NATION

PASSWORD

Degrees of Citizenship in YN?

A place to put national factbooks, embassy exchanges, and other information regarding the nations of the world. [In character]
User avatar
The Land of the Ephyral
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 456
Founded: Jun 03, 2016
Right-wing Utopia

Degrees of Citizenship in YN?

Postby The Land of the Ephyral » Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:05 am

Whilst in the modern day we tend to think of citizenship as that of a singular construct, you are either a citizen or not, this has not been the case for most of human civilised history and in fact many nations today tend to operate, even if unofficially, on a graduated citizenship basis.

One of the best examples of this in the ancient world might be the Roman Republic. Full citizens of the Roman state were afforded all legal rights and protections, but divided between those that were permitted to vote and those that could not. This could be along a dichotomy of residency, as transferring from one city to another may not guarantee you keep your level of citizenship, or the dichotomy between men and women. As women were not included in the political processes of the state, they were not afforded the right of voting or running for office, which placed them in the lower category of full citizen.

Further down was the Latin Right extended to the Latin League, which afforded some legal rights but not others, and restricted the right to vote, extending partial citizenship. You then also had the idea of the Socii, or 'allies'. Some of the differences here are that Roman citizens could not be crucified or tortured, whilst the same right was not extended to these groups. Furthermore, a Roman citizen sentenced to death for a non-treasonous crime could commute it to exile, and had the right to have a capital case be judged in Rome itself.

Other examples exist such as Athenian native citizens with the right to vote, citizens without, and foreign citizens who chose to live in the Athenian state.

Today, nations in the real world such as Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of what we consider Western Civilisation afford the same rights, protections, and guarantees to all those with the legal ability to call themselves citizens of the nation. However this is by no means a rule that all nations follow and as shown, most did not.




Code: Select all
[b]Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen?[/b]

[b]At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were?[/b]

[b]Does your nation operate on such a practice today?[/b]

[b]If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it?[/b]

[b]If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks?[/b]

[b]Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation?[/b]

[b]If such a practice [i]is[/i] in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do [i]not[/i] operate by such ideas?[/b]

[b]If such a practice is [i]not[/i], what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that [i]do[/i] operate by such ideas?[/b]

[b]If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned?[/b]

[b]If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted?[/b]





EDIT: Corrected 'human history' to 'human civilised history'.

EDIT 2: Added a question inquiring as to what the actual citizenship divisions are. I apologise for that mistake as I had written it before, but corrected to a code format and forgot to put it back in.
Last edited by The Land of the Ephyral on Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:10 am, edited 2 times in total.
Economic Right: 3.0 | Social Authoritarian: 2.0

"History is littered with wars which everybody knew would never happen." - Enoch Powell



US
UK
Ethnocultural Nationalism
Social-Traditional Conservatism
Western Model Patriarchy
Gender Roles
For Britain Party
UKIP
Britain First
Free Market Capitalism
Race Realism
Ethnic Homogeneity

Socialism
Communism
EU
Social 'Justice'
Social Democracy
Feminism
LGBT+
Social liberalism
Islam
Judaism
Palestine
Israel
Iran
Saudi Arabia
UK Labour Party
Uk Conservative Party
"Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity"

User avatar
Palagaria
Secretary
 
Posts: 27
Founded: Jun 07, 2018
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Palagaria » Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:08 am

The Land of the Ephyral wrote:Whilst in the modern day we tend to think of citizenship as that of a singular construct, you are either a citizen or not, this has not been the case for most of human civilised history and in fact many nations today tend to operate, even if unofficially, on a graduated citizenship basis.

One of the best examples of this in the ancient world might be the Roman Republic. Full citizens of the Roman state were afforded all legal rights and protections, but divided between those that were permitted to vote and those that could not. This could be along a dichotomy of residency, as transferring from one city to another may not guarantee you keep your level of citizenship, or the dichotomy between men and women. As women were not included in the political processes of the state, they were not afforded the right of voting or running for office, which placed them in the lower category of full citizen.

