n o f s o v e r e i g n t y i s u s e f u l , i n the sense that it h i g h l i g h t s the c o n c e p t u a l changes that have taken p l a c e since the Westphalia, i t r i s k s r e d u c i n g the concept o f sovereignty to a grand narrative.  D o i n g so o v e r l o o k s the  shifts i n p o w e r relations that o c c u r r e d have o c c u r r e d w i t h i n the three t i m e p e r i o d s h e identifies.  F o r e x a m p l e , i n H e l d ' s account, c l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y encompasses the  p e r i o d from Westphalia to the early 2 0  t h  century. T h e r e i s little reference to the shifts  i n p o w e r that t o o k p l a c e f o l l o w i n g the F r e n c h and A m e r i c a n R e v o l u t i o n s o r the i m p a c t this h a d u p o n international r e l a t i o n s . . 65  M o r e o v e r , H e l d e m p h a s i z e s the differences b e t w e e n the m o d e l s o f s o v e r e i g n t y . d o i n g so h e d o w n p l a y s their c o n t i n u i t y .  In  T h i s portrays s o v e r e i g n t y as a linear and  e v o l u t i o n a r y concept, rather than s h i f t i n g and contingent.  Sovereignty should be  c o n c e i v e d o f as a l o o s e l y associated c o l l e c t i o n o f themes rather than a linear p r o g r e s s i o n . T h o s e themes compete w i t h each other, r i s i n g a n d f a l l i n g i n p r o m i n e n c e over t i m e . I n H e l d ' s account, classic sovereignty is succeeded b y l i b e r a l sovereignty because o f the abuse o f p o w e r under the former. H o w e v e r , this shift i n emphasis w a s not s i m p l y a t r a n s i t i o n f r o m an i n f e r i o r to a superior system. It m a r k e d a resurgence  64 65  Ibid, at 38. Elie Kedourie, Nationalism (Hutchinson University Library, 1960) at 15.  29  o f a theme that had fallen out o f favour as the concept o f the Rights o f M a n had taken hold.  From the time o f Westphalia until the French Revolution, the dominant concept o f government in Europe was one o f Enlightened Absolutism. It rested upon a premise that that there was a universal law o f nature which could be identified through the use o f reason.  66  The sovereign and his or her subjects were bound together i n common  pursuit o f improvement.  It was believed that by adhering to the law o f nature, the  welfare o f all could be ensured.  Between the French Revolution and the early 2 0  th  century the notion that the w i l l o f the people was subject to a higher power fell into decline. The rise o f liberal sovereignty was not simply an innovation.  It was also a  revival o f a theme present in an earlier model o f sovereignty.  B y endorsing cosmopolitan sovereignty, Held seeks to overcome the tensions present in liberal sovereignty.  However, cosmopolitan sovereignty does not resolve the  conceptual difficulties found in earlier models.  In cosmopolitan sovereignty, H e l d  envisages participation by those subject to the exercise o f power rather than those with the formal status o f citizen.  However, it may be difficult to determine what  constitutes being sufficiently affected by a power.  For example, a new road built  between two major cities is likely to impact upon the lives o f a large number o f people in some form, yet determining the appropriate level o f consultation is likely to be problematic.  It is debatable whether all those affected, however marginally,  should be consulted. It may be fairer to consult only with those upon w h o m the road  30  w i l l directly impact. Alternatively, it may be preferable to give greater weight to the views o f those with expert knowledge on the need for the road and its potential environmental impact than to the views o f the local community.  A related concern is determining the appropriate weight that should be given to the views o f those affected by a decision. It seems inconsistent with the principle o f substantive equality to give a person who stands to be marginally affected by a decision equal standing with those whose life w i l l be severely disrupted. Yet Held offers no suggestions on how competing claims should be weighted against each other.  Possession o f citizenship i n a bordered world determines the right to  participate  i n decision making processes  in a formal and  arbitrary  manner.  Cosmopolitan sovereignty seeks to replace that arbitrary system with one i n which the criteria for participation is no more rational.  2.11 The Decline o f Sovereignty?  A n alternative to Held's evolutionary theory o f sovereignty is the suggestion that sovereignty should be conceived o f in the manner suggested by M a r x and Weber but that it is in decline.  Ohmaie Kenichi emphasizes the disparity between a strict  adherence to the concept o f sovereignty as supreme and absolute power within a territory and present day global economic trends as evidence o f the decline o f the  Ibid, at 10.  31  nation-state.  H e argues that in an era o f globalization the nation-state has become  an increasingly redundant "middle-man." economic.  However, Kenichi's focus is narrowly  In his account, borders are simply a hindrance to economic progress.  Kenichi declares nationalism "a jingoistic celebration o f nationhood that places far more value on emotion-grabbing symbols than on real, concrete improvements in the quality o f l i f e . "  68  However, as Richard Falk points out, the legacy o f state  sovereignty and nationalism is more ambivalent. Whilst resistance to globalization has highlighted the more chauvinistic aspects o f nationalism, the concept o f the secular, sovereign state has also been utilized as a means to reject privilege.  69  Moreover, Kenichi's suggestion that we now live in "a borderless w o r l d " does not stand up to even a cursory examination. For those without the necessary skills or financial resources, the power o f the state to exercise control over national borders remain very real barriers to movement.  N e i l M a c C o r m i c k argues that sovereignty is i n decline but questions the extent to 70  which the state ever exercised absolute power within its borders.  Instead, for  MacCormick, the "decline" o f sovereignty relates to the increasing dispersal o f power among different bodies.  He argues that sovereignty is primarily i n decline in the  sense that the state-centric model o f legal systems proposed by theorists such as John Austin is increasingly redundant as a means o f understanding the manner i n which  Ohmae Kenichi, The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies (HarperCollins, 1995). Ibid, at 13. Richard Falk, "The Decline of Citizenship in an Era of Globalization" 2000 4(1) Citizenship Studies, 5 at 11. Neil MacCormick, "Beyond the Sovereign State" 56(1) (1993) M L R 1.  6 7  6 i  6 9  7 0  32  law operates. Alternative sites of power, such as the EU, international law, and even forms of illegal regulation, are of increasing importance to daily life. He suggests that whilst these sites perform tasks once perceived to be the sole province of state law, they are too dispersed to be seen as "sovereign" powers in themselves. Therefore, as power becomes decentralized, the notion of sovereignty has fallen into decline.  2.12 Cosmopolitanism and Exclusivity Whilst MacCormick is of the view that sovereignty is an increasingly redundant concept, his argument, that the decline of sovereignty is primarily conceptual, has the capacity to accommodate a scenario in which some themes traditionally associated with sovereignty retain importance while others fall into decline. It is therefore at least partially compatible with a theory advanced by Saskia Sassen critiquing the theory that states are in terminal decline. Sassen argues that though globalizing forces have altered the role of the state, it retains relevance by providing the framework in which those forces operate.  She states "much that we describe as  global, including some of the most strategic functions necessary for globalization, is grounded in national territories."  71  The reassessment of the legitimacy and effectiveness of state power on a global scale coincides with a weakening of the mono-cultural, Gaelic, Catholic identity that  Saskia Sassen, Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization (Columbia University Press, 1996) at 13.  71  33  dominated the Republic of Ireland throughout the twentieth century.  John A.  Harrington states, "In a series of referenda voters have abandoned irredentism, embraced secularism and liberalized the social code." In this section I consider why 72  arguments in favour of restricting entitlement to Irish citizenship have become potent in recent years - as the paradigm that assumed a bordered world is being challenged and Ireland has embraced multiple and shifting identities as a member of the EU.  One explanation for increased concern about the state's ability to control its borders is the growing importance of migration law in relation to state sovereignty. Catherine Dauvergne suggests that migration law has become the "last bastion" of traditional sovereignty. Other areas traditionally considered exclusively within the domain of 73  the sovereign state, such as economic policy and law and order, have been challenged by other sites of power. The growth of a culture of human rights has placed restrictions upon the measures that can be introduced by governments in the name of law and order; the phenomenon of globalization prevents states from "managing" economies in the manner that they once felt they could.  In contrast to this trend, states retain almost complete control of their borders. They are free to introduce immigration laws in which the selection of candidates is based upon the perceived advantage to the receiving state. There is no requirement that the state consider the wider impact of its policies, such as the removal of skilled workers  7 2  John A Harrington, "Citizenship and the Biopolitics of Postnationalist Ireland" (2005) 32(3) J. L . &  Soc'y 424 at 424. Catherine Dauvergne, "Sovereignty, Migration and the Rule of Law in Global Times" (2004) 67(4) Mod. L. Rev. 588 at 588. 7 3  34  from their country of origin. Dauvergne states that even in regard to refugee law, the one area of migration law which does involve commitment to international conventions, the state retains rights associated with traditional sovereignty: states enter into the Refugee Convention as sovereign powers; they limit the number of refugees who will benefit from the protection of the Convention; the practical impact of the Refugee Convention upon the exercise of sovereignty in Western states is limited, as a disproportionate number of refugees are admitted by poorer countries; and failure to adhere to the Convention carries no penalty.  74  As traditional areas in which the state excised sovereignty have eroded, the importance of migration law has increased. Ironically, the role of migration law has changed by virtue of its staying the same. Dauvergne states, "As nations have seen their powers to control the flows of money or ideas and to set economic or cultural policies slip away, they seek to assert themselves as nations through migration laws and policies which assert their nation-ness and exemplify their sovereign control and capacity."  75  The Republic of Ireland's insistence upon the right to assert sovereignty was clearly demonstrated in Lobe, where "the need to preserve the integrity of and respect for the state's asylum and immigration laws" was emphasized.  76  The issue of control of state  borders was, surprisingly, less obvious during the Citizenship Referendum. One of the central arguments advanced by the "Yes" campaign was that restricting  74 75  Ibid, at 597. Ibid, at 595.  35  entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w a s necessary because it b e s t o w e d the right to l i v e and work anywhere in Europe.  T h e " a b u s e " o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s w a s portrayed as a  threat not just to the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland but to the w h o l e o f E u r o p e . In the f o l l o w i n g pages I c o n s i d e r h o w the Irish c o u l d at once embrace c u l t u r a l c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m - i n the f o r m o f " E u r o p e a n n e s s " - and at the same t i m e restrict its m i g r a t i o n l a w s .  In  order to r e c o n c i l e the c l a i m that the state has retained the characteristics o f c l a s s i c s o v e r e i g n t y i n regard to m i g r a t i o n l a w w i t h the argument a d v a n c e d b y the " Y e s " c a m p a i g n , I e m p l o y , and attempt to b u i l d u p o n , a theoretical f r a m e w o r k d e v e l o p e d b y F i t z p a t r i c k and H a r r i n g t o n .  2.13 T h e N a t i o n  T h e n a t i o n has been d e s c r i b e d as "the m o s t u n i v e r s a l l y legitimate v a l u e i n the p o l i t i c a l l i f e o f our t i m e . "  7 7  Y e t despite its s e e m i n g o m n i p r e s e n c e , i d e n t i f y i n g w h a t it  is has proves p r o b l e m a t i c . Peter F i t z p a t r i c k states, " W e f i n d it d i f f i c u l t to challenge n a t i o n because w e cannot say w h a t it is so as to i d e n t i f y it e x p l i c i t l y and thence confront i t . "  7 8  In F i t z p a t r i c k ' s analysis, the n a t i o n is i n t r i n s i c a l l y l i n k e d to c r i t e r i a 79  that f a i l to define it, s u c h as history, territory and c o m m o n language.  *  In t h i s ,  account, it b e c o m e s i m p o s s i b l e to v i e w the n a t i o n as distinct f r o m the accounts o f its origins and development.  76  A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice, [2003] 1 IR 3 at 5 [Lobe] Keane C.J.  77  Benedict. Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism,  (Verso, 1991) at 3. Peter Fitzpatrick, "We Know What It Is When You Do Not Ask Us" (2004) 8 LTC 263. 78  36  Debate about the n a t i o n has t r a d i t i o n a l l y sought to ascertain its o r i g i n s a n d chart its development.  It is p o s s i b l e to d i s c e r n t w o b r o a d s c h o o l s o f thought.  O n e contends  that nations are l o n g established h u m a n t r a d i t i o n ; i f they are n o t quite " n a t u r a l " p h e n o m e n a they are at least l o n g established means o f o r g a n i z i n g h u m a n society. S u c h theorists c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d " o r g a n i c " o r " e t h n i c " theorists o f n a t i o n .  The  second s c h o o l contends that the n a t i o n i s a recent i n v e n t i o n , e m e r g i n g o n l y i n the late 18  th  century. A s s u c h they m a y be regarded as " m o d e r n i s t s . "  2.14 T h e E t h n i c N a t i o n  A n early e x a m p l e o f the n a t i o n c o n c e i v e d o f as a n " e t h n i c " o r " o r g a n i c " unit i s f o u n d i n the w o r k o f J o h a n n G o t t f r i e d H e r d e r . a  reaction  t o , eighteenth  century  80  Herder's w o r k was both influenced by, and  Enlightenment  thinking.  Theorists  s u c h as 81  M o n t e s q u i e u p r o m o t e d c l a s s i c a l r e p u b l i c a n i s m as the i d e a l g o v e r n m e n t structure. The  classical  republican  state  demanded  loyalty  from  its  citizens  whilst  s i m u l t a n e o u s l y e m p h a s i z i n g the l i m i t e d sphere i n w h i c h the state c o u l d exercise power  over individuals.  Herder wrote  at a t i m e w h e n groups w i t h i n  Europe,  p r o m p t e d b y the r e v i v a l o f the r e p u b l i c a n i d e a l , w e r e b e g i n n i n g to d i s t i n g u i s h themselves o n the basis o f a " n a t i o n a l i d e n t i t y . "  H e shared w i t h eighteenth-century  theorists a sense o f n a t i o n a l identity, but disagreed w i t h their e x a l t a t i o n o f the i n d i v i d u a l and the c o s m o p o l i t a n . H e r d e r objected to the d i s p a r i t y h e s a w b e t w e e n the  0 1  Peter Fitzpatrick, Modernism and the Grounds of Law (Cambridge, 2002) at 112. Derek Heater, Theory of Nationhood (MacMillan Press Ltd, 1998) at 121. Ibid, at 9.  37  p o l i t i c a l state, as advocated b y the thinkers o f the c l a s s i c a l E n l i g h t e n m e n t p e r i o d , and the c u l t u r a l n a t i o n he w i t n e s s e d i n eighteenth century G e r m a n y .  Ergang  suggests H e r d e r ' s  work  represents  a bridge b e t w e e n  the  18th  century  intellectual f o c u s u p o n " r e a s o n " and the 19th century e m p h a s i s u p o n " r o m a n c e . "  He  states,  the  "To  the  i n d i v i d u a l i s m o f the  c o l l e c t i v i s m o f the n i n e t e e n t h . "  eighteenth  century  Herder  opposed  M a n y o f Herder's contemporaries saw national  differences as obstacles to be o v e r c o m e b y u n i v e r s a l i s m . In contrast, H e r d e r b e l i e v e d i n n u r t u r i n g the c u l t u r a l n a t i o n . H e b e l i e v e d the n a t i o n w a s the i d e a l g r o u p i n w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s w o u l d achieve happiness and f u l f i l l m e n t . would  go  against  what  nature  had  decreed.  T o " o v e r c o m e " the n a t i o n  Herder  warned  against  c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m o f the eighteenth century, stating " W h e r e nature has  the  separated  nationalities b y language, c u s t o m s , and character one m u s t not attempt to change t h e m into one u n i t y b y artefacta and c h e m i c a l o p e r a t i o n s . "  83  The organic conception  o f the n a t i o n is demonstrated a g a i n i n H e r d e r ' s e x p l a n a t i o n o f h o w different nations interact a n d co-exist. In Ideen, the rise and f a l l o f nations is c o m p a r e d to the l i f e c y c l e o f a tree: a n a t i o n g r o w s , experiences maturity, then m a k e s w a y f o r other n a t i o n s .  F o r H e r d e r , the high-point o f h u m a n existence w a s " h u m a n i t y . "  84  Herder's definition  o f h u m a n i t y is u n c l e a r ; E r g a n g states, " H e constantly accentuated the w o r d h u m a n i t y , but b e c a m e v e r y v a g u e w h e n he tried to define i t . "  8 5  W h a t e v e r its c o n c e p t u a l  8 2  R. R. Ergang, Herder and the Foundations of German Nationalism (Octagon Books, 1966) at 248.  83  Ibid, at 97. Ibid, at 85. Ibid, at 82.  M 85  38  uncertainties, H e r d e r ' s " h u m a n i t y " w a s u n d o u b t e d l y a c o m m u n i t a r i a n , rather than an i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , c o n c e p t i o n o f h u m a n g o o d . H e r d e r saw the i n d i v i d u a l as a c o m p o n e n t part o f a larger g r o u p rather than the g r o u p as the s u m o f its parts. It w a s t h r o u g h the group that the i n d i v i d u a l a c h i e v e d happiness and f u l f i l l m e n t . H e r d e r stated the n a t i o n w a s the particular type o f group necessary for h u m a n s to a c h i e v e h u m a n i t y .  He  stressed that a n y other type o f group w a s i n s u f f i c i e n t to a c h i e v e this a i m . H e v i e w e d the n a t i o n as the natural unit o f society, u n i q u e l y suited to b r i n g out the best i n h u m a n b e i n g s ; the m e m b e r s o f each n a t i o n w e r e shaped b y and suited to the group into w h i c h they w e r e b o r n .  H e r d e r b e l i e v e d the h u m a n race w a s one species separated  into different nations b y p h y s i c a l e n v i r o n m e n t , e d u c a t i o n , external relations w i t h other groups, t r a d i t i o n and heredity.  H e argued the h e r e d i t y aspect o f the n a t i o n  ensured that an " e s s e n c e " o f the n a t i o n passed t h r o u g h s u c c e s s i v e  generations.  Descendants o f a n a t i o n w o u l d therefore continue to d i s p l a y the characteristics o f that n a t i o n for s o m e t i m e e v e n i f they resettled a m o n g another c o m m u n i t y .  A m o r e recent e x a m p l e o f the organic theory o f nations is f o u n d i n the w o r k o f A n t h o n y D . S m i t h . In the Ethnic Origins of Nations he argues that the m o v e towards establishment o f the m o d e r n n a t i o n w a s g r a d u a l , a l l o w i n g remnants o f the prem o d e r n era to i n f l u e n c e the f o r m a t i o n o f the nation-state.  86  S m i t h attempts to chart  the emergence o f m o d e r n nations f r o m the groups that predated t h e m . In d o i n g so, he hopes to determine the s i m i l a r i t i e s and differences between m o d e r n n a t i o n a l units and the c u l t u r a l units that predated t h e m .  S m i t h uses the t e r m " e t h n i e " to abbreviate the  Anthony D. Smith, Ethnic Origins of Nations (Blackwell, 1988).  39  " ' f o r m ' , ' i d e n t i t y ' , ' m y t h ' , ' s y m b o l ' and ' c o m m u n i c a t i o n ' c o d e s " o f a c o m m u n i t y . H e c l a i m s that w i t h o u t the f o u n d a t i o n p r o v i d e d b y " e t h n i e " attempts at nation-  oo b u i l d i n g are l i k e l y to be s e r i o u s l y h i n d e r e d .  F o r S m i t h , " f o r m " pertains to f r a m e w o r k i n w h i c h c o m m u n a l s y m b o l s operate.  He  argues that a l t h o u g h c u l t u r a l s y m b o l s m a y change o v e r t i m e , the f r a m e w o r k i n w h i c h they operate is less p r o n e to change. perception o f "shared history."  S m i t h ' s concept o f " i d e n t i t y " refers to a  It does not d e m a n d that the m o d e r n n a t i o n emerge  f r o m a group that p r e v i o u s l y h a d a sense o f c o l l e c t i v e i d e n t i t y or adhered to a c o m m o n i d e o l o g y . S m i t h argues that over t i m e the " s h a r e d m e a n i n g s " a n d " c o m m o n e x p e r i e n c e " o f a c o m m u n i t y generates  a pool o f myths, symbols and ways  of  c o m m u n i c a t i n g . H e contends that the " m y t h i c " a n d " s y m b o l i c " character o f ethnicity that ensures its d u r a b i l i t y .  89  H e states, " T h e  ' c o r e ' o f e t h n i c i t y , as it has been  transmitted i n the h i s t o r i c a l r e c o r d and as it shapes the i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c e resides i n this quartet o f ' m y t h s , m e m o r i e s , values and s y m b o l s ' a n d i n the characteristic f o r m s or styles and genres o f certain h i s t o r i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s o f p o p u l a t i o n s . "  9 0  2.15 T h e N a t i o n as a M o d e r n P h e n o m e n o n  M o d e r n i s t s c o n t e n d that the concepts o f n a t i o n and n a t i o n a l i s m d i d not exist u n t i l the late 18th century.  "ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, 88 89  90  T h e m o d e r n i s t c o n c e p t i o n o f the n a t i o n refers s p e c i f i c a l l y to the  at 14. at 15. at 16. at 15.  40  nation-state w h i c h , they c o n t e n d , is i n stark contrast to the c o m m u n i t i e s o f the prem o d e r n era. W h i l s t m o d e r n i s t s d o not d e n y that s o c i a l groups e x i s t e d p r i o r to the late eighteenth century, they m a i n t a i n that such groups cannot b e c o n s i d e r e d nations. E r i c J . H o b s b a w m states that the n a t i o n , " i s a s o c i a l entity o n l y i n s o f a r as it relates to a certain k i n d o f m o d e r n territorial state, the 'nation-state', a n d it is p o i n t l e s s to d i s c u s s n a t i o n and n a t i o n a l i t y except insofar as b o t h relate to i t . "  9 1  T h e r e are substantial differences betw een the theories a d v a n c e d b y m o d e r n i s t s . F o r e x a m p l e , w h i l s t H o b s b a w m and Ernst G e l l n e r agree o n the t i m e at w h i c h the concept o f the n a t i o n e m e r g e d , their account o f the concept o f n a t i o n a l i s m d i v e r g e s .  Despite  differences, it is u s e f u l to a c k n o w l e d g e the s i m i l a r i t y o f a p p r o a c h o f writers s u c h H o b s b a w m , Gellner and Bendedict Anderson.  T h e y share the v i e w that the n a t i o n  emerged as a consequence o f a broader trend o f " m o d e r n i z a t i o n " w h i c h i n c l u d e d d e v e l o p m e n t s s u c h as the emergence o f c a p i t a l i s m , b u r e a u c r a c y a n d b e l i e f that the w o r l d c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d t h r o u g h r e a s o n .  92  T h e contrast b e t w e e n the age o f n a t i o n a l i s m a n d p r e v i o u s structuring o f societies is e x p l o r e d b y A n d e r s o n . H e contends that the o r d e r i n g o f the w o r l d into states w i t h i d e n t i f i a b l e borders w a s not a feature o f the pre-modern era. H e states, " [ I ] n the older i m a g i n i n g , w h e r e states w e r e d e f i n e d b y centres, borders w e r e p o r o u s a n d i ndi s ti n ct a n d sovereignties faded i m p e r c e p t i b l y into one a n o t h e r . "  93  A n d e r s o n argues that  E.J. Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality (Cambridge, 1990) at 9-10 Smith, supra note 86 at 8. Anderson, supra note 77 at 19.  91  9 2  9 3  41  u n l i k e earlier s o c i a l m o d e l s , i n w h i c h l e g i t i m a c y d e r i v e d f r o m a d i v i n e order, the l e g i t i m a c y o f the nation-state stems f r o m the consent o f those it governs.  He  contends the v e r y concept o f the n a t i o n challenges the h i e r a r c h i c a l o r d e r i n g o f p e o p l e f o u n d i n the pre-modern era; despite the v e r y real presence o f i n t e r n a l i n e q u a l i t y , the n a t i o n is based o n the m o d e r n p r e m i s e o f h o r i z o n t a l c o m r a d e s h i p rather hierarchical ordering.  than  94  G e l l n e r argues that nations are contingent entities rather than the natural order o f h u m a n societies.  H e contends that nations e m e r g e d t o w a r d s the e n d o f the 18th  century because c o n d i t i o n s enabled " s t a n d a r d i z e d , h o m o g e n o u s , c e n t r a l l y sustained h i g h c u l t u r e s " to assert themselves as the standard o f p o l i t i c a l l e g i t i m a c y . states that w h i l s t the emergence  o f nations w a s  95  contingent u p o n w i d e r  Gellner social  d e v e l o p m e n t s , the concepts o f the n a t i o n and n a t i o n a l i s m asserted themselves so s u c c e s s f u l l y that the n a t i o n c a m e to be seen as a natural aspect o f the h u m a n condition.  F o r G e l l n e r , n a t i o n a l i s m is " a p o l i t i c a l p r i n c i p l e , w h i c h h o l d s that the  p o l i t i c a l and n a t i o n a l unit s h o u l d be c o n g r u e n t . "  96  H e considers the m o d e r n era to be  an " a g e o f n a t i o n a l i s m " i n the sense that the b e l i e f that the w o r l d s h o u l d be c o m p r i s e d o f nations has b e c a m e so d o m i n a n t that c o n c e i v i n g o f a w o r l d o r d e r e d a n y other w a y is a l m o s t u n t h i n k a b l e . G e l l n e r argues that it is the a l m o s t u n q u e s t i o n e d l e g i t i m a c y o f n a t i o n a l i s m that has p r o m p t e d c u l t u r a l groups to strive f o r the status o f n a t i o n h o o d .  Anderson, supra note 77 at 7. Ernst Gellner, Nations and Nationalism (Oxford, 1983) at 55. Ibid, at 1.  42  G e l l n e r states " n a t i o n s c a n be d e f i n e d o n l y i n terms o f the age o f n a t i o n a l i s m , rather than as y o u m i g h t expect, the other w a y r o u n d . "  9 7  H o b s b a w m ' s account o f the emergence o f n a t i o n a l i s m differs s o m e w h a t f r o m that o f Gellner.  H e argues that the n a t i o n e m e r g e d i n the late eighteenth century w h i l s t  n a t i o n a l i s m dates f r o m n e a r l y a century l a t e r .  98  H o b s b a w m states that at the t i m e o f  the A m e r i c a n a n d F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n s , " t h e n a t i o n " a n d " t h e state" w e r e understood to be " i n d i v i s i b l e . " T h e state w a s c o n s i d e r e d the e x p r e s s i o n o f the w i l l o f the people. H e states, " T h e ' n a t i o n ' so c o n s i d e r e d , w a s the b o d y o f c i t i z e n s w h o s e c o l l e c t i v e sovereignty  constituted t h e m  a state  which  w a s their  political expression."  9 9  H o b s b a w m contends that w h a t d i s t i n g u i s h e d the n a t i o n at this t i m e w a s a c o m m o n rejection o f a m o d e l o f s o c i e ty based o n a h i e r a r c h i c a l structure. H e states the n a t i o n w a s characterized b y a c o m m i t m e n t to " t h e c o m m o n interest against particular interests, the c o m m o n g o o d against p r i v i l e g e . "  1 0 0  B e t w e e n 1790 a n d 1880, i n order to constitute a n a t i o n , a p e o p l e h a d to b e c o n s i d e r e d " v i a b l e . " T h i s w a s k n o w n as the " t h r e s h o l d p r i n c i p l e . " I n order to c o m p l y w i t h this principle,  a people  population.  101  h a d to b e e n d o w e d  with  sufficient  land,  resources a n d  A d d i t i o n a l l y , the group h a d to demonstrate a l o n g s t a n d i n g association  102 w i t h a n e x i s t i n g state, the p o s s e s s i o n o f a c u l t u r a l elite a n d a c a p a c i t y f o r conquest.  Ibid, at 55. Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 102. Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 19. Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 20. ' Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 31. Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 37.  0  2  43  H o b s b a w m characterizes this c o n c e p t i o n o f the n a t i o n as a p r o g r e s s i v e f o r c e , b r i n g i n g s m a l l e r c o m m u n i t i e s together to achieve " i m p r o v e m e n t . "  H o b s b a w m suggests that the criteria u s e d to determine the l e g i t i m a c y o f a n a t i o n altered s i g n i f i c a n t l y after 1880. T h e thres hol d p r i n c i p l e w a s a b a n d o n e d and e t h n i c i t y and language b e c a m e k e y c r i t e r i a f o r d e f i n i n g n a t i o n s ;  103  groups c l a i m i n g to be nations s i g n i f i c a n t l y increased.  c o n s e q u e n t l y , the n u m b e r o f H e states i n the late 19th  century, n a t i o n a l i s m - a term that reflected the b e l i e f that nations h a d p o l i t i c a l rights emerged.  1 0 4  T h i s changed the character o f the n a t i o n . T h e theory that " n o n - v i a b l e "  c o m m u n i t i e s w o u l d assimilate into larger nations w a s a b a n d o n e d as c u l t u r a l groups p r o c l a i m e d themselves s o v e r e i g n nations w i t h c o r r e s p o n d i n g  rights.  Hobsbawm  argues it w a s o n l y i n the late nineteenth century that the p o p u l i s t a s s u m p t i o n o f a l i n k b e t w e e n language, e t h n i c i t y and the n a t i o n e m e r g e d - as a c o n s e r v a t i v e r e a c t i o n to s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l change.  He  attributes this d e v e l o p m e n t  to the threat  that  t r a d i t i o n a l c o m m u n i t i e s felt f r o m the i m p a c t o f m o d e r n i t y , the emergence o f a n e w u r b a n s o c i a l structure and the mass m i g r a t i o n o f the nineteenth century.  These  created c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h groups sought to d i s t i n g u i s h those w h o w e r e " l i k e themselves" from "others."  1 0 5  J o h n H u t c h i n s o n argues that c u l t u r a l n a t i o n a l i s m has b e e n w r o n g l y p e r c e i v e d as the regressive counterpart to p o l i t i c a l n a t i o n a l i s m . Instead, he contends is a distinct m o v e m e n t w i t h different aims - m a n y o f w h i c h are p r o g r e s s i v e .  103  For Hutchinson,  Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 102.  44  c u l t u r a l n a t i o n a l i s m is " d e f e n s i v e " i n the sense that i t w a s t y p i c a l l y p r o m o t e d b y the elite i n " f o l k " societies i n response to the i m p a c t o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n .  