Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 22 Mar 1956

Vol. 155 No. 8

Committee On Finance. - Irish Nationality and Citizenship Bill, 1955—Committee Stage.

Sections 1 to 5 inclusive agreed to.
SECTION 6.
Question proposed: "That Section 6 stand part of the Bill."

This section is, far and away, the most important section in the Bill as it provides for the main source of citizenship—birth in Ireland. It also provides that citizenship, when established, may descend through the blood of either the father or mother. For a full understanding, its provisions must be read in conjunction with the provisions of Section 7 which require formalities to be complied with in certain cases.

As a preliminary, it is necessary to refer to the corresponding provisions of existing law governing the acquisition of citizenship — that is the law contained in Article 3 of the 1922 Constitution and Section 2 of the Act of 1955 which is paraphrased in pages 3 and 4 of the Explanatory Memorandum circulated with the Bill.

In relation to persons born before 6th December, 1922, existing law makes no provision for citizenship in the case of considerable overseas populations of the Irish race who were born, or whose immediate forefathers were born in Ireland. In Australia, Britain, Canada, the U.S.A. and elsewhere, there are large numbers of persons who emigrated from Ireland before 6th December, 1922, and who did not have a domicile in Ireland on that date. They are not citizens under Article 3 of the 1922 Constitution. And for one reason or another—unawareness, perhaps, of the registration provisions of Section 2 (4) of the Act of 1935, or because they are prohibited by being naturalised citizens of their country of residence—they have not become Irish citizens by registration. Only 4,409 persons have registered since 1935 and their sons and daughters, children of direct Irish stock, are not Irish citizens and could only become Irish citizens by coming to live in Ireland and taking out naturalisation papers.

As regards persons born since 6th December, 1922, the provisions of Section 2 of the 1935 Act which govern their citizenship seem to us to be defective in many respects. While citizenship is provided for by birth in the Twenty-Six Counties, birth in the Six Counties is treated the same as birth in any alien land; furthermore, the provision that a person born outside the Twenty-Six counties of an Irish father born outside the Twenty-Six Counties can acquire citizenship by registration only within two years of birth seems unduly restrictive; and derivation of citizenship through the father, in disregard of the mother, does not commend itself to us.

Section 6 of this Bill (as qualified by Section 7) proposes to rectify that position. If it is enacted into law, every living person born in any part of the 32 Counties before 6th December, 1922, will be an Irish citizen from birth; every living person born outside the 32 Counties whose father or mother was born in any part of the 32 Counties before 6th December, 1922, will be an Irish citizen; every living person who is the grandchild of a person born in any part of the 32 Counties prior to 6th December, 1922, will be an Irish citizen—provided that where the person and his or her parents are all born outside the 32 Counties citizenship is conditional on registration.

That is how we propose that citizenship will originate in and flow from persons born before 6th December, 1922. The vast majority of persons living in any part of the 32 Counties, to-day, will almost certainly be covered by this new umbrella of citizenship. And their children born outside Ireland will be citizens by descent and so on into future generations.

But, in addition to the line of citizenship flowing from our pre-1922 stock, Section 6 makes provision for citizenship which originates by birth in the Twenty-Six County State and is transmitted from either the Irish father or Irish mother to the children born abroad.

Furthermore, there is yet a third originating source of citizenship: where birth, without Irish ancestry, takes place in the Six Counties on or after 6th December, 1922 — that fact alone enables the person concerned to declare himself to be an Irish citizen, in which case his citizenship dates from his birth and is the citizenship of his children. Once citizenship is established in this way, it continues without formality of any kind through succeeding generations born in the Six Counties.

There are ways, apart from birth in the national territory, in which Irish citizenship may originate, such as the issue to a person of a certificate of citizenship, under Section 12, or a certificate of naturalisation under Section 18. The citizenship of the children born to such citizens is provided for in Section 6, which says that "every person is an Irish citizen if his father or mother was an Irish citizen at the time of that person's birth".

I think that our proposals in Section 6—as qualified in Section 7—are just and generous and that they will have the general approval of the House.

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 7.

On Deputy Costello's amendment No. 1, I take it that the amendment to Section 29 proposed by the Minister is to effect the same purpose?