Further down was the Latin Right extended to the Latin League, which afforded some legal rights but not others, and restricted the right to vote, extending partial citizenship. You then also had the idea of the Socii, or 'allies'. Some of the differences here are that Roman citizens could not be crucified or tortured, whilst the same right was not extended to these groups. Furthermore, a Roman citizen sentenced to death for a non-treasonous crime could commute it to exile, and had the right to have a capital case be judged in Rome itself.

Other examples exist such as Athenian native citizens with the right to vote, citizens without, and foreign citizens who chose to live in the Athenian state.

Today, nations in the real world such as Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of what we consider Western Civilisation afford the same rights, protections, and guarantees to all those with the legal ability to call themselves citizens of the nation. However this is by no means a rule that all nations follow and as shown, most did not.




Code: Select all
[b]Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen?[/b]

[b]At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were?[/b]

[b]Does your nation operate on such a practice today?[/b]

[b]If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it?[/b]

[b]Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation?[/b]

[b]If such a practice [i]is[/i] in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do [i]not[/i] operate by such ideas?[/b]

[b]If such a practice is [i]not[/i], what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that [i]do[/i] operate by such ideas?[/b]

[b]If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned?[/b]

[b]If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted?[/b]





EDIT: Corrected 'human history' to 'human civilised history'.


Palagaria has two
1: Born Palagarian (full citizen)(with at least one Palagari parent)
2: Illegal immigrant who hasn't been detained and sent to a Detention Center yet
Political System of Palagaria

"it is the duty of every Palagarian to ensure that at the end of the day, Palagaria emerges a thriving nation, No matter what"

- General Leader Grant Darnell

User avatar
The Atlantean Islands
Envoy
 
Posts: 206
Founded: Apr 07, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Atlantean Islands » Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:54 am

We have three:

1. Full citizen - A full citizen is either natural born or naturalised.
2. Immigrant - This degree refers to people who legally immigrated to Atlantis. An immigrant is given a documentation ID. He or she must stay for at least three years, attend Atlantean culture classes and pass an Atlantean culture integration test to become a full citizen. He or she has the right to find employment and own property (albeit limited), but he or she cannot vote or hold public office. Also, while able to have an Atlantean Welfare Bank account, he or she would be unable to reap the full benefits.
3. Illegal immigrant - Examples of this include the refugees that has plagued Europe or tourists who overstay their visa.

Due to the existence of a second caste, we don't take lightly to cultural cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism.
Last edited by The Atlantean Islands on Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:26 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Uses certain NS stats.

Atlantis is an MT nation that is the third richest country in the world, behind only China and the United States. It is closer to the UK, USA, Italy and Spain (in that order, though Italy and Spain is probably tied) culturally than it is Greece. It is also a naval power.

And no, Atlantis is not underwater: It has a land area around the size of France.

Pros: Classical liberalism, democracy, the West, Brexit, Viktor Orban, free education, strong military
Cons: Authoritarianism, fascism, communism, multiculturalism, Islamism

User avatar
Fatatatutti
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10880
Founded: Jun 02, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Fatatatutti » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am

No.

User avatar
Estainia
Senator
 
Posts: 4691
Founded: Jul 03, 2009
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Estainia » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:03 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? One is, or is not an Imperial.

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? One is, or is not, an Imperial.

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? One is, or is not, an Imperial.
ἡ μείζων ἀρχὴ τῆς Ἐσταινίας καὶ τῆς Ἀλισονίας
Is a bit of magic your thing, or scientific post-modernism?
Consider joining Rostil today and help build a lasting setting!

User avatar
Kirav
Minister
 
Posts: 2277
Founded: Sep 07, 2006
Capitalizt

Postby Kirav » Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:03 pm

Yes, as a matter of fact. The Kiravian Federacy does have several different classes of citizenship and nationality.