However, he  characterizes it as s e e k i n g to r e c o n c i l e the traditions o f those societies w i t h m o d e r n i t y and i s therefore " p r o g r e s s i v e . "  1 0 6  2.16 T h e I m p o s s i b i l i t y o f N a t i o n  F i t z p a t r i c k argues that attempts to define the n a t i o n either b y reference to e t h n i c i t y o r m o d e r n i t y have been u n s u c c e s s f u l . S p e c i f i c a l l y , he i s c r i t i c a l o f attempts to d i s c o v e r an " e s s e n c e " o f n a t i o n b y reference to ethnic o r i g i n s o r h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t s . F i t z p a t r i c k contends that h a v i n g set out to define w h a t the n a t i o n i s b y reference to p a r t i c u l a r ethnic o r i g i n s o r u n i v e r s a l h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t s , theorists then f a i l to d o so o n their o w n terms: as not a l l ethnicities are granted the status o f n a t i o n h o o d , d i s t i n g u i s h i n g nations from c u l t u r a l groups b e c o m e s reliant u p o n q u a l i t i e s i n a d d i t i o n to e t h n i c i t y ; i f the m o d e r n n a t i o n is d i s t i n g u i s h e d b y contrast to the particularities o f ethnicity, it is s t i l l dependent u p o n e t h n i c i t y f o r that p o i n t o f c o m p a r i s o n . T h e m e a n i n g o f the t e r m n a t i o n , F i t z p a t r i c k contends, " s e e m s fated to r e m a i n t i e d to the v e r y c r i t e r i a - o f c o m m o n language, territory, h i s t o r y a n d so o n - w h i c h repeatedly f a i l to m a r k it d e f i n i t i v e l y . "  1 0 7  H e suggests that the search f o r the o r i g i n s o f n a t i o n demonstrates the p a r a d o x at the heart o f m o d e r n i t y ; m o d e r n i t y defines i t s e l f i n o p p o s i t i o n to m y t h , a n d yet the o r i g i n s  105 106  Hobsbawm, supra note 91 at 109. John Hutchinson, The Dynamics of Cultural Nationalism (Allen and Unwin, 1987).  45  o f m o d e r n societies are e x p l a i n e d b y u t i l i z i n g the m y t h i c , to w h i c h opposes itself.  modernity  F i t z p a t r i c k states, " W h a t E n l i g h t e n m e n t a n d m o d e r n i t y s u p p o s e d l y  reject, i n a w o r d , is transcendence...In the u n i f o r m l i g h t o f m o d e r n i t y , there i s n o r o o m f o r a d u a l i t y o f m e a n i n g o r f o r a n y ultimate a m b i g u i t y . "  1 0 8  In the search f o r  o r i g i n s and the b e l i e f that the essence o f an object c a n b e f o u n d , the m y t h o l o g y o f the pre-modern age i s m e r e l y substituted b y a b e l i e f that b y l o o k i n g to the past the essence o f an object c a n be f o u n d .  2.17 L a w and N a t i o n  F i t z p a t r i c k argues that the concepts o f the n a t i o n a n d m o d e r n l a w are b o t h distinct and interdependent.  I n c o m i n g together they f o r m a d i s c o u r s e i n w h i c h each concept  a f f i r m s the l e g i t i m a c y o f the other.  H e describes m o d e r n l a w as " i l l i m i t a b l y - s e l f  g e n e r a t i n g , " that i s , l a w insists u p o n its l e g i t i m a c y b y reference to itself, rather than any p r i o r standard. F i t z p a t r i c k notes that, p a r a d o x i c a l l y , the l a w is " c o n t a i n e d " b y the p a r t i c u l a r i t y o f its l o c a t i o n , a n d yet i s " u n c o n t a i n e d " i n the sense that it serves to define the l i m i t s o f the nation-state.  T h e n a t i o n , t h o u g h dependent u p o n l a w f o r its  existence, nonetheless retains some a u t o n o m y outside that r e l a t i o n s h i p ; F i t z p a t r i c k assumes that l a w a n d n a t i o n w i l l each intersect w i t h other concepts i n a m a n n e r independent o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p e x a m i n e d above.  Fitzpatrck, supra note 79 at 112. Fitzpatrick, supra note 40 at 48.  46  I v i s u a l i z e F i t z p a t r i c k ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f l a w and n a t i o n b y w a y o f an a n a l o g y w i t h the c o r r e s p o n d i n g beams o f a p i t c h e d roof. modern law.  T h e first o f the t w o b e a m s represents the  T h e b e a m is self-generating i n the sense that it u n d o u b t e d l y creates the  structure o f the r o o f ; there is n o t h i n g w e can p o i n t to as m o r e central to the r o o f s construction.  T h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e c o n d b e a m represents the n a t i o n .  It p r o v i d e s a  l o c a t i o n f o r the first b e a m ; w i t h o u t the s e c o n d b e a m , the first w i l l c o l l a p s e . T h e t w o b e a m s r e m a i n distinct.  It is p o s s i b l e to g a i n s o m e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f each b e a m  w i t h o u t reference to the other, s u c h as d i s c o v e r i n g the m a t e r i a l f r o m w h i c h it is m a d e . T h e i r i n t e r d e p e n d e n c y does not t e l l us e v e r y t h i n g about the i n d i v i d u a l c o m p o n e n t s . E a c h is capable  o f relationships b e y o n d the one d e s c r i b e d a b o v e .  However,  c o n s i d e r i n g the relationship between the t w o beams p r o v i d e s i n s i g h t into each that w e w i l l not g a i n b y s t u d y i n g t h e m independently.  2.18 T h e C o s m o p o l i t a n N a t i o n  F i t z p a t r i c k argues that the concept o f " E u r o p e a n n e s s " is f o u n d e d o n a c o n c e p t i o n o f i t s e l f as u n i v e r s a l , ordered, d y n a m i c and p r o g r e s s i v e .  109  T h i s i d e n t i t y is created b y  o p p o s i n g i t s e l f to that w h i c h is " u n c i v i l i z e d . " T h e " c i v i l i z a t i o n " o f E u r o p e contrasts i t s e l f w i t h the p e r c e i v e d " l a w l e s s n e s s " o f A f r i c a . F i t z p a t r i c k ' s starting p o i n t is w h a t D e r r i d a refers to as "the p a r a d o x o f n a t i o n s . " N a t i o n s , o f c o u r s e , have borders and because o f this are n e c e s s a r i l y g e o g r a p h i c a l l y l i m i t e d . N e v e r t h e l e s s , nations define themselves b y reference to the u n i v e r s a l .  H e suggests that the u n i v e r s a l i t y o f the  n a t i o n is r e c o n c i l e d w i t h the p a r t i c u l a r i t y o f g e o g r a p h y t h r o u g h the abstract.  The  47  n a t i o n o v e r c o m e s the l i m i t a t i o n s o f borders b y an appeal to g rand narratives o f its history and destiny. F i t z p a t r i c k cites the e x a m p l e o f B a l i b a r ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f " F r e n c h i d e o l o g y " to demonstrate this point. A s "the l a n d o f the ' R i g h t s o f M a n , ' " B a l i b a r e x p l a i n s , "true ' F r e n c h i d e o l o g y ' " entrusts the n a t i o n w i t h a m i s s i o n to educate the world.  1 1 0  T h r o u g h this m i s s i o n , the values o f the F r e n c h extend b e y o n d the particular  to the u n i v e r s a l . F r a n c e m a y be c o n t a i n e d b y borders, but the F r e n c h h a v e a d u t y to spread " F r e n c h " values to the rest o f the w o r l d . T h e n a t i o n m a y alternatively achieve a sense o f u n i v e r s a l i t y t h o u g h a c l a i m to e m b o d y u n i v e r s a l traits. T h o u g h a n a t i o n w i l l not be u n i q u e i n p o s s e s s i n g those traits, it perceives i t s e l f to be an e x a m p l e , perhaps  a necessary  one, to the  rest o f the  world.  F i t z p a t r i c k states,  "The  E n l i g h t e n m e n t , or m o d e r n i z a t i o n , or m a t e r i a l achievement m a y be w o r l d projects, but the n a t i o n w i l l s t i l l c l a i m to m a n i f e s t t h e m e x c e p t i o n a l l y o r to e n d o w t h e m w i t h particular o r i g i n s or necessary s u p p l e m e n t s . "  111  N a t i o n a l narratives, w h i c h appeal to the u n i v e r s a l , act as a h o m o g e n i z i n g f o r c e w i t h i n the n a t i o n . F i t z p a t r i c k suggests that the h o m o g e n i z i n g effect o f n a t i o n a l i s m b e c a m e one o f the characteristics that d e f i n e d E u r o p e from A f r i c a . T h e c o n c e p t o f W e s t e r n or E u r o p e a n nations w a s f o r m e d b y a process o f c o l l e c t i v e l y O t h e r i n g themselves from Africa.  The  e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n o f u n i v e r s a l characteristics, " e m b o d i e d " b y  W e s t e r n nations, w a s contrasted w i t h the p a r t i c u l a r i t y and heterogeneity o f A f r i c a . F i t z p a t r i c k uses the t e r m "the c o m i t y o f n a t i o n s " to describe the c o l l e c t i v i t y o f W e s t e r n nations. A l t h o u g h the c r i t e r i a for m e m b e r s h i p v a r i e d o v e r t i m e , a constant  109 110  Fitzpatrick, supra note 79 at 125. Fitzpatrick, supra note 79 at 120.  48  standard has b e e n that o f " c i v i l i z a t i o n . " "Westernness," Fitzpatrick  is formed  cites H e g e l ' s  T h e concept o f E u r o p e a n n e s s ,  1 1 2  i n o p p o s i t i o n t o that  perceived  later  to be u n c i v i l i z e d .  d e p i c t i o n o f A f r i c a i n the Philosophy of History t o  demonstrate the i m p o r t a n c e o f the contrast b e t w e e n c i v i l i z a t i o n a n d lawlessness found i n Western philosophy.  H e argues the c o m i t y o f nations e m e r g e d b y  contrasting E u r o p e a n n e s s , a n d the a d m i r a b l e traits it c l a i m e d t o e m b o d y , w i t h a negative d e p i c t i o n o f A f r i c a .  1 1 3  A c c o r d i n g t o H e g e l , "the A f r i c a n " l i v e s i n a state o f lawlessness. H e represents m a n " i n h i s c o m p l e t e l y w i l d and u n t a m e d s t a t e . " standard o f u n i v e r s a l i t y .  114  T h e A f r i c a n has not yet a c h i e v e d the  E u r o p e a n r e g i m e s , d i v i d e d into nations and u n d e r l a w , are  contrasted w i t h the l a w l e s s o f A f r i c a . T h e status o f n a t i o n b e c o m e s s y n o n y m o u s w i t h c i v i l i z a t i o n . T h e negative d e p i c t i o n o f the A f r i c a n serves a n u m b e r o f f u n c t i o n s . B y p r o v i d i n g contrast it a f f i r m s the E u r o p e a n n a t i o n ' s p e r c e p t i o n o f i t s e l f as c i v i l i z e d . H e g e l ' s A f r i c a also serves as a threat o r w a r n i n g to the c i v i l i z e d n a t i o n ; the n a t i o n that has transcended savagery has m e r e l y progressed a l o n g a scale r a n g i n g f r o m savagery to c i v i l i z a t i o n .  C i v i l i z a t i o n i s therefore n o t detached f r o m savagery b u t  l i n k e d t o it. F i t z p a t r i c k states, " T h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e v e r s i o n o r r e g r e s s i o n to the badness w i t h i n also r e m a i n s . "  1 1 5  T h e c i v i l i z e d n a t i o n faces the constant threat o f  reversion.  Fitzpatrick, Ibid. Ibid. Fitzpatrick,  111  supra  note 79 at 121.  supra  note 40 at 126.  1,2  {n  114  49  H a r r i n g t o n argues the Lobe  d e c i s i o n a n d the o u t c o m e  Citizenship  Referendum  showcase the i d e o l o g i c a l shifts that have taken p l a c e i n Ireland i n recent years. describes the d o m i n a n t Irish identity o f the 2 1 w h i c h he b o r r o w s f r o m R i c h a r d K e a r n e y .  s t  He  century as " p o s t n a t i o n a l i s t , " a t e r m  K e a r n e y ' s w o r k suggests the c o n f l i c t  1 1 6  b e t w e e n N a t i o n a l i s t s and U n i o n i s t s i n N o r t h e r n Ireland m i g h t b e r e s o l v e d b y l o o k i n g to a c o m m o n E u r o p e a n identity.  H e argues that t r a d i t i o n a l N a t i o n a l i s t a n d U n i o n i s t  identities w e r e o p p o s e d to each other; each m a d e e x c l u s i v e territorial c l a i m s to N o r t h e r n Ireland.  Kearney  attributes the s y m b o l i c a n d actual v i o l e n c e  o f the  N o r t h e r n Ireland " t r o u b l e s " to the impasse created b y this i d e o l o g i c a l l o g j a m .  He  suggests that the c o n f l i c t i n N o r t h e r n Ireland c o u l d best b e r e s o l v e d b y each side embracing "multiple and shifting identities."  117  T h i s p r o p o s a l attempts to transcend  the l o g j a m b y i n v i t i n g each group to embrace a c o m m o n E u r o p e a n c o s m o p o l i t a n identity.  K e a r n e y states, " N a t i o n a l identity [ w o u l d ] appeal to a n h i s t o r i c past, a n d  transnational, E u r o p e a n  identity to a projected  future, [ w h i l e ] r e g i o n a l  represents a c o m m i t m e n t to participatory d e m o c r a c y i n the p r e s e n t . "  Drawing  o n the w o r k  nationalist stalemate  identity  118  o f F i t z p a t r i c k , H a r r i n g t o n argues that the " e s c a p e  into the f l o w  or E u r o p e a n  contrasting E u r o p e a n identity w i t h a n " O t h e r . " state o f the early-to-mid 2 0  t h  progress" necessarily  from  involves  W h e r e a s the n e w l y independent Irish  century d e f i n e d i t s e l f i n o p p o s i t i o n to Great B r i t a i n , the  m o d e r n d a y E u r o p e a n Irish state defines i t s e l f i n contrast to the " b a c k w a r d s " nations  115 116 117  118  Fitzpatrick, supra note 79 at 128. Richard Kearney, Postnationalist Ireland (Routledge Press, 1997) at 2. Harrington, supra note 72 at 3. Kearney, supra note 116 at 59.  50  o f A f r i c a and Eastern E u r o p e . H a r r i n g t o n states, " I n a sense the b o r d e r that matters i s n o l o n g e r the l i n e separating N o r t h f r o m South.  It i s instead the barrier b e t w e e n  E u r o p e a n d its others w h i c h runs t h r o u g h the ports a n d the airports, r i g h t into the maternity w a r d s o f the s t a t e . "  119  I suggest that the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's embrace o f E u r o p e a n n e s s re-invents the n a t i o n rather than transcends i t . F i t z p a t r i c k ' s analysis c h a l l e n g e s the narrative i n w h i c h the nation-state progresses from a p a r o c h i a l irredentist n a t i o n a l i s m to a s h i f t i n g c o s m o p o l i t a n p o s t n a t i o n a l i s m . Instead c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m i s i n c o r p o r a t e d as a trait o f E u r o p e a n nation-ness. F i t z p a t r i c k suggests that m e m b e r s h i p o f the E U has c o m e to s y m b o l i z e the m e m b e r state's embrace o f c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m . T h u s m e m b e r s h i p o f the 120  E U r e a f f i r m s the l e g i t i m a c y o f the nation-state rather than transcends it.  In F i t z p a t r i c k ' s a n a l y s i s , c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m b e c o m e s a characteristic o f E n l i g h t e n e d European nationalism.  H e l d ' s diagnosis o f f e r i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y o f o v e r c o m i n g the  c o n t r a d i c t i o n s o f l i b e r a l i s m serves to perpetuate the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s o f the n a t i o n . A t present the w o r l d i s d i v i d e d into " c i v i l i z e d " W e s t e r n nations a n d the Other b y borders. I n H e l d ' s c o s m o p o l i t a n m o d e l , the c i v i l i z e d w o r l d is recast as c o s m o p o l i t a n i n o p p o s i t i o n to the irredentist Other.  Harrington, supra note 72 at 19. Fitzpatrck, supra note 79 at 136.  51  2.19 C o n c l u s i o n  In the p r e c e d i n g pages I have sought to locate the Irish C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w i t h i n a d i s c u s s i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p , s o v e r e i g n t y and the n a t i o n . I h a v e a r g u e d that each o f these s h o u l d be seen as a c o l l e c t i o n o f l o o s e l y associated inter-related themes rather than c l e a r l y d e f i n e d concepts.  T h e d y n a m i c q u a l i t y o f these themes results i n  p e r i o d i c exposure o f the inadequacies o f the grand narratives o f m o d e r n i t y .  However,  the pervasiveness o f m o d e r n i s m ' s b e l i e f i n certainty leads us to d e v e l o p ever m o r e c o m p l e x theories i n an attempt to a c c o m m o d a t e the d y n a m i c nature o f these themes.  In the f o l l o w i n g chapters I e x p l o r e h o w these themes p l a y e d out i n Lobe and the Citizenship Referendum.  I argue that w h i l s t Lobe and the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m  e x p o s e d the tensions present i n m o d e r n d e f i n i t i o n s o f c i t i z e n s h i p , s o v e r e i g n t y and nation,  an examination  o f the  history  o f the  regulation  demonstrates that those tensions w e r e a l w a y s present.  o f Irish  citizenship  A s s u c h , Lobe and the  C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m m a r k a c o n t i n u i t y as w e l l as change.  52  CHAPTER THREE  3.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n  A s chapter t w o e x p l a i n e d , o n e o f the trends o f the 2 0  t h  century w a s a g r a d u a l  n a r r o w i n g o f the d i s t i n c t i o n between the rights e n j o y e d b y c i t i z e n s a n d non-citizens. P e r s o n h o o d w a s i n c r e a s i n g l y h e l d as the criteria f o r entitlement to rights rather than citizenship.  121  T h i s has l e d to questions b e i n g raised about the r e l e v a n c e  of  c i t i z e n s h i p , s o v e r e i g n t y a n d the nation-state i n the 2 1 century. G e r a r d D e l a n t y states s t  " E s p e c i a l l y i n the countries o f the E u r o p e a n U n i o n , residence is i n c r e a s i n g l y c o m i n g to b e the over-riding factor i n c i t i z e n s h i p r i g h t s . . . a l t h o u g h s t i l l based o n the p r i o r i t y o f n a t i o n a l c i t i z e n s h i p , a l e g a l l y c o d i f i e d E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n s h i p n o w exists as a post122  nationalist c i t i z e n s h i p .  In contrast, S a s k i a Sassen argues that t h o u g h it has r e l i n q u i s h e d m u c h o f its traditional s o v e r e i g n p o w e r , i n regard to i m m i g r a t i o n , the n a t i o n state continues to 123  assert the right to c o n t r o l its borders.  Y o u w i l l recall, Catherine  Dauvergne  contends that as other areas t r a d i t i o n a l l y c o n s i d e r e d e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h i n the d o m a i n o f the s o v e r e i g n state, s u c h as e c o n o m i c p o l i c y and l a w and order, h a v e b e e n c h a l l e n g e d b y other sites o f p o w e r , m i g r a t i o n l a w has b e c o m e the " l a s t b a s t i o n " o f t r a d i t i o n a l Joseph H . Carens, "Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Immigration: False Dichotomies and Shifting Presuppositions" Ronald Beiner & Wayne Norman ed., Canadian Political Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2001) 17 at 20. Gerard Delanty, "Irish Political Community in Transition" (2005) 33 Irish Review 13 at 15. Saskia Sassen, Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization (Columbia University Press, 1996) at 59. 121  122 123  53  sovereignty.  124  In this chapter I seek to b u i l d u p o n the f r a m e w o r k established b y  Sassen a n d D a u v e r g n e . I suggest that c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d as a type o f m i g r a t i o n l a w . P o s s e s s i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p entitles persons to e x e r c i s e certain rights w i t h i n a state that non-citizens cannot. B y i n c r e a s i n g the n u m b e r o f p e o p l e e l i g i b l e to receive c i t i z e n s h i p - f o r e x a m p l e b y i n c l u d i n g descendents o f c i t i z e n s b o r n outside the state - a c o u n t r y increases the n u m b e r o f p e o p l e w h o c a n m i g r a t e to the state w i t h o u t the need to satisfy the requirements o f f o r m a l m i g r a t i o n l a w s .  By  r e s t r i c t i n g entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d sought to  exercise c o n t r o l o v e r its borders.  H o w e v e r , I suggest this m a n n e r o f e x e r c i s i n g  s o v e r e i g n t y w a s not n e w to the Irish state.  T h e p r a c t i c a l a n d s y m b o l i c use o f  c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s has a l w a y s b e e n o f particular i m p o r t a n c e to the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland. F o r m u c h o f the h i s t o r y o f the state, h o w e v e r , the use o f c i t i z e n s h i p l a w as a f o r m o f m i g r a t i o n l a w w a s o b s c u r e d b y the r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l n u m b e r o f p e o p l e i m m i g r a t i n g to Ireland and the s e e m i n g l y generous p r o v i s i o n s o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w .  3.2 Ireland and S o v e r e i g n t y  W h i l s t I agree w i t h D a u v e r g n e that the c o n t r o l o f borders i s o f i n c r e a s i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e to states i n their efforts to assert sovereignty, I suggest that use o f c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s has l o n g been o f p a r t i c u l a r i m p o r t a n c e to the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland.  T h o u g h it b e c a m e  f o r m a l l y independent i n 1937, the extent to w h i c h the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d c o u l d  Catherine Dauvergne, "Sovereignty, Migration and the Rule of Law in Global Times" (2004) 67(4) Mod. L . Rev. 588 124  54  exercise sovereignty limited.  i n the " t r a d i t i o n a l " sense d u r i n g the e n s u i n g decades w a s  I n the w a k e o f independence, the R e p u b l i c  o f Ireland  remained  tied  e c o n o m i c a l l y to the U n i t e d K i n g d o m . T h e m a j o r i t y o f Irish exports w e n t to the U K ; t h o u g h the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland established its o w n c u r r e n c y , it w a s a d e r i v a t i v e o f S t i r l i n g a n d Irish interest rates m a t c h e d those set i n L o n d o n . B r e n d a n H a l l i g a n states, "Ireland  w a s part  o f an economic  and monetary  m o d i f i c a t i o n s because o f p o l i t i c a l i n d e p e n d e n c e . "  union,  with  some  minor  125  T h e extent to w h i c h the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c o u l d c l a i m to exercise s o v e r e i g n t y i n regards to l a w and order w a s also l i m i t e d . T h e Government of Ireland Act, 1920 [the 1920  Act]  126  p a r t i t i o n e d Ireland  into the Irish F r e e State a n d N o r t h e r n  Ireland.  N o r t h e r n Ireland r e m a i n e d part o f the U K . T h o u g h A r t i c l e 2 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland  1937 declared that the national territory c o m p r i s e d " t h e w h o l e Ireland o f  I r e l a n d , " the Oireachtas d i d not exercise p o w e r o v e r the s i x counties i n the north-east corner, a fact a c k n o w l e d g e d i n A r t i c l e 3.  T h e R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's relationship w i t h the U K has g r a d u a l l y altered. b o t h states j o i n e d the E u r o p e a n U n i o n [ E U ] .  1 2 7  I n 1972  T h r o u g h m e m b e r s h i p o f the E U , the  R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the U K changed f r o m o n e i n w h i c h it w a s e c o n o m i c a l l y dependent u p o n the U K to o n e i n w h i c h the states are partners i n a  Brendan Halligan, "What Difference did It Make?" in Rory O'Donnell ed., Europe: the Irish Experience, (Institute of European Affiars, 2000) 18 at 18. Government of Ireland Act 1920 (U.K.) 1920, c.67, s.l. Then the European Economic Community [EEC]. 126  127  55  broader u n i o n .  F i n t a n O ' T o o l e states that 1996 w a s the year i n w h i c h " i t b e c a m e *  128  •  p o s s i b l e to understand the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland w i t h o u t reference to B r i t a i n . "  P o l i t i c a l l y , the r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw een the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland a n d the U K has also c h a n g e d . T h e B r i t i s h G o v e r n m e n t a c k n o w l e d g e d Ireland's right to s e l f d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n the Agreement o f 1 9 9 8 . Northern  Ireland  were  1 2 9  I n the event that voters i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland a n d  to endorse  proposals  f o r a u n i t e d Ireland  G o v e r n m e n t has stated it w o u l d accept that r e s u l t .  130  the B r i t i s h  In a r e c i p r o c a l gesture, the  R e p u b l i c o f Ireland r e m o v e d its territorial c l a i m to N o r t h e r n Ireland i n A r t i c l e s 2 a n d 3 o f its C o n s t i t u t i o n . C o n s e q u e n t l y there ceased to b e a d i s p a r i t y b e t w e e n the area that the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c l a i m s as its n a t i o n a l territory a n d that o v e r w h i c h it exercises effective sovereignty.  ;  W h i l s t these d e v e l o p m e n t s enabled the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland to a c h i e v e  economic  p r o s p e r i t y a n d n o r m a l i z e d its relations w i t h the U K , they h a v e n o t resulted i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland e x e r c i s i n g sovereignty i n a t r a d i t i o n a l manner. It has ceased to b e e c o n o m i c a l l y dependent u p o n the U K , but has a c h i e v e d that status t h r o u g h E u r o p e a n integration and the embrace g l o b a l i z a t i o n rather than t h r o u g h s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . It has u t i l i z e d processes that have seen m a n y facets o f state s o v e r e i g n t y transferred f r o m states to supra-national b o d i e s .  F u r t h e r m o r e , w h i l s t the Agreement resulted i n the  r e m o v a l o f the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's territorial c l a i m to N o r t h e r n Ireland, it also  Fintan O'Toole, quoted in Michael Mays, "Irish Identity in an Age of Globalisation" (2005) 13(1) Irish Studies Review at 7. Northern Ireland Act 1998 (U.K.) 1998 c.47, s.l. 128  129  56  c o m m i t t e d the state to e s t a b l i s h i n g a H u m a n R i g h t s C o m m i s s i o n to ensure that the 131  state c o n f o r m s to international h u m a n rights standards.  •  T h e r e f o r e , at the p o i n t i n  w h i c h the state's c l a i m to sovereignty c o i n c i d e d m o s t s t r o n g l y w i t h its a b i l i t y to exercise authority o v e r its p r o c l a i m e d territory, the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland a n n o u n c e d that its authority w a s subject to a standard set b e y o n d the borders o f the nation-state. C o n s e q u e n t l y , the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland has n e v e r e x e r c i s e d m a n y o f the p o w e r s traditionally  associated  with  state  sovereignty.  demonstrate that r e g u l a t i o n o f m i g r a t i o n l a w s  I n the f o l l o w i n g  sections  I  i s o n e o f the t o o l s that it has  c o n s i s t e n t l y u s e d as a means to assert sovereignty.  3.3 Irish C i t i z e n s h i p 1 9 2 2 - 1937  T h e Irish F r e e State w a s established i n 1922. T h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f the F r e e State o f Ireland [the 1922 C o n s t i t u t i o n ] was based u p o n the terms o f the Anglo-Irish Treaty o f 1921 [the 1921 Treaty]. It granted the Irish F r e e State s o m e p o l i t i c a l a u t o n o m y as a d o m i n i o n o f the B r i t i s h C o m m o n w e a l t h .  A r t i c l e 3 dealt w i t h I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p .  It  stated,  " E v e r y p e r s o n , w i t h o u t d i s t i n c t i o n o f sex d o m i c i l e d i n the area o f the Irish F r e e State (Saorstat E r e a n n ) at the t i m e o f the c o m i n g into o p e r a t i o n o f this C o n s t i t u t i o n , w h o w a s b o r n i n Ireland o r w h o has b e e n o r d i n a r i l y resident i n the area o f the Irish F r e e State (Saorstat E r e a n n ) f o r not less than seven years,  The Agreement, 1998, Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity, s.9. Northern Ireland Office, online < http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf>. 131  57  is a c i t i z e n o f the Irish Free State (Saorstat E r e a n n ) a n d s h a l l w i t h i n the l i m i t s o f the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the Irish Free State (Saorstat E r e a n n ) e n j o y the p r i v i l e g e s and b e subject to the o b l i g a t i o n s o f s u c h c i t i z e n s h i p : p r o v i d e d that a n y s u c h p e r s o n b e i n g a c i t i z e n o f another State m a y elect n o t to accept the c i t i z e n s h i p h e r e b y c o n f e r r e d ; a n d the c o n d i t i o n s g o v e r n i n g the future a c q u i s i t i o n a n d t e r m i n a t i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p i n the Irish Free State (Saorstat E r e a n n ) s h a l l be determined b y l a w . "  1 3 2  U n d e r the 1922 C o n s t i t u t i o n , anyone b o r n i n the 2 6 counties that c o m p r i s e d the Irish F r e e State p r i o r to the date u p o n w h i c h it c a m e into effect b e c a m e a n Irish c i t i z e n . A n y o n e b o r n i n the i s l a n d o f Ireland and resident i n the Irish F r e e State at the t i m e the 1922 C o n s t i t u t i o n c a m e into effect w a s also a c i t i z e n o f the Irish F r e e State.-  S o too  w a s anyone b o r n elsewhere w h o h a d l i v e d i n the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the Irish F r e e State for the p r e c e d i n g three years.  F r o m 1922 u n t i l the p a s s i n g o f the Irish Nationality  and Citizenship  Act 1935 [the  1935 Act] there w a s n o statute g o v e r n i n g Irish n a t i o n a l i t y o r c i t i z e n s h i p . T h i s l e d to the a n o m a l y that those b o r n i n the Irish F r e e State after 6 D e c e m b e r 1922 w e r e not Irish c i t i z e n s u n t i l the 1935 Act conferred c i t i z e n s h i p u p o n t h e m  retrospectively.  M a r y D a l y suggests that the d e l a y i n i n t r o d u c i n g a n A c t w a s because the Irish F r e e State w a s reluctant  to introduce  legislation acknowledging  its c i t i z e n s h i p w a s  Constitution of the Free State of Ireland 1922, Article 3 (Stationary Office, 1922).  58  subservient to B r i t i s h n a t i o n a l i t y .  133  She suggests that the Irish F r e e State resisted  l e g i s l a t i n g o n c i t i z e n s h i p i n the hope that negotiations at the I m p e r i a l C o n f e r e n c e o f 1926 w o u l d  lead to a declaration that C o m m o n w e a l t h c i t i z e n s h i p and  British  n a t i o n a l i t y w e r e o f equal status. Instead, T h e B a l f o u r D e c l a r a t i o n o f 1926 adopted an " u m b r e l l a " theory o f B r i t i s h nationality.  It stated that w h i l s t C o m m o n w e a l t h states  w e r e e q u a l , the status o f C o m m o n w e a l t h c i t i z e n w a s s e c o n d a r y to the allegiance subjects o w e d to the B r i t i s h C r o w n .  T h e 1935  Act  attempted to assert, as far as p o s s i b l e , Ireland's c l a i m to be a s o v e r e i g n  n a t i o n w h i l s t m i n i m i z i n g the detrimental effect u p o n its r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h B r i t a i n .  It  was p r i m a r i l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h the assertion o f s o v e r e i g n t y i n the territory o f the Irish F r e e State.  S e c t i o n 33 p u r p o r t e d to repeal the B r i t i s h l e g i s l a t i o n , so those b o r n i n the  Irish F r e e State w o u l d not l o n g e r be b o t h Irish c i t i z e n s a n d B r i t i s h nationals. suggests that the c r i t e r i a f o r Irish c i t i z e n s h i p i n the 1935 c o r r e s p o n d i n g B r i t i s h A c t i n an attempt to placate B r i t a i n .  T h e 1935  Act  Act  Daly  w e r e m o d e l e d o n the  1 3 4  also m a r k s the b e g i n n i n g o f a process b y the I r i s h state to use its  c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s to assert sovereignty, i n a l i m i t e d f o r m , o v e r the w h o l e i s l a n d o f Ireland.  T h e Constitutional (Amendment No.  26)  Act,  1935  135  r e m o v e d the phrase  " w i t h i n the l i m i t s o f the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the Irish Free State (Saorstat E r e a n n ) " f r o m A r t i c l e 3 o f the 1922  Constitution. T h i s enabled the O i r e a c h t a s to pass l e g i s l a t i o n  Mary Daly, "Irish Nationality and Citizenship since 1922" (2001) 32 Irish Historical Studies 377 at 382. Daly, ibid, at 385. Constitutional (Amendment No. 26) Act 1935 (JL), 1935 c. 12. 