Amendment not moved.

In regard to amendment No. 2 in Deputy Costello's name, what is wrong with the amendment is that it is making a distinction between citizenship derived from the father and mother born outside Ireland. I think that the Minister should consider between this and the Report Stage whether the principle involved in Deputy Costello's amendment should be adopted.

Does the Deputy mean the first amendment or the second?

The second. Under this section as it stands now we are going to give citizenship without either application or registration not only to the children of Irish citizens born outside Ireland but also to their children. I think that tends to make citizenship very cheap. If we take the idea in Deputy Declan Costello's amendment, and apply it to the children of fathers and mothers born outside Ireland, we would limit the granting of citizenship to a proper extent. I think it is reasonable to grant citizenship without undue formality to the children of Irish citizens who are born outside Ireland—the children who are born outside Ireland — but I think we should stop there and not apply automatic citizenship to the children's children.

If they want to become Irish citizens we can adopt the idea in the 1935 Act and also the idea in the amendment by Deputy Declan Costello. I think the Minister should consider that matter between now and the Report Stage.

There is no reason why the second or third generation should not be compelled to register and thus show their interest in Irish citizenship before it is granted to them.

I think the Minister should consider what Deputy Aiken has said. There is reason for it. The section as it stands does seem to make the matter too facile altogether.

The matter is not as Deputy Aiken suggested at all. A person must register.

But not the second generation.

Yes, under Section 2 (a). We are not accepting Deputy Costello's amendment. If we were to accept the proposals we would, of course, be bridging some of the gap between the existing law and the new Bill. We would, I know, be acknowledging the Irish citizenship of a person born abroad of a mother born in Ireland but that would be going only a limited distance along the road to acknowledging that the blood of the mother is of the same value as the blood of the father in transmitting Irish citizenship.

Amendment No. 2 not moved.
Sections 7 to 13 inclusive agreed to.
SECTION 14.

I move amendment No. 3:—

Before Section 14, but in Part III, to insert a new section as follows:—

14.—Irish citizenship may be conferred on an alien by means of a certificate of naturalisation granted by the Minister.

I take it that that is purely a drafting amendment?

Amendment agreed to.

Acting-Chairman

Acceptance of this amendment involves the deletion of Section 14 of the Bill.

Section 14 accordingly deleted; new Section 14 inserted.

Section 15 agreed to.
SECTION 16.
Question proposed: "That Section 16 stand part of the Bill."

Did the Minister go into the matter of the phrase "Irish associations"? It seems to me to be very wide. I know it was in the 1935 Act but 21 years have elapsed since then. As I say, the phrase "Irish associations" seems to me very wide. After all, the rest of the section seems to provide a long list of categories to whom a certificate of naturalisation can be granted without complying with all the conditions in Section 15. Section 16 gives power to the Minister to grant a certificate of naturalisation where the applicant is of Irish descent or Irish associations, where the applicant is a parent or guardian acting on behalf of a minor of Irish descent or Irish associations, where the applicant is a naturalised Irish citizen acting on behalf of his minor child, where the applicant is a woman who is married to a naturalised Irish citizen, where the applicant is married to a woman who is an Irish citizen (otherwise than by naturalisation), and where the applicant is or has been resident abroad in the public service. As I raised this point on the Second Reading, I should like to know from the Minister what exactly he has in mind or what type of person he has in mind to whom he wants to grant a certificate of naturalisation although all the conditions for naturalisation have not been complied with.

The use of the expression "Irish associations" in paragraph (a), without definition has been queried. This use was deliberate. The same expression occurred in Section 7 of the 1935 Act which enabled the Minister to grant a certificate to a minor who has not complied with the ordinary requirements of naturalisation on account of his Irish descent or associations. It is intended to cover cases such as those of aliens who join the Defence Forces or aliens who have many years residence in Ireland but are unable to complete a year's continuous residence prior to the date of application.

We have a case in mind of a Stateless alien who has been here for a considerable number of years and has succeeded in getting a scholarship which requires his presence abroad for about two months in every year. Unless we have some loophole for cases such as this, the residence requirements, which are of value generally, will prevent the grant of citizenship to a person fitted in every way for the honour.