Kiravian nationals (térnaxuya), or more specifically bare/mere nationals (miśgatérnaxuya) are people who have Kiravian nationality and are entitled to hold Kiravian passports and receive Kiravian consular services abroad. These include both general nationals (ovsitérnaxuya) and Kiravian Nationals (Overseas) (átrafarax-kiravitérnaxuya). KN(O) status is typically granted either to members of Coscivian or Celtic minority populations in other countries (particularly those subject to state repression), or to individuals in special circumstances on the advice of the Prime Executive, usually on humanitarian grounds. General nationals have right of abode in the Kiravian Federacy, cannot be deported or stripped of their nationality, and can travel freely through the Federacy and its external possessions. They hold the same passports as Kiravian citizens and metics, and as such enjoy the same visa-waiver and other privileges enjoyed by Kiravian citizens and metics in other countries. They can serve in the Kiravian military, but cannot hold officers' commissions or warrants. They cannot vote or stand for public office, and are not eligible for certain federal government benefits (though state/territorial governments often treat them the same as other Kiravians). Kiravian Nationals (Overseas) do not have automatic right of abode in the Kiravian Federacy, but they are allowed to freely enter it and remain for up to 60 days. They do, by local legislation, have right of abode in the Kiravian dependencies of St. Kennera and Pribraltar They also have "right of refuge", meaning that they can take shelter in the Federacy or anyplace subject to its jurisdiction for an indefinite period if they are in danger in the country where they normally reside, provided they notify the Overseas Kiravians Bureau or a local court clerk or postal captain. KN(O)s carry different passports than other Kiravians, and as such may have different visa requirements in foreign countries.

Metics (vôvodinya) enjoy all the same rights as full Kiravian citizens in terms of public benefits, consular services, etc., but cannot vote or stand for federal public office. Many individual states allow metics to vote in state and local elections and hold state and local offices. Metics are also referred to as "partial citizens" (ārvidesinya) or "citizen-candidates" (desinō-ivaburya) The majority of metics are immigrants who have earned Kiravian nationality and are in the process of becoming full citizens, but the metic population also includes a wide variety of people who became metics through a number of different circumstances, including:

‣ Descendants of people who were metics ab initio: For much of Kiravian history, including during the largest waves of Coscivian immigration to Kiravia, Coscivian persons admitted to the Federacy to settle were automatically accorded the status of metic, with the expectation that they would apply for full citizenship after living in Kiravia for the required five years. However, a significant minority of these people never did so for whatever reason, and because metics can go about everyday life with the same rights as citizens, some families have lived in Kiravia for multiple generations and have passed on their status to their children without bothering to upgrade.

‣ Descendants of people (whether immigrants or natives) who obtained or were born with Kiravian nationality and began the process of applying for full citizenship but either never completed it or were ruled ineligible.

‣ Descendants of people who were born out-of-wedlock to Kiravian citizens back when laws limited birthright citizenship to the legitimate children of citizen fathers. Also, people born to foreign fathers and Kiravian mothers during this time. Like the above two categories, people in this situation are free to apply for full citizenship, but not all have done so.

‣ Members of certain Aboriginal Kiravite tribes. After Kiravia gained control of the entire island-continent of Great Kirav in the Continental War, members of Aboriginal Kiravite tribes who had already been living under Kiravian rule before the war or who joined forces with Kiravia during the war were granted Kiravian citizenship. Members of tribes who had been neutral or completely uninvolved (mostly tribes in the Western Highlands) were granted meticship. Members of tribes who had fought against Kiravia were initially treated as a stateless subject people, but were gradually granted meticship on a tribe-by-tribe basis. All are now eligible to apply for full citizenship, but not all have done so.

Citizens (desinya) are Kiravian nationals with full political rights, who can stand for any public offices for which they are otherwise eligible and vote in any elections.