133  134  135  59  w h i c h b e s t o w e d I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p u p o n those b o r n o u t s i d e the b o r d e r s o f the I r i s h F r e e State.  S e c t i o n 2 o f the 1935 Act enabled the c h i l d r e n o f m a l e I r i s h c i t i z e n s b o r n  outside the state to b e a w a r d e d Irish c i t i z e n s h i p .  1 3 6  T h e 1935 Act also b e s t o w e d a  d i s c r e t i o n a r y p o w e r to a w a r d c i t i z e n s h i p to those b o r n o u t s i d e the I r i s h F r e e State u p o n the M i n i s t e r f o r J u s t i c e .  137  It therefore b e c a m e p o s s i b l e for. residents o f  N o r t h e r n I r e l a n d to b e c o m e Irish c i t i z e n s .  T h e measures i n t r o d u c e d b y the 1935 Act w e r e c r i t i c i z e d b y s o m e m e m b e r s o f the D a i l as not g o i n g far e n o u g h i n asserting Irish s o v e r e i g n t y . D e p u t y J o h n A . C o s t e l l o stated that the 1935 A c t w a s a " n a t i o n a l i t y " A c t i n n a m e o n l y .  H e c o m p l a i n e d that  the 1935 Act d i d n o t h i n g to assert the s o v e r e i g n t y o f the I r i s h n a t i o n " w h i c h springs f r o m o u r sentiments as a n independent race, f r o m the f u l l k n o w l e d g e o f o u r past h i s t o r y as a n a t i o n . "  1 3 8  I n a sense h e w a s correct. D e s p i t e the w o r d i n g o f the 1935  Act, B r i t a i n c o n t i n u e d to v i e w Ireland as a C o m m o n w e a l t h m e m b e r a n d d i d not r e c o g n i z e Irish c i t i z e n s h i p as distinct f r o m B r i t i s h n a t i o n a l i t y u n t i l 1 9 4 8 . A s s u c h , Irish c i t i z e n s c o n t i n u e d to b e B r i t i s h subjects.  Others r a i s e d c r i t i c i s m s o f the 1935 Act's treatment o f the residents o f N o r t h e r n Ireland.  D u r i n g the debate s u r r o u n d i n g the Irish Nationality  and Citizenship  Bill,  1934, D e p u t y J o h n E s m o n d e c o m p l a i n e d that the measures w e r e i n a p p r o p r i a t e as they treated m e m b e r s o f the " I r i s h n a t i o n " resident i n N o r t h e r n I r e l a n d i n the same m a n n e r as " f o r e i g n e r s . " H e stated,  136  137  Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1935, (I.), 1936 s.2(2)(a). Ibid. s.4.  60  " u n d e r this B i l l , i n future the Irish p e o p l e o f the N o r t h are t o be p u t i n the same p o s i t i o n as T u r k s . . . a c c o r d i n g to the B i l l i n future the y o u n g T u r k s o f T y r o n e and the d a n c i n g D e r v i s h e s o f D e r r y w i l l have to g o o n a p i l g r i m a g e to that  Mecca  o f Irish  nationality,  Piccadilly  Circus,  a n d , at t h e H i g h  C o m m i s s i o n e r ' s o f f i c e there, w i l l have to have their names i n s c r i b e d i n order 139  to o b t a i n the benefits o f I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p . "  3.4 I r i s h C i t i z e n s h i p : 1937 - 1998 In 1 9 3 7 , the 2 6 counties that t o d a y c o m p r i s e the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d adopted its present c o n s t i t u t i o n . A r t i c l e 9 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n decreed that a l l c i t i z e n s o f the Irish F r e e State b e c a m e c i t i z e n s o f the Ireland u p o n the C o n s t i t u t i o n c o m i n g into e f f e c t .  140  Future a c q u i s i t i o n and loss o f c i t i z e n s h i p c o n t i n u e d to b e d e t e r m i n e d b y the 1935 Act u n t i l 1956. A t that point, the 1935 Act w a s r e p l a c e d w i t h the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1956 [the 1956 Act] w h i c h , although a m e n d e d since its i n t r o d u c t i o n , w a s never repealed and r e m a i n s i n effect t o d a y .  1 4 1  T h e c i t i z e n s h i p r e g i m e i m p l e m e n t e d b y the 1956 Act sought t o a c h i e v e t w o goals. It sought to further o v e r c o m e the d i f f i c u l t y p o s e d b y p a r t i t i o n to the Irish nationalist v i s i o n , i n w h i c h the w h o l e i s l a n d o f Ireland w a s r e c o g n i z e d as a nation-state; it also  138  139 140 141  Deputy John A. Costello, Ireland, DM Debates, vol.55 (4 April 1935). Deputy John Esmonde, Ireland, DM Debates, vol.55 (4 April 1935). Constitution of Ireland 1937, Article 9.1.1. Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (I.) 1956, c.26 [the 1956 Act].  61  attempted to counteract the p r o b l e m o f d e p o p u l a t i o n . T h e framers o f the 1956  Act  h o p e d to achieve these goals b y e x t e n d i n g the categories o f p e r s o n entitled to c l a i m Irish c i t i z e n s h i p .  T h e i n f l u e n c e o f the jus soli p r i n c i p l e is apparent i n Part II o f the 1956 the 1956  Act.  Part II o f  Act defines w h o is an Irish c i t i z e n . U n t i l recent changes i n the l e g i s l a t i o n ,  S e c t i o n 6(1)  stated anyone  b o r n i n Ireland w a s  a n Irish citizen.  q u a l i f i c a t i o n w a s r e q u i r e d i n order t o acquire Irish c i t i z e n s h i p . p r i n c i p l e r e m a i n s w i t h i n the 1956 requirement.  1 4 2  N o further T h e jus soli  Act today; albeit i n a f o r m t e m p e r e d b y a r e s i d e n c y  Part II o f the 1956 Act i s also e x t e n s i v e l y i n f l u e n c e d b y the jus  sanguinis p r i n c i p l e . S e c t i o n 6(2) states that a c h i l d b o r n to a parent w h o is an Irish c i t i z e n is an Irish c i t i z e n . T h e r u l e applies regardless o f w h e t h e r the c h i l d w a s b o r n i n the state, the c i t i z e n parent was resident i n Ireland at the t i m e o f the c h i l d ' s b i r t h , or i f the c i t i z e n parent w a s a l i v e at the t i m e o f the c h i l d ' s b i r t h .  B y b e s t o w i n g Irish  c i t i z e n s h i p u p o n the c h i l d r e n o f Irish c i t i z e n s , regardless o f w h e t h e r the c h i l d w a s b o r n or w i l l be raised i n Ireland, S e c t i o n 6(2) demonstrates a c o n c e p t i o n o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p i n w h i c h Irishness  i s d e f i n e d b y lineage rather than b i r t h i n t o , o r  c o n t r i b u t i o n to, Irish society.  T h e i n f l u e n c e o f the jus sanguinis p r i n c i p l e is also evident i n Part III o f the 1956 Part III determines w h o c a n b e c o m e an Irish c i t i z e n .  Act.  O r d i n a r i l y , an a l i e n m u s t  c o m p l y w i t h c o n d i t i o n s set out i n S e c t i o n 15 o f the A c t i n order t o receive a  62  certificate o f n a t u r a l i z a t i o n .  S e c t i o n 15 is q u a l i f i e d b y S e c t i o n  circumstances  in which  the M i n i s t e r  naturalization  regardless  o f whether  f o r Justice  m a y grant  the c o n d i t i o n s  16 w h i c h lists a certificate o f  are m e t .  A m o n g the  c i r c u m s t a n c e s e x p r e s s l y stated b y S e c t i o n 16 is " w h e r e the a p p l i c a n t is o f Irish decent"  1 4 3  a n d " w h e r e the applicant i s a parent o r g u a r d i a n a c t i n g o n b e h a l f o f a  m i n o r o f Irish d e c e n t . "  1 4 4  B y the early 1950s, an i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e r o f p e o p l e b o r n i n N o r t h e r n Ireland w e r e not entitled to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p under the 1935 Act because their fathers h a d b e e n b o r n outside the state.  H o w e v e r , M a r y D a l y argues that e x t e n d i n g the benefits o f Irish  c i t i z e n s h i p to their f e l l o w c o u n t r y m e n was not the p r i m a r y g o a l o f the framers o f the 1956 Act. H e r research indicates that the Irish G o v e r n m e n t w a s m o r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h s e c u r i n g the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's c l a i m to be a s o v e r e i g n state than e n s u r i n g the w e l l b e i n g o f those i n N o r t h e r n Ireland.  S h e p o i n t s o u t that w h i l s t the Irish  G o v e r n m e n t h a d protested s t r o n g l y about the British Nationality Act 1948  145  it h a d  hitherto s h o w n little c o n c e r n f o r a n o m a l i e s i n its o w n l e g i s l a t i o n w h i c h prevented N o r t h e r n e r s from e x e r c i s i n g rights w i t h i n the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d .  146  T h e e x t e n s i o n o f entitlement to c i t i z e n s h i p w a s therefore p r i m a r i l y a s y m b o l i c measure.  B y e n t i t l i n g anyone b o r n i n the i s l a n d o f Ireland to I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p , the  The exception to this rule was the case of those born in Northern Ireland who were required under Section 7 of the 1956 Act to "declare" that they were Irish in order to acquire Irish citizenship. Consequently, it is not correct to state they were Irish citizens solely from birth. Supra note 141 s. 16(a). Supra note 141 s. 16(b). 142  143  144  145  British Nationality Act 1948 (UK) 1948, c.56.  146  Daly, supra note 133 at 392  63  1956 Act served to further a national narrative about the i n d i v i s i b i l i t y o f the Irish n a t i o n i n the face o f c h a l l e n g e p o s e d b y partition. T h o u g h the p o w e r o f the Irish state o n l y extended to 2 6 o f the 3 2 counties, the 1956 Act entitled those b o r n i n N o r t h e r n Ireland  to c l a i m Irish c i t i z e n s h i p .  It sought to reduce, as far as p o s s i b l e , the  d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n those b o r n i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland and those b o r n i n N o r t h e r n Ireland.  R e m a r k s b y then M i n i s t e r f o r Justice, James Everett, d u r i n g the D a i l debate  o n w h a t w a s to b e c o m e the 1956 Act indicate the p r e v a i l i n g m o o d o f the t i m e .  He  stated, " A result o f this n e w p r o v i s i o n is that b i r t h i n the n a t i o n a l territory o f the S i x C o u n t i e s i s r e c o g n i z e d , just as i n the T w e n t y - S i x  C o u n t i e s , as e n a b l i n g  Irish  c i t i z e n s h i p to be transmitted f r o m either the father o r m o t h e r to the c h i l d r e n i n a never ending chain, without any formality o f r e g i s t r a t i o n . "  147  B y e n t i t l i n g a large class o f persons to c l a i m Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , the 1956  Act  also  sought to counter d e p o p u l a t i o n , o n e o f the p r a c t i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s f a c i n g the state at that time.  A p p r o x i m a t e l y h a l f a m i l l i o n p e o p l e - o n e seventh o f the p o p u l a t i o n - left  Ireland i n the 1 9 5 0 s .  1 4 8  In 1956 the threat d e p o p u l a t i o n p o s e d to Irish society w a s  p e r c e i v e d to be greater than that p o s e d b y i n w a r d m i g r a t i o n .  John A . Harrington  describes the n a t i o n a l c l i m a t e o f the t i m e as " o n e o f defeat a n d d e s p a i r . "  1 4 9  T h e 1956  Act entitled b o t h those b o r n i n the state and those descendent o f Irish c i t i z e n s to c l a i m c i t i z e n s h i p i n the hope that it w o u l d decrease the threat p o s e d b y d e p o p u l a t i o n .  150  It  Deputy James Everett, Ireland, Dail Debates, vol. 154 (29 February 1956). Tim Pat Coogan, De Valera: Long Fellow, Long Shadow (London, Hutchinson 1993) at 661-667. John A . Harringon, "Citizenship and Biopolitics of Postnationalist Ireland" (2005) 32(3) J.L. & Soc'y424at431. Siobhan Mullally, "Citizenship and Family Life in Ireland: Asking the Question 'Who Belongs?'" (2005) 25(3) Legal Studies 578. 147  148  149  150  64  w a s a strategy l i n k e d to the concept o f Irish s o v e r e i g n t y i n the sense that it attempted to secure the state t h r o u g h e c o n o m i c w e l l - b e i n g .  3.5 T h e N i n e t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t to the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland  O n 10 A p r i l 1998, agreement w a s reached b e t w e e n negotiators c h a r g e d w i t h s e c u r i n g a settlement for g o v e r n i n g N o r t h e r n I r e l a n d .  151  T h e Agreement w a s accepted b y  voters i n N o r t h e r n Ireland and the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland i n separate referenda.  It  effected s i g n i f i c a n t change i n the relationships b e t w e e n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland, N o r t h e r n Ireland, and Great B r i t a i n . T h e undertakings o f the parties e n v i s a g e d a rec o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f " I r i s h n e s s " and " B r i t i s h n e s s . " In the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland, voters a p p r o v e d the N i n e t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t to the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland.  This replaced  the t r a d i t i o n a l c l a i m to N o r t h e r n Ireland w i t h an i n c l u s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f Irishness. However,  w h i l s t the N i n e t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t  signaled a re-conceptualization o f  " I r i s h n e s s " and the aspirations o f the state, the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c o n t i n u e d to use its c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s as an e x p r e s s i o n o f state sovereignty.  F r o m the t i m e o f Ireland's p a r t i t i o n b y the Act],  Government of Ireland Act, 1920 [the 1920  N o r t h e r n Ireland w a s the subject c o m p e t i n g c l a i m s to s o v e r e i g n t y b e t w e e n the  Irish F r e e State ( w h i c h b e c a m e the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland) and the U n i t e d K i n g d o m . B r o a d l y s p e a k i n g , those w h o i d e n t i f i e d themselves as Irish N a t i o n a l i s t s p e r c e i v e d the p a r t i t i o n o f Ireland and the establishment o f N o r t h e r n Ireland to be an i l l e g i t i m a t e act,  Ibid.  65  w h i l s t those w h o saw themselves as B r i t i s h U n i o n i s t s h e l d that N o r t h e r n I r e l a n d w a s a legitimate state.  N a t i o n a l i s t s reasoned that the G e n e r a l E l e c t i o n o f 1 9 1 8 , i n w h i c h a m a j o r i t y  in  Ireland h a d endorsed independence, gave l e g i t i m a c y to the concept o f I r e l a n d as an independent, u n i t a r y i s l a n d nation.  That a m a j o r i t y o f voters i n the north-east o f  Ireland h a d rejected independence d i d not j u s t i f y p a r t i t i o n .  JJ.  Lee  succinctly  captures the d o m i n a n t N a t i o n a l i s t critique o f p a r t i t i o n , stating " T h e U l s t e r u n i o n i s t m i n d saw n o i n c o n g r u i t y i n d e n y i n g a n y nationalist right to rule the n i n e counties o f 'Protestant' U l s t e r o n the basis o f a 3:1 nationalist m a j o r i t y i n Ireland as a w h o l e , w h i l s t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n s i s t i n g o n a right to rule U l s t e r w i t h a 55 per cent Protestant 152  majority."  T h e rejection o f the l e g i t i m a c y o f N o r t h e r n I r e l a n d w a s reflected i n  A r t i c l e s 2 and 3 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland 1 9 3 7 : " A r t i c l e 2.  T h e n a t i o n a l territory consists o f the w h o l e I s l a n d o f Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas.  A r t i c l e 3.  P e n d i n g the re-integration o f the n a t i o n a l territory, and w i t h o u t prejudice to the right o f the P a r l i a m e n t and G o v e r n m e n t established b y this C o n s t i t u t i o n to  66  exercise j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r the w h o l e o f that territory, the l a w s enacted b y that P a r l i a m e n t s h a l l have the l i k e area and extent o f a p p l i c a t i o n as the l a w s o f Saorstat E i r e a n n and the l i k e extra-territorial e f f e c t . "  B y l a y i n g c l a i m to "the w h o l e i s l a n d o f I r e l a n d , " A r t i c l e 2 d e n i e d the l e g i t i m a c y o f N o r t h e r n Ireland. R e f e r e n c e to "the re-integration o f the n a t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y " i n A r t i c l e 3 reflected a u n i t a r y c o n c e p t i o n o f the Irish nation-state. It p e r c e i v e d a t i m e i n w h i c h "the N o r t h " (never N o r t h e r n Ireland) w o u l d assimilate into the Irish F r e e State. T h e concept  o f assimilation  is central  to the traditional  Nationalist  concept  of  r e u n i f i c a t i o n ; the re-integration o f the n a t i o n a l territory w o u l d be a u n i l a t e r a l a c t i o n i n w h i c h the i l l e g i t i m a t e northern state assimilated into the legitimate southern state.  U n i o n i s t s argued that the 1920 Act created t w o legitimate states, N o r t h e r n Ireland and the Irish F r e e State, w h e n it partitioned the i s l a n d o f Ireland. U n i o n i s t s reasoned that at the t i m e o f p a r t i t i o n the w h o l e o f Ireland w a s part o f the U n i t e d K i n g d o m a n d therefore  subject  to the W e s t m i n s t e r  doctrine  o f Parliamentary  Supremacy.  C o n s e q u e n t l y , the W e s t m i n s t e r P a r l i a m e n t h a d the authority to p a r t i t i o n Ireland i f it w i s h e d . F u r t h e r m o r e , the doctrine o f P a r l i a m e n t a r y S u p r e m a c y ensured that, u n t i l the event o f a repeal o f the 1920 Act, N o r t h e r n Ireland w a s a legitimate p o l i t i c a l entity. In contrast to the c l a i m s o f N a t i o n a l i s t s , U n i o n i s t s m a i n t a i n e d the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland m a d e a n i l l e g i t i m a t e territorial c l a i m u p o n part o f the s o v e r e i g n  United  Kingdom.  J.J. Lee, Ireland 1912-1925: Politics and Society (Cambridge University Press, 1989) at 4.  67  T h e Agreement sought t o m o v e a w a y f r o m w h a t K e a r n e y dubs " t h e nationalistu n i o n i s t l o g j a m " o f c o m p e t i n g irredentist c l a i m s to s o v e r e i g n t y .  753  It e n v i s a g e d a re-  c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n , n o t o n l y o f northern N a t i o n a l i s m a n d U n i o n i s m , b u t also w i d e r Irish and B r i t i s h identities. Irish and B r i t i s h identities w e r e r e c o n c e i v e d as i n t i m a t e l y inter-related rather than m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e a n d n e c e s s a r i l y i n c o m p a t i b l e . T h e Agreement e n v i s a g e d that w h i l s t p e o p l e w o u l d retain their sense o f Irishness o r B r i t i s h n e s s these w o u l d b e seen as a n h i s t o r i c aspect o f a b r o a d e r c o m m u n i t y . M e a n w h i l e , it w o u l d b e p o s s i b l e to transcend l o n g s t a n d i n g d i f f i c u l t i e s b y each group l o o k i n g to the future t h r o u g h the lens o f a c o m m o n E u r o p e a n identity.  I n the  R e p u b l i c o f Ireland, the o r i g i n a l A r t i c l e 2 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f I r e l a n d w h i c h l a i d c l a i m to the w h o l e i s l a n d o f Ireland w a s r e p l a c e d w i t h a n i n c l u s i v e concept o f Irishness:  " A r t i c l e 2.  It i s the entitlement a n d birthright o f e v e r y p e r s o n b o r n i n the i s l a n d o f Ireland, w h i c h i n c l u d e s its islands a n d seas, to b e part o f the Irish N a t i o n . That i s also the entitlement o f a l l persons o t h e r w i s e q u a l i f i e d i n accordance w i t h l a w to b e c i t i z e n s o f Ireland.  F u r t h e r m o r e , the I r i s h n a t i o n cherishes its  s p e c i a l a f f i n i t y w i t h p e o p l e o f Irish ancestry l i v i n g a b r o a d w h o share i t s c u l t u r a l identity and h e r i t a g e . "  Richard Kearney, Postnationalist Ireland (Routledge Press, 1997) at 2.  68  T h e n e w A r t i c l e 3 a c k n o w l e d g e d a p l u r a l i t y o f I r i s h identities. W h i l s t it retained the N a t i o n a l i s t aspiration o f a u n i t e d Ireland, it a c k n o w l e d g e d the n o r t h e r n state.  The  concept o f u n i f i c a t i o n t h r o u g h a s s i m i l a t i o n was abandoned.  A r t i c l e 3.  1.  It is the f i r m w i l l o f the Irish n a t i o n , i n h a r m o n y a n d f r i e n d s h i p , to unite a l l the p e o p l e w h o share the territory o f the i s l a n d s o f Ireland, i n a l l the d i v e r s i t y o f their shared identities and traditions, r e c o g n i s i n g that a u n i t e d Ireland s h a l l be brought about o n l y b y p e a c e f u l means w i t h the consent o f the m a j o r i t y o f the p e o p l e , d e m o c r a t i c a l l y expressed, i n b o t h j u r i s d i c t i o n s i n the i s l a n d .  U n t i l then, the l a w s enacted b y the P a r l i a m e n t that existed  i m m e d i a t e l y before the c o m i n g into operation o f this C o n s t i t u t i o n .  2.  Institutions w i t h executive p o w e r s and f u n c t i o n s that are shared between those j u r i s d i c t i o n s m a y be established b y their respective  responsible  authorities for stated purposes and m a y exercise p o w e r s and functions i n respect o f a l l or any part o f the i s l a n d . "  T h e r e v i s e d A r t i c l e s 2 and 3 a c k n o w l e d g e the l e g i t i m a c y o f the I r i s h identity o f northern N a t i o n a l i s t s and the B r i t i s h identity o f northern U n i o n i s t s . A r t i c l e 2 entitles any p e r s o n b o r n o n the i s l a n d o f Ireland " t o be part o f the I r i s h n a t i o n . " a c k n o w l e d g e s the l e g i t i m a c y o f N o r t h e r n Ireland.  Article 3  It r e c o g n i z e s that a u n i t e d Ireland  69  c a n o n l y b e a c h i e v e d w i t h the consent o f the m a j o r i t y o f p e o p l e w i t h i n the R e p u b l i c of  Ireland  and Northern  Ireland.  Furthermore,  the Agreement c o m m i t s the  G o v e r n m e n t o f the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland to p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n cross-border b o d i e s i n N o r t h e r n Ireland ["the north-south d i m e n s i o n " ] a n d inter-governmental b o d i e s w i t h the B r i t i s h G o v e r n m e n t i n L o n d o n ["the east-west d i m e n s i o n . " ]  T h e a m e n d i n g o f A r t i c l e s 2 a n d 3 i n d i c a t e d that the narrative i n w h i c h the w h o l e i s l a n d o f Ireland w a s r i g h t f u l l y a m o n o - c u l t u r a l nation-state h a d ceased to d o m i n a t e Irish p o l i t i c a l thought i n the w a y that it h a d throughout m o s t o f the 2 0  t h  century.  H o w e v e r , w h i l s t the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland adopted a n e w i n c l u s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f Irishness, a n d the area o v e r w h i c h the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c l a i m e d as its r i g h t f u l territory altered, the state c o n t i n u e d to use c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s to exert s o v e r e i g n t y o v e r that territory.  I n the D a i l , T D s raised concerns as to whether the A r t i c l e 2 w o u l d  reduce the a b i l i t y o f c i t i z e n s resident i n the state to h o l d their g o v e r n m e n t to account. F o r m e r T a o i s e a c h J o h n B r u t o n sought reassurance that I r i s h c i t i z e n s resident outside the state w o u l d not b e entitled to vote i n elections w i t h i n the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d .  154  T h e T a o i s e a c h , B e r t i e A h e r n assured the D a i l that the n e w A r t i c l e 2 w o u l d not extend v o t i n g rights to Irish c i t i z e n s outside the state. H e p o i n t e d out that u n d e r A r t i c l e 16.2 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n residence i n the state w a s a prerequisite f o r c i t i z e n s to exercise voting rights.  1 5 5  John Bruton, Ireland, Dail Debates, vol.489 (22 April 1998). Bertie Ahern, Ireland, DM Debates, vol.489 (22 April 1998).  70  T h e r e f o r e , w h i l e one consequence o f the Agreement w a s that the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland f o r m a l l y a c k n o w l e d g e d northern N a t i o n a l i s t s and those o f Irish descent as part o f the Irish n a t i o n , it s i m u l t a n e o u s l y ensured that the o p e r a t i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p rights r e m a i n e d tied to the territorial state. In d o i n g so, the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c o n t i n u e d to exercise s o v e r e i g n t y o v e r the n a t i o n a l territory t h r o u g h its c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s .  3.6 Irish S o v e r e i g n t y and the R i g h t s o f the F a m i l y  A year b e f o r e the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m , the Irish S u p r e m e C o u r t released the d e c i s i o n o f A.O.  & D.L.  v. Minister for  Justice [Lobe].  156  It s e e m i n g l y restricted the  rights o f Irish c i t i z e n s b o r n to non-nationals f r o m r e s i d i n g i n the state. S i n c e the case of Fajujonu v. Minister for  Justice [Fajujonu]?  51  Government p o l i c y had proceeded  o n the m i s a p p r e h e n s i o n that non-national parents o f c h i l d - c i t i z e n s c o u l d not be 1  deported.  CO  H o w e v e r , as I w i l l s h o w , the Irish courts have a l w a y s h e l d that the rights  o f c h i l d c i t i z e n s to the care and c o m p a n y o f their parents i n the state w e r e "subject to the e x i g e n c i e s o f the c o m m o n g o o d . "  F u r t h e r m o r e , courts d e f i n e d " t h e c o m m o n  g o o d , " against w h i c h the c h i l d r e n ' s right to r e m a i n i n the state w a s m e a s u r e d , as the state's a b i l i t y to exercise sovereignty over the n a t i o n a l territory. T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t d e c i s i o n i n Lobe i n d i c a t e d that the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c o n s i d e r e d the c o m m o n g o o d to be best served b y rejecting applications from non-nationals to r e m a i n i n the state  156  A.O.&  157  Fajujonu v. Minister for Justice [ 1990] 2 IR 151 [Fajujonu]  D.L. v. Minister for Justice, [2003] 1 IR 3, 2003 [Lobe].  Donncha O'Connell & Ciara Smyth, "Citizenship and the Irish Constitution" in Ursula Fraser & Colin Harvey ed., Sanctuary in Ireland: Perspectives on Asylum Law and Policy (Institute of Public Administration, 2003) 229 at 235. 158  71  f o r the.benefit o f their c i t i z e n c h i l d r e n . H o w e v e r , this d e c i s i o n expressed a change i n p r i o r i t i e s o f the state, rather than a fundamental change o f p o l i c y .  T h e c l a i m that the state's a b i l i t y to assert c o n t r o l o f its borders c o u l d be o u t w e i g h e d b y the right to f a m i l y l i f e f o u n d i n A r t i c l e 41 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n w a s c o n s i d e r e d i n Pok Sun Shum v. Ireland [Pok Sun Shum].'  59  T h e plaintiff was a Chinese national  w h o a r r i v e d i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland i n 1978. H e m a r r i e d a n I r i s h c i t i z e n and h a d four Irish c h i l d r e n . A t s o m e p o i n t , the p l a i n t i f f was i n v o l v e d i n " a serious i n c i d e n t " and t o l d that h e must leave the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland.  H o w e v e r , he d i d not do so.  Instead, he r e m a i n e d i n the state and i n 1981 a p p l i e d f o r a certificate o f n a t u r a l i z a t i o n . H i s a p p l i c a t i o n w a s d e n i e d and he w a s once a g a i n t o l d that h e w o u l d have to leave the state.  T h e p l a i n t i f f sought a d e c l a r a t i o n f r o m the H i g h C o u r t that h i s r e m o v a l  f r o m the state w o u l d v i o l a t e his w i f e ' s right to f a m i l y l i f e , protected u n d e r A r t i c l e 41 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland.  T h e H i g h C o u r t rejected h i s c l a i m .  C o s t e l l o J . stated that the right to f a m i l y l i f e ,  guaranteed under A r t i c l e 41 c o u l d be restricted i n the interests o f the p u b l i c g o o d . H e stated "I do not t h i n k that the rights o f the ' f a m i l y ' are absolute, i n the sense that they are n o t subject to some restrictions b y the s t a t e . "  160  Costello J . continued b y  e m p h a s i z i n g the need f o r the state to b e able to assert s o v e r e i g n t y t h r o u g h c o n t r o l o f its borders.  "It seems t o m e that the State...must have v e r y w i d e p o w e r s i n the  Pok Sun Shum v. Ireland, [1986] 6 I.L.R.M. 593 Ibid, at 597.  72  interest o f the c o m m o n g o o d to c o n t r o l aliens, their entry into the state, their departure and their activities w h e n i n the s t a t e . "  161  T h e Irish C o u r t s adopted a s i m i l a r approach i n Osheku v. Ireland [Oskeku].  162  The  p l a i n t i f f w a s a N i g e r i a n c i t i z e n w h o had l i v e d i n the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d since 1979. U p o n a r r i v a l , the he agreed to leave the state w i t h i n a m o n t h . Instead h e m a r r i e d a n Irish c i t i z e n and h a d a c h i l d w h o w a s also a n Irish c i t i z e n .  T h e p l a i n t i f f sought a n  order to restrain the M i n i s t e r f o r Justice f r o m deporting h i m .  T h e p o w e r to deport  aliens w a s b e s t o w e d u p o n the M i n i s t e r b y section 4 o f the Alien Act 1935. T h e p l a i n t i f f argued that i n cases w h e r e a non-national w a s part o f a n I r i s h f a m i l y , the Alien Act 1935 w a s i n c o n f l i c t w i t h the right to f a m i l y l i f e guaranteed b y A r t i c l e s 4 0 , 41 and 4 2 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n .  G a n n o n J . rejected the p l a i n t i f f s c l a i m .  H e quoted, apparently w i t h a p p r o v a l , the  remarks o f C o s t e l l o J . i n Pok Sun Shum w h i c h stated that the rights o f the f a m i l y guaranteed b y the C o n s t i t u t i o n w e r e not absolute.  G a n n o n J . h e l d that there w e r e  c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h it w a s necessary to restrict the rights o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n pursuit o f the c o m m o n g o o d . H e stated, " T h e r e are f u n d a m e n t a l rights o f the state as w e l l as fundamental  rights o f c i t i z e n s , a n d the p r o t e c t i o n o f the f o r m e r m a y i n v o l v e  restrictions i n circumstances o f necessity o n the l a t t e r . "  163  H e w e n t o n to e m p h a s i z e  that the c o n t r o l o f borders w a s o f k e y i m p o r t a n c e to the i n t e g r i t y o f the state. H e r u l e d that the integrity o f the state, " c o n s t i t u t e d as i t i s o f the c o l l e c t i v e b o d y o f its  161 162  Ibid, at 599. Osheku v. Ireland [1986] IR 735 [Osheku].  73  c i t i z e n s w i t h i n the n a t i o n a l territory m u s t be defended and v i n d i c a t e d b y the organs o f State and b y the c i t i z e n s so there m a y be true s o c i a l order w i t h i n the territory and c o n c o r d e m a i n t a i n e d w i t h other nations i n accordance w i t h the objectives d e c l a r e d i n the p r e a m b l e to the C o n s t i t u t i o n . "  1 6 4  T h e m a i n authority u p o n w h i c h the f a m i l e s i n Lobe r e l i e d w a s a p r e v i o u s I r i s h S u p r e m e C o u r t case, Fajujonu v. Minister for Justice.  165  M r . and M r s . Fajujonu were  N i g e r i a n and M o r o c c a n c i t i z e n s respectively. T h e y h a d l i v e d i n I r e l a n d i l l e g a l l y f r o m 1981. B e t w e e n 1983 and 1987 they h a d three c h i l d r e n w h o , b y v i r t u e o f the place o f their b i r t h , w e r e Irish citizens. A t some p o i n t i n 1981 a d e p o r t a t i o n order w a s i s s u e d against M r . F a j u j o n u , a l t h o u g h i t w a s never enforced.  