I do not think the way this section is drafted could be described as leaving a loophole. It is an actual highway. Take the position of an applicant for citizenship in Section 16 (a) who is of Irish descent or Irish associations. How is that to be interpreted? It is quite open, under this, to dispense with all the other provisions there are as to qualifications for citizenship. For instance, it appears to me that under this, if an Arab in Cairo drinks a glass of Irish whiskey it would qualify him for citizenship under this particular provision.

That is drawing the long bow.

If a Mesopotamian goes into a business partnership with a man of Irish descent, he would have Irish associations and it would be open to any Minister to grant his application for Irish citizenship. If we are left without some specific definition of what Irish associations may be, it means, in effect, that anybody in the whole wide world may become a citizen of this State if the particular Minister in power at the time is so inclined and is agreeable to give him citizenship. By that it appears to me that all the other provisions in relation to residence qualifications and so on can go by the board because anybody from the ends of the earth if he desires Irish citizenship can get some kind of Irish associations. It will be very easy to acquire Irish associations and thereby qualify himself for a certificate of naturalisation.

But he does not qualify himself. He has no right to get it. He may get it.

Perhaps Deputy McGilligan would tell us what "Irish associations" mean?

What did it mean in 1935?

I am asking the legal luminary on the front benches to tell us what it means because this is his section.

The phrase occurred in the 1935 Act and there is no difficulty about applying it in the limited circumstances of Section 7. It was deliberately left undefined here. I understand that Deputy Moran thinks that an Arab who drinks Irish whiskey has Irish associations. If there is a Minister mad enough to accept that interpretation, he is empowered to do so, but we do not often elect members of such calibre, or to accept that line of argument.

There is an obvious case the Minister referred to, that of an individual whom I know. He is a person of considerable academic qualifications who had to fly as a refugee from the Continent. He is a doctor in three universities. He came here and is associated with one of the universities. Because of his qualifications, he has succeeded in getting a scholarship under the U.N.O. It means that he must get out of this country for a certain period each year and that means that he cannot qualify under Section 15 because he cannot complete a year's continuous residence prior to the date of application. It is to meet that sort of case that the loophole is left. Because a loophole is left, it does not necessarily follow that the Minister will be lunatic enough to extend it in the manner suggested by the Deputy, who would leave no discrimination to the Minister at all. The phrase is here since 1935 and no effort has been made to widen it in any extravagant fashion. Deliberately, the phrase has not been defined.

Surely if we are enacting legislation here we should know what we mean. I have asked Deputy McGilligan to give us a definition of "Irish associations" a phrase with which we are dealing here. Of course, he cites that because he cannot define what is legally meant by "Irish associations". I suggest nobody in the House can do so. It is the height of absurdity, at all events, to enact legislation the meaning of which the House does not understand. It is a greater absurdity to write this into the Statute Book and expect that at some time or other some court will interpret it. If it is the intention of the Minister and the House to state that the Minister can, in suitable circumstances and at his own sweet will, confer Irish citizenship on anybody, then let us say so.

If we do it in that form the Minister, who may grant at his own sweet will Irish citizenship to anybody, will have to take the responsibility for it and we will not leave it open to any future Minister who might abuse that particular power to say: "Well, it is written into Section 16 of this Act that this particular individual had Irish associations, whatever that may mean." I far prefer to put the onus on the Minister by writing on the Statute Book that a Minister for Justice of this country in the future can, in suitable cases, confer Irish citizenship on anybody. I think it would be far better to do that than to write in a sub-section of this type the meaning of which no Deputy understands, the meaning of which the country does not understand and one which certainly no judge would be able to understand or to interpret.

I think Deputy Moran is not being reasonable in his approach. First of all, we are on common ground that the definition of "Irish association," if at all possible, might lead to the type of situation about which the Deputy would immediately start to wail. In my view, this Act is designed to be interpreted by a reasonable Minister in the circumstances of each individual case. I thought the Deputy was possibly being legal ad absurdum when he suggested that “Irish association” might simply be the drinking of a glass of whiskey with Irish representatives at, for instance, some international conference. Surely that would be an infusion of Irish spirit rather than “Irish association.”

