NRNs, NRNA and Dual Citizenship
By Bhim B Karki*
There is no exact or reliable count of the non-resident Nepalis (NRN) or Nepalis living outside Nepal for educational, professional, business or other purposes, worldwide. But we know that there are many and the number is increasing by the day. In Dallas Fort-worth, a mid-size metropolitan city in the US, where I reside, their number is estimated at more than thirteen thousand. Non-Resident Nepali Association (NRNA) estimates that there are around 1.9 million NRNs scattered around the world and one hundred fifty thousand in North America alone.
One common thread among most Nepalis, wherever they may be living, is that they want to keep their heritage and Nepali citizenship even after accepting citizenship of their country of residence. This matter of heritage and dual citizenship (DC) is very near and dear to most every Nepali living abroad, particularly, the first generation Nepalis who were Nepali citizens when they left Nepal. The zeal and thirst to stay closely connected to Nepal and contribute to Nepali interests is strong throughout the Nepali diasporas.
If a Nepali citizen residing in a foreign country acquires that country's citizenship but wants to keep his/her Nepali citizenship, should he/she be allowed to do so? Should a person of Nepali origin (PNO) or someone married to such PNO and their children and grandchildren be granted Nepali citizenship while they are citizens of their country of residence? Is DC realistic in Nepali context? Can DC be for the greater good of Nepal and Nepalis? These questions appear simple on the surface, however, when we sit down to peel their many layers, we begin to see the complexities. The questions have given rise to much debates, dialogues and controversy among NRNs everywhere and, more urgently, among legal and constitutional experts, Nepali Constituent Assembly members, politicians and statesmen in Nepal, and Nepali intellectuals and others. NRNA, which represents NRNs globally – by representing the national NRN organizations (National Coordination Councils) of about 55 countries of the world – has been leading the campaign for DC among others on behalf of NRNs everywhere.
DC is one of the widely misunderstood and confusing topics in Nepal and among the NRNs. Unfortunately, the general public and the politicians in Nepal think mostly of the remittances coming into the country when they discuss the issues of NRNs or DC rights. Remittances from abroad are undeniably and increasingly contributing heavily to the foreign currency reserve and trade balance, that is the most immediate but only one of the benefits to Nepal and the Nepalis from NRNs. Nepalis go abroad in pursuit of education, skills, professional opportunities, jobs, better income and so forth. More and more Nepalis are going abroad every year and proving to be successful in their pursuits. For various reasons, many of them have become naturalized in the country of their residence. The Nepali diasporas is expanding rapidly.
Now, if Nepal is able to attract the knowledge, skills, expertise, connections and financial resources that the NRNs possess, it will have access to a vast treasure-trove of resources it urgently needs for socio-economic development and the improvement of the quality of life of the Nepali people. How many accomplished and proven engineers, economists, diplomats, scientists and other seasoned professionals are out there willing and able to contribute to the development of Nepal and the betterment of life of all Nepalis? Many of these are interested in coming back to give something back or live or retire in Nepal, if they had DC and the environment were friendly to them. Many are interested in spending stretches of time in Nepal close to their near and dear ones while also making themselves useful to the country and people. This does not mean, however, that provision of DC will bring back NRNs in droves to Nepal or that they will all come with sacks of money to invest in Nepal. It will take time and sustained efforts – wise policies and laws and regulations and DC right -- to attract them to come back. Unfortunately, DC is sometimes interpreted as just a vehicle for NRNs to access or retain ownership of their ancestral or family assets or acquire property in Nepal. While this is, undeniably, one of the inherent features or attractions of any DC provision, it is, however, not so significant in the longer term.
First-generation NRNs are most anxious to stay closely connected to Nepal in familial, socio-cultural and economic terms. They are also anxious to contribute to Nepal's interest. They are also very eager for their children and grandchildren to develop close ties to Nepal and everything Nepali. They firmly believe that they need for DC for this purpose as well. Subsequent generations of NRNs can develop strong ties to Nepal and also take greater pride in their heritage only if their parents and grandparents are able to provide them the right opportunities by creating and maintaining strong bridges to Nepal, a process facilitated by DC.