I n 1983 the F a j u j o n u f a m i l y  asked the court to r e c o g n i z e that their c h i l d r e n h a d a right to the care a n d c o m p a n y o f their parents i n the state under A r t i c l e 41 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n , and guarantee that the parents w o u l d not be deported.  T h e H i g h C o u r t r u l e d that w h i l s t c h i l d c i t i z e n s h a d a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t to be i n the state, and to the care and c o m p a n y o f their non-national parents, they d i d not have a right to the s o c i e t y o f their parents i n the state.  O n appeal, the S u p r e m e C o u r t h e l d  the c h i l d r e n i n v o l v e d h a d a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l right to the care and c o m p a n y o f their parents and h a d a prima facie entitlement to exercise that r i g h t i n the state.  It h e l d  that the parents c o u l d indicate a c h o i c e o f residence o n the c h i l d c i t i z e n ' s b e h a l f i f it  163  164  165  Ibid, at 746. Ibid. Fajujonu, supra note 157.  74  was " i n the interests o f those infant c h i l d r e n . "  1 6 6  Fajujonu, established that the  c h i l d ' s right to the care a n d c o m p a n y o f his o r her parents i n the state c o u l d o n l y be restricted " s u b j e c t to the e x i g e n c i e s o f the c o m m o n g o o d . "  7 6 7  The Supreme Court did  not o v e r r u l e the H i g h C o u r t d e c i s i o n a n d d i d n o t f i n d f o r the appellants.  Rather, it  i n v i t e d the M i n i s t e r f o r Justice to reconsider h i s o p i n i o n to deport M r . F a j u j o n u . A s it h a p p e n e d , the o r i g i n a l deportation order h a d b e c o m e i n v a l i d a n d a n e w order w a s not issued.  D u r i n g the 1990s the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c h a n g e d f r o m a c o u n t r y o f net e m i g r a t i o n to one o f net i m m i g r a t i o n . A m o n g those entering the c o u n t r y w a s a n i n c r e a s e d n u m b e r o f a s y l u m seekers. T h e n u m b e r o f p e o p l e s e e k i n g a s y l u m i n I r e l a n d rose f r o m 3 9 i n 1992 to a p p r o x i m a t e l y 12,000 i n 2 0 0 2 .  1 6 8  i n t r o d u c e d the l e n g t h y Refugee Act, 1996.  169  In response to this, the G o v e r n m e n t H o w e v e r , G o v e r n m e n t p o l i c y i n regard  to the non-national parents o f Irish c h i l d r e n p r o c e e d e d o n the m i s a p p r e h e n s i o n that 170  they c o u l d not be deported. non-national parents  T h e p e r c e p t i o n that, as a consequence o f Fajujonu, the  o f c h i l d c i t i z e n s c o u l d e f f e c t i v e l y b y p a s s the a s y l u m a n d  i m m i g r a t i o n system a n d r e m a i n i n the state b y asserting a c h o i c e o f residence o n b e h a l f o f the c h i l d w a s seen as a threat to the integrity o f that system.  Consequently,  a d e c i s i o n w a s m a d e to b e g i n r e f u s i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s to r e m a i n i n the state i n the hope  ,&t> 161  Ibid at 162. Ibid.  Maurice Manning, "Introduction" in Ursula Fraser & Colin Harvey ed., Sanctuary in Ireland: Perspectives on Asylum Law and Policy (Institute of Public Administration, 2003) xi at xii 168  169  Refugee Act 1996 (I.), 1996, c.17.  170  O'Connell & Smyth, supra note 158 at 235.  75  that  it w o u l d p r o v o k e  "overturned."  a l e g a l challenge  that w o u l d result i n Fajujonu  being  1 7 1  T h e c h a l l e n g e to the M i n i s t e r f o r J u s t i c e ' s d e c i s i o n to refuse residence rights to nonn a t i o n a l parents w a s raised i n  Lobe. T h e Lobe case c o n c e r n e d the L o b e f a m i l y f r o m  the C z e c h R e p u b l i c and the O s a y a n d e f a m i l y f r o m N i g e r i a . T h e L o b e f a m i l y c a m e to Ireland i n M a r c h 2 0 0 1 ; the Osayandes a r r i v e d i n M a y o f the same year.  In each  instance, the parents c l a i m e d a s y l u m u p o n a r r i v a l i n the state b u t their a p p l i c a t i o n s were unsuccessful.  A n order to deport b o t h the L o b e a n d O s a y a n d e f a m i l i e s w a s  i s s u e d but, before it c o u l d b e e n f o r c e d , each f a m i l y gave b i r t h to a c h i l d . A t the t i m e of  the c h i l d r e n ' s  citizenship.  birth,  anyone  born  i n Ireland  automatically  received  Irish  T h e f a m i l i e s contended that i n light o f the b i r t h o f a c h i l d c i t i z e n , the  state c o u l d n o longer deport the parents.  The  Lobe case c o n s i d e r e d w h e t h e r a c h i l d  c i t i z e n h a d the right to reside w i t h his o r her non-national parents i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland.  T h e f a m i l i e s s u b m i t t e d three arguments o n b e h a l f o f the c h i l d r e n .  F i r s t l y , they  contended that as the c h i l d r e n w e r e Irish c i t i z e n s , i n accordance w i t h A r t i c l e s 2 and 9 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland, they h a d a n u n q u a l i f i e d right to reside i n the state. A s the c h i l d r e n w e r e dependent u p o n the care o f their parents, a n d the d e p o r t a t i o n o f the parents w o u l d l e a d to the r e m o v a l o f the c h i l d r e n f r o m the state, the d e p o r t a t i o n o f the parents a m o u n t e d to a v i o l a t i o n o f the c h i l d r e n ' s right to reside i n the state. S e c o n d l y , it w a s s u b m i t t e d that the deportation order w a s a v i o l a t i o n o f A r t i c l e s 40.1  171  O'Connell & Smyth, supra note 158 at 231. 76  and 40.3 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n .  A r t i c l e 40.1 h o l d s that a l l persons m u s t be treated  e q u a l l y before the l a w ; A r t i c l e 40.3 c o m m i t s the state to u p h o l d i n g the rights o f the individual.  T h e f a m i l i e s argued that as the deportation order w o u l d l e a d to the  r e m o v a l o f the c h i l d r e n , as w e l l as their parents from the state, it d i s t i n g u i s h e d the q u a l i t y o f c i t i z e n s h i p enjoyed b y c i t i z e n s b o r n o f non-nationals from those b o r n o f Irish c i t i z e n s . T h i s , they c l a i m e d , a m o u n t e d to a f o r m o f d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , f o r b i d d e n b y A r t i c l e s 40.1 and 4 0 . 3 , against c h i l d c i t i z e n s b o r n o f non-national parents.  Finally,  the f a m i l i e s argued that the C o n s t i t u t i o n entitled the c h i l d r e n to the care a n d c o m p a n y o f their parents i n the state.  A r t i c l e 41 r e c o g n i z e s "the F a m i l y " as p o s s e s s i n g  " i n a l i e n a b l e and i m p r e s c r i p t i b l e rights, antecedent to and superior to a l l p o s i t i v e l a w . " It c o m m i t s the state to protecting the f a m i l y , " i n its c o n s t i t u t i o n and a u t h o r i t y . "  It  w a s s u b m i t t e d that, as the c h i l d r e n w e r e dependent u p o n their parents, d e p o r t i n g the parents w o u l d r e m o v e the c h i l d r e n from the state and d e p r i v e t h e m o f their right to the state's p r o t e c t i o n o f the f a m i l y .  T h e f a m i l i e s w e r e u n s u c c e s s f u l i n their b i d to r e m a i n i n the state. A m a j o r i t y o f the S u p r e m e C o u r t h e l d that w h i l s t , i n general, a c i t i z e n has the right not to be e x p e l l e d f r o m the state, the right is not absolute. K e a n e C.J. c i t e d the e x t r a d i t i o n process as an e x a m p l e o f a c i r c u m s t a n c e i n w h i c h a c i t i z e n m a y l e g i t i m a t e l y be c o m p e l l e d to leave 172  the state.  T h e court stressed that the deportation o f the parents d i d not affect the  right o f the c h i l d r e n , as c i t i z e n s , to return to the state w h e n they w e r e capable o f asserting a c h o i c e o f residence independent o f their parents.  Rather, the c h i l d r e n  Lobe, supra note 156 at 27.  77  were  leaving  deportation.  the state  merely  as a p r a c t i c a l  consequence  o f their  parents'  173  T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t also rejected the argument that the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f I r e l a n d ' s c o m m i t m e n t to the p r o t e c t i o n o f the f a m i l y guaranteed the c h i l d r e n the right to the care and c o m p a n y o f their parents i n the state. K e a n e C.J. p o i n t e d to i m p r i s o n m e n t as an instance i n w h i c h the integrity o f the f a m i l y m a y b e restricted l e g i t i m a t e l y , i n d i c a t i n g that w h i l s t the f a m i l y m a y possess rights that are s u p e r i o r to a l l p o s i t i v e l a w , the C o u r t d i d not r e c o g n i z e the integrity o f the f a m i l y as a n absolute r i g h t .  1 7 4  T h e m a j o r i t y o f the S u p r e m e C o u r t h e l d that the right o f the c h i l d c i t i z e n to reside i n the state h a d to b e b a l a n c e d against the right o f the Oireachtas to e x e r c i s e p o w e r o v e r the entry o f non-nationals into the state.  In that b a l a n c i n g act, they c o n s i d e r e d the  c o n t r o l o f borders o f greater i m p o r t a n c e than the rights o f the c h i l d c i t i z e n . E a c h o f the Justices i n the m a j o r i t y endorsed the v i e w expressed b y G a n n o n J . i n Osheku v. Ireland  175  that "the n a t i o n a l territory m u s t be defended b y the organs o f the State and  b y the c i t i z e n s . "  1 7 6  E x e r c i s i n g c o n t r o l o v e r non-nationals w i t h i n the n a t i o n a l territory  w a s c o n s i d e r e d so essential to the integrity o f the state that it o u t w e i g h e d the rights o f c h i l d c i t i z e n s to reside i n the state. T h i s w a s expressed m o s t f o r c e f u l l y b y K e a n e J . w h o stated " i t w o u l d seem to m e that it cannot be said, as a matter o f l a w , that, i n a case s u c h as the present, the parents o f the m i n o r applicants c a n assert a c h o i c e to  173 174 175  Lobe, supra note 156 at 75. Lobe, supra note 156 at 27. Osheku, supra note 162 at 746.  78  reside i n the State o n b e h a l f o f the m i n o r applicants, e v e n i f that c o u l d b e said to b e i n the interests o f the m i n o r a p p l i c a n t s . "  177  T h e increase i n the n u m b e r s o f p e o p l e entering the c o u n t r y c l e a r l y i n f l u e n c e d the d e c i s i o n o f the S u p r e m e C o u r t i n Lobe. Fajujonu  C o m p a r i n g the c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h  w a s d e c i d e d w i t h those o f Lobe, M u r r a y J . stated " T h e r e is m a n i f e s t l y a  d i s t i n c t i o n to b e d r a w n between a situation w h e r e the n u m b e r o f persons s e e k i n g to enter the State i n a n y o n e year i s v e r y l o w , f o r e x a m p l e 3 0 o r 4 0 , a n d the situation where m a n y thousands seek to d o s o . "  1 7 8  H i s c o m m e n t s indicate that it w a s the  change i n m a t e r i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s , rather than a change i n the rights associated w i t h Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , that p r o m p t e d the court to rule that the f a m i l i e s i n Lobe c o u l d n o t 179  r e m a i n i n the state. K e a n e C J . m a d e s i m i l a r r e m a r k s i n h i s j u d g m e n t .  T h e Lobe  case h e l d that, p r o v i d i n g the i m m i g r a t i o n services gave appropriate c o n s i d e r a t i o n to the c l a i m o f a c h i l d c i t i z e n w h e n m a k i n g its d e c i s i o n , the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland c o u l d r e m o v e the non-national parents o f c h i l d c i t i z e n s f r o m the state, e v e n i f that w a s to the detriment o f the c h i l d r e n .  In d o i n g s o , the courts a f f i r m e d that the rights  associated w i t h p o s s e s s i n g Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w e r e subservient to the state's right to assert s o v e r e i g n t y o v e r the national territory. C l a i r e B r e e n suggests that the d e c i s i o n to d e n y r e s i d e n c y rights to the non-national parents  o f Irish c h i l d r e n at best ignores the rights o f the c h i l d a n d at w o r s t  Lobe, supra note 156 at 24, 45, 85, and 134, Keane C.J., Denham, Murray and Hardiman JJ. Geoghegan J. endorses the decisions of Keane C.J. and Hardiman J. at 166. Lobe, supra note 156 at 20, Keane C.J. Lobe, supra note 156 at 45, Murray J. 176  177  178  79  d i s c r i m i n a t e s against c i t i z e n s o n the grounds o f their parents' n a t i o n a l i t y . S h e argues that the  Lobe d e c i s i o n disregarded Irish j u r i s p r u d e n c e that e m p h a s i z e d the need to  p r i o r i t i z e the best interest o f the c h i l d .  1 8 0  T h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f I r e l a n d places p a r t i c u l a r  i m p o r t a n c e u p o n the (nuclear) f a m i l y . It permits state interference i n f a m i l y l i f e o n l y 181  w h e n parents f a i l i n their " p h y s i c a l or m o r a l " duty to their c h i l d r e n .  The well-  b e i n g o f c h i l d r e n has often been cited as j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n i n f a m i l y l i f e . T h e y t y p i c a l l y i n v o l v e s o c i a l services r e m o v i n g c h i l d r e n f r o m the c u s t o d y o f their parents.  B r e e n contends that the best interests o f the c h i l d w e r e d i s r e g a r d e d i n Lobe i n f a v o u r o f e n s u r i n g the state retained the p o w e r to c o n t r o l its borders.  S h e argues that the  S u p r e m e C o u r t c o u l d have d r a w n u p o n the C o n v e n t i o n o n the R i g h t s o f the C h i l d [ C R C ] to defend the rights o f the c h i l d c i t i z e n .  T h e R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d assumes a  d u a l i s t i c a p p r o a c h to international l a w . In theory, d u a l i s m h o l d s that international l a w c a n o n l y b e e n f o r c e d i f it has been i n c o r p o r a t e d into d o m e s t i c l a w .  However,  B r e e n p o i n t s out that the Irish experience o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n d o m e s t i c a n d international l a w is m o r e c o m p l e x than the f o r m a l d e f i n i t i o n o f d u a l i s m suggests. Irish courts have repeated stated that international l a w is not enforceable  unless  i n c o r p o r a t e d into d o m e s t i c l a w . N e v e r t h e l e s s , they have i n v o k e d international l a w as g u i d a n c e f o r interpreting the m e a n i n g o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n s a n d domestic legislation.  179  A t the t i m e o f  Kelly v. O 'Neill the E u r o p e a n C o n v e n t i o n o n H u m a n  Lobe, supra note 156 at 25, Keane C.J.  180  Claire Breen, "Refugee Law in Ireland: Disregarding the Rights of the Child-Citizen, Discriminating against the Rights of the Child" (2004) 15(4) Int'l J. Refugee L . 750. Constitution of Ireland Article 41.1. 181  80  Rights  [ECHR]  d i d n o t f o r m part o f the R e p u b l i c  o f Ireland's domestic l a w .  H o w e v e r , the court d e e m e d the state's r a t i f i c a t i o n o f the E C H R s u f f i c i e n t authority to take the j u r i s p r u d e n c e  o f the E u r o p e a n  Court o f H u m a n  Rights  into  account.  T h e r e f o r e , w h i l s t d o m e s t i c l a w p r o v i d e s the o n l y source o f enforceable rights i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland, the character o f those rights has been i n f l u e n c e d b y international law.  T h e Lobe case stands i n m a r k e d contrast to s u c h d e c i s i o n s . It s a w rights repeatedly e m p h a s i z e d i n international l a w m a r g i n a l i z e d b y the S u p r e m e C o u r t .  F o r example,  A r t i c l e 2 o f the C R C , o f w h i c h the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland i s a signatory, requires states ensure their practices are n o n - d i s c r i m i n a t o r y , " i r r e s p e c t i v e o f c h i l d ' s , o r h i s o r her 182  parent's...status."  T h e u n i v e r s a l nature o f rights e m p h a s i z e d i n A r t i c l e 2 o f the  C R C w a s not used to interpret the rights o f the Irish c i t i z e n b o r n to non-national parents.  Instead, the S u p r e m e C o u r t e m p h a s i z e d the need f o r the state to e able to  exercise c o n t r o l o v e r its borders.  S i o b h a n M u l l a l l y agrees that the Supreme C o u r t ' s w i l l i n g n e s s to p e r m i t the E x e c u t i v e to intervene i n the private sphere o f f a m i l y l i f e i n Lobe w a s i n m a r k e d contrast to p r e v i o u s d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the rights o f the f a m i l y .  S h e notes that o n l y a year  before the S u p r e m e C o u r t r u l e d that constitutional p r o v i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the f a m i l y p e r m i t t e d the state to intervene o n l y i n the m o s t e x c e p t i o n a l o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s .  183  She  argues that acting i n the best interest o f the c h i l d has repeatedly b e e n u s e d to j u s t i f y  182  183  Breen, supra note 180 at 753. Mullally, supra note 150 at 579.  81  state i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland. T h e r e f o r e , despite the state's o s t e n s i b l y " p r o - f a m i l y " c o n s t i t u t i o n and extensive j u r i s p r u d e n c e e m p h a s i z i n g the i m p o r t a n c e o f a c t i n g i n the best interest o f the c h i l d , the Lobe case m i r r o r e d the a p p r o a c h o f courts i n other W e s t e r n countries w i t h jus soli c i t i z e n s h i p r e g i m e s .  B r e e n and M u l l a l l y demonstrate that there w a s s u f f i c i e n t j u d i c i a l precedent to m a k e a case against d e p o r t i n g the f a m i l i e s i n Lobe.  H o w e v e r , I suggest that that the p r o b l e m  is not that the S u p r e m e C o u r t m a d e the w r o n g d e c i s i o n but that m a k i n g a d e c i s i o n c o m p r o m i s e d the p r i n c i p l e s that l a w purports to stand for. It w i l l be r e c a l l e d that i n chapter t w o I e m p l o y e d the w o r k o f Jean L. C o h e n , w h o argues that the c o m p o n e n t parts o f c i t i z e n s h i p - p o l i t i c a l , j u d i c i a l and i d e n t i t y - d o n o t a l w a y s f i t together h a r m o n i o u s l y . In Lobe the j u d i c i a l c o m p o n e n t o f c i t i z e n s h i p , i n the f o r m o f the right o f the c h i l d c i t i z e n s to equal treatment before the l a w , c a m e into c o n f l i c t w i t h the p o l i t i c a l aspect, w h i c h asserted that the state h a d a right to c o n t r o l non-nationals w i t h i n its territory.  T h e response o f the S u p r e m e C o u r t w a s not to a c k n o w l e d g e the t e n s i o n betw een the c o m p o n e n t parts o f c i t i z e n s h i p , but rather to d e n y it.  A m a j o r i t y h e l d that the l a w  d e m a n d e d the deportation o f the parents, i g n o r i n g that the l a w also r e q u i r e d the c h i l d r e n be a c c o r d e d the same rights as c i t i z e n s b o r n to Irish parents. I n d o i n g so, the S u p r e m e C o u r t d o w n p l a y e d the precedents w h i c h p l a c e d the rights o f the f a m i l y and the best interests o f the c h i l d at the forefront o f j u d i c i a l d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . B r e e n and M u l l a l l y ' s c r i t i c i s m s o f the Lobe d e c i s i o n are not w i t h o u t m e r i t , but p l a c i n g the  82  emphasis u p o n the rights o f the c h i l d does not r e s o l v e the t e n s i o n p o s e d to l e g a l systems b y c i t i z e n s b o r n to non-national parents.  It s i m p l y places the emphasis o n  difference p r i n c i p l e s .  3.7 C h a l l e n g e s to State S o v e r e i g n t y  D u r i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m c a m p a i g n , the o p i n i o n o f the A d v o c a t e G e n e r a l i n the case o f Chen v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [Chen] w a s released.  1 8 4  Chen considered whether a c h i l d c i t i z e n o f an E U m e m b e r state, w h o i s  e f f e c t i v e l y i n the care o f a national o f a non-member c o u n t r y , h a d the right to reside i n another m e m b e r state.  A l t h o u g h the case d i r e c t l y c o n c e r n e d the G o v e r n m e n t o f  the U n i t e d K i n g d o m , the o u t c o m e w a s o f general s i g n i f i c a n c e throughout the E U .  T h e c h i l d i n q u e s t i o n , Catherine C h e n , w a s b o r n i n B e l f a s t to a C h i n e s e n a t i o n a l , M a n L a v e t t e C h e n [ M r s . C h e n ] i n September 2 0 0 0 .  M r s . C h e n traveled  from  Great  B r i t a i n , w h e r e she l i v e d at the t i m e , to N o r t h e r n Ireland so that h e r c h i l d w o u l d b e entitled to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p .  T h o u g h h i s t o r i c a l l y the U n i t e d K i n g d o m  awarded  c i t i z e n s h i p o n the basis o f the jus soli p r i n c i p l e , a r e s i d e n c y requirement w a s inserted  into U K citizenship l a w b y the British Nationality Act 1981.  185  part o f the U n i t e d K i n g d o m .  N o r t h e r n Ireland is  H o w e v e r , under S e c t i o n 7(1) o f the Irish N a t i o n a l i t y  and C i t i z e n s h i p A c t , 1956, M r s C h e n w a s entitled to " d e c l a r e " C a t h e r i n e a n Irish c i t i z e n , at w h i c h p o i n t she retrospectively b e c a m e a n I r i s h c i t i z e n " a t b i r t h . "  After  Chen v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Case C-200/02 [2004] E.C.J, at para. 47 [Chen]. 184  83  C a t h e r i n e w a s b o r n , she and M r s . C h e n returned to B r i t a i n w h e r e they a p p l i e d f o r a long-term r e s i d e n c y p e r m i t . T h e a p p l i c a t i o n w a s refused.  M r s . C h e n appealed to the E u r o p e a n C o u r t o f Justice [ E C J ] to have the d e c i s i o n to refuse h e r long-term r e s i d e n c y a p p l i c a t i o n overturned. S h e argued that the U K H o m e D e p a r t m e n t ' s refusal w a s a breach o f C a t h e r i n e ' s right o f free m o v e m e n t w i t h i n E U M e m b e r States, as guaranteed to E U c i t i z e n s b y A r t i c l e 18 E C and D i r e c t i v e 90/364. T h e E C J w a s a s k e d to determine whether C a t h e r i n e ' s d e p e n d e n c y u p o n h e r m o t h e r c o n f e r r e d a right u p o n M r s . C h e n to reside w i t h h e r daughter i n a m e m b e r state o f w h i c h C a t h e r i n e w a s not a c i t i z e n .  T h e A d v o c a t e G e n e r a l , and later the E C J itself, h e l d that a c h i l d w h o s e parents w e r e not E U nationals c o u l d reside i n another m e m b e r state i n the c o m p a n y o f i t s parents.  186  It h e l d that p r o v i d e d Catherine w a s c o v e r e d b y " a p p r o p r i a t e sickness  i n s u r a n c e " a n d the parents h a d sufficient f i n a n c i a l resources to ensure the c h i l d d i d not b e c o m e " a n unreasonable b u r d e n u p o n the state," the U K G o v e r n m e n t c o u l d n o t restrict C a t h e r i n e ' s right to free m o v e m e n t .  I n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland, advocates  o f the r e s t r i c t i o n o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p argued that the o p i n i o n o f the A d v o c a t e G e n e r a l i n Chen demonstrated the threat that I r e l a n d ' s e x i s t i n g c i t i z e n s h i p l a w p o s e d , b o t h to its o w n s o v e r e i g n t y a n d to the sovereignty o f its E U p a r t n e r s .  188  I suggest that the  i m p l i c a t i o n s o f the Chen case are m o r e c o m p l e x than the r e a c t i o n o f " Y e s " c a m p a i g n  185 186  187  British Nationality Act 1981 (U.K.) 1981, c. 61, s.l. Chen, supra note 184 at para. 47. Chen, supra note 184 at para. 47.  84  suggested. It demonstrates the c o n t i n u i n g p o t e n c y o f the s o v e r e i g n t y o f E U m e m b e r states as m u c h as it challenges it.  By  d e c l a r i n g that free m o v e m e n t p r o v i s i o n s entitle E U c i t i z e n s to reside i n a n y  m e m b e r state, p r o v i d e d that they d o not b e c o m e a n unreasonable b u r d e n u p o n their state o f residence, the E C J appeared to detach the a b i l i t y to c o n t r o l a d m i s s i o n o f nonnationals f r o m the nation-state. T o the extent that Chen represents a c h a l l e n g e to the s o v e r e i g n t y o f E U m e m b e r states, the challenge c o m e s n o t from non-nationals b u t from  the E U itself.  Peter F i t z p a t r i c k argues that despite the p a r t i c u l a r i t y o f its 189  l o c a t i o n , the n a t i o n posits i t s e l f as e m b o d y i n g u n i v e r s a l characteristics.  This  u n i v e r s a l i t y i s a m o n g the p o s i t i v e characteristics attributed to the n a t i o n and i s p l a c e d i n contrast to the particular a n d p a r o c h i a l .  F i t z p a t r i c k suggests that rather than  t r a n s c e n d i n g the n a t i o n , the E U p r o m o t e s i t s e l f as e m b o d y i n g those a t t r i b u t e s .  190  A s chapter t w o e x p l a i n e d , rights e n j o y e d b y E U c i t i z e n s resident i n other m e m b e r states d o n o t c o r r e s p o n d f u l l y to those e n j o y e d b y c i t i z e n s r e s i d i n g i n their o w n state. T y p i c a l l y , the E U c i t i z e n r e s i d i n g i n their o w n state i s p r i v i l e g e d o v e r those another m e m b e r s t a t e . EU  191  from  T h e Chen case h i g h l i g h t s that certain rights associated w i t h  c i t i z e n s h i p are restricted to those outside their h o m e state.  Siobhan M u l l a l l y  notes that the rights i n v o k e d i n Chen w e r e dependent u p o n the c h i l d r e s i d i n g i n  See Carol Coulter, "European finding bolsters case for referendum made by Government" Irish Times (19 May 2004) and "Citizen Chen" Editorial, Irish Independent (19 May 2004). Peter Fitzpatrick, Modernism and the Grounds of Law (Cambridge, 2002) at 132. 188  189  190  Ibid, at 136.  Marco Martiniello, "Citizenship in the European Union" in T. Alexander Alienikoff & Douglas B . Klusmeyer ed., From Migrants to Citizens: Membership in a Changing World (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2000) 324 at 366. 191  85  another m e m b e r state.  S h e suggests that as the D i r e c t i v e s r e l i e d u p o n i n the Chen  case d e p e n d u p o n the c i t i z e n c r o s s i n g a n a t i o n a l border, the d e c i s i o n i n Chen w a s n o i n d i c a t i o n that a n appeal to the E C J w o u l d result i n the d e c i s i o n i n Lobe overturned.  being  192  H o w e v e r , it s h o u l d be noted that the rights b e s t o w e d b y E U c i t i z e n s h i p a n d a f f i r m e d b y the E C J r e m a i n dependent u p o n the p r i o r p o s s e s s i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p o f a m e m b e r state.  A s the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m demonstrates, this i s a n area i n w h i c h the  m e m b e r states retain f u l l c o n t r o l .  F u r t h e r m o r e , the restrictions p l a c e d u p o n the  m e m b e r states' right to c o n t r o l the m o v e m e n t o f non-nationals w i t h i n its borders a p p l y o n l y to c i t i z e n s o f other E U states a n d certain m e m b e r s o f their f a m i l i e s . M e m b e r states f u l l y retain the right to c o n t r o l the m o v e m e n t o f n o n - E U nationals. T h e r e f o r e , w h i l s t the transfer o f authority to exert c o n t r o l o f its borders indicates a loss  o f the s o v e r e i g n t y  b y the m e m b e r  states,  paradoxically,  the process  s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e a f f i r m s the sovereignty o f those states.  3.8 C o n c l u s i o n  I h a v e sought to demonstrate that the issue o f the r e g u l a t i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p has l o n g been l i n k e d to the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's assertion o f n a t i o n a l s o v e r e i g n t y .  T h e right  o f the state to c o n t r o l its borders i s c o n s i d e r e d so central to n a t i o n a l i d e n t i t y that e v e n w h e n the non-national i n v o k e s values that the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland h a s declared superior to n a t i o n a l l a w , he o r she is u n l i k e l y to b e s u c c e s s f u l i n their a p p l i c a t i o n . A s  192  Mullally, supra note 150 at 590. 86  w e have seen, m e m b e r s h i p o f the EU has, to s o m e extent, restricted the a b i l i t y o f its m e m b e r states to exercise f u l l c o n t r o l o v e r their n a t i o n a l borders.  In the f o l l o w i n g  chapter I e x a m i n e the themes o f the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m and c o n s i d e r w h y the EU w a s not p e r c e i v e d as a threat to Irish sovereignty.  87  CHAPTER FOUR  4.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n  T h i s chapter e x p l o r e s the themes o f c o n t i n u i t y , change a n d c o n t r a d i c t i o n i n the Irish Citizenship Referendum.  I e x a m i n e the G o v e r n m e n t ' s j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r s e e k i n g the  a p p r o v a l o f a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendment p r i o r to i n t r o d u c i n g l e g i s l a t i o n . I suggest that the t w o c l a i m s u p o n w h i c h the G o v e r n m e n t ' s r e l i e d w e r e c o n t r a d i c t o r y .  T h e first  assumed that the terms "the n a t i o n " and "the c i t i z e n r y " w e r e interchangeable w h i l e the s e c o n d p l a c e d t h e m i n o p p o s i t i o n to each other.  M y f o c u s then turns to the u n d e r l y i n g m o t i v a t i o n for s e e k i n g to restrict entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p . T h i s , I suggest, w a s also a m b i g u o u s . It sought b o t h to preserve an e x i s t i n g concept o f Irishness and advance a n e w I r i s h E u r o p e a n identity.  The  restriction o f entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w a s therefore s i m u l t a n e o u s l y defensive and transformative.  In the latter part o f this chapter I e x a m i n e the  arguments  a d v a n c e d b y proponents and opponents o f the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m . I argue that it is not p o s s i b l e to see the arguments a d v a n c e d b y the t w o " s i d e s " i n terms o f a progressive/conservative d i c h o t o m y .  Instead, b o t h sides a d v a n c e d a v i s i o n o f the  " g o o d " Irish society b y d r a w i n g u p o n the n o t i o n o f t r a d i t i o n w h i l s t a d v a n c i n g a narrative o f n a t i o n a l progress.  88  4.2 W a s a C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m N e c e s s a r y ?  T h e C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w a s j u s t i f i e d o n the grounds that a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l change was necessary i n order to alter Irish c i t i z e n s h i p law. T h e a s s u m p t i o n that there w a s a need to change Ireland's c i t i z e n s h i p l a w o f course prefigures this. I n support o f the c l a i m that a r e f e r e n d u m was necessary, the G o v e r n m e n t a d v a n c e d t w o arguments.  T h e first c o n c e r n e d the substantive need to restrict I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p .  I n the early  1990s the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland changed from a c o u n t r y o f net e m i g r a t i o n to one o f net immigration.  1 9 3  C h i l d r e n b o r n to those non-nationals b e c a m e I r i s h c i t i z e n s because  o f the jus soli p r i n c i p l e i n S e c t i o n 6(1) o f the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 [1956 Act]}  94  T h e Government  c l a i m e d that p e o p l e w i t h n o p r e v i o u s  c o n n e c t i o n t o Ireland w e r e c h o o s i n g to g i v e b i r t h there i n order t o secure passports f o r their c h i l d r e n .  