This graduated hierarchy of legal statuses is neither particularly controversial nor completely uncontested. Most Kiravians support or accept the current system, but there have been various movements for reform. The two largest political caucuses in the federal legislature, the Shaftonist-Republican Alliance and Caritist Social Union, have both declared their support for elevating non-immigrant, non-transitional metics to full citizenship, but have yet to introduce legislation to this effect.

Most historians believe that these different degrees of citizenship were inspired by the social and political class hierarchy in the nation of Heku, with which Kiravia has longstanding economic ties.

User avatar
The Eternal Kawaii
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1714
Founded: Apr 21, 2005
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Eternal Kawaii » Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:07 pm

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

All Kawaiians are equal under the law, from the most revered Patriarch to the lowliest Child of the Cute One.
Learn More about The Eternal Kawaii from our Factbook!

"Aside from being illegal, it's not like Max Barry Day was that bad of a resolution." -- Glen Rhodes
"as a member of the GA elite, I don't have to take this" -- Vancouvia

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1670
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:38 pm

No.

User avatar
Gandoor
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8064
Founded: Sep 23, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Gandoor » Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:13 am

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? No

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? No

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? No

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? No

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? N/A

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? Pointless, all citizens should have full and equal rights within their nation.

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? N/A

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? N/A
OOC - Call me Viola
IC Flag|NSindex Articles|Q&A
Flag is currently Cure Ma Chérie and Cure Amour from Hugtto! Precure
I'm female.
OOC Info
Twitter: @Sailor_Viola
Steam: Princess Viola
TGs are welcome

User avatar
Auzkhia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26287
Founded: Mar 11, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Auzkhia » Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:02 am

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Yes, we had lower class subjects in our history, but that is long gone. Feudal Auzkhia had serfs, but after that, voting rights only applied to landed gentry, then all men could vote, but not women until 1918. 1918 was when universal suffrage was guaranteed, this due to the war and women had to take industrial jobs because of conscription.

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? No

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it?

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? There used to be those who were only imperial subjects, not full citizens, which applied to those who lived in the colonies, but that was abolished in 1949.

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? Used to be, but everyone in the realm has full citizenship.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? N/A

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? We think it's very unequal and unfair.

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? The Socialist Government moved to make all subjects full citizens to ensure everyone had full say in governance.

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? n/a
Hello, I'm Auzi.
I do not use NS page statistics.
PONIES UNITE!!!
Factbook (Under Construction) Death to Realism! Embassies
Alles über mich, everything about me.
Agender/enby (They/them) Bisexual, Pennsylvanian, Furry, Agnostic atheist, social democrat, market socialist.
Democratic Congress 2018

User avatar
Andower
Secretary
 
Posts: 33
Founded: Jun 23, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Andower » Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:09 am

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Yes

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? Yes

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? The racial caste system, with whites at the top having the most rights (and most responsibilities) and blacks at the bottom having the least. Historically the men in each caste had more rights than the women in their caste, but this is no longer the case

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? Yes, socialists and some of the more radical civil rights groups are known to support so called "universal citizenship" but the vast majority are strongly against the idea

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? Most of the nations in our world which have "universal citizenship" tend to have very racially homogeneous societies, precluding the need for graduated citizenship altogether

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? It was first adopted by the early colonial authorities as a way of maintaining the position of the (generally wealthy) early white settlers over the descendants of slaves and indentured labourers that were imported into Andower
Last edited by Andower on Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ashturkstan
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 4
Founded: Jul 13, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ashturkstan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:46 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Yes, explained below
  • In medieval times, Ashturk society was under a caste system
  • In modern times; prisoners, ex-convicts, and immigrant citizens are not afforded full rights as natural born citizens

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? Yes; prisoners, ex-convicts, and immigrant citizens are not afforded full rights as natural born citizens

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? Yes, in ancient and medieval times