With regard to this particular section, for obvious reasons the 1935 Act avoided definition. I would say the reasons were, first, the impracticability of a clear-cut definition and, secondly, that the Government of that day were satisfied that the Minister for Justice, in interpreting the meaning of the expression "Irish association," would act within the normal bounds of reasonableness as we know it legally and as a prudent man might. There is no suggestion that this particular section will go any further than to give the Minister, as Ministers have under much of our legislation, a discriminatory power in relation to certain discretionary positions. If there were some limitation to that, I think we would have infinitely more criticism from the Opposition.

Let us see how the Act will work and how the interpretation of this section works out before we try to spancel it with difficulties that might be insurmountable afterwards in the normal legislation pattern. It is not an easy thing to define. That is common case. Why try and define it? Why not, rather, allow the individual circumstances of each case and the examination of the circumstances of each case to be the yardstick by which the Minister will assess whether or not there is what could normally be interpreted as "Irish association" there?

Deputy Moran may be making a successful debating argument but I think the practical approach to this matter is that it gives a flexibility that is necessary — one which can be safeguarded by the fact that we do not believe it would be possible ever for somebody to hold the responsibility of Minister for Justice and have the mentality that could stretch to the extended circumstances suggested by Deputy Moran.

I am not satisfied with the explanations that have been given by the Minister and by the Attorney-General. There is no use in saying in 1956 that because something was written into an Act of Parliament in 1935 we should just swallow it without any examination or without trying to define something quite clearly. This Bill is to carry out the terms of the Constitution. In 1935, the Constitution was very different. That was prior to the present Constitution. I agree with the Attorney-General that the type of person he alluded to should be entitled to the grant of a certificate of naturalisation even though he does not fulfil all the qualifications that are in Section 16. I agree also that the Minister should be empowered to grant a person who served in the Irish Army a certificate without fulfilling all the conditions of Section 16. Parliamentary draftsmanship has improved very much in the past 21 years. All one has to do is to compare the drafting of this particular Bill with the 1935 Act or to see how Acts prior to that time were drafted. There has been an improvement. I think it is not beyond the wit of a parliamentary draftsman to cite a few cases or types of cases that would be entitled to this treatment rather than go through the roundabouts of Section 15.

We have in Section 12 a ready-made provision that the President may grant Irish citizenship as a token of honour to a person or to the child or grandchild of a person who, in the opinion of the Government, has done signal honour or rendered distinguished service to the nation. When a person has done signal honour or rendered distinguished service to the nation the Government are empowered to grant, through the instrumentality of the President and with all due formality, a certificate of naturalisation. I think that, really, the types of cases the Minister has in mind and those alluded to by the Attorney-General could, if all went to all, be dealt with under Section 12. If the Minister wants to put that into Section 16, I think he could get his staff and the parliamentary draftsman to give him a list of cases.

We have now 21 years' experience of operating a Citizenship Act here. Before that we had no such experience. During those 21 years practically all the types of cases have occurred that are likely to occur in the future. We are anxious at this stage, in adopting what is a really permanent bit of legislation about citizenship that may not be changed for a great number of years, to see it clearcut and defined, so that everyone will know where he stands. I do not think the Dáil will be anxious that this certificate of citizenship should become a mere question of application to the Minister.

I would ask the Minister to consider between now and the Report Stage whether he could not break down the various types of cases to which he wants it to apply. I do not mind if it is in rather general wording such as the very general wording that is in Section 12 "a person... has done signal honour or rendered distinguished service to the nation." It may be a phrase of that kind to the effect that a person has given service of an economic nature or in any other way to the nation. I am sure the Minister's staff, in association with the parliamentary draftsman, if put to this job between now and the date on which we discuss this on the Report Stage, will bring something in that will be more satisfactory than this form of section.

If Deputy Aiken has any strong objection to the expression "Irish association" or if he thinks it is too vague, I can assure him I will have the matter considered again on the Report Stage. I think Deputy Aiken will disagree with Deputy Moran and accept that no Minister for Justice would be so foolish as to grant a certificate to a person unless he was satisfied that person came into the category that Deputy Aiken has recommended. I can assure Deputy Aiken I will have the matter reconsidered between now and the Report Stage.