Irish  It d u b b e d the scenario i n w h i c h non-national w o m e n  a r r i v e d i n the State i n the late stages o f p r e g n a n c y " p a s s p o r t t o u r i s m " and claimedthat, i n effect, Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s were b e i n g " a b u s e d . "  1 9 5  T h e G o v e r n m e n t ' s s e c o n d argument addressed w h y it b e l i e v e d a r e f e r e n d u m o n the issue o f c i t i z e n s h i p w a s necessary.  T h e M i n i s t e r f o r Justice stated that a l t h o u g h  "Statistical Yearbook of Ireland 2004," online, Central Statistics Office <http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/statisticalyearbook/2004/statisticalyearbook200 df> Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (I.) 1956 c.26. "Citizenship Referendum: The Government's Proposals," online: Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform <http://www.iustice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/flJUSO5ZJF5Cen/$File/Govtproposals.pdf>. 193  194  195  89  S e c t i o n 6(1) o f the 1956  Act  w a s s t i l l i n force at that t i m e , the I r i s h P a r l i a m e n t  [Oireachtas] n o longer h a d the p o w e r to legislate o n the issue o f c i t i z e n s h i p .  1 9 6  It w i l l  be r e c a l l e d that a redrafted v e r s i o n o f A r t i c l e 2 stating " i t is the entitlement and birthright o f e v e r y p e r s o n b o r n i n the i s l a n d o f Ireland.. .to be part o f the I r i s h n a t i o n " w a s inserted into the C o n s t i t u t i o n i n 1998. a m e n d i n g the 1956  Act  The Government  stated that s i m p l y  w o u l d be i n e f f e c t i v e because a n y l e g i s l a t i v e r e s t r i c t i o n o n 197  entitlement to I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p w o u l d be i n c o n f l i c t w i t h the A r t i c l e 2.  • •  Writing in  the Sunday Independent, the M i n i s t e r for Justice e x p l a i n e d , "I have c o n s u l t e d w i t h the A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l to see i f w e c o u l d solve this b y b r i n g i n g f o r w a r d a suitable A c t o f P a r l i a m e n t , but h i s f i r m advice s t r o n g l y c o n c u r r e d w i t h m y o w n v i e w : that a n y A c t i no  w o u l d be inconsistent w i t h the C o n s t i t u t i o n as it n o w stands."  In c o n s i d e r i n g the c l a i m s advanced b y the G o v e r n m e n t i n order to j u s t i f y restriction o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p I e m p l o y an a n a l y t i c a l approach d e v e l o p e d b y Jacques D e r r i d a . D o i n g so p r o v i d e s insights into perceptions o f " l e g i t i m a t e " a n d " a b u s i v e " uses o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w .  I suggest that the t w o c l a i m s u p o n w h i c h the  Government's  j u s t i f i c a t i o n for h o l d i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m r e l i e d w e r e contradictory.  The  first e x p l a n a t i o n r e l i e d u p o n the a s s u m p t i o n that terms  "the  "the  n a t i o n " and  c i t i z e n r y " w e r e interchangeable w h i l e the second p l a c e d t h e m i n o p p o s i t i o n to each other.  90  4.3 T h e C o n t r a d i c t i o n o f the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m  T h e G o v e r n m e n t stated that A r t i c l e 2 elevated entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p to a right. T h i s w a s based o n the a s s u m p t i o n that the terms " p a r t o f the Irish n a t i o n " and " I r i s h c i t i z e n " w e r e interchangeable.  However,  the arguments a d v a n c e d b y  the  G o v e r n m e n t i n support o f restricting c i t i z e n s h i p presented t h e m as d i s t i n c t and i n o p p o s i t i o n to each other. W r i t i n g i n the Irish Examiner i n M a y 2 0 0 4 , P r i m e M i n i s t e r [Taoiseach]  Bertie  A h e r n argued that e x i s t i n g Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w  resulted  in  variance b e t w e e n the n a t i o n a l group and those entitled to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p . H e stated, "I b e l i e v e that Irish c i t i z e n s h i p s h o u l d be a v a i l a b l e to c h i l d r e n b o r n i n Ireland i f their parents have a real c o n n e c t i o n to this i s l a n d . " M r . A h e r n c o n t i n u e d , " W h a t a  YES  vote w i l l do is close a l o o p h o l e i n our l a w that has been o p e n to abuse. It w i l l ensure that Irish c i t i z e n s h i p remains o p e n to those w h o have a genuine c o n n e c t i o n to this country."  1 9 9  T h e v e r y use o f language that suggests c i t i z e n s h i p is b e i n g abused  indicates that s o m e t h i n g p r i o r to c i t i z e n s h i p is the measure b y w h i c h the l e g i t i m a c y o f a c l a i m to Irishness is measured.  In Of Grammatology,  200  D e r r i d a argues that the m e t a p h y s i c a l t r a d i t i o n that dominates  W e s t e r n thought c o n c e i v e s o f a h i e r a r c h y o f s i g n i f i e r s i n w h i c h those p e r c e i v e d to be closest i n p r o x i m i t y to a s i g n i f i e d " T r u t h " are p r i v i l e g e d , w h i l e " l e s s e r " s i g n i f i e r s are  198 199  Michael McDowell, "Proposed Citizenship Referendum" Sunday Independent (14 March 2004). Bertie Ahern, "Conception of Citizenship" Irish Examiner (31 May 2004).  91  presented as o p p o s i n g that T r u t h .  D e r r i d a cites Saussure's p r i v i l e g i n g o f the  2 0 1  s p o k e n w o r d o v e r w r i t t e n language as a n e x a m p l e o f this h i e r a r c h y .  Saussure states,  " L a n g u a g e and w r i t i n g are t w o distinct systems o f s i g n s ; the s e c o n d exists f o r the sole purpose o f representing the f i r s t . "  2 0 2  In this e x a m p l e , the s p o k e n w o r d i s c o n c e i v e d  o f as s i g n i f y i n g the T r u t h o f the speaker's experience.  T h e w r i t t e n w o r d i s not  c o n s i d e r e d a n alternative s i g n i f i e r o f the T r u t h but the s i g n i f i e r o f the s p o k e n w o r d . It is relegated to the status o f the s i g n i f i e r o f a s i g n i f i e r .  H o w e v e r , n o t o n l y i s the  w r i t t e n w o r d beneath the s p o k e n w o r d i n the h i e r a r c h y because o f its p e r c e i v e d p r o x i m i t y to the T r u t h o f the speaker's experience, it i s also c o n c e i v e d o f as a negative to the T r u t h . T h i s is because its status as " n o t the s i g n i f i e r " constructs the w r i t t e n w o r d as o p p o s e d to the T r u t h .  T h e w o r d " n o t " i n the a b o v e statement is  central to u n d e r s t a n d i n g D e r r i d a ' s c l a i m that as a s i g n i f i e r ' s p r o x i m i t y f r o m the s i g n i f i e d T r u t h increases it b e c o m e s o p p o s e d to that T r u t h .  I n the e x a m p l e o f the  s p o k e n a n d w r i t t e n w o r d , because the w r i t t e n w o r d does n o t s i g n i f y the T r u t h , s i g n i f y i n g instead the s p o k e n w o r d , it i s o p p o s e d to the T r u t h .  In M r . A h e r n ' s v i e w , the fact that a c h i l d w a s a n Irish c i t i z e n w a s i n s u f f i c i e n t to render it part o f "the Irish n a t i o n . " Rather, the c h i l d ' s status as a n I r i s h c i t i z e n poses a threat to the n a t i o n . N o t o n l y w a s the c h i l d c i t i z e n not part o f the I r i s h n a t i o n , it w a s o p p o s e d to it. T h e d i s t i n c t i o n betw een m e m b e r s o f the n a t i o n and I r i s h c i t i z e n s was made m o r e e x p l i c i t l y b y M r . A h e r n i n a D a i l debate. P r e s s e d b y a m e m b e r o f the o p p o s i t i o n as to w h y the " a b u s e " o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w h a d n o t been anticipated  2 0 0 201  Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology (John Hopkins University Press, 1997). Ibid, at 11.  92  w h e n A r t i c l e 2 w a s drafted i n 1998, M r . A h e r n r e s p o n d e d , "I d i d n o t v i s u a l i s e . . . R u s s i a n s , M o l d o v a n s (sic) a n d U k r a i n i a n s c o m i n g to this c o u n t r y . . . f o r t w o o r three w e e k s to have c h i l d r e n , s i m p l y f o r the benefit o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p . "  T h r o u g h o u t the  C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m , the G o v e r n m e n t argued that p o s s e s s i o n o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p d i d n o t , o f itself, indicate that a person h a d a " r e a l c o n n e c t i o n " to Ireland.  In  a p p r o v i n g the T w e n t y S e v e n t h A m e n d m e n t to the C o n s t i t u t i o n , I r i s h voters endorsed the v i e w that c h i l d r e n o f non-nationals w e r e not m e m b e r s o f the n a t i o n a l g r o u p a n d therefore s h o u l d n o t b e g i v e n the l e g a l rights a c c o r d e d c i t i z e n s . H o w e v e r , i n d o i n g so, they negated the p r o c e d u r a l reason f o r h o l d i n g the r e f e r e n d u m . I n a c c e p t i n g that the Irish n a t i o n a n d the Irish c i t i z e n r y w e r e distinct, Irish voters apparently endorsed the v i e w that a l e g i s l a t i v e change to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s w a s p o s s i b l e a n d a r e f e r e n d u m w a s unnecessary.  By  the G o v e r n m e n t ' s  unnecessary.  o w n p o s i t i v i s t i c l o g i c , the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w a s  T h e assertion that the r e f e r e n d u m w a s h e l d s i m p l y to o v e r c o m e a l e g a l  l o o p h o l e i s contradictory. A literal r e a d i n g o f A r t i c l e 2 reveals n o t h i n g to suggest a right to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p . C o n v e r s e l y , a p u r p o s i v e interpretation i n v o k e s concepts o f an essential Irishness that i s p r i o r to the legal status o f c i t i z e n w h i c h i n turn negates the G o v e r n m e n t ' s assertion that the r e f e r e n d u m w a s h e l d p u r e l y to o v e r c o m e a legal technicality.  Ibid, at 11. Bertie Ahern, Ireland, Dail Debates vol.582 (30 March 2004).  93  4.4 J u d i c i a l Interpretation o f A r t i c l e 2  N o n e o f the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's p o l i t i c a l parties d i s p u t e d the G o v e r n m e n t ' s c l a i m that a r e f e r e n d u m w a s necessary to restrict entitlement t o I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p .  Both  advocates and opponents o f the restriction o f entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p f o c u s e d u p o n whether that restriction was desirable rather than w h e t h e r a r e f e r e n d u m w a s necessary to enact change.  H o w e v e r , the G o v e r n m e n t ' s interpretation o f A r t i c l e 2  differs s u b s t a n t i a l l y f r o m the m a j o r i t y o f the S u p r e m e C o u r t i n Lobe a year b e f o r e the Citizenship Referendum was held.  K e a n e C.J. rejected the suggestion that A r t i c l e 2 created a r i g h t to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p for a l l those b o r n i n I r e l a n d .  204  H e h e l d the c h i l d r e n i n Lobe h a d b e c o m e Irish c i t i z e n s  because o f S e c t i o n 6(1) o f the 1956 Act,  w h i c h at the t i m e stated " E v e r y p e r s o n b o r n  i n Ireland i s an Irish c i t i z e n f r o m b i r t h . "  H a r d i m a n J . d e c l a r e d that A r t i c l e 2  2 0 5  a c k n o w l e d g e d , rather than c o n f e r r e d , r i g h t s .  2 0 6  L i k e the C h i e f Justice, he h e l d that  entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p was s t i l l g o v e r n e d b y S e c t i o n 6(1) o f the 1956 Act?  01  G e o g h e g a n J . agreed w i t h K e a n e C.J. and H a r d i m a n J .  2 0 8  D e n h a m J . d e c l a r e d that A r t i c l e 2 created a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t to I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p . H o w e v e r , h a v i n g a n n o u n c e d that the terms "part o f the n a t i o n " a n d " c i t i z e n " s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d interchangeable, she d r e w a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the t w o concepts  204  205  206  m  208  A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice, [2003] 1 IR 3 at 18 [Lobe]. Ibid. Ibid, at 130. Ibid, at 131. Ibid, at 166.  94  which contradicts that statement. Denham J. attempted to balance "the rights o f the Nation, o f individuals and o f the family u n i t . "  209  The concept o f "balancing"  necessarily involves separating that which you wish to balance; it is impossible to balance something against itself.  This makes a conceptual distinction between the  children as "citizens" and members o f "the Irish nation." The inference o f Denham J's statement is that she did not view the child citizens are part o f the Irish nation. Rather, they were non-nationals who, through their status as citizens, acquired some rights against the state.  Denham J. did not consider the children's well-being as  contributing to the well-being o f the nation.  Instead, their status as citizens was  conceived o f as a threat to the nation.  Murray and McGuinness JJ. stated that Article 2 created a birthright to Irish citizenship. Whilst neither held that Article 2 bestowed Irish citizenship itself, they suggest that it gave constitutional protection to the right found i n Section 6(1) o f the 1956 Act. Murray J. suggested that Article 2 did effect some change to entitlement to Irish citizenship, declaring "Prior to the adoption o f the amendment, citizenship was acquired by l a w . "  210  He considered the impact o f Article 2 to be "declaratory o f the  existing right to citizenship o f a person born in Ireland as provided for by law." In her dissenting judgment, McGuinness states, " G i v e n the changes i n the pattern o f immigration to this country, it is not impossible that, i n the absence o f constitutional  Ibid, at 60. Ibid, at 81.  95  protection, the statutory provision in this jurisdiction might...have been changed...In 211  light of Article 2 such a statutory change cannot now occur."  Fennelly J. interpreted Article 2 as "a qualitative statement of the nature of citizenship."  212  He states that Article 2 should have "real content." However, this  does not necessarily mean that it must create a right to Irish citizenship. At no point does Fennelly J. state that Article 2 creates a right to Irish citizenship. Whilst Fennelly J. suggests that Article 2 extends a right to be part of the Irish nation to citizens and people of Irish ancestry living abroad he does not state that the right to be part of the Irish nation includes the right to be an Irish citizen - either for those born in Ireland or those of Irish ancestry.  Therefore, in Lobe, only two of the seven Supreme Court Justices expressly stated that Article 2 granted Irish citizenship or gave constitutional protection to the right to Irish citizenship through birth. Of those, one made remarks later in her decision which contradict her previous declaration on the meaning of Article 2. Another Justice, Murray J., inferred the right existed. Three of the Supreme Court Justices endorsed the view that Article 2 did not create a right to Irish citizenship whilst the remarks of Fennelly J. were inconclusive. Consequently, the assumption that Article 2 raised the statutory entitlement to Irish citizenship to a constitutional right was far from a certainty.  211 2 , 2  Ibid, at 99. Ibid, at 181.  96  4.5 Conceptions of Irishness  As an amendment to the Constitution of Ireland was not necessary in order to change Irish citizenship laws, it prompts consideration of the function the Citizenship Referendum. I suggest it exercised a purpose of the Constitution recognized in Finn v.Att.  Gen  2U  In Finn, the plaintiff sought a declaration that the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution Bill, 1982 [the Eighth Amendment Bill} was unconstitutional.  The  proposed Eighth Amendment sought to insert a "pro life" clause into the Constitution. In an attempt to ensure that abortion was deemed unconstitutional, the plaintiff argued that the Constitution of Ireland already protected the unborn child's right to life and therefore the Eighth Amendment Bill was superfluous. Barrington J. held that whilst the plaintiff was correct to state that unborn child's right to life was already protected by the Constitution, that did not make the Eighth Amendment Bill unconstitutional. He held that Article 46.1 allows for unlimited amendment to the Constitution of Ireland. He stated "I am satisfied that by Article 46 s.l, the people intended to give themselves the full power to amend any provision of the Constitution and that this power includes a power to clarify or make more explicit anything in the Constitution."  214  The Citizenship Referendum should be seen as a statement about the values officially endorsed by the Irish State in the early 21st century. It was a campaign in which  97  c o n c e p t i o n s o f the g o o d s o c i e ty c o m p e t e d . It w a s not a t w o s i d e d argument i n w h i c h one side advocated a racist p o l i c y a n d the other objected to it. N e i t h e r advocates n o r opponents o f the p r o p o s e d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendment c o m p r i s e d a s i n g l e g r o u p . T o v i e w the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m i n this w a y ignores the d i f f e r i n g v i e w p o i n t s w i t h i n the " Y e s " a n d " N o " c a m p s . It also o v e r l o o k s the c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n the t w o " s i d e s . " B o t h m a i n s t r e a m Y e s a n d N o c a m p a i g n s a s s u m e d a w o r l d d i v i d e d into nations a n d therefore m a d e c l a i m s about i n c l u s i o n a n d e x c l u s i o n . T h e y each presented a v i s i o n o f the " g o o d " Irish society. E a c h v e r s i o n r e l i e d u p o n m y t h s about the n a t i o n a l character o f the Irish.  T h i s i n turn meant that b o t h advocates a n d opponents o f the p r o p o s e d  a m e n d m e n t to the C o n s t i t u t i o n r e l i e d u p o n c r i t e r i a that d i s t i n g u i s h e d the I r i s h f r o m other nations.  A c c o r d i n g to H e g e l , o u r c o n c e p t i o n o f w h o w e are is reliant o n a sense o f " t h e Other."  T o a f f i r m w h o o r w h a t w e are w e m u s t distance o u r s e l v e s f r o m that w h i c h  w e are not. H e g e l ' s starting p o i n t is D e s c a r t e s ' assertion "I t h i n k therefore I a m . " S e l f c o n s c i o u s n e s s is p r o o f f o r Descartes that there is T r u t h .  H e g e l c o n s i d e r s the  p r o b l e m o f d i s t i n g u i s h i n g that w h i c h w e are f r o m that w h i c h w e are not. H e suggests that i n order to d i s c o v e r the " s e l f w e need to d i s t i n g u i s h it f r o m that w h i c h it is not. H e states,  " C o n s c i o u s n e s s . . . h a s a d o u b l e object: one is the i m m e d i a t e object, that o f sense-certainty a n d p e r c e p t i o n , w h i c h h o w e v e r for self consciousness has the  213  214  Finn v. Alt. Gen [1983] I.R. 154 [Finn]. Ibid, at 163.  98  character o f a negative; a n d the s e c o n d , v i z . itself, w h i c h i s the true essence, and i s present o n l y i n the first instance as o p p o s e d to the first object.  In this  sphere, s e l f c o n s c i o u s n e s s e x h i b i t s i t s e l f as the m o v e m e n t i n w h i c h this 215  antithesis i s r e m o v e d , a n d the identity w i t h i t s e l f b e c o m e s e x p l i c i t f o r i t . "  F o r H e g e l , the s e l f is the essence that is left w h e n that w h i c h it i s n o t i s r e m o v e d . In the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n I o u t l i n e the j u s t i f i c a t i o n s g i v e n b y advocates a n d opponents o f the a m e n d m e n t  to the C o n s t i t u t i o n .  B y e x p l o r i n g the a s s u m p t i o n s u n d e r l y i n g  j u s t i f i c a t i o n s g i v e n f o r a n d against restricting entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p I argue that b o t h " s i d e s " r e l i e d u p o n a c o n c e p t i o n o f Irishness that w a s p l a c e d i n contrast to an Other.  W h i l s t the m a i n s t r e a m Y e s a n d N o c a m p a i g n s d i d n o t use o v e r t l y racist  language, the assumptions u n d e r p i n n i n g their arguments r e l i e d u p o n a c u l t u r a l e s s e n t i a l i s m also f o u n d i n racist discourses.  4.6 T h e Y e s C a m p a i g n  T h e m a i n s t r e a m Y e s c a m p a i g n c o m p r i s e d o f the r u l i n g F i a n n a F a i l a n d P r o g r e s s i v e D e m o c r a t parties. T h e largest o p p o s i t i o n party, F i n e G a e l d i d n o t a c t i v e l y c a m p a i g n d u r i n g the r e f e r e n d u m , a l t h o u g h it d i d endorse the r e f e r e n d u m a n d the G o v e r n m e n t ' s plans to restrict entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p .  Georg Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, trans, by A . V . Miller, (Oxford University Press, 1977) at 105 (emphasis his own.)  2 1 5  99  T h e G o v e r n m e n t c o a l i t i o n a d v a n c e d three reasons f o r r e s t r i c t i n g entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p : F i r s t l y , it c l a i m e d that non-nationals f r o m outside the E U w e r e t r a v e l i n g to Ireland to g i v e b i r t h to c h i l d r e n f o r s e l f i s h reasons: to g a i n s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l a n d e c o n o m i c rights w i t h i n Irish s o c i e t y a n d to a right o f residence w i t h i n the E U f o r themselves.  216  S e c o n d l y , the G o v e r n m e n t stated that the n u m b e r o f non-national  w o m e n a r r i v i n g i n Ireland i n order to g i v e b i r t h to c h i l d r e n w a s p l a c i n g a strain o n m a t e r n i t y services i n D u b l i n .  T h e f i n a l argument presented b y the G o v e r n m e n t w a s  that r e m o v i n g entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p b y b i r t h w o u l d r e m o v e the i n c e n t i v e f o r w o m e n to travel to Ireland d u r i n g the late stages o f p r e g n a n c y .  T h i s argument w a s  c o u c h e d i n the language o f h u m a n i t a r i a n i s m . T h e G o v e r n m e n t stressed the danger o f the j o u r n e y to b o t h the m o t h e r a n d h e r c h i l d .  It speculated that the prospect o f  s e c u r i n g Irish, a n d therefore E u r o p e a n , c i t i z e n s h i p f o r their c h i l d w a s p l a c i n g v u l n e r a b l e w o m e n at r i s k . U n d e r pressure f r o m their partners, w h o w i s h e d to secure a right to r e s i d e n c y themselves t h r o u g h their l i n k to a n I r i s h c i t i z e n , pregnant w o m e n w e r e t r a v e l i n g to Ireland.  T h e G o v e r n m e n t therefore presented the r e s t r i c t i o n o f  entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p as a h u m a n e m e a s u r e .  217  H a r r i n g t o n suggests that the o u t c o m e o f the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m changes i n the d o m i n a n t c o n c e p t i o n o f I r i s h n e s s .  218  reflected  H e contends that the d o m i n a n t  n a t i o n a l narrative has c h a n g e d since the f o u n d i n g o f the I r i s h state i n the e a r l y 2 0 century.  D u r i n g the p e r i o d f o l l o w i n g Irish independence f r o m B r i t a i n ,  TH  Ireland  "Citizenship Referendum: The Government's Proposals," supra note 195 at 5. McDowell, supra note 198. John A Harrington, "Citizenship and the Biopolitics of Postnationalist Ireland" (2005) 32(3) J. L . & Soc'y 424 at425. . ' ' 2 1 6  2 1 7  2 1 8  100  d e f i n e d i t s e l f i n o p p o s i t i o n to " B r i t i s h n e s s . " distinction  between  Irishness  and  Indeed, a b e l i e f i n a  Britishness  was  used  to  fundamental  justify  independence and to forge a sense o f national i d e n t i t y f o r the n e w  Ireland's Irish  state.  H a r r i n g t o n suggests that f r o m the m i d - 1 9 5 0 s , but e s p e c i a l l y since the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's entry into w h a t was then the E u r o p e a n E c o n o m i c C o m m u n i t y , the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland has m o v e d a w a y from d e f i n i n g i t s e l f i n o p p o s i t i o n to B r i t a i n and has e m b r a c e d a c o s m o p o l i t a n E u r o p e a n identity. identity,  liberalized  and  cosmopolitan Europe.  2 1 9  It has rejected a fixed m o n o - c u l t u r a l  embraced  the  "multiple  However,  as H a r r i n g t o n  and  shifting  identities"  acknowledges,  of  embracing  a  E u r o p e a n i d e n t i t y does not transcend the need to define o n e s e l f i n o p p o s i t i o n to an Other. D r a w i n g o n the w o r k Peter F i t z p a t r i c k , H a r r i n g t o n indicates that i n e m b r a c i n g a E u r o p e a n identity, Ireland embraces a E u r o c e n t r i c w o r l d v i e w to the e x c l u s i o n o f n o n - E u r o p e a n Others.  H a r r i n g t o n ' s analysis appears to be c o n f i r m e d b y the rhetoric o f the Y e s c a m p a i g n d u r i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m .  T h r o u g h o u t the c a m p a i g n , the  Government  e m p h a s i z e d that the restriction o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w a s necessary i n order f o r Ireland to f u l f i l l its r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as a E u r o p e a n n a t i o n .  R a t h e r than d e f i n i n g Ireland i n  o p p o s i t i o n to B r i t a i n , the Y e s c a m p a i g n presented the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland as a European nation dealing with a European problem.  2 , 9  Ibid, at 422. 101  T h e restriction o f entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w a s presented as a means o f 990  e l i m i n a t i n g a danger to pregnant w o m e n a n d u n b o r n c h i l d r e n . Ireland as a c o m p a s s i o n a t e nation.  •  T h i s constructed  T h e n o n - E u r o p e a n m a l e w a s c h a r a c t e r i z e d as  w i l l i n g to r i s k the w e l l - b e i n g o f his c h i l d o r pregnant partner i n order to increase h i s c l a i m to reside i n E u r o p e .  H i s reasons f o r s e e k i n g entry to E u r o p e , i n order to c l a i m  s o c i a l security benefits f r o m a s oci ety h e h a d n o t c o n t r i b u t e d t o , w e r e e q u a l l y contemptible.  E u r o p e a n Ireland w a s portrayed as b o t h g o o d a n d u n d e r threat f r o m  the n o n - E u r o p e a n .  Ireland contrasted i t s e l f f a v o r a b l y against the n o n - E u r o p e a n  countries o f A f r i c a a n d the f o r m e r Eastern B l o c . constructed i n a n e x t r e m e l y negative  light.  N o n - E u r o p e a n nations w e r e  T h e non-European  e m b o d i e d the  negative, threatening traits that a c i v i l i z e d E u r o p e a n Ireland h a d transcended. Ireland w a s p o r t r a y e d as p r o t e c t i n g the health o f non-national w o m e n a n d their u n b o r n c h i l d r e n w h o w o u l d otherwise b e c o e r c e d into t r a v e l i n g d u r i n g the late stages o f pregnancy.  Ireland w a s also portrayed as a v i c t i m o f the n o n - E u r o p e a n ; the fragile  E u r o p e a n c i v i l i z a t i o n faced threats i n the f o r m o f m a t e r n i t y w a r d s at b u r s t i n g p o i n t , s o c i a l s e c u r i t y abuse and u n c o n t r o l l e d borders.  D e s p i t e the strength o f m u c h o f H a r r i n g t o n ' s argument, I have d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h some o f the inferences h e draws.  O n a theoretical l e v e l I a m c o n c e r n e d that the term  " p o s t n a t i o n a l i s m " is m i s l e a d i n g . H a r r i n g t o n uses p o s t n a t i o n a l i s m , a t e r m he b o r r o w s from Richard Kearney,  2 2 1  to s i g n i f y a p o l i t i c a l i d e n t i t y that has transcended the  p h y s i c a l a n d i d e o l o g i c a l boundaries o f t r a d i t i o n a l Irish n a t i o n a l i s m to embrace a  2 2 0  221  McDowell, supra note 198. Richard Kearney, Postnationalist Ireland (Routledge, 1997).  102  c o s m o p o l i t a n E u r o p e a n identity.  H e exposes the r a c i a l i z e d u n d e r p i n n i n g s o f the  postnationalist project b y the a p p l i c a t i o n o f Peter F i t z p a t r i c k ' s c r i t i q u e o f H e g e l . However,  in  identifying  the  European  identity  as  postnationalist,  Harrington  o v e r l o o k s a k e y p o i n t i n F i t z p a t r i c k ' s theory; E u r o p e a n i d e n t i t y recreates rather than transcends  nationalism.  Fitzpatrick  states,  "the  EU  achieves  this  seeming  transcendence, not b y b e c o m i n g different to its member-nations but, rather,  by  222  c o n t a i n i n g t h e m i n a r e p l i c a t i o n o f the d i m e n s i o n s and d y n a m i c o f the n a t i o n . "  As  s u c h , it is perhaps m o r e accurate to talk o f " I r i s h E u r o p e a n n a t i o n a l i s m . "  T h e s e c o n d c o n c e r n I have is the a s s u m p t i o n that those w h o v o t e d Y e s d i d so because they e m b r a c e d a c o s m o p o l i t a n identity.  A l t h o u g h an o v e r w h e l m i n g m a j o r i t y o f  voters endorsed the p r o p o s e d amendment, there is a shortage o f strong data to indicate w h y they chose to support it. suggested  there  referendum.  223  was  much  voter  O p i n i o n p o l l s taken b e f o r e the r e f e r e n d u m confusion  regarding  the  purpose  of  the  T h e o n l y exit p o l l taken o n the d a y o f the r e f e r e n d u m suggested that ")")A  m a n y supported the r e f e r e n d u m because o f anti-immigrant sentiment.  The Yes/No  nature o f the r e f e r e n d u m g i v e s a false i m p r e s s i o n o f h o m o g e n e i t y a m o n g the sides. T h e m a i n s t r e a m Y e s c a m p a i g n argued that the R e p u b l i c o f I r e l a n d ' s status as a c o s m o p o l i t a n state j u s t i f i e d c h a n g i n g its c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s .  A s s u c h it accords w i t h  H a r r i n g t o n ' s analysis. H o w e v e r , there were also v o i c e s w h o a d v o c a t e d a Y e s vote i n order to reject c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m i n f a v o u r o f a c o n s e r v a t i v e , i n w a r d - l o o k i n g identity. 222  Ibid, at 133.  Carol Coulter, "Confusion over what Yes or No vote means" Irish Times, 2 June 2004. By the Irish Broadcaster RTE, cited in Priya Rajsekar "Can I Look You Confidently in the Eye Again" Irish Times (6 June 2004). 2 2 3  2 2 4  103  W i t h a l a c k o f i n f o r m a t i o n o n w h y Irish voters endorsed the p r o p o s a l , the extent to w h i c h the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m reflected a r e c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I r i s h i d e n t i t y b y the general p u b l i c , and h o w m u c h it remains a n aspiration o f a c o s m o p o l i t a n elite, is unclear.  T h e extent to w h i c h the traditional p r e o c c u p a t i o n s o f I r i s h n a t i o n a l i s m c o n t i n u e to p l a y a role i n the 2 1  s t  century has been e x p l o r e d b y P a t r i c k H a n a f i n .  2 2 5  Harrington's  account suggests an almost linear transition f r o m i r r e d e n t i s m to c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m . H a n a f i n ' s w o r k c o n s i d e r s the c o m p l e x i t y o f s o c i a l change i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland. H e argues that w i t h the establishment o f the Irish State, c i t i z e n s h i p w a s f o u n d e d u p o n R o m a n C a t h o l i c c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the i n d i v i d u a l . It c o n c e i v e d o f the c i t i z e n as " l i v i n g for death. T h e " i d e a l " I r i s h c i t i z e n w a s one w h o w a s prepared t o s a c r i f i c e their o w n l i f e , either l i t e r a l l y o r f i g u r a t i v e l y , f o r the l i f e o f the n a t i o n .  