This post has been read 7164 times!
|If you want to know the truth about people look at who represent them in their Parliament and you will know which people deserve a shower of rose petals and who deserve shoes to be hurled at them, according to the British leader the late Sir Winston Churchill.|
I do not care about the real intentions of the MPs who have supported the proposed amendments to the Nationality Law. Most of them have a direct interest in the amendment for fear of what they cannot deal with and therefore they attempt to strengthen their legal status through amendments — now in future.
I am concerned about the positions taken by the MPs who are well versed with the history of our nation and who are my friends, especially Rakan Al-Nisf, Riyadh Al-Adasani and Abdullah Al-Roumi, who, together with 24 other MPs have supported the amendment to the Nationality Law.
Here, I understand that these MPs have the right to doubt the attitude of the government to keep control over withdrawing the nationality. I also understand these MPs sympathize with those whose citizenships have been revoked from their humanitarian point of view.
They do not want the issue of withdrawal of the nationality to be in the hands of the government because such situations put everyone at the mercy of the government. They want to make sure such situations do not arise in future. I can say government control over the issue may be fair today, but this cannot always be guaranteed based on the fact the government has done it before, and will do it again.
Although more than one MP has volunteered to respond indirectly to our queries and explained why they have voted in favor of the bill with regards the right to appeal the revocation of the citizenship, it has not prevented the government from withdrawing or revoking the citizenship, neither controlled the forgery nor the issue of holding dual citizenship or tampering with the nationality even if the forgery took place long time ago.
In short, this is the proposal that was voted on and rejected in the end. All MPs rejected the other amendments to the Nationality Law, which stipulate that the nationality is only withdrawn or revoked by virtue of a court order or that which gives protection to forgers or those who hold the nationality.
The MPs who support the proposed amendments have aroused a lot of confusion especially since the Speaker of the National Assembly clearly demonstrated the seriousness of the amendment to everyone, and stressed on the need to correct the situation, open the file of forgery, address the situation of the forgers and then go for legislation. This will lead to resorting to the judiciary and restricting the government in cases of withdrawal of nationality, a view that is shared by other MPs.
Therefore, we have the right to ask you ‘Why you insist on voting on the draft law, when you are aware of the seriousness of the proposal and that the whole issue is wrong. If we look at the background of the majority of those who have supported the draft bill, we will find they are those who are good at twisting the truth.
I personally believe that neither the government nor the Parliament, or the judiciary can deal properly and fairly with the situation of up to 10,000 forgers and 400,000 of those who hold the dual nationality or those who acquired it fraudulently.
We also believe that no one has the time and the ability to address all complexities and entanglements that are associated with the issue.
The withdrawal of nationality from this huge number of people will complicate further the issue of bedoun or the so-called stateless people. This situation will deteriorate instead of being solved.
By Ahmad Al-Sarraf