It is a fact that Nepalis are settling in countries where living conditions are better and educational, employment and personal growth opportunities are available. Naturally, they would like their children and grandchildren to have opportunities they themselves did not have back in Nepal. Considering its current state of affairs, Nepal very badly needs all the NRNs it can attract to come to Nepal and contribute in whatever ways they can. Naturally, successive generations of NRNs will be progressively better equipped to contribute to Nepal's development process, if they are assisted to develop active interest in Nepal from early on in life.
Keeping NRNs engaged and interested in Nepal -- by providing DC and creating an inviting, enabling and encouraging environment -- will unquestionably benefit Nepal and Nepalis in the short as well as the long run. There is a reason why Canada, the US, Israel, Russia and other countries have been inviting and enabling the young and talented citizens of the world to come and settle in their countries. Nepal will gradually rise as a powerful brand in the global market, particularly in the tourism, traditional art and craft and native herbs areas. Nepali diasporas communities and their members identified with the brand will naturally be its agents in the expanding global market. It is high time Nepal opened its mind and eyes, started thinking of future and adopted wise human capital- and growth-friendly policies and laws.
Some DC-related discussions are focusing on national security and sovereignty issues as well as the question of a DC-holder’s allegiance. These arguments can be quickly dealt with by examining how many countries currently have DC provisions and what effect the same have had on their security and sovereignty. One of the ongoing arguments in the global NRN community involves “DC with partial rights” versus “DC with full rights.” The way this argument is framed is unfortunate and unproductive since there is no one universal standard for citizenship (or nationality). So the meaning of “full” and “half” is relative to time and place, just as citizenship or nationality law varies from country to country.
The way it is being used, the phrase “DC partial rights” seems to imply socio-cultural and economic rights, while “DC with full rights” seems to imply “partial rights” plus political rights. Among the countries that allow DC or tolerate it as a matter of policy, there is hardly any that does not put restrictions or limitations on the rights of those of its citizens that are residing in a foreign country and have taken citizenship there. Furthermore, when discussing DC, we seem to totally ignore the duties or obligations inherently associated with rights. Our discussion would be more meaningful or productive if we were to specify rights, instead of using the confusing and confounding terms “full” and “partial,” and if we were to discuss duties and obligations as well.
In this day and age, when the concept of global citizenship is fast becoming reality, more and more people are crossing many of the man-made boundaries of nation states for business, education, tourism or livelihood purposes. As the world becomes more “flat” everyday as a result of accelerating globalization and other factors, it is becoming increasingly common and even essential for a person to have dual or multiple citizenship. There are examples of citizens of multiple countries becoming prime ministers, prominent politicians or statesmen of their country of origin.
NRNA since its inception has been leading the campaign for DC as one of its major goals and promoting dialogue and discussion and representing the Nepali diasporas and NRN groups worldwide. To deal with the very complex issue of DC, the International Coordination Council (ICC), NRNA’s executive body, has established the "Task Force on Dual Citizenship" (TFDC). TFDC’s efforts and activities are focused entirely on DC and its various aspects. It has been mobilizing experts and stakeholders inside and outside of Nepal in support of DC or equivalent and pursuing a pragmatic, reasonable strategy to contribute to securing for NRNs those rights and privileges that are most meaningful to most of them and within reach in a reasonable time frame. Adopting an “all or nothing” or the so-called “full rights” approach means a very, very long struggle with uncertain outcome. It also means we are ignoring the majority NRNs’ urgent need and interest of today.
Recently, the government of Nepal has started issuing NRN Identity Cards, which can be taken as another major formal step toward DC, following the NRN-related legislation and regulations. NRNA and its TFDC are relentlessly pursuing the DC goal with rapidly growing momentum, while both are mindful that Nepal government is going through a tough transitional period and DC is only one of the many, many issues it has to deal with. On our part, however, we NRNs must keep the issue of DC front and center and strengthen our campaign for it by remaining totally united behind NRNA, since DC represents a win-win state for Nepal, Nepalis and the NRNs around the globe. We need to adopt a graduated, step-by-step approach and go for what is achievable in the present context and forget the proverbial “aakaash ko phal.”
*The author is a member of the current NRNA Task Force on Dual Citizenship. The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the policy or position of the NRNA or the Task Force on Dual Citizenship.
No comments:
Post a Comment