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks?
    [1]Non-convicted Natural Born citizens Can vote in all elections and hold a position in the national government
    [2]Convicted Natural Born citizens can vote using provisional ballots and hold a position in the national government
    [3]Non-convicted immigrant citizens can vote using provisional ballots that do not have all measures and offices on them, nor can they hold any higher office than local government
    [4]Convicted Immigrant Citizens cannot vote but can run for local office
    [5]All imprisoned persons cannot vote or hold any office while their status is incarcerated

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? There are no nationwide movements to remove it.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? The nation doesn't judge other nations for not having a similar system

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? See above

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? N/A

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? N/A
Ashturkish Republic

User avatar
Russo-Austria
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 166
Founded: Feb 08, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Russo-Austria » Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:55 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Since the de Medici dynasty was formed

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? Yes

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it?

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks?
From bottom to top tier:
Illigle slave
Ligle slave
Serf
Indentured servant
Free peasant
Lower Bugoisie (worth at least 250,000 gold sovreignsa a year)
The Church
Honourary Titled
Lower Aristocracy
Upper Bugoisie (worth at least 1.5 million gold sovriegns a year)
Middle Aristocracy
Elected Officials
Upper Aristocracy
Royalty

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? Yes. For the wealthy to gain less influence - and to end slavery, serfdom, etc.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? No hatred or love

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? Approval

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned?

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted?
Join this cool RP: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=446624

User avatar
Great Nortend
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 378
Founded: Jul 08, 2017
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Great Nortend » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:26 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes, Great Nortend has the aequivalent concept of subjectship.
At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Yes.
Does your nation operate on such a practice today? Yes.
If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? The two major 'ranks' as it were, are full subjectship and petit subjectship. A full subject of the Crown is the highest degree of national of Great Nortend. The lesser grade is petit subjectship. Full subjectship grants suffrage to those people who are enfranchised, and is a requirement of holding public office, entering university and of receipt of general alms. Furthermore, full subjects may not be deported and possess right of entry and right of abode in Great Nortend. On the other hand, petit subjects may be deported if they hold a dual citizenship, and only hold indefinite leave to enter and indefinite leave to remain. There are also distinctions made in treason law where treason committed by a full subject is high treason whereas treason committed by a petit subject is only grand petty treason, a distinction that results in a slightly lesser punishment. Furthermore, only full subjects are permitted to hold commissions and warrants, and are described as 'trusty and beloved' in Royal letters patent, declarations, proclamations &c. whereas petit subjects are merely described as 'good and trusty'. All hereditary peers are automatically made full subjects even if they hold dual nationality.

Full subjectship requires the swearing of a full and absolute oath of allegiance to the King, as well as the swearing of a number of other oaths, which is traditionally a part of the confirmation ceremony. No full subject may hold a dual nationality or be a subject of any other country, princely state, nation or foreign power. All children born in His Majesty's Dominion to Nortan fathers are considered full subjects usque, or [by the right of blood/soil] until [the age of majority], unless they hold another nationality. If by the age of majority, a full subject usque refuses or otherwise fails to swear the required oaths, he loses his full subjectship automatically and becomes a petit subject, of the grade in totali if he holds no other nationality, or cum altero if he does. Full subjectship generally cannot be held with another nationality, except by special petition to the Privy Council or in the aforementioned cases regarding peers. Upon the conferral of a foreign nationality, a person's full subjectship is automatically revoked.

