{"title":"割不断的纽带在丹麦失去归属感","authors":"Kerstin Bree Carlson","doi":"10.1007/s10978-024-09398-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 2018, the Danish Supreme Court revoked Adam Johansen’s citizenship in conjunction with his conviction for terrorism. Applying a proportionality test adapted from European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence for naturalised, not natural, citizens, the Danish court determined that Johansen’s Muslim faith tied him to Tunisia, his father’s country, rather than to Denmark. In March 2022, the ECtHR unanimously upheld this judgment. In so doing, the ECtHR solidified an emerging standard in cases of citizenship revocation for natural citizens, which standard is weaker than the protections enjoyed by naturalised citizens. This article reviews the Danish and ECtHR jurisprudence to show how the explosive expansion of citizenship revocation in relation to terror crimes, combined with the ECtHR’s emerging jurisprudence rejecting substantive review for such revocation, demonstrates a significant, multidirectional weakening of rights protections in Europe.</p>","PeriodicalId":44360,"journal":{"name":"LAW AND CRITIQUE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ties that Sever: Losing the Right to Belong in Denmark\",\"authors\":\"Kerstin Bree Carlson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10978-024-09398-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In 2018, the Danish Supreme Court revoked Adam Johansen’s citizenship in conjunction with his conviction for terrorism. Applying a proportionality test adapted from European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence for naturalised, not natural, citizens, the Danish court determined that Johansen’s Muslim faith tied him to Tunisia, his father’s country, rather than to Denmark. In March 2022, the ECtHR unanimously upheld this judgment. In so doing, the ECtHR solidified an emerging standard in cases of citizenship revocation for natural citizens, which standard is weaker than the protections enjoyed by naturalised citizens. This article reviews the Danish and ECtHR jurisprudence to show how the explosive expansion of citizenship revocation in relation to terror crimes, combined with the ECtHR’s emerging jurisprudence rejecting substantive review for such revocation, demonstrates a significant, multidirectional weakening of rights protections in Europe.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44360,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LAW AND CRITIQUE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LAW AND CRITIQUE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-024-09398-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LAW AND CRITIQUE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-024-09398-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Ties that Sever: Losing the Right to Belong in Denmark
In 2018, the Danish Supreme Court revoked Adam Johansen’s citizenship in conjunction with his conviction for terrorism. Applying a proportionality test adapted from European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence for naturalised, not natural, citizens, the Danish court determined that Johansen’s Muslim faith tied him to Tunisia, his father’s country, rather than to Denmark. In March 2022, the ECtHR unanimously upheld this judgment. In so doing, the ECtHR solidified an emerging standard in cases of citizenship revocation for natural citizens, which standard is weaker than the protections enjoyed by naturalised citizens. This article reviews the Danish and ECtHR jurisprudence to show how the explosive expansion of citizenship revocation in relation to terror crimes, combined with the ECtHR’s emerging jurisprudence rejecting substantive review for such revocation, demonstrates a significant, multidirectional weakening of rights protections in Europe.
期刊介绍：
Law and Critique is the prime international critical legal theory journal. It has been published for 20 years and is associated with the Critical Legal Conference. Law and Critique covers all aspects of legal theory, jurisprudence and substantive law that are approached from a critical perspective. Law and Critique has introduced into legal scholarship a variety of schools of thought, such as postmodernism; feminism; queer theory; critical race theory; literary approaches to law; psychoanalysis; law and the humanities; law and aesthetics and post-colonialism. Postmodern jurisprudence, law and aesthetics and law and psychoanalysis were pioneered in Law and Critique which remains the most authoritative international source for these schools of thought. Law and Critique is keen to translate and incorporate non-English critical legal thought. More specifically, Law and Critique encourages the submission of articles in the areas of critical legal theory and history, law and literature, law and psychoanalysis, feminist legal theory, critical race theory, law and post-colonialism; postmodern jurisprudence, law and aesthetics; legal phenomenology; and law and autopoiesis. Past special issues include: ''Critical Legal Education''; ''The Gender of Law''; ''Law and Postmodernism''; ''Law and Literature''; ''Law and Post-colonialism'', ''Law and Theatre''; ''Jean-Luc Nancy and Law''; ''Agamben and Law''. Law and Critique is ranked amongst the top 20 per cent of law journals by the Australian Research Council.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