H a n a f i n contends that  t h o u g h Irish s o c i e t y has l i b e r a l i z e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y , the concept o f Irishness as a f o r m o f self-sacrifice continues to assert i t s e l f .  226  H a n a f i n ' s study considers the role o f u n b o r n c h i l d r e n a n d Irish martyrs as v i r t u a l , i d e a l Irish c i t i z e n s . H e e m p l o y s a D e r r i d i a n analysis to argue that the change  from  irredentist Irish n a t i o n a l i s m to l i b e r a l c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m i s n o t s i m p l y a matter o f s o c i a l progress. C o s m o p o l i t a n i s m does not s i m p l y replace t r a d i t i o n a l I r i s h identities. Rather,  the engagement  o f cosmopolitanism  with  Irishness  has a  mutually  Patrick Hanafin, "Valourising the Virtual Citizen: The Sacrificial Grounds of Postcolonial Citizenship in Ireland" 2G03 ( 1 ) Law, Social Justice and Global Development Journal http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/global/03-l/hanafin.html. Ibid, at 3. 2 2 5  226  104  transformative effect u p o n each concept.  F o r e x a m p l e , i n regards to the issue o f  a b o r t i o n , H a n a f i n suggests that l i b e r a l i z a t i o n i n other areas o f I r i s h l i f e p r o v o k e d a response  f r o m conservative  sections o f society that m i g h t o t h e r w i s e  not have  o c c u r r e d . T h o u g h the I r i s h State has never p e r m i t t e d a b o r t i o n , c o n c e r n s that a m o r e general process o f l i b e r a l i z a t i o n w o u l d lead to its l e g a l i z a t i o n p r o m p t e d the f o r m a t i o n o f anti-abortion groups w h o s u c c e s s f u l l y l o b b i e d f o r the i n s e r t i o n o f a " p r o - l i f e " clause into the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland i n 1983.  L i b e r a l i z a t i o n s h o u l d therefore be  seen as a catalyst f o r c h a n g e ; h o w e v e r , its i m p a c t is i n f l u e n c e d b y the c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f the e x i s t i n g society.  It s i m u l t a n e o u s l y challenges the d o m i n a n t s o c i a l order a n d  reasserts traditional values o f that society.  C o n t i n u i n g the theme o f c o n t i n u i t y a n d change, I suggest that i n Lobe a n d the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w e witness the e v o c a t i o n o f a n e w i d e n t i t y t h r o u g h themes familiar  t o Irish  Referendum  society.  centred  Siobhan  Mullally  o n the migrant  woman's  points  o u t that  reproductive  l o n g s t a n d i n g debate i n I r i s h society s u r r o u n d i n g a b o r t i o n .  2 2 7  the Citizenship  role, recalling the  Lobe i n v o k e d the rights  o f the f a m i l y , w h i c h are c o n s i d e r e d so central to Irish i d e n t i t y that A r t i c l e 41 o f the C o n s t i t u t i o n declares the " s u p e r i o r to a l l p o s i t i v e l a w . " Y e t , f o l l o w i n g the embrace o f a broader E u r o p e a n identity, the traditional " I r i s h " a p p r o a c h t o w a r d s these themes w a s s e e m i n g l y abandoned.  T h e l i f e o f the c h i l d a n d role o f the m o t h e r w a s not  celebrated. N o r w e r e the rights o f the f a m i l y c o n s i d e r e d superior to the state's right to c o n t r o l its borders.  M u l l a l l y states, " W h e r e m i g r a n t w o m e n have i n v o k e d the  Siobhan Mullally, "Gendered borders: reproduction, family unity and immigration law in Ireland" in Walsum S (ed., Women and Immigration Law (Cavendish: London, 2005) 4 (forthcoming).  2 2 7  105  c o n s t i t u t i o n a l protections a f f o r d e d to the f a m i l y or the State's duty to ' d e f e n d and v i n d i c a t e ' the right to l i f e o f the ' u n b o r n , ' the State has been q u i c k to appeal to the requirements o f c o m i t y w i t h other nations and its inherent a n d u n i v e r s a l right to control i m m i g r a t i o n . "  2 2 8  Interestingly, the p e r c e i v e d p o w e r relationship w i t h i n i m m i g r a n t f a m i l i e s indicates that the patriarchal n u c l e a r f a m i l y c o n t i n u e d to d o m i n a n t the I r i s h i m a g i n a t i o n .  As  w e have seen, the expectant mothers w e r e d e p i c t e d as v i c t i m s , l a c k i n g a u t o n o m y . T h e y w e r e c o n c e i v e d o f as subservient to their m a l e partners - t r a v e l i n g to Ireland at h i s behest and f o r his benefit.  T h e r e f o r e , e v e n t h o u g h the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m  serves as an i n d i c a t o r o f s o c i a l change i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland, it also r e v i s i t e d and a f f i r m e d themes associated w i t h m o r e t r a d i t i o n a l I r i s h identities.  4.7 O t h e r V o i c e s  A s stated earlier, the c h o i c e o f v o t i n g Y e s or N o i n the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m i m p l i e d a d i c h o t o m y b e t w e e n the v i e w s o f advocates and opponents that d i d not r e a l l y exist. In this section I o u t l i n e some o f the v i e w s expressed b y advocates o f the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendment.  These v o i c e s often endorsed v i e w s that w e r e either  o v e r t l y racist or based u p o n c u l t u r a l stereotypes c o m m o n to racist discourses.  I  b e l i e v e that t h o u g h they w e r e not endorsed b y the G o v e r n m e n t c o a l i t i o n , w i t h o u t e v i d e n c e o f w h a t p r o m p t e d Irish voters to endorse the T w e n t y - S e v e n t h  Amendment  the v i e w s expressed b y those v o i c e s cannot be d i s c o u n t e d .  106  There is a g r o w i n g b o d y o f w o r k suggesting that r a c i s m is a m u c h m i s u n d e r s t o o d concept i n Ireland.  T h o u g h the U N has r e c o g n i z e d that r a c i s m is n o t about s k i n  c o l o u r b u t p re j u d i c e based u p o n h i e r a r c h y , i n f e r i o r i t y a n d s u p e r i o r i t y d r a w n a l o n g ethnic or r a c i a l l i n e s , i n Ireland r a c i s m tends to be d e f i n e d n a r r o w l y . B r y a n F a n n i n g states, " P o p u l a r understandings o f r a c i s m tend to define i t . . . i n terms o f b e l i e f s about b i o l o g i c a l i n f e r i o r i t y , p h y s i c a l attacks a n d v e r b a l a b u s e . "  2 2 9  A m o n g the m y t h s that  c o n t i n u e to have c u r r e n c y is the v i e w that the Irish are n o t racist a n d that the p h e n o m e n o n o f r a c i s m is s o m e t h i n g that Ireland has o n l y e x p e r i e n c e d i n the last fifteen or t w e n t y y e a r s .  230  These v i e w s have been e x p o s e d as b a s e d u p o n a m y t h  about the h o m o g e n e i t y o f Irishness.  F a n n i n g describes that m y t h as " a n i d e o l o g i c a l  construct. It w a s b o r n , i n part, out o f nineteenth-century c l a i m s that there w a s s u c h a t h i n g as the Irish r a c e . "  2 3 1  A Y e s v o t e w a s endorsed b y the u n a s h a m e d l y a n t i - i m m i g r a t i o n " I m m i g r a t i o n C o n t r o l Platform" [ICP].  2 3 2  T h e I C P is a s m a l l Euro-skeptic g r o u p o p p o s e d to a l m o s t a n y  i m m i g r a t i o n to Ireland, i n c l u d i n g f r o m E U states.  It endorsed a Y e s vote i n the  C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m , stating that it w a s a step t o w a r d s reasserting I r e l a n d ' s s o v e r e i g n t y as a state, w h i c h " f o r c e d m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m " w a s e r o d i n g .  2 3 3  The ICP  b e l i e v e d the G o v e r n m e n t proposals to restrict entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p s h o u l d  Bryan Fanning, Racism and Social Change in the Republic of Ireland (Manchester University Press, 2003) at 19. Louise Beirne & Vinodh Jaichand, "Breaking Down Barriers: Tackling Racism in Ireland at the Level of the State and its Institutions," (Amnesty International, 2006) at 33. 2 2 9  2 3 0  Ibid. at 8.  23[  2 3 2 2 3 3  Immigration Control Platform, online: <www.immigrationcontrol.org>. Sean McCarthaigh, "Putting Irish people first" Irish Examiner (27 May 2004).  107  have gone further. It argued f o r the restrictions o n I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p s h o u l d b e a p p l i e d r e t r o s p e c t i v e l y a n d e m p l o y e d the f a m i l i a r c o m p l a i n t that tax-payer's m o n e y w a s b e i n g u s e d to support " b o g u s " a s y l u m seekers.  T h e r e m i g h t b e a t e n d e n c y to d i s m i s s the I C P as a s m a l l , i n s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p . H o w e v e r , m a i n s t r e a m commentators advanced arguments that shared that g r o u p ' s b e l i e f that the Irish w e r e a c u l t u r a l l y h o m o g e n o u s group u n u s e d to i m m i g r a n t s i n n a t i o n a l newspapers d u r i n g the r e f e r e n d u m c a m p a i g n .  W r i t i n g i n the Irish Times,  c o l u m n i s t J o h n W a t e r s d i s m i s s e d the suggestion that the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w o u l d encourage racist tendencies, c l a i m i n g " T h e r e i s v e r y little r a c i s m i n Ireland, and a s t o n i s h i n g l y little c o n s i d e r i n g that w e learned v e r y m u c h o f w h a t w e k n o w about l i f e at the knee o f the most racist p o w e r o n the p l a n e t . "  2 3 5  I n m a k i n g this c l a i m ,  M r . W a t e r s reiterated a v i e w s t i l l w i d e l y h e l d i n Ireland; the I r i s h are not r a c i s t .  236  A r g u i n g that the r e f e r e n d u m w o u l d be h e a v i l y defeated, he c o n f i d e n t l y r e c a l l e d the generous nature o f the Irish. H e stated, "It is less than a generation since I r i s h p e o p l e l i n e d u p at their teachers' desks to give their pennies to the b l a c k b a b i e s . T o ask t h e m now...to snatch passports f r o m the grasp o f the babies o f the b l a c k babies i s a little too m u c h f o r this breed o f w h i t e m a n . "  T h e a i d c a m p a i g n s referred to h a v e since been  d e s c r i b e d as " w e l l m e a n i n g but p a t r o n i z i n g " a n d i d e n t i f i e d as c o n t r i b u t i n g " t o the  See remarks by Pat Talbot in Sean McCathaigh "Putting Irish People First," Irish Examiner, May 27 2004. John Waters, "Citizenship Stroke an Act of Folly" Irish Times (19 April 2004). B i l l Rolston & Michael Shannon, Encounters: How Racism came to Ireland (Beyond the Pale, 2002) at 2. Waters, supra note 235. th  2 3 5  2 3 6  2 3 7  108  deep-seated attitudes o f r a c i a l superiority i n the p s y c h e o f the m a j o r i t y ethnic g r o u p " by  an A m n e s t y  International  report.  u n d o u b t e d l y i n t e n d e d to b e i r o n i c .  238  T h e rhetoric  o f "black  babies" was  H o w e v e r , there i s n o t h i n g to i n d i c a t e that M r .  W a t e r s v i e w e d the A f r i c a n m i s s i o n a r y c a m p a i g n s as a n y t h i n g but p r o o f that r a c i s m w a s n o t a n issue i n Ireland.  H i s argument r e l i e d u p o n stereotypes o f the Irish,  p o r t r a y e d as w e l c o m i n g and generous, w h i c h w e r e contrasted w i t h a p o r t r a y a l o f the B r i t i s h as "the m o s t racist p o w e r o n the p l a n e t . " Rather than d i s p e l c l a i m s that r a c i s m exists i n Ireland, M r . W a t e r s u s e d r a c i a l i z e d assumptions to ( w r o n g l y ) p r e d i c t the o u t c o m e o f the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m .  T h e w i d e s p r e a d b e l i e f that Ireland, w a s u n t i l r e c e n t l y a s o c i e t y free f r o m r a c i s m i t s e l f w a s p r o m o t e d b y Irish n a t i o n a l i s m , w h i c h d e f i n e d i t s e l f as " g o o d " i n o p p o s i t i o n to " b a d " B r i t a i n and B r i t i s h n e s s . contrasts the character  I n h i s h i s t o r y o f twentieth century Ireland, J . J . L e e  o f Irish n a t i o n a l i s m w i t h that o f U l s t e r U n i o n i s m .  Of  U n i o n i s t s he states, " R a c e a n d r e l i g i o n w e r e i n e x t r i c a b l y i n t e r t w i n e d i n U l s t e r u n i o n i s t consciousness.  U n i o n i s t s c o u l d not r e l y o n the c r i t e r i o n o f c o l o u r , f o r the  C a t h o l i c s l a c k e d the i m a g i n a t i o n to g o off-white, n o r o n the c r i t e r i o n o f language, f o r the C a t h o l i c s h a d u n s p o r t i n g l y abandoned their o w n . It w a s therefore i m p e r a t i v e to sustain Protestantism as the s y m b o l o f r a c i a l s u p e r i o r i t y . "  239  I n contrast, L e e states  " r a c i s m w a s far less central to the i d e o l o g y o f Irish n a t i o n a l i s m than to that o f U l s t e r unionism."  2 4 0  ' Beirne & Jaichand, supra note 230 at 33. ' J.J. Lee, Ireland 1912-1985: Politics and Society (Cambridge University Press, 1989) at 4.  109  A v a r i a t i o n o n the c l a i m that Ireland is not racist i s the argument that r a c i s m is a n e w phenomenon in Ireland. narrative.  241  R o l s t o n a n d S h a n n o n i d e n t i f y t w o v e r s i o n s o f this  T h e first they t e r m a n " i m m i g r a n t b l a m i n g " narrative, i n w h i c h the  emergence o f r a c i s m is attributed to the a r r i v a l o f the i m m i g r a n t rather than the actions o f the host society. T h e s e c o n d i s a s l i g h t l y m o r e l i b e r a l account i n w h i c h the actions o f the host society are attributed to the " n a t u r a l teething p r o b l e m s " o f a h o m o g e n o u s s o c i e t y e n c o u n t e r i n g different cultures f o r the first t i m e .  T h e s e c o n d o f these t w o narratives w a s endorsed i n a n e d i t o r i a l entitled " I t ' s R i g h t to V o t e Y e s , " b y the Irish I n d e p e n d e n t .  242  A m o n g the reasons it gave f o r t a k i n g this  v i e w w a s that the jus soli p r i n c i p l e w a s unsuited to a c o u n t r y s u c h as Ireland. T h e paper stated that m o s t countries that retained birthright c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s  were  " i m m i g r a n t c o u n t r i e s . " I n d o i n g so it shared the v i e w taken b y the I C P that Ireland w a s not a l a n d o f i m m i g r a n t s . A s i d e f r o m the m i s l e a d i n g nature o f the account o f the d e v e l o p m e n t o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w  2 4 3  the Irish Examiner's e d i t o r i a l served to re-  enforce a c o m m o n l y h e l d m y t h about the h o m o g e n e i t y o f the Irish.  B r y a n F a n n i n g describes the m y t h as thus, " I r e l a n d has a l w a y s b e e n a h o m o g e n o u s society and that the Irish identity is s o m e t h i n g that r e m a i n s fixed a n d u n c h a n g e d . "  2 4 4  T h e concept o f Irish i d e n t i t y as fixed and u n c h a n g i n g i s perhaps best illustrated b y the  240  Ibid, at 10.  Rolston & Shannon, supra note 236 at 2. "It's right to vote Yes," Editorial, Irish Independent (19 May 2004). The division of citizenship regimes into jus soli and jus sanguinis regimes is largely dependent upon whether they derive from a common law or civil law tradition, not their status as "old world" or "new world" nations. Fanning, supra note 229 at 3. 2 4 1  2 4 2  2 4 3  2 4 4  110  m a n y references f o u n d to G a e l i c Ireland f o u n d i n Irish nationalist literature.  In  P a d r a i c Pearse's " M i s e E i r e " ["I a m I r e l a n d " ] , f o r e x a m p l e , the i s l a n d o f Ireland is portrayed as the c o m m o n mother o f G a e l i c a n d m o d e r n d a y I r e l a n d .  245  Closely  related to this v i e w is a n a s s u m p t i o n that it is b o t h natural a n d i n e v i t a b l e that the i s l a n d o f Ireland s h o u l d a single autonomous p o l i t i c a l unit.  L e e criticizes Ulster  U n i o n i s t s f o r s e e k i n g to establish the p a r t i t i o n o f Ireland, stating " T h e n i n e c o u n t y p r o v i n c e o f U l s t e r w a s neither a n administrative n o r a p o l i t i c a l u n i t y . "  2 4 6  In contrast,  for L e e , the l o g i c o f Irish N a t i o n a l i s m s e e k i n g to establish a s o v e r e i g n independent Ireland w h e r e o n e h a d not existed before is so s e l f evident as to g o u n q u e s t i o n e d .  T h e c o n c e p t i o n o f the Irish as a h o m o g e n o u s group is b e g i n n i n g to b e questioned. D . G . B o y c e points out i n h i s history o f Irish n a t i o n a l i s m , that it is " b a d h i s t o r y " to regard the G a e l s as " t h e Irish i n the i n f a n c y o f their r a c e . "  H e argues that the  2 4 7  i m p o r t a n c e o f the G a e l s to m o d e r n Irish identity c o m e s f r o m their s y m b o l i c status g i v e n to t h e m i n the m o r e recent past.  B o y c e states, "It m a y w e l l be that the tacit  a s s u m p t i o n b y m a n y nationalist historians that this last C e l t i c i n v a s i o n w a s ' g o o d , ' and a l l post-Celtic i n c u r s i o n s and i n v a s i o n s ' b a d ' w a s because the later invaders w e r e unfortunate e n o u g h to have their m i s d e e d s c h r o n i c l e d , w h i l e the G a e l s w e r e able to c o m p o s e their o w n , m o r e flattering v e r s i o n o f their h i s t o r y . "  2 4 8  A c c o u n t s o f the  o r i g i n o f the Irish n a t i o n , p r o v i d e d i n p o e m s s u c h as " M i s e E i r e , " served to m a r k the Irish as a distinct group w i t h n a t i o n a l characteristics.  S u c h narratives g i v e a n a r r o w  Padraic Pearse, The Collected Works of Padraic Pearse: Plays, Stories, Poems (Manunsel and Co. Ltd, 1917) at 40. Lee, supra note 247 at 9. D.George Boyce, Nationalism in Ireland (Routledge, 1995) at 25.  2 4 5  2 4 6  2 4 7  Ill  and e x c l u s i o n a r y account o f Irishness. T h e y p l a y e d a k e y r o l e i n j u s t i f y i n g Ireland's independence at w h a t is c o n s i d e r e d b y H o b s b a w m the high-point o f n a t i o n a l i s m b y f r a m i n g Ireland's p o p u l a t i o n as distinct, and necessarily h o m o g e n o u s . Examiner's  T h e Irish  2 4 9  e d i t o r i a l endorsed a c o n c e p t i o n o f Irishness w h i c h has little scope to  a l l o w for the c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f the N o r m a n s , A n g l o - I r i s h , Irish-Italians,  or  Irish  T r a v e l l e r s , to n a m e a f e w groups.  T h e argument that the I r i s h n a t i o n is a construct and not a g i v e n n o w f i n d s i t s e l f " i n tune w i t h the w i d e r i n t e l l e c t u a l currents o f the a g e . " Ireland has recently m o v e d a w a y c o s m o p o l i t a n E u r o p e a n identity.  from  2 5 0  J o h n H a r r i n g t o n argues that  irredentist n a t i o n a l i s m a n d e m b r a c e d  a  A s s u c h , essentialist n a t i o n a l i s m is n o w b e i n g  questioned. T h i s is borne out b y the reasons g i v e n b y the m a i n s t r e a m Y e s c a m p a i g n d u r i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m .  There are m a n y p r o b l e m s w i t h the E u r o c e n t r i c  v i s i o n f o r Ireland set out b y the current G o v e r n m e n t , but it d i d not advocate  a  restriction o f entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p o n the grounds that o n l y those o f G a e l i c decent s h o u l d be entitled to it. H o w e v e r , that m a i n s t r e a m I r i s h newspapers p u b l i s h e d articles s u c h as the Examiner's  e d i t o r i a l or J o h n W a t e r s ' article w i t h o u t c o m m e n t  b e i n g passed indicates that the v i e w that there is a " t r u e " Irishness w h i c h is W h i t e , C e l t i c , C a t h o l i c and dates b a c k to m y t h i c a l times s t i l l gains w i d e  acceptance  throughout the c o u n t r y .  E.J. Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality (Cambridge, 1989). R.V. Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the Nation, (Arnold, 2003) at 1.  2 5 0  112  4.8 T h e N o C a m p a i g n  A N o vote w a s endorsed b y L a b o u r , I r e l a n d ' s t h i r d largest p o l i t i c a l party, a n d t w o smaller  parties:  Sinn  Fein  a p p r o x i m a t e l y 45 g r o u p s Liberties,  2 5 2  2 5 1  a n d the Greens.  It  also  attracted  support  from  w h i c h i n c l u d e d groups s u c h as the I r i s h C o u n c i l f o r C i v i l  the M e t h o d i s t C h u r c h i n I r e l a n d ,  253  as w e l l as a n u m b e r o f a n u m b e r o f  o r g a n i z a t i o n s f o r m e d s p e c i f i c a l l y to oppose the r e f e r e n d u m , s u c h as " L a w y e r s against the A m e n d m e n t . "  2 5 4  B e c a u s e o f the large n u m b e r o f s m a l l groups o p p o s i n g the  r e f e r e n d u m it is not p o s s i b l e to outline i n detail the reasons g i v e n b y each. Instead I w i l l l i m i t m y analysis to the c l a i m that the G o v e r n m e n t ' s p r o p o s a l s w e r e racist.  A n u m b e r o f opponents o f the p r o p o s e d amendment raised c o n c e r n s that the p l a n to restrict entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w a s racist o r c o u l d encourage those w i t h racist tendencies.  In d o i n g so they f o c u s e d u p o n the G o v e r n m e n t ' s  plans to restrict  entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , s h o u l d the p r o p o s e d a m e n d m e n t be passed, rather than the effect o f the r e f e r e n d u m itself.  G r e e n P a r t y leader, T r e v o r Sargent, stated  " T h i s p l a y s into the hands o f those w h o are t r y i n g to h e i g h t e n t e n s i o n a n d p l a y the race card i n the run-up to E u r o p e a n and l o c a l e l e c t i o n s . "  2 5 5  S i n n F e i n c l a i m e d that  the G o v e r n m e n t w a s s e e k i n g a c i t i z e n s h i p r e g i m e based o n " b l o o d t i e s " ( s e e m i n g l y o v e r l o o k i n g that Irish c i t i z e n s h i p l a w w a s already, i n part, based u p o n s u c h a  Grainne Cunningham & Helen Bruce, "Alliance of Voices United in Calling for No Vote" Irish Independent (9 June 2004). Aisling Reidy, "Conception of Citizenship" Irish Examiner (31 May 2004). Patsy McGarry, "Methodists Say Vote is 111-Judged" Irish Times, (26 May2004). Michael O'Farrell, "Citizenship Referendum will Target Innocent Children i f Passed, warn Lawyers" Irish Examiner (20 May 2004). Senan Molony, "Green Party Attacks the 'Opportunism' of Coalition's Citizenship Vote" Irish Independent, (17 May 2004). 251  2 5 2  2 5 3  2 5 4  2 5 5  113  concept.)  F o r the most part, the L a b o u r P a r t y restricted its c r i t i c i s m to the m a n n e r  i n w h i c h the r e f e r e n d u m w a s h e l d , stating that the G o v e r n m e n t h a d f a i l e d to f o l l o w the p r o t o c o l f o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendments b y p r o p e r l y c o n s u l t i n g a l l parties elected to the D a i l a n d h a d f a i l e d to p r o v i d e a n y c o m p e l l i n g e v i d e n c e f o r a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l change.  257  H o w e v e r , Pat R a b b i t t e , leader o f the L a b o u r P a r t y also suggested at o n e  p o i n t that h o l d i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w a s a c y n i c a l attempt b y the r u l i n g c o a l i t i o n to m a k e gains i n elections, h e l d o n the same d a y , b y e x p l o i t i n g p u b l i c concerns about i m m i g r a t i o n .  2 5 8  T h e argument that the p r o p o s e d T w e n t y - S e v e n t h A m e n d m e n t w a s racist o v e r l o o k e d the r a c i a l i z e d character o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p p r i o r to the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m .  A  r a c i a l i z e d c o n c e p t i o n o f Irishness already p l a y e d i n d e f i n i n g the n a t i o n a l group.  In  the w a k e o f independence, national identity i n the Irish F r e e State w a s d o m i n a t e d b y an a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h C a t h o l i c i s m  2 5 9  and the m y t h o f a G a e l i c m o n o - c u l t u r a l n a t i o n .  2 6 0  A s a consequence, alternative narratives o f the I r i s h experience w e r e suppressed; the l e g i t i m a c y o f T r a v e l l e r s ' culture w a s d e n i e d ; the role o f Protestantism i n s h a p i n g Irish c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y w a s d o w n p l a y e d ; w o m e n w e r e relegated to the private  sphere.  261  D u r i n g this p e r i o d , the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a n a t i o n a l i d e n t i t y i n o p p o s i t i o n to B r i t a i n  Aengus O Snodaigh, in Brian Dowling, "Tanaiste Rejects Racist Charge over Poll" Irish Independent (22 May 2004). Pat Rabbitte, Ireland, Dail Debates, vol. 582 (7 April 2004). 2 5 7  258  Ibid.  Beirne & Jaichand, supra note 230 at 33 Fanning, supra note 229 at 10. Breda Gray & Louise Ryan, "The Politics of Irish Identity and the Interconnections between Feminism, Nationhood, and Colonialism" in Ruth Roach Pierson ed., Nation, Empire and Colony: Historicizing Gender and Race (Indian University Press, 1998) 121 at 126-28. 2 5 9  2 6 0  2 6 1  114  p o s i t e d Ireland a n d the Irish as g o o d against negative d e p i c t i o n s o f B r i t a i n a n d Britishness.  T h o s e a d v o c a t i n g a N o vote w e r e as reliant o n a c o n c e p t i o n o f the g o o d society, w i t h borders, as proponents o f a Y e s vote. A s s u c h , they also r e q u i r e d a b a d s o c i e t y f r o m w h i c h to O t h e r themselves. I n some cases B r i t a i n , the O t h e r h i s t o r i c a l l y u s e d b y Irish n a t i o n a l i s m , w a s used.  O n e N o c a m p a i g n s l o g a n c o m p a r e d the p r o p o s a l to restrict  entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w i t h the r a c i s m e x p e r i e n c e d b y I r i s h i m m i g r a n t s i n B r i t a i n i n the 1950s a n d 1960s. Irish?'"  2 6 2  It read, " R e m e m b e r ' N o B l a c k s , N o D o g s , N o  In this c o n c e p t i o n o f the g o o d society, Irishness - the v i c t i m o f  c o l o n i a l i s m rather than its perpetrator - w a s contrasted f a v o u r a b l y w i t h B r i t a i n .  In h i s study o f Ireland's interaction w i t h c o l o n i a l i s m , Stephen H o w e suggests that the rhetoric o f Irish a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s m is o f recent pedigree.  H o w e argues that t h o u g h  some p r o m i n e n t advocates o f Irish independence, s u c h as D a n i e l O ' C o n n e l l , made c o m m o n cause w i t h oppressed peoples i n the B r i t i s h C o l o n i e s , Irish n a t i o n a l i s m ' s relationship the c o l o n i a l era i s , o n the w h o l e , a m b i v a l e n t .  H e states that m o s t early  Irish nationalists s i m p l y d i d not i d e n t i f y their cause w i t h n o n - E u r o p e a n struggles. S o m e , t h o u g h n o t a m a j o r i t y , o f Irish nationalists w e n t further, a r g u i n g f o r Irish independence o n grounds o f Ireland's d i s s i m i l a r i t y to B r i t a i n ' s other c o l o n i e s rather than m a k i n g c o m m o n cause w i t h them.  F o r J o h n M i t c h e l , it w a s the s u p p o s e d  b i o l o g i c a l s u p e r i o r i t y o f the w h i t e Irish that made Ireland's  2 6 2  2 6 3  status as a c o l o n y  Socialist Workers Party, online: http://www.swp.ie/html/home.htm. Stephen Howe, Ireland and Empire, (Oxford University Press, 2000) at 43.  115  unbearable because it relegated a " W h i t e " n a t i o n to the status o f "the N e g r o . " H o w e ' s is one o f a n u m b e r o f recent studies that suggest that the d e n i a l o f r a c i s m i n 265  Ireland w a s i t s e l f based u p o n a n i n h e r e n t l y racist d e p i c t i o n o f the E n g l i s h Other. Irish  nationalist accounts  o f Ireland's  relationship w i t h B r i t a i n  o v e r l o o k e d the  b i o l o g i c a l a n d c u l t u r a l e s s e n t i a l i s m u p o n w h i c h the d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the Irish and B r i t i s h w a s based. T h r o u g h a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f D a i l debates o f the t i m e , M u l l a l l y demonstrates that despite the i n c l u s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f Irish c i t i z e n s h i p set out i n the 1956 Act it p u r s u e d a r a c i a l i z e d c o n c e p t i o n b o t h o f the Irish and the O t h e r .  2 6 6  S h e d r a w s attention to the  remarks o f D e p u t y A n t h o n y E s m o n d e , w h o raised concerns that the 1956 Act w o u l d entitle p e o p l e " w h o m i g h t not be exactly satisfactory, f r o m the standpoint o f Irish culture and Irish thought, or to the o v e r w h e l m i n g m a j o r i t y o f the Irish p e o p l e " to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p . M o r e o v e r , despite the s e e m i n g l y i n c l u s i v e nature o f the 1956 Act, it w a s i n t r o d u c e d i n pursuit o f a state-building project that w a s h i g h l y r a c i a l i z e d . T h e 1956 Act reflects a c o n c e p t i o n o f the Irish as a h o m o g e n o u s , c u l t u r a l l y distinct n a t i o n l i n k e d b y b l o o d and their relationship w i t h the i s l a n d o f Ireland.  It a i m e d to reduce,  as m u c h as p o s s i b l e , the d i s t i n c t i o n between those b o r n i n the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland and those b o r n i n N o r t h e r n Ireland i n furtherance o f the b e l i e f that the Irish are a distinct c u l t u r a l unit. T h e v i e w s o f James Everett, M i n i s t e r f o r Justice at the t i m e , illustrate h o w the a i m o f the 1956 Act w a s to g i v e l e g a l r e c o g n i t i o n to those p e r c e i v e d to b e  Ibid, at 44. See generally Beirne & Jaichand, supra note 230 and Fanning, supra note 229. Siobhan Mullally, "Citizenship and Family Life in Ireland: Asking the question 'Who Belongs?'" (2005) 25(3) Legal Studies 578 at 581. 264  2 6 5 2 6 6  116  c u l t u r a l l y Irish. T h e M i n i s t e r i s c a r e f u l to note i n the course o f e x p l a i n i n g the i m p a c t o f the l e g i s l a t i o n that since the l e g i s l a t i o n w o u l d require a p e r s o n resident i n N o r t h e r n Ireland to " d e c l a r e " their Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , the 1956 Act w o u l d not b e s t o w c i t i z e n s h i p u p o n those " o f entirely a l i e n parentage w i t h o u t a n y r a c i a l t i e s . "  2 6 7  T h e use o f an i n c l u s i v e jus soli p r i n c i p l e i n the 1956 Act w a s j u s t i f i e d b y reference to a n a t i o n a l narrative that w a s not o p p o s e d to a r a c i a l i z e d c o n c e p t i o n o f the w o r l d , b u t rather  dependent  upon  it.  By  entitling those  born  in Northern  Ireland  to  r e t r o s p e c t i v e l y c l a i m Irish c i t i z e n s h i p f r o m b i r t h the 1956 Act a f f i r m e d the nationalist narrative that Ireland w a s c u l t u r a l l y h o m o g e n o u s , regardless o f p a r t i t i o n .  4 . 9 L e g i s l a t i v e C h a n g e s F o l l o w i n g the R e f e r e n d u m  H a v i n g c o n s i d e r e d the assumptions u n d e r p i n n i n g earlier c i t i z e n s h i p l e g i s l a t i o n a n d the Irish C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m , I n o w c o n s i d e r the changes enacted b y the Irish  Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004 [the 2004 Act], a m e n d e d S e c t i o n 6 o f the  1956 Act  26S  Section 4 o f the 2004 Act  S e c t i o n 6 A n o w reads, " A p e r s o n b o r n i n the  i s l a n d o f Ireland s h a l l not be entitled to b e a n Irish c i t i z e n unless a parent o f that p e r s o n has, d u r i n g the p e r i o d o f 4 years i m m e d i a t e l y p r e c e d i n g the p e r s o n ' s birth, b e e n resident i n the i s l a n d o f Ireland f o r a p e r i o d o f not less than 3 years o r periods the aggregate o f w h i c h i s not less than 3 y e a r s . "  2 6 9  W h i l s t s e c t i o n 6 A restricts the  entitlement o f b o t h E u r o p e a n s and non-Europeans to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , it ensures that  2 6 7  James Everett, Ireland, Dail Debates, vol. 154 (29 February 1956.)  