Petit subjectship of Great Nortend is the first step for those wishing to become full subjects of Great Nortend. Petit subjects are still required to bear allegiance towards His Majesty however are permitted to hold dual nationality with favourable states. Petit subjectship is separated into two sub-classes. Petit subjectship cum altero, or with another [nationality], is the Nortan equivalent of a permanent resident. Petit subjectship in totali, or in full, is the form held by erstwhile full subjects usque who fail to swear the required oaths by the age of majority, and have not acquired any other nationality. There is little difference in the two grades, except that those cum altero may be deported and are considered nationals of the other country, whilst those in totali are considered to be nationals of Great Nortend. A person who is a petit subject in totali may become a full subject by taking the required oaths at any time in front of a competent authority. A petit subject cum altero can become a full subject by satisfying the full citizenship criteria. Becoming a petit subject cum altero requires the taking of the Subjectship Examination, and satisfaction of the petit subject criteria.
Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? No.
If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? There is little public consideration of it, as the form in Great Nortend is mostly a slightly different version of permanent residency.
If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? The system arose out of the common law, in the 19th and 20th centuries as notions of nationality settled.
Last edited by Great Nortend on Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
News from Great Nortend: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=417866
Diplomacy with Great Nortend: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=417865
Fly with Royal Airways: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=417867
Fly to Great Nortend: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=417864
Nortan Q&A: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=428776
This nation generally represents my personal views in most areas, though slightly exaggerated perhaps.

User avatar
New Hayesalia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7447
Founded: Jul 21, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby New Hayesalia » Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:32 am

Image


Image




To the requester,
14th of July, 2018



Dear Requestor,


The New Hayesalian Government is constitutionally empowered to establish laws regarding New Hayesalian citizenship and nationality affairs.

New Hayesalia's founding is attributable to open borders and migration across the world, with our modern nation welcoming millions of new citizens and permanent residents each year. New Hayesalia is a multicultural state sharing the core values of Compassion, Freedom, and Determination.

Citizenship in New Hayesalia is traced back to 1895, when the concept of Hayesalian Union citizenship was introduced. It was not originally viewed as a single citizenship, but rather acted as a form of further supranational identity building and allowed for freedom of movement across the Hayesalian Union. It was later considered that unification of the Hayesalian Union citizenships to a central process would allow for easier administration and enhanced supranational unity, and Hayesalian Union citizenship was formally established and internationally recognised in 1949. In that sense, citizenship was divided until 1949 along provincial border lines.

Upon amalgamation, all citizens of the Hayesalian Union became citizens of New Hayesalia. The same applied for citizens of Montmaray upon that nation's Amalgamation a year later. It is expected that the last remaining Hayesalian Union passports will expire in July of 2019, and the same for Montmaray the following year.

As a democratic nation, all citizens of New Hayesalia are considered equal and there are no levels of distinctions in citizenship.

I trust this information to be of use to you. Please do not hesitate to contact the FOI Office for any future enquiries.

Shannon Broad
Response Officer, New Hayesalian Freedom of Information Office


The Greater Island Kingdom of New Hayesalia
Amalgamated July 21, 2009

This is an official message of the New Hayesalian Government. This message
may be disseminated in accordance with the security classification noted above.



Last edited by New Hayesalia on Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Alinghi Federal-Democratic Republic
Diplomat
 
Posts: 887
Founded: May 07, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Alinghi Federal-Democratic Republic » Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:51 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? No, Alinghi until the last half of XVII ceuntry whan an unhabitated land, the first colonist are who escaped from persecutions for religious motive (because are accued to be "heretics") from France, UK, German States, and Italian States. Due the lack of population where arent born things as nobility, or things that determined a persoan have a higer rank whan other.In 1754 the Kingdom of Alinghi is born, in the 1790 the illuminist first king Ferdinand I fascinated by the Declaration of Universal Declaration of Human Rights in France duing the French Revolution, with his volounty seeing the event of French Revolution he limits his powers conceding a constitutrion. Making a de Facto situation also the de jure situation of equalitity among all citizen

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? No.

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? No.

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? No

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation?

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas?

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? Alinghi oppose storngly to this ideal, all citizen among thier differencies have the right to be have the same rights and opportunities

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned?

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted?
Pro: Democracy, social equality, switzerland, Social-Democracy, EU, ONU, Federalism, same sex marriage and Schengen , Ferderal non-ethinc based (intendned not a state based on an ethnic group) Palestine,Fatah (palestone political party),Sanders, Pan-Europeism (US of Europe)
Anti: Dictitonaship, FAscism, Communism, Racism, Putin's Russia, Berlusconi, religous intollerance, Trump, Erdogan , British Gov., Netanyahu, Likud, Hofer
The tax rate is the half of NS index, because the NS index is so is so unrealistic, some nation have over 100%
I'm a Euro-Federalist!!!