Question put and agreed to.
Sections 17 to 20 put and agreed to.
SECTION 21.

I move amendment No. 4:—

In sub-section (2), line 11, before "renounce" to insert "except with the consent of the Minister,".

This seems to deal with the point I raised that a citizen may not renounce Irish citizenship under this section during a time of war as defined in Article 28.3.3 of the Constitution. I think the Minister's amendment meets my point, that in view of the fact that the state of emergency that was declared back in 1939 is still continued, it would prohibit any person renouncing his citizenship even since 1945, the year in which hostilities ended. I am glad the Minister has made this loophole and has taken power that the Minister may, in appropriate cases, give the right to a person to renounce Irish citizenship even though it is in a time of war as defined in Article 28.3.3 of the Constitution.

Deputy Aiken has said what I would have said in this connection.

Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, put and agreed to.
Section 22 agreed to.
SECTION 23.

I move amendment No. 5:—

To delete sub-section (2).

As this sub-section stands it would have the result that a woman born in Ireland who lost her citizenship, by reason of acquiring her husband's alien citizenship and living permanently abroad, would regain Irish citizenship as from the passing of the Act. Without this provision she would have citizenship from birth by virtue of birth in Ireland.

To retain sub-section (2) of Section 23 would tend to cast doubt on the Irish citizenship of persons born in Ireland who lost their Irish citizenship under Section 21 of the Act of 1935 on acquiring another citizenship. It is the intention that under Section 6 (1) of this Bill every living person born in Ireland is a citizen unless he makes an act of renunciation of citizenship.

Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, put and agreed to.
Sections 24 and 25 agreed to.
SECTION 26.
Question proposed: "That Section 26 stand part of the Bill."

On Section 26, does the Minister see any difficulty where the Dáil has already approved of an agreement with another country, providing for an exchange of citizenship rights? Although the Dáil has passed that particular agreement it is still left with power to reject one of the sections of the agreement. Notwithstanding the fact that the agreement may have been approved by the Dáil the part granting reciprocal rights will not in fact become operative under this section until the Dáil passes another resolution. Is there any difficulty in that?

We shall have the point examined.

Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 27.

I move amendment No. 6:—

In sub-section (2), lines 36 to 38, to delete "whose father or mother was, on the date of that person's birth, an Irish citizen born outside Ireland" and substitute "deriving citizenship through a father or mother born outside Ireland".

This is of a drafting nature.

Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, put and agreed to.
Section 28 agreed to.
SECTION 29.

I move amendment No. 7:—

Before Section 29 to insert a new section as follows:—

29.—An Irish citizen, wherever born, shall be entitled to all the rights and privileges conferred by the terms of any enactment on persons born in Ireland.

A number of statutes give rights and privileges to citizens born in the State which are not enjoyed by other classes of citizens — classes such as Article 3 citizens who were born outside Ireland or Irish parents pre-6th December, 1922, or persons born abroad, since then, of fathers who were citizens at the time of the person's birth, or naturalised citizens.

This section provides that an Irish citizen, no matter how his citizenship is derived — whether by birth or blood or by Act of State — will qualify for the rights and privileges now reserved by some statutes—the Moneylenders Act, 1933, the Control of Manufactures Acts, 1932 and 1934, the Control of Imports Acts, 1934, the Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Act, 1934—to citizens born in the State.

I do not think that this amendment effects any great change in the practice, whatever may have been the law. The operation of the Control of Manufactures Act and of other Acts always took into account the type of person that we are providing for in this Bill. But does the Minister think that this is the correct way or will it be a convenient way for people who might be looking up those other Acts to see what their rights are and to discover what they can do? Is the Minister satisfied that this amendment will make it clear enough to them without amending these other Acts?

I am satisfied. I will have the whole matter examined.

Amendment put and agreed to.
Section 29, as amended, agreed to.
Section 30 and Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.

When is it proposed to take the next stage?

Would Deputy Aiken have any objection to giving us the Report Stage now?

The Minister had better examine these few matters. I think the Bill could be improved.

Report Stage ordered for Tuesday, 10th April, 1956.
Top
Share