268  Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004 (I.) 2004, s.4 [the 2004 Act].  117  the c h i l d r e n o f non-Europeans are less l i k e l y to acquire I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p . T h e right to free  m o v e m e n t o f persons i s guaranteed to E U c i t i z e n s b y A r t i c l e 18 E C and 270  D i r e c t i v e 90/364. T h e case o f Chen v Secretary of State for the Home Department a f f i r m e d that the right to reside i n another M e m b e r State i s dependent u p o n E U citizens  having  adequate  resources  t o support themselves.  Therefore,  while  E u r o p e a n s have a prima facie right to enter and r e m a i n i n I r e l a n d , non-Europeans face the prospect o f b e i n g d e n i e d the necessary d o c u m e n t a t i o n to stay i n the state l o n g e n o u g h for their c h i l d r e n to be b o r n Irish citizens.  T h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a c h i l d b o r n to n o n - E u r o p e a n parents to b e c o m e an I r i s h c i t i z e n is further d i m i n i s h e d b y subsections 6 A ( 4 ) and (5).  These d r a w an e x p l i c i t d i s t i n c t i o n  b e t w e e n the criteria that E u r o p e a n and n o n - E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n s m u s t f u l f i l l i n order for their c h i l d r e n to be entitled to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , s h o u l d they be b o r n i n Ireland. F o r the c h i l d o f a n o n - E u r o p e a n to r e c e i v e Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , its parents m u s t have b e e n l e g a l l y resident i n either the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland or N o r t h e r n Ireland f o r three out o f the p r e c e d i n g four years.  F u r t h e r m o r e , t i m e spent i n Ireland under a study p e r m i t  does not count towards that r e q u i r e m e n t .  271  There is n o c o r r e s p o n d i n g requirement o f  l e g a l i t y o f residence f o r the E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n parents o f a c h i l d b o r n i n Ireland. W h i l s t i t c o u l d be argued that s u c h a requirement i s u n n e c e s s a r y i n the case o f a E u r o p e a n parent because A r t i c l e 18 E C and D i r e c t i v e 90/364 g i v e E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n s the right to l i v e and w o r k i n any m e m b e r state, it m u s t be r e m e m b e r e d that that right  269  Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (I.) 1956, s.6A [the 1956 Act]  270  Chen v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Case C-200/02 [E.C.J.]. Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1956, s. 6A(4)(b) as amended by the Irish Nationality and  271  Citizenship Act, 2004. 118  is not absolute. T h e Chen case h e l d that the right to reside i n another m e m b e r state i s dependent u p o n E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n s h a v i n g adequate resources to support themselves. T h e y m a y be r e q u i r e d to leave another M e m b e r State i f they b e c o m e an unreasonable b u r d e n u p o n the s o c i a l services o f that country.  U n d e r the n e w I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p  r e g i m e , it i s c o n c e i v a b l e that a c h i l d b o r n to a E u r o p e a n c i t i z e n w h o has f a i l e d to c o m p l y w i t h an order to leave Ireland w o u l d receive Irish c i t i z e n s h i p w h i l e a c h i l d b o r n to a n o n - E u r o p e a n , l e g a l l y resident for the purposes o f e d u c a t i o n , w o u l d not.  "Europeanness,"  as p r e s c r i b e d b y the 2004 Act, i s n o t c o n f i n e d to c i t i z e n s o f  countries that are m e m b e r s o f the E u r o p e a n U n i o n . countries  that  Switzerland.  2 7 2  are m e m b e r s  o f the E u r o p e a n  It also i n c l u d e s c i t i z e n s o f  Economic  Area  (EEA)  and  F u r t h e r m o r e , the jus sanguinis p r i n c i p l e f o u n d i n the o r i g i n a l v e r s i o n  o f the 1956 Act w a s not substantially altered b y the 2004 Act.  C o l l e c t i v e l y , the  amendments to the 1956 Act made b y the 2004 Act amount to a p r i v i l e g i n g o f c i t i z e n s o f the h i s t o r i c " c o m i t y o f n a t i o n s " to the e x c l u s i o n o f those w h o f a l l outside that c o l l e c t i v e o f nations.  4.10 C o n c l u s i o n  In this chapter I h a v e sought to e x p l o r e the themes o f c o n t i n u i t y , change a n d c o n t r a d i c t i o n i n the Irish C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m . I argued that the j u s t i f i c a t i o n s for g i v e n f o r h o l d i n g a r e f e r e n d u m o n the issue o f c i t i z e n s h i p w e r e contradictory.  2 7 2  The 2004 Act, supra note 268, s. 2.  119  T h e r e f o r e the r e f e r e n d u m w a s not necessary i n a p o s i t i v i s t i c sense. c o n s i d e r e d the p u rp o s e served.  I therefore  I argued it is best seen as a f o r u m . i n w h i c h  c o n c e p t i o n s o f the g o o d society c o m p e t e d . H o w e v e r , there are s i m i l a r i t i e s as w e l l as differences i n the c o n c e p t i o n s o f the g o o d society.  W h i l s t those s u p p o r t i n g the  C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m advocated restricting entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p and those o p p o s e d to it advocated k e e p i n g the l a w as it w a s , b o t h agreed that there s h o u l d be a border.  M o r e o v e r , the m o t i v a t i o n b e h i n d r e s t r i c t i n g entitlement to  c i t i z e n s h i p also served a d u a l purpose.  Irish  It sought b o t h to preserve a t r a d i t i o n a l  concept o f Irishness and advance a v i s i o n o f the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland as a E u r o p e a n nation.  T h e subsequent l e g i s l a t i o n i n t r o d u c e d b y the 2 0 0 4 A c t w a s geared towards  restricting non-Europeans rather than s i m p l y those p e r c e i v e d to be non-Irish.  This  indicates that the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland i n c r e a s i n g l y sees i t s e l f as a E u r o p e a n n a t i o n . H o w e v e r , this does not i m p l y that it has or w i l l a b a n d o n " I r i s h n e s s " i n f a v o u r o f "Europeanness."  Rather, the values p e r c e i v e d to be e m b o d i e d b y E u r o p e a n n e s s are  i n c o r p o r a t e d as part o f the Irish n a t i o n a l identity.  120  CHAPTER FIVE  In this thesis I have sought to locate the recent changes to the r e g u l a t i o n o f I r i s h C i t i z e n s h i p i n a g l o b a l a n d h i s t o r i c a l context. I have argued that w h i l s t the changes  enacted b y A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice [Lobe]  and the Irish Nationality and  273  Citizenship Act 2004 [the 2004 Act]  214  have m a d e the r e g u l a t i o n o f I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p  m o r e restrictive, the story o f the r e g u l a t i o n o f Irish identities i s , o n the w h o l e , a m o r e d y n a m i c affair.  C h a p t e r t w o p r o v i d e d a theoretical f r a m e w o r k f o r e x a m i n i n g the p e r c e i v e d need to restrict entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p and introduce tighter b o r d e r c o n t r o l s . I argued that c i t i z e n s h i p i s a c o n c e p t u a l l y uncertain t e r m that o v e r l a p s w i t h other, e q u a l l y a m b i g u o u s concepts s u c h as s o v e r e i g n t y a n d n a t i o n .  E a c h i s best seen as a  d e s c r i p t i v e t e r m f o r a series o f l o o s e l y related themes that f a l l a n d rise i n p r o m i n e n c e over  time.  Though  the concepts  o f citizenship,  sovereignty  a n d n a t i o n are  d e m o n s t r a b l y u n c e r t a i n , a p r e v a i l i n g b e l i e f i n the tenets o f m o d e r n i t y - rationality, o b j e c t i v i t y and the rejection o f a m b i g u i t y - demands that they c a n a n d m u s t be neatly defined.  The dynamic  nature  o f the themes  e n c o m p a s s e d b y these  concepts  p e r i o d i c a l l y exposes the tensions that are a l w a y s present i n their d e f i n i t i o n .  A.O.&D.L. v. Minister for Justice, [2003] 1 IR 3 [Lobe]. Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004 (I.) 2004 [the 2004 Act].  121  In chapter three I argued that the r e g u l a t i o n o f I r i s h c i t i z e n s h i p has a l w a y s  been  c l o s e l y l i n k e d b o t h to the Irish state's assertion o f sovereignty a n d a sense o f Irish n a t i o n a l identity.  B y reference to D a i l debates o n earlier l e g i s l a t i o n , I s h o w e d that  concerns about the state's a b i l i t y to assert sovereignty, a n d the p e r c e i v e d d i s p a r i t y b et w e e n the Irish n a t i o n and those entitled to c l a i m Irish c i t i z e n s h i p , are not m e r e l y a recent p h e n o m e n o n . T h e R e p u b l i c o f Ireland has l o n g u s e d its c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s as an e x p r e s s i o n o f its sovereignty.  M y e x a m i n a t i o n o f case l a w also reveals the o v e r -  r i d i n g i m p o r t a n c e a s c r i b e d to the right o f the state to assert i t s e l f as s o v e r e i g n b y the Irish courts. I suggested that the creation o f E u r o p e a n U n i o n [ E U ] c i t i z e n s h i p has to s o m e extent c h a l l e n g e d the R e p u b l i c o f Ireland's a b i l i t y to exercise c o n t r o l o v e r its borders.  H o w e v e r , b y m a k i n g E U c i t i z e n s h i p dependent u p o n n a t i o n a l c i t i z e n s h i p ,  the E U s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e a f f i r m s the s o v e r e i g n t y o f its m e m b e r states.  Chapter  f o u r considers the  contradictions i n the j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r h o l d i n g  the  C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m . I suggest it was not strictly necessary i n a p o s i t i v i s t i c l e g a l sense. Instead, I argue that the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m is best seen as an e x p r e s s i o n o f the d o m i n a n t Irish n a t i o n a l i d e n t i t y i n the 21  st  century.  I therefore e x p l o r e the  assumptions u n d e r p i n n i n g arguments a d v a n c e d d u r i n g the c a m p a i g n . W h i l s t I agree w i t h others w h o have suggested R e p u b l i c o f Ireland is f o r g i n g a n e w  European  identity, I argue that it is not an i n d i c a t i o n that it is n o w a postnationalist society. Rather, Irish n a t i o n a l i s m has adopted " E u r o p e a n n e s s " as a n a t i o n a l trait.  122  In  Lobe a n d the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m the tools o f m o d e r n i t y - c l a i m s to reason,  o b j e c t i v i t y , fairness a n d the language o f rights - w e r e u s e d to j u s t i f y a j u d i c i a l d e c i s i o n and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendment contrary to the p r i n c i p l e s m o d e r n i t y purports to stand f o r . T h e r e are t w o interesting points to b e d r a w n f r o m this:  F i r s t l y , the  b e l i e f i n m o d e r n i t y i s so p e r v a s i v e that e v e n as the v a l u e s it purports to stand f o r are neglected, that neglect i s j u s t i f i e d b y reference to m o d e r n i t y .  S e c o n d l y , substantive  e q u a l i t y i s w a i v e d i n order ensure the s u r v i v a l o f structures that preserve the m y t h s o f modern law.  I f a m a j o r i t y o f the Irish S u p r e m e C o u r t h a d c o m e to a different c o n c l u s i o n i n Lobe, the o u t c o m e w o u l d have been advantageous f o r the f a m i l i e s c o n c e r n e d . S i m i l a r l y , i f those e l i g i b l e to vote i n the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m h a d rejected the p r o p o s a l , c h i l d r e n b o r n to non-nationals l i v i n g i n the state m i g h t h a v e c o n t i n u e d to r e c e i v e the benefit o f entitlement to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p t h r o u g h b i r t h . is not to argue that  2 7 5  N e v e r t h e l e s s , m y purpose  Lobe w a s w r o n g l y d e c i d e d . N o r is it to argue that a rejection o f  the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m w o u l d have been a v i c t o r y f o r the oppressed. Rather, it is to suggest that the contradictions that are apparent i n the r e a s o n i n g o f the S u p r e m e C o u r t Justices i n Lobe and the j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r h o l d i n g the C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m illustrate the extent to w h i c h m o d e r n l a w is based u p o n m y t h a n d also the f r a g i l i t y o f the s e e m i n g l y i n c o n t r o v e r t i b l e truths o f m o d e r n l a w .  Although, as I have argued, a constitutional amendment was not strictly necessary in order for the Oireachtas to restrict entitlement to Irish citizenship.  123  Lobe illustrates that because the p r i n c i p l e s u n d e r p i n n i n g the m o d e r n concept o f c i t i z e n s h i p c o n f l i c t i n m a n y w a y s , the S u p r e m e C o u r t c o u l d not h a v e r e c o n c i l e d them.  H o w e v e r , because the concept o f m o d e r n l a w i s p r e m i s e d o n the a s s u m p t i o n  that there i s a r a t i o n a l answer to a p r o b l e m , the courts do not address that tension. It is therefore necessary f o r the courts to p r o m o t e one element o f the d i l e m m a presented to it as o v e r - r i d i n g i n its i m p o r t a n c e . B y e m p h a s i z i n g either the rights o f the state or those o f the c h i l d the court attempts to a f f i r m the p r e m i s e u n d e r l y i n g m o d e r n l a w that it has a n answer to the p r o b l e m p o s e d b y c h i l d c i t i z e n s b o r n to non-nationals.  I  suggest that a m a j o r i t y o f the Supreme C o u r t chose t o e m p h a s i z e the state's right to c o n t r o l non-citizens w i t h i n the national territory because  s u c h a d e c i s i o n better  a f f i r m s the l a w ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f itself; i f non-nationals c a n assert a right to reside i n the state, b y virtue o f the rights o f their c i t i z e n c h i l d r e n , the l a w ' s c l a i m to authority o v e r the n a t i o n a l territory i s d i m i n i s h e d .  T h e i m p l i c a t i o n o f this i s that w h e n the  courts are f a c e d w i t h a d i l e m m a that challenges the c l a i m s o f m o d e r n i t y l a w w i l l seek to a f f i r m its a b i l i t y to r e s o l v e the p r o b l e m . H a d the court r u l e d i n f a v o u r o f the c h i l d c i t i z e n , it w o u l d h a v e substantively u p h e l d a v a l u e espoused b y m o d e r n i t y .  However,  it w o u l d h a v e been at the expense o f the right o f the state to c o n t r o l its borders. W h e n the l a w u p h o l d s the right o f the state to c o n t r o l its b o r d e r s , i t continues to assert that it c a n strike a b a l a n c e b e t w e e n the rights o f the c h i l d and those o f the state. A c c e p t i n g the argument that the rights o f the c h i l d o u t w e i g h the rights o f the state concedes that the l a w does not have absolute c o n t r o l o v e r the n a t i o n a l territory.  In  Lobe, the S u p r e m e C o u r t ' s p r e o c c u p a t i o n became d e f e n d i n g the m y t h o f m o d e r n i t y rather than e n f o r c i n g the values f o r w h i c h m o d e r n i t y purports to stand.  124  A s i m i l a r p a r a d o x e m e r g e d d u r i n g the r e f e r e n d u m c a m p a i g n . believed  the  Citizenship Referendum  was  necessary,  the  E x p l a i n i n g w h y he Minister  for  Justice  e m p l o y e d the tools o f m o d e r n i t y - s p e c i f i c a l l y c l a i m s to r a t i o n a l i t y and fairness. T h e p r o p o s a l to h o l d a r e f e r e n d u m w a s l a u n c h e d b y p i t c h i n g it b e t w e e n the t w o e q u a l l y i r r a t i o n a l and u n f a i r straw-men o f the r i g h t - w i n g racist and the l e f t - w i n g Utopian dreamer; the M i n i s t e r stated, "I s i m p l y w o n ' t a l l o w the p r o p o s a l to be hi-jacked b y those w h o w i s h to further a racist agenda; but e q u a l l y I w i l l be harsh i n m y c r i t i c i s m o f those o n the other end o f the p o l i t i c a l s p e c t r u m w h o c l a i m to detect r a c i s m i n a n y a c t i o n , h o w e v e r r a t i o n a l , fair-minded or s o u n d l y based, that affects i m m i g r a t i o n or citizenship p o l i c y . " justification  2 7 6  H o w e v e r , as I have s h o w n , a c c e p t i n g the  f o r h o l d i n g the  Citizenship Referendum  requires  the  Government's embrace  of  c o n t r a d i c t i o n rather than rationality.  Whilst  I b e l i e v e that w h i l e l a w has an important role to p l a y i n the issue o f  international m i g r a t i o n , its c a p a c i t y to address the issues raised is l i m i t e d . have seen, l a w is i n t i m a t e l y l i n k e d to the b o r d e r e d n a t i o n . independent adjudicator but an interested party.  A s we  It is therefore not an  T h e c a p a c i t y o f m o d e r n l a w to  engage w i t h the matter o f international m i g r a t i o n is also restricted b y its b e l i e f that it can f i n d a rational and correct answer to the p r o b l e m .  I suggest that w e  must  therefore l o o k to non-legal as w e l l as legal strategies to engage w i t h the matter o f international m i g r a t i o n . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t i m e and space constraints prevent m e e x p l o r i n g those strategies i n the course o f this thesis.  from  T h e c o n c e p t i o n o f l a w as a  125  m y t h i s c o m p a t i b l e w i t h a b e l i e f that l a w i s i n f l u e n c e d b y less d o m i n a n t discourses, a l t h o u g h l a w i t s e l f cannot f u l l y a c k n o w l e d g e the debt that it o w e s to those sources. W h i l s t it i s not p o s s i b l e to o v e r c o m e the p r o b l e m s generated b y a b o r d e r e d w o r l d , m y hope i s that b y a c k n o w l e d g i n g the l i m i t a t i o n s o f m o d e r n l a w a step i s t a k e n towards e n g a g i n g w i t h the issue o f international m i g r a t i o n i n a m o r e h o l i s t i c manner.  Michael McDowell, "Proposed Citizenship Referendum" Sunday Independent (14 March 2004).  126  BIBLIOGRAPHY LEGISLATION: REPUBLIC OF IRELAND Aliens Act 1935 (I.) 1935 c.12. B u n r e a c h t n a h E i r e a n n : C o n s t i t u t i o n o f Ireland 1937. C o n s t i t u t i o n o f the F r e e State o f Ireland 1922.  Constitutional  (Amendment No. 26) Act 1935 (I.), 1935 c.12.  Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1935 (I.) 1935, c. 13. Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (I.) 1956, c.26. Irish National and Citizenship Act 2004 (I.) 2 0 0 4 , c.38. Refugee Act 1996 (I.) 1996, c.17.  LEGISLATION: OTHER British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act 1918 ( U K ) 1918 c.38. British Nationality Act 1948 ( U . K . ) 1948, c.56. ; British Nationality Act 1981 ( U . K . ) 1981, c . 6 1 . C o u n c i l D i r e c t i v e 7 3 / 1 4 8 / E E C o f 21 M a y 1973 o n the a b o l i t i o n o f restrictions o n m o v e m e n t and residence w i t h i n the C o m m u n i t y f o r nationals o f M e m b e r States w i t h regard to establishment and the p r o v i s i o n o f services, [1973]  O.J.L. 172 at 14.  C o u n c i l D i r e c t i v e 9 0 / 3 6 4 / E E C o f 2 8 June 1990 o n the right o f r e s i d e n c e , [1990] O . J . L . 180 at 26.  Government of Ireland Act 1920 ( U . K . ) , c.67. Northern Ireland Act 1998 ( U . K . ) 1998, c.47.  JURISPRUDENCE: REPUBLIC OF IRELAND Fajujonu v. Minister for Justice, [1990] I R 151, a f f g [1987] I E H C 2.  127  Finn v. Att. Gen., [1983] I R 154. A.O. & D.L. v. Minister for Justice, [2003] 1 I R 3, I E S C 3 Osheku v. Ireland, [ 1986] I R 7 3 3 . PokSun Shunt v. Ireland, [1986] I . L . R . M . 5 9 3 .  JURISPRUDENCE:  OTHER  Chen v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, C a s e C-200/02 [2004] E . C . J .  GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS Ireland, Dail Debates, v o l . 55 (4 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . Ireland, Dail Debates, v o l . 1 5 4 (29 F e b r u a r y 1956). Ireland, Dail Debates, v o l . 4 8 9 , (22 A p r i l 1998). Ireland, Dail Debates, v o l . 5 8 2 (30 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . Ireland, DM Debates, v o l . 5 8 2 (7 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . "Citizenship Referendum: The Government's Proposals," online: Department o f Justice, E q u a l i t y a n d L a w R e f o r m <http://www.iustice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/flJUSO5ZJF5Cen/$File/Govtproposals.pdf>. " T h e A g r e e m e n t , " o n l i n e N o r t h e r n Ireland O f f i c e <http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf>.  TREATIES T r e a t y o f M a a s t r i c h t 1992 O.J. C 1 9 1 , 2 9 J u l y 1992 T r e a t y o f R o m e 1957 2 9 8 U . N . T . S . 3 T r e a t y o f A m s t e r d a m 1997 O.J. C 3 4 0 10 N o v e m b e r 1997. T r e a t y o f N i c e 2001 O.J. C 8 0 2 6 F e b r u a r y 2 0 0 1 .  128  SECONDARY MATERIAL: MONOGRAPHS A n d e r s o n , B e n e d i c t . Imagined Communities: R e f l e c t i o n s o n the O r i g i n a n d Spread o f N a t i o n a l i s m ( V e r s o , 1991). A r e n d t , H a n n a h . The Origins of Totalitarianism ( A n d r e D e u t s c h , 1986). A u s t i n , J o h n . The Province of Jurisprudence Determined (Hackett P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y , 1998).  B o y c e , D . G e o r g e . Nationalism in Ireland (Routledge, 1995). C a s e y , James. Constitutional Law in Ireland (Sweet and M a x w e l l , 2 0 0 0 ) . C o m e r f o r d , R . V . Ireland: Inventing the Nation ( A r n o l d , 2 0 0 3 ) . C o o g a n , T i m Pat. De Valera: Long Fellow, Long Shadow ( H u t c h i n s o n , 1993). D a u v e r g n e , Catherine. Humanitarianism, Identity, and Nation: Migration Laws in Canada and Australia ( U B C Press, 2 0 0 5 ) . D e r r i d a , Jacques. Of Grammatology (John H o p k i n s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1997). D e S a i n t - E x u p e r y , A n t o i n e . The Little Prince ( W a n d s w o r t h E d i t i o n s L i m i t e d , 1995). E r g a n g , R . R . Herder and the Foundations of German Nationalism ( O c t a g o n B o o k s , 1966). F a n n i n g , B r i a n . Racism and Social Change in the Republic of Ireland ( M a n c h e s t e r U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2003).  F i t z p a t r i c k , Peter. The Mythology of Modern Law ( R o u t l e d g e , 1992). —. Modernism and the Grounds of Law ( C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2 0 0 2 ) . F o u c a u l t , M i c h e l . Madness and Civilization (Routledge, 1989). G e l l n e r , Ernst. Nations and Nationalism ( O x f o r d , 1983). H a b e r m a s , Jurgen. The Inclusion of the Other(Polity  Press, 1999).  H a r t , H . L . A . The Concept of Law ( O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1961). Heater, D e r e k . The Theory of Nationhood ( M a c M i l l a n Press L t d , 1998). H e l l e r , Joseph. Good as Gold ( S i m o n and Schuster P a p e r b a c k s , 1976).  129  H e g e l , G e o r g . Phenomenology of Spirit, trans, b y A . V . M i l l e r ( O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1977).  H o b s b a w m , E.J. Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality ( C a m b r i d g e , 1990).  H u t c h i n s o n , J o h n . The Dynamics of Cultural Nationalism ( A l l e n and U n w i n , 1987). H o w e , Stephen. Ireland and Empire ( O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2 0 0 0 ) . Ignatieff, M i c h a e l . The Needs of Strangers (Chatto and W i n d u s , 1984) K e a r n e y , R i c h a r d . Postnationalist Ireland (Routledge Press, 1997). K e d o u r i e , E l i e . Nationalism ( H u t c h i n s o n U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , 1960). K e l l y , J . M . The Irish Constitution (Jurist P u b l i s h i n g , 1980).  K e n i c h i , O h m a e . The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies ( H a r p e r C o l i n s P u b l i s h i n g , 1995).  L e e , J.J. Ireland 1921-1985: Politics and Society ( C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989).  M a r s h a l l T . H . & B o t t o m o r e T o m . Citizenship and Social Class ( P l u t o Press 1992).  M i n o w , M a r t h a . Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion and American Law ( C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1990).  O n g , A i s h w a . Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality ( D u k e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1999).  Pearse, Padraic. The Collected Works of Padraic Pearse: Plays, Stories, Poems ( M a n u n s e l and C o . L t d , 1917).  R a z a c k , Sherene H . Looking White People in the Eye: Gender, Race, and Culture in Courtrooms and Classrooms ( U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o Press, 1998).  R o l s t o n , B i l l & S h a n n o n , M i c h a e l . Encounters: How Racism came to Ireland ( B e y o n d the P a l e , 2002).  Sassen, S a s k i a . Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization ( C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1996).  Smart, C a r o l . Feminism and the Power of Law ( R o u t l e d g e , 1989).  130  S m i t h , A n t h o n y D . The Ethnic Origins of Nations ( B l a c k w e l l , 1988). T o r p e y , J o h n . The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship and the State ( C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2 0 0 0 ) .  W i l l l i a m s , P a t r i c i a J . The Alchemy of Race and Rights ( H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1991). Y e a t s , W . B . E v e r y m a n ' s Poetry ( J . M . D e n t , 1997)  SECONDARY M A T E R I A L : EDITED C O L L E C T I O N S C a r e n s , J o s e p h H . " C o s m o p o l i t a n i s m , N a t i o n a l i s m , and I m m i g r a t i o n : F a l s e  D i c h o t o m i e s and S h i f t i n g P r e s u p p o s i t i o n s " R o n a l d B e i n e r & W a y n e N o r m a n ed., Canadian Political Philosophy ( O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2 0 0 1 ) 17.  C o p l e s t o n , F r e d e r i c k . British Philosophy: Hobbes to Hume ( C o n t i n u u m P r e s s , 1959). C u l l e n , P a u l . " T h e 1997 B o r d e r C a m p a i g n : R e f u g e e s , A s y l u m a n d R a c e o n the B o r d e r s " i n E. C r o w l e y & J . M a c L a u g h l i n ed., Under the Belly of the Tiger:  Class, Race, Identity and Culture in the Global Ireland (Irish R e p o r t e r , 1997) 101.  D e L a n g e , R o e l . " P a r a d o x e s o f E u r o p e a n C i t i z e n s h i p " i n Peter F i t z p a t r i c k ed., Nationalism, Racism and the Rule of Law ( D a r t m o u t h , 1995) 9 7 .  D u n n , J o h n . " J o h n L o c k e : the p o l i t i c s o f t r u s t " i n B r i a n R e d h e a d , ed., Plato to Nato: Studies in Political Thought ( P e n g u i n 1995) 108.  Feldblum, M i r i a m . "Reconfiguring Citizenship i n Western Europe" i n Christian J o p p k e ed., Challenges to the Nation State ( O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1998) 231. F i t z p a t r i c k , Peter. ' " W e k n o w w h a t it is w h e n y o u d o not ask u s ' : N a t i o n a l i s m as  R a c i s m " i n Peter F i t z p a t r i c k , ed., Nationalism, Racism and the Rule of Law ( D a r t m o u t h , 1995) 3.  G a l l a g h e r , M i c h a e l . " I r e l a n d : the r e f e r e n d u m as a conservative d e v i c e ? " i n M i c h a e l  G a l l a g h e r & P i e r V i n c e n z o U l e r i ed., The Referendum Experience in Europe ( B a s i n g s t o k e , 1996) 86.  G r a y , B r e d a & R y a n L o u i s e . " T h e P o l i t i c s o f Irish identity and the Interconnections  b e tw e e n F e m i n i s m , N a t i o n h o o d and C o l o n i a l i s m " i n R u t h R o a c h P i e r s o n , ed.,  Nation, Empire and Colony: Historicizing Gender and Race ( I n d i a n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1998) 1 2 1 .  131  H a b e r m a s , Jurgen. " M o d e r n i t y : A n U n f i n i s h e d P r o j e c t " i n D a v i d I n g r a m & J u l i a S i m o n I n g r a m ed., C r i t i c a l T h e o r y ( P a r a H o u s e , 1991) 158.  H a l l i g a n , B r e n d a n . " W h a t D i f f e r e n c e D i d It M a k e ? " i n R o r y O ' D o n n e l l , ed., Europe: the Irish Experience (Institute o f E u r o p e a n A f f a i r s , 2 0 0 0 ) 18. H e d e r m a n - O ' B r i a n , M i r i a m . " T h e W a y W e W e r e " i n R o r y O ' D o n n e l l , ed., Europe: The Irish Experience (Institute o f E u r o p e a n A f f a i r s , 2 0 0 0 ) 6. H o l m e s , M i c h a e l . " I r i s h approaches to E u r o p e a n i n t e g r a t i o n " i n M i c h a e l H o l m e s , ed.,  Ireland and the EU: Nice, Enlargement and the Future of Europe ( M a n c h e s t e r U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2 0 0 5 ) 1.  M a r t i n e l l o M a r c o . " C i t i z e n s h i p i n the E u r o p e a n U n i o n " i n T . A l e x a n d e r A l e i n i k o f f & D o u g l a s B . K l u s m e y e r ed., From Migrants to Citizens: Membership in a Changing World ( C a r n e g i e E n d o w m e n t f o r International Peace, 2 0 0 0 ) 3 4 2 .  M c V e i g h , R o b b i e . "Is There an Irish A n t i - R a c i s m ? B u i l d i n g an anti-racist I r e l a n d " i n R o b b i e M c V e i g h & R o n i t L e n t i n ed., Racism and Anti-Racism in Ireland ( B e y o n d the P a l e , 2 0 0 2 ) 2 1 1 .  Minogue, K.R.  Nationalism ( B a t s f o r d L t d , 1967).  O ' C o n n e l l , D o n n c h a & S m y t h , C i a r a . " C i t i z e n s h i p and the I r i s h C o n s t i t u t i o n " i n  U r s u l a Fraser and C o l i n H a r v e y ed., Sanctuary in Ireland: Perspectives on  Asylum Law and Policy (Institute o f P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 2 0 0 3 ) 2 2 9 .  O ' D o n n e l l , R o r y . " T h e N e w Ireland i n the N e w E u r o p e " i n R o r y O ' D o n n e l l , e d . , Europe: The Irish Experience (Institute o f E u r o p e a n A f f a i r s , 2 0 0 0 ) 1 6 1 . Rosas, A l l a n . " T h e Decline o f Sovereignty: L e g a l Perspectives" i n J y r k i L i v o n e n , ed., The Future of the Nation State in Europe ( E d w a r d E l g a r P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y , 1993) 130.  S n y d e r , L o u i s L . Varieties of Nationalism: A Comparative Study ( D r y d e n Press, 1976).  T a n n a m , M a r i a n . " Q u e s t i o n i n g Irish A n t i - R a c i s m " i n R o b b i e M c V e i g h & R o n i t L e n t i n ed., Racism and Anti-Racism in Ireland ( B e y o n d the P a l e , 2 0 0 2 ) 193.  T u c k , R i c h a r d . " T h o m a s H o b b e s : the s k e p t i c a l state" i n B r i a n R e d h e a d , ed., Plato to Nato: Studies in Political Thought ( P e n g u i n , 1995) 9 6 .  V a n W a l s u m , Sarah. " F o u c a u l t and the ' I l l e g a l A l i e n ' : N a t i o n a l Identity as F o c u s f o r D i s t i n c t i o n and C o n t r o l " i n Peter F i t z p a t r i c k & J a m e s H e n r y B e r g e r o n , ed;,  132  Europe's Other: European Law between Modernity and Postmodernity ( A s h g a t e , 1998) 179.  SECONDARY MATERIAL: JOURNAL ARTICLES B o y d , S u s a n . " S o m e P o s t m o d e r n i s t C h a l l e n g e s to F e m i n i s t A n a l y s e s o f L a w , F a m i l y and State: I d e o l o g y and D i s c o u r s e i n C h i l d C u s t o d y L a w " 10 C a n . J . F a m . L., 79, B r e e n , C l a i r e . " R e f u g e e L a w i n Ireland: D i s r e g a r d i n g the R i g h t s o f the C h i l d - C i t i z e n , D i s c r i m i n a t i n g against the R i g h t s o f the C h i l d " (2004) 15(4) I n t ' l J . R e f u g e e L. 7 5 0 .  B r o w n Scott, James. " N a t i o n a l i t y : Jus S o l i or Jus S a n g u i n i s " ( 1 9 3 0 ) 6 0 A . J . I . L . 5 8 . C a r e n s , J o s e p h H . " A l i e n s and C i t i z e n s : T h e C a s e f o r O p e n B o r d e r s " ( 1 9 8 7 ) 49(2) Review o f Politics 251.  — . " W h o B e l o n g s ? T h e o r e t i c a l and L e g a l Q u e s t i o n s about B i r t h r i g h t C i t i z e n s h i p i n the U n i t e d States" (1987) 37 U . T . L . J : 4 1 3 .  C o h e n , Jean L. " C h a n g i n g P a r a d i g m s o f C i t i z e n s h i p and the E x c l u s i v e n e s s o f the D e m o s " (1999) 14(3) International S o c i o l o g y 2 4 5 .  D a l y , M a r y . " I r i s h N a t i o n a l i t y and C i t i z e n s h i p since 1 9 2 2 " (2001) 32 I r i s h H i s t o r i c a l Studies, 3 3 7 . D a u v e r g n e , C a t h e r i n e . " B e y o n d Justice: T h e C o n s e q u e n c e s o f L i b e r a l i s m f o r I m m i g r a t i o n L a w " (1997) 10(2) C a n . J . L . & o f Jur. 3 2 3 .  — . " S o v e r e i g n t y , M i g r a t i o n and the R u l e o f L a w i n G l o b a l T i m e s " (2004) 67(4) M o d . L . Rev. 588. D e l a n t y , G e r a r d . " I r i s h P o l i t i c a l C o m m u n i t y i n T r a n s i t i o n " (2005) 33 Irish R e v i e w 13.  F a l k , R i c h a r d . " T h e D e c l i n e o f C i t i z e n s h i p i n an E r a o f G l o b a l i z a t i o n " 2 0 0 0 4(1) C i t i z e n s h i p Studies, 5.  F i t z p a t r i c k , Peter. " W e K n o w W h a t It Is W h e n Y o u D o N o t A s k U s " i n (2004) 8 Challenging Nation.  F l e t c h e r , R u t h . " P o s t - c o l o n i a l F r a g m e n t s : Representations o f A b o r t i o n i n Irish L a w and P o l i t i c s " (2001) 28(4) J . L . & S o c ' y 5 6 8 .  133  G a l l o w a y , D o n a l d . " L i b e r a l i s m , G l o b a l i s m and I m m i g r a t i o n " (1993) 18 Q u e e n ' s L.J. 266.  P a u l G i l r o y " R a c e E n d s H e r e " (1998) 21(5) E t h n i c and R a c i a l Studies 8 3 8 . B r i a n G i r v a n , " S o c i a l C h a n g e and M o r a l P o l i t i c s : the Irish C o n s t i t u t i o n a l R e f e r e n d u m 1 9 8 3 " (1986) 34 P o l i t Studies 6 1 . J o h n A . H a r r i n g t o n , " C i t i z e n s h i p and the B i o p o l i t i c s o f P o s t n a t i o n a l i s t I r e l a n d " (2005) 32(3) J . L . & S o c ' y 4 2 4 .  H e l d , D a v i d . " L a w o f States, L a w o f P e o p l e s : Three M o d e l s o f S o v e r e i g n t y " (2002) 8 L e g a l T h e o r y 1.  H e t t n e y , B j o r n . " T h e Fate o f C i t i z e n s h i p i n P o s t - W e s t p h a l i a " (2000) 4(1) C i t i z e n s h i p Studies, 3 5 .  H u n t A l a n . " T h e B i g Fear: L a w C o n f r o n t s P o s t m o d e r n i s m " (1990) 35 M c G i l l L.J. 515. J o p p k e , C h r i s t i a n . " W h y L i b e r a l States A c c e p t U n w a n t e d I m m i g r a t i o n " (1998) 50 W o r l d Polit, 266.  K u p e r , A n d r e w . " R a w l s i a n G l o b a l Justice: B e y o n d the L a w o f P e o p l e s to a C o s m o p o l i t a n L a w o f P e r s o n s " (2000) 28(5) P o l i t T h e o r y 6 4 0 .  L e n t i n , R o n i t . " B l a c k B o d i e s and ' H e a d l e s s H o o k e r s ' : A l t e r n a t i v e G l o b a l N a r r a t i v e s f o r 2 1 C e n t u r y I r e l a n d " (2005) 33 Irish R e v i e w 1. s t  L i n d a h l , H a n s . " E u r o p e a n Integration: P o p u l a r S o v e r e i g n t y and a P o l i t i c s o f B o u n d a r i e s " (2000) 6(3) E u r . L.J. 2 3 9 . M a c C o r m i c k , S i r N e i l . " B e y o n d the S o v e r e i g n State" (1993) 56 M o d . L. R e v . 1. — . " Q u e s t i o n i n g P o s t - S o v e r e i g n t y " (2004) 2 9 E u r . L. R e v . 8 5 2 . M a n i n , B e r n a r d . " O n L e g i t i m a c y and P o l i t i c a l D e l i b e r a t i o n " (1987) 15(3) P o l i t i c a l Theory 338.  M a y s , M i c h a e l . " I r i s h Identity i n an A g e o f G l o b a l i s a t i o n " (2005) 13(1) I r i s h Studies R e v i e w 3.  M e g a w , J o h n . " B r i t i s h Subjects a n d E i r e C i t i z e n s " 8 N.Ir. L e g a l Q . 1 2 9 .  134  M u l l a l l y , S i o b h a n . " C i t i z e n s h i p and F a m i l y L i f e i n Ireland: A s k i n g the q u e s t i o n ' W h o B e l o n g s ? ' " (2005) 25(3) L e g a l Studies 5 7 8 .  N e w a r k , F . H . " B r i t i s h N a t i o n a l i t y and Irish C i t i z e n s h i p " 5 N . Ir. L e g a l Q. 76. O ' D o n n e l l , D o n a l . " C o n s t i t u t i o n a l B a c k g r o u n d to A s p e c t s o f the G o o d F r i d a y A g r e e m e n t : A R e p u b l i c o f Ireland P e r s p e c t i v e " 50(1) N . Ir. L e g a l Q. 76. O ' L e a r y , B r e n d a n . " T h e N a t u r e o f the A g r e e m e n t " 2 2 Fordham Int'I L.J.  1628.  S a w y e r , C a r o l i n e . " N o t E v e r y C h i l d M a t t e r s : the U K ' s E x p u l s i o n o f B r i t i s h C i t i z e n s " (2006) 14 I n t T J . C h i l d . R t s . 157. S c h n e f f l e r , S a m u a l . " C o n c e p t i o n s o f C o s m o p o l i t a n i s m " (1999) 11(3) U t i l i t a s 2 5 5 . T u r k e l , G e r a l d . " M i c h e l F o u c a u l t : L a w , P o w e r , a n d K n o w l e d g e " (1990) 17(2) J . L. & S o c ' y 170. W a l d r o n , J e r e m y . " W h a t is C o s m o p o l i t a n ? " (2000) 8 J o u r n a l o f P o l i t i c a l P h i l o s o p h y 227.  W a r d , Ian. " B e y o n d C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s m : T h e Search f o r a E u r o p e a n P o l i t i c a l I m a g i n a t i o n " (2001) 17(1) Eur. L. J. 2 4 .  SECONDARY MATERIAL: ELECTRONIC SOURCES Beirne, Louise & Jaichand, V i n o d h . " B r e a k i n g D o w n Barriers: T a c k l i n g racism i n Ireland at the l e v e l o f the State and its I n s t i t u t i o n s " ( A m n e s t y International, 2 0 0 6 ) , o n l i n e : <http://www.amnesty.ie/user/content/view/full/5486>. H a n a f i n , P a t r i c k . " V a l o r i z i n g the V i r t u a l C i t i z e n : T h e S a c r i f i c i a l G r o u n d s o f P o s t c o l o n i a l C i t i z e n s h i p i n I r e l a n d " (2003) Law, Social Justice & Global  Development Journal, o n l i n e : <http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/global/03l/hanafm.html>.  SECONDARY MATERIAL: FORTHCOMING MANUSCRIPTS — . " C r o s s i n g B o r d e r s : G e n d e r , C i t i z e n s h i p and R e p r o d u c t i v e A u t o n o m y i n I r e l a n d " (forthcoming).  SECONDARY MATERIAL: NEWSPAPER ARTICLES A h e r n , B e r t i e . " C o n c e p t i o n o f c i t i z e n s h i p " Irish Examiner (31 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  135  — . " W h y a Y e s vote w i l l ensure fairness and b a l a n c e " Irish Independent (7 June 2004). A n d e r s o n , N i c o l a . " N o n - n a t i o n a l s , c h i l d r e n face e x c l u s i o n i f a m e n d m e n t passed, l a w y e r s w a r n . " Irish Independent (20 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  —.  " A m e n d m e n t c o u l d spark f l o o d o f actions over c i t i z e n s h i p " Irish Independent (21 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  A r n o l d , B r u c e . " R e f e r e n d u m o n c i t i z e n s h i p is not the a n s w e r " Irish Independent (12 M a r c h 2004).  —.  " V o t i n g i n elections d e v o i d o f c o m p e l l i n g i s s u e s " Irish Independent (5 June 2004).  B a c i k , Ivana. " R a c e r e f e r e n d u m c o u l d face serious l e g a l c h a l l e n g e s " Irish Independent (11 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . B e e s l e y , A r t h u r . " C i t i z e n s h i p right under study b y G o v e r n m e n t " Irish Times (31 January 2004).  — . " F G to support g o v e r n m e n t o n c i t i z e n s h i p p o l l " Irish Times (24 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " M c D o w e l l rejects c r i t i c i s m o f p o l l b y h u m a n rights b o d y " Irish Times (28 A p r i l 2004).  — . " C o a l i t i o n defends proposals o n c i t i z e n s h i p r i g h t s " Irish Times (22 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " R e f e r e n d u m b o o k l e t s to be posted to a l l h o m e s this w e e k " Irish Times (25 M a y 2004). — . " T a o i s e a c h defends ' l i b e r a l ' c i t i z e n l a w " Irish Times (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . —.  " V o t e r s u r g e d to a i d ' g e n u i n e m i g r a n t s ' " Irish Times (4 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  B i n c h y , W i l l i a m . " R e f e r e n d u m caters to w o r s t , not best, i n a l l o f u s " Irish Independent (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . B r a d y , T o m . " I l l e g a l s deported after d a w n r a i d s " Irish Independent (31 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . B r e n n o c k , M a r k . " C o a l i t i o n d e t e r m i n e d o n c i t i z e n s h i p p o l l " Irish Times (12 M a r c h 2004). — . " M c D o w e l l changes argument o n r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (9 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " T a o i s e a c h urges Y e s v o t e " Irish Times (9 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  136  — . " G r e e n P a r t y urges voters to reject c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (15 A p r i l 2004). — . " T a n a i s t e staunchly defends c i t i z e n s h i p p o l l p l a n " Irish Times ( 2 0 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " B r i t i s h b a c k c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (20 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . ' " C i t i z e n s h i p tourists' a t i n y g r o u p , statistics i n d i c a t e " Irish Times (22 A p r i l 2004).  — . " L a b o u r says c i t i z e n s h i p p r o p o s a l ' d e e p l y f l a w e d ' " Irish Times (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . B r e s l i n , J o h n . " A s y l u m seekers face bone tests to c h e c k a g e s " Irish Examiner (14 M a y 2004). B r o w n e , V i n c e n t . " P u n i s h P D s over this racist c a p e r " Irish Times (9 June 2 0 0 4 ) . B u c k l e y , D a n . " I m m i g r a n t pastor stands i n Y o u g h a l " Irish Examiner (4 June 2 0 0 4 ) . C a h i l l , A n n . " E U battles to f i n d c o m m o n i m m i g r a t i o n p o l i c y " Irish Examiner (7 June 2004). C a s s i d y , E d d i e . " C i t i z e n s h i p vote ' w i l l create r a c i a l d i v i s i o n ' " Irish Examiner (12 M a r c h 2004). C o u l t e r , C a r o l . " T e m p o r a r y permits s h o u l d be ' e x c e p t i o n ' f o r m i g r a n t s " Irish Times (31 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " U K case m a y have b e a r i n g o n c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (3 A p r i l 2004). — . " A m e n d m e n t w o u l d e n d the automatic right to Irish c i t i z e n s h i p " Irish Times (9 A p r i l 2004). — . " C i v i l rights group v o i c e s c o n c e r n at c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (14 M a y 2004).  — . " E u r o p e a n f i n d i n g bolsters case f o r r e f e r e n d u m made b y G o v e r n m e n t " Irish Times (19 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " L a w y e r s u n i t e d against r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (20 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " N u m b e r o f ' d o n ' t k n o w s ' reflects a c o m p l i c a t e d i s s u e " Irish Times (24 M a y 2004).  137  — . " P o l i t i c i a n s a s k e d to be ' m o d e r a t e ' i n r e f e r e n d u m d e b a t e " Irish Times (26 M a y 2004). — . " C o n f u s i o n o v e r w h a t Y e s or N o vote m e a n s " Irish Times (2 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " A m e n d m e n t w i l l guard c i t i z e n s h i p f r o m abuse, G o v e r n m e n t a r g u e s " Irish Times (10 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " R e f e r e n d u m : a l l y o u need to k n o w . " Irish Times (10 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " U r g e n t need f o r i m m i g r a t i o n p o l i c y " Irish Times (14 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " M c D o w e l l plans range o f m o v e s o n i m m i g r a t i o n " Irish Times (14 June 2 0 0 4 ) . C u l l e n , P a u l . " G o v e r n m e n t accused o f m i s i n f o r m a t i o n " Irish Times (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " C i t i z e n s h i p l o o p h o l e is d a m a g i n g c r e d i b i l i t y o f entire a s y l u m s y s t e m " Irish Times (3 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  C u n n i n g h a m , G r a i n n e & B r a d y , T o m . " C h i n e s e r u l i n g 'justifies d e c i s i o n ' o n p o l l " Irish Independent (19 M a y 2 0 0 4 )  C u n n i n g h a m , G r a i n n e & B r u c e , H e l e n . " A l l i a n c e o f v o i c e s unite i n c a l l f o r N o v o t e " Irish Independent (9 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  D o n a g h y , K a t h y . " N e w u n i t set u p to deal w i t h ' I r i s h b a b y ' c l a i m s " Irish Independent (18 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . D o n n e l l y , K a t h e r i n e . " R a c i s m i n schools a n d colleges 'needs to be t a c k l e d ' " Irish Independent (12 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) .  D o w l i n g , B r i a n . " R e f e r e n d u m result is ' n o t a foregone c o n c l u s i o n ' " Irish Independent 21 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " G r e e n s list 10 reasons to vote N o i n r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Independent (22 M a y 2004).  — . " T a n a i s t e rejects racist charge o v e r p o l l " Irish Independent (22 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " G r e e n s urge the u n d e c i d e d to vote N o i n ' u n f a i r , u n n e c e s s a r y ' p o l l " Irish Independent (8 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  D u n d o n , M a r y . " F a i l u r e to reveal passport figures a t t a c k e d " Irish Examiner (10 M a y 2004).  F i n l a y , Peter. " E q u a l i t y s h o u l d be cornerstone o f l a w o n c i t i z e n s h i p " Irish Times (4 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  138  G u r d g i e v , C o n s t a n t i n e T . , " T h e r e f e r e n d u m f o r a n d a g a i n s t " Irish Times (8 June 2004). H a n a f i n , M a r y . " W h y w e have to close c i t i z e n s h i p l o o p h o l e " Irish Independent (19 M a y 2004).  H a y d e n , A n n e . " I m m i g r a n t r i p - o f f c l a i m s ' i n s u l t i n g ' " Irish Examiner (21 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . H e f f e r n a n , B r e d a . " C o a l i t i o n accused o f r u n n i n g ' m i s i n f o r m a t i o n c a m p a i g n ' " Irish Independent (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . H e n n e s s y , M a r k . " D a t e set f o r c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Times (7 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " R i g h t s b o d y ' s v i e w s not s o u g h t " Irish Times (14 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " M o r r i s o n terms p o l l o n c i t i z e n s h i p ' d a n g e r o u s ' " Irish Times (14 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " C o u r t w i l l grant w o r k rights to i l l e g a l s i f l a w is not altered - P D s " Irish Times (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . H o g a n , E u g e n e . " H a r k i n accuses F F o f e n g a g i n g i n d i r t y t r i c k s c a m p a i g n against h e r " Irish Independent (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  H o g a n , L o u i s e . " G r e e n s p u s h f o r debate o n c i t i z e n s h i p v o t e " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2004). H o l l a n d , K i t t y . " C i t i z e n s h i p referendum f u e l l i n g r a c i s m , say d o c t o r s " Irish Times (1 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  H u m p h r e y s , Joe. " T i m i n g o f r e f e r e n d u m c r i t i c i z e d " Irish Times (22 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . L a l l y , C o n n o r . " S e v e n t y f a i l e d a s y l u m seekers f o r d e p o r t a t i o n " Irish Times (31 M a r c h 2004).  L e n i h a n , B r i a n . " C i t i z e n s h i p change c o m m o n s e n s e " Irish Times (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) L u c e y , A n n e . " D e b a t e c a n c e l e d due to reluctance o f Y e s s p e a k e r s " Irish Independent (1 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  M a c E o c h a i d h , C o l m . " C i t i z e n referendum is u n n e c e s s a r y " Irish Times (20 A p r i l 2004). M a r t i n , M i c h e a l & B i n c h y , W i l l i a m . " C i t i z e n I r e l a n d " Irish Examiner (8 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  139  M c C a r t h a i g h , S e a n . " C i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m to be h e l d despite fears o f r a c i s m " Irish Examiner (22 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " E u r o p e a n court d e c i s i o n c o u l d affect c i t i z e n s h i p v o t e " Irish Examiner (18 M a y 2004). —.  " G o v e r n m e n t a c c u s e d o f ' m i s l e a d i n g ' v o t e r s " Irish Examiner (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " T a k i n g a stand f o r the l o c a l i t y " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . —.  " P u t t i n g Irish p e o p l e f i r s t " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " N o basis to ' c i t i z e n s h i p t o u r i s m ' , says s t u d y " Irish Examiner (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . M c D o n a l d , B r i a n . " P e o p l e b e i n g r a i l r o a d e d into r e f e r e n d u m , says R a b b i t t e " Irish Independent (15 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  M c D o n a l d , B r i a n & M o l o n y , Senan. " M i n i s t e r attacks ' N o ' vote i n c i t i z e n d e b a t e " Irish Independent (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  M c D o w e l l , M i c h a e l . " P r o p o s e d C i t i z e n s h i p R e f e r e n d u m " Sunday Independent (14 M a r c h 2004). — . " W e m u s t be able to manage m i g r a t i o n i n a sensible f a s h i o n " Irish Times (24 A p r i l 2004). — . " Y e s " Irish Examiner (7 June 2 0 0 4 ) . M c E n r o e , Juno. " D o c t o r denies M c D o w e l l t o u r i s m b i r t h c l a i m s " Irish Examiner (28 M a y 2004).  M c G a r r y , Patsy. " M e t h o d i s t s say c i t i z e n s h i p vote is ' i l l - j u d g e d ' " Irish Times (26 M a y 2004).  — . " B i s h o p s w a r n o n rights issue i n c i t i z e n s h i p p o l l " Irish Times (5 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " J e s u i t centre advises a ' N o ' v o t e " Irish Times (8 June 2 0 0 4 ) . —.  " F o r m e r moderator says r e f e r e n d u m p r o p o s a l w o u l d e x c l u d e m o s t i n n e e d " Irish Times (10 June 2004).\  M c G e e , H a r r y . " V o t e r issue study l e d to r e f e r e n d u m c a l l " Irish Examiner (24 M a r c h 2004). —.  " F F and F G face l o c a l e l e c t i o n losses, p o l l s h o w s " I r i s h E x a m i n e r (17 M a y 2004).  140  — . " W a r o f w o r d s o n c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m heats u p " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2004). M c G i n n , D a n . " R u s h e d r e f e r e n d u m c a m p a i g n underrates v o t e r s " Irish Examiner (22 M a y 2004). M c K e n n a , G e n e . " F F ro u n d s o n ' r a c i s t ' attack i n p o l l o v e r b i r t h r i g h t " Irish Independent (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) —.  " P o l l s h o w s c o m f o r t a b l e m a j o r i t y for Y e s vote i n r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Independent (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  M c K e n n a , G e n e & O ' C o n n o r , A l i s o n . " L a w change p l a n n e d to c l o s e ' b a b y tourist' t r a i l " Irish Independent (11 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " T u r n o u t up as d o u b l e p o l l stirs voters " Irish Independent (12 June 2 0 0 4 ) . M o l o n y , Senan. " G r e e n party attacks the ' o p p o r t u n i s m ' o f c o a l i t i o n ' s c i t i z e n v o t e " Irish Independent (17 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  M o l o n e y , S e n a n & M c K e n n a , G e n e . " M o u n t i n g pressure o n p o l l p r o p o s a l " Irish Independent (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 )  — . " W i d e and e v e n l y spread Y e s for birthright c h a n g e " I r i s h Independent (14 June 2004).  M o r a h a n , J i m . " M c D o w e l l hits b a c k at m o u n t i n g o p p o s i t i o n to c i t i z e n s h i p v o t e " Irish Examiner (20 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . M o r r i s o n , B r u c e A . " T h e r e f e r e n d u m : f o r and a g a i n s t " Irish Times (8 June 2 0 0 4 ) . M u l l e n , R o n a n . " C o m p a s s i o n plus c o n t r o l w o u l d obviate this dangerous r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Examiner (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  N e w m a n , C h r i s t i n e & C u l l e n , P a u l . " M o t i v e for r e f e r e n d u m is q u e s t i o n e d " Irish T i m e s (7 June 2 0 0 4 ) . N o l a n , N i a m h . " E q u a l i t y l a w s ' m u s t be c h a n g e d ' " Irish Examiner (10 June 2 0 0 4 ) . N o l a n , N i a m h & C a h i l l , A n n e . " R e s i d e n c y r u l i n g b a c k s r e f e r e n d u m m o v e , says M c D o w e l l " Irish Examiner (19 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  O ' B r i e n , C a r l . " C i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m c o n f u s i n g v o t e r s " Irish Times (29 M a y 2004).  141  O ' B r i e n , P a u l . " U n u s u a l , uneasy alliances m a k e up. b o t h sides o f r e f e r e n d u m c a m p a i g n " Irish Examiner (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . O ' C o n n e l l , D o n n c h a & S m y t h , C i a r a . " T h e case f o r urgent c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e f o r m has s i m p l y not been m a d e " Irish Times (1 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) .  O ' C o n n o r , A l i s o n . "State is ' p l a y i n g race c a r d ' o v e r p o l l s " Irish Independent (12 M a r c h 2004). — . " A s y l u m seekers t o l d they c a n ' t f o r m F F c u m a n n " Irish Independent (27 M a y 2004).  — . " R e f e r e n d u m o n c i t i z e n s h i p courageous, says M c D o w e l l " Irish Independent (10 June 2 0 0 4 )  O ' C o n n o r , N i a l l . " M a r t i n says opponents distorting the f a c t s " Irish Times (1 June 2004). O ' D o h e r t y , C a r o l i n e . "I a m a f r a i d they w i l l take m y b a b y " Irish E x a m i n e r (26 M a y 2004).  —.  " R e s o u n d i n g Y e s f o r c i t i z e n s h i p c h a n g e " Irish Examiner (14 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  O ' F a r r e l l , M i c h a e l . " I m m i g r a t i o n B i l l passes i n D a i l a m i d O p p o s i t i o n 'rubbers t a m p i n g ' c l a i m s " Irish Examiner (6 F e b r u a r y 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " I m m i g r a t i o n b i l l to be passed despite p r o t e s t s " Irish Examiner (5 F e b r u a r y 2004). — . " C i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m ' i n breach o f A g r e e m e n t ' " Irish Examiner (15 M a y 2004).  —.  " C i t i z e n s h i p vote w i l l damage G o o d F r i d a y A g r e e m e n t , s a y s co-author" Irish Examiner (20 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  —.  " G o v e r n m e n t is p l a y i n g catch-up i n c i t i z e n s h i p c a m p a i g n " Irish Examiner (21 M a y 2004).  — . " G o v e r n m e n t i n danger o f l o s i n g c i t i z e n s h i p v o t e " Irish Examiner (21 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " C o u g h l a n hits out at r e f e r e n d u m race c l a i m s " Irish Examiner (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " A m e n d m e n t a reasonable response, says H a r n e y " Irish Examiner (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " Y e s c a m p gets a boost f r o m L e i n s t e r p o l l " Irish Examiner (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  142  — . " Y e s vote b a c k e d b y clear D u b l i n m a j o r i t y " Irish Examiner (2 June 2 0 0 4 ) . O ' H a l l o r a n , M a r i e . " C i t i z e n s h i p referendum date not set, says H a r n e y " Irish Times (24 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " C i t i z e n s h i p system ' b e i n g a b u s e d ' " Irish Times (31 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) . O ' K e e f f e , C o r m a c . " C a l l f o r c h i l d a s y l u m seeker c o n t r o l s " Irish Examiner (14 M a y 2004). — . " 2 0 f a m i l i e s o f Irish-born c h i l d r e n d e p o r t e d " Irish Examiner (22 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " I s s u e b e h i n d the c i t i z e n s h i p vote w e r e put into f o c u s last w e e k " Irish Examiner (25 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " A s y l u m seekers ' g i v i n g their c h i l d r e n a better l i f e ' " Irish Examiner (1 June 2004).  — . " T w o - i n - f i v e voters ' d o not k n o w issue o f r e f e r e n d u m ' " Irish Examiner (2 June 2004). — . " C o u n c i l query maternity d o c t o r s ' role i n d e b a t e " Irish Examiner (3 June 2 0 0 4 ) — . " F F a i m s stop Ireland b e i n g magnet f o r m i g r a n t s " Irish Examiner (4 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " A s y l u m a p p l i c a t i o n s i n first quarter d o w n 5 5 % o n last y e a r " Irish Examiner (5 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " S i g n i f i c a n t increase i n numbers d e p o r t e d " Irish Examiner (8 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " F i l i p i n o nurses c a l l f o r r e f e r e n d u m N o v o t e " Irish Examiner (9 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " E m e r g e n c y i f c i t i z e n s h i p l a w s not c h a n g e d , w a r n s M c D o w e l l " Irish Examiner (10 June 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " G o v e r n m e n t u r g e d to r e v i e w i m m i g r a t i o n p o l i c y " Irish Examiner (14 June 2004).  — . " R i g h t s b o d y to study l e g i s l a t i o n " Irish Examiner (14 June 2 0 0 4 ) . O ' M a h o n y , Peter. " W a n t e d : a reasoned l o o k e d at c i t i z e n s h i p i s s u e " Irish Times (21 M a y 2004).  O ' R e g a n , E i l i s h . " H o s p i t a l sees surge i n i m m i g r a n t b i r t h s " Irish Independent (19 M a y 2004).  143  "State t u r n i n g into apartheid r e g i m e , ' N o ' doctors m a i n t a i n " Irish Independent (1 June 2 0 0 4 ) . O ' T o o l e , F i n t a n . " R a c i s t ? N o this p o l l is far w o r s e " Irish Times (27 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . Parker, C h r i s t y . " C i t i z e n s h i p p o l l m o r a l l y w r o n g , says c a n d i d a t e " Irish Examiner (12 M a r c h 2004).  Q u i n n , D a v i d . " B i s h o p s urge a c t i o n o n ' c i t i z e n b y b a b y ' a p p l i c a n t s " Irish Independent (12 M a r c h 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " C h a m p i o n o f U S visas ' s h o c k e d ' at c i t i z e n s h i p p r o p o s a l s " Irish Independent (20 M a y 2004). — . " C h i l d r e n ' s rights 'at stake' i n State" Irish Independent (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " R e p o r t reveals 6 0 p c drop i n pregnant w o m e n seeking a s y l u m " Irish Independent (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " J e s u i t s c a l l f o r ' N o ' vote i n c i t i z e n r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Independent (7 June 2004). Rajsekar, P r i y a . " H u r r i e d referendum has put negative f o c u s o n s k i n c o l o u r " Irish Times (7 June 2004).  — . " C a n I l o o k y o u c o n f i d e n t l y i n the eye a g a i n ? " Irish Times (16 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  R e i d , L i a m . " O p p o n e n t s must face reality o f ' c i t i z e n s h i p s h o p p i n g ' - M i n i s t e r " Irish Times (31 M a y 2004).  R i n g , E v e l y n . " R i g h t s alliance urges voters to t h i n k o f c h i l d r e n a n d v o t e against a m e n d m e n t " Irish Examiner (26 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . Shanahan, C a t h e r i n e . C i t i z e n s h i p t o u r i s m ' n o t o n l y i n D u b l i n ' " Irish Examiner (1 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  Sheahan, F i o n n a n . " G r e e n card p l a n f o r s k i l l e d i m m i g r a n t s " Irish Examiner (4 M a y 2004)  — . " C i t i z e n s h i p vote makes i m m i g r a t i o n e l e c t i o n i s s u e " Irish Examiner (11 M a r c h 2004).  — . " G o v e r n m e n t p l a y i n g race c a r d , c l a i m s o p p o s i t i o n " Irish Examiner (12 M a r c h 2004). — . " F G b a c k s G o v e r n m e n t o n c i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m " Irish Examiner (12 M a y 2004).  144  —.  " R e v e a l e d : p r o o f o f c i t i z e n s h i p t o u r i s m " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  — . " O n e - s t o p c i t i z e n s h i p s h o p " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " L i t t l e A n a s t a s i a c o u l d have been Irish c i t i z e n " Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " C i t i z e n s h i p tourists 'hit maternity s e r v i c e s ' " Irish Examiner (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " I r i s h patients felt i n a m i n o r i t y " Irish Examiner (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " W o m e n ' a r r i v e f r o m airport i n l a b o u r ' " Irish Examiner (31 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . S i g g i n s , L o r n a . " R e f e r e n d u m a ' r a i l r o a d i n g ' a f f a i r " Irish Times (15 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . S w e e n e y , C o n o r . " ' W a v e o f m i g r a t i o n ' fears not j u s t i f i e d , says P r o d i " Irish Independent ( 1 8  th  M a r c h 2004).  T y r r e l l , F i o n a . " L a b o u r s p o k e s m a n for j u s t i c e says people ' w i l l l i v e to regret' Y e s v o t e " Irish Times (14 June 2004).  W a l s h e , J o h n . " N u m b e r s i n w o r k at r e c o r d l e v e l as f o r e i g n labour r i s e s " Irish Independent (7 June 2004).  W a t e r s , J o h n . " C i t i z e n s h i p stroke an act o f f o l l y " Irish Times (19 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . — . " M i s u s i n g concept o f c i t i z e n s h i p " Irish Times (7 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  SECONDARY MATERIAL: NEWSPAPER EDITORIALS " I m m i g r a n t abuse: P r o t e c t i o n o f c h i l d r e n p a r a m o u n t , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Examiner (14 M a y 2004).  " C i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m j u s t i f i e d , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Examiner (27 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . " W e need t i m e to get this r i g h t , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Examiner (28 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . " F G b a c k s c o a l i t i o n over c i t i z e n s h i p p o l l , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Independent (12 M a y 2004). " R e f e r e n d u m d r i v e to get u n d e r w a y , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Independent (18 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . " C i t i z e n C h e n , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Independent (19 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) . "It's right to vote Y e s , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Independent (11 June 2 0 0 4 ) .  145  ' C i t i z e n s h i p changes not r a c i s t " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Times (8 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . ' C i t i z e n s h i p r e f e r e n d u m sparks f u r o r e " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Times (8 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . ' C i t i z e n s h i p v o t e , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Times (9 A p r i l 2004). ' O n b e i n g Irish t o d a y , " E d i t o r i a l , Irish Times (17 A p r i l 2 0 0 4 ) . 'Case not p r o v e n o n r e f e r e n d u m , " Irish T i m e s (24 M a y 2 0 0 4 ) .  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0077731/manifest

Comment

Related Items