I'm gay

User avatar
Ko-oren
Senator
 
Posts: 3794
Founded: Nov 26, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ko-oren » Sun Jul 15, 2018 11:50 am

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Yes

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? Yes

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? N/A

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? It was on a geographical basis; people had different rights based on the province they were in and the province they are from, all while the entire nation presented itself as one single nation. Currently, it is on a basis of who is, is in the process of, or claims to want to become a Ko-orenite citizen. All three are allowed to study under cheaper rates, the former two may vote, and only the first may carry a Ko-orenite passport.

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? There was a call for removal, which was granted several centuries ago.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? That is fair enough.

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas?

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? N/A

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? N/A
Domestic Sports Newswires - Factbook - Top attractions in Ko-oren - Map


Trigramme: KOR - Demonym: Ko-orenite - Population: 27.270.096

User avatar
Crylante
Diplomat
 
Posts: 553
Founded: Dec 06, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Crylante » Sun Jul 15, 2018 1:24 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes.

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? There was feudalism largely up to the late 17th century, and traces remained until 1900.

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? No; a founding principle of Crylante is a rejection of this.

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? tir Lhaeraidd and the United Kingdom of Lhedwin, two states which Crylante has been a vassal of/part of, had noble titles, but Lhaeraidh rule was responsible for the abolition of serfdom in Crylante.

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? No.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? N/A

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? The people generally strongly look down on them.

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? Lhaeraidh rule abolished serfdom in an attempt to win popular support with the Crylantian populace, and the results of the Great War/Crylantian Revolution led to the abolition of all hereditary titles and tiers of citizenship.

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? N/A


Crylantian Federation
Social democratic confederation of Latin-Danes, Danes and Finns.
IIWiki



Economic Left/Right: -8.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.59

"We are one of the richest countries in the world, and there is absolutely no reason why anyone should have to live in poverty." - Jeremy Corbyn

User avatar
Vsyerossiya
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 9
Founded: Jun 26, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Vsyerossiya » Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:17 pm

Does your nation operate on the idea of such a thing as a citizen? Yes.

At any point in your nation's history, has your society operated on a graduated citizenship practice, where different individuals could both claim to be citizens but have different rights afforded to them depending on the class of citizen they were? Yes.

Does your nation operate on such a practice today? Yes, but the current practice is not directly connected to the past, graduated system.

If not, were you ever under the control or influence of another state that did, and enforced it upon you as a subject or otherwise included your people within it? N/A

If so at any point in history, along which lines was citizenship divided? What are their tiers / ranks? Current system: Working Class (third class), Intelligentsia (intellectual middle class), Party (first class), and Autocrat (leader).

Is there any popular call to either remove graduated citizenship, or implement it, depending on the current situation of your nation? No such movement exists.

If such a practice is in place, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do not operate by such ideas? They are disorganized, chaotic, and inefficient.

If such a practice is not, what is the view within your nation (popular or government official stance) upon nations and societies that do operate by such ideas? N/A

If this practice was ever in place, but isn't anymore, when and why was it abandoned? N/A

If this practice was not in place before, but is now, when and why was it adopted? To increase efficiency and national unity based on hierarchical collectivist principles.
Всероссия (Vsyerossiya) is a Russian unitary state •
• Encompassing Великороссия (Great Russia), Белороссия (White Russia), and Малороссия (Little Russia) •
• Highly anti-captialist and anti-fascist •
• Led by a Государь (Sovereign/Emperor) supported by the Партия (Party) •
• Very religious (Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate) •


•+•Православие - Партия - Народность•+•


Remove ads

Return to Factbooks and National Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Connori Pilgrims, GemNation, SquareDisc City

Remove ads