Taiwanese Citizenship and Renunciation II

[color=#0000FF][i]Mod’s note: Part one of this discussion is [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/taiwanese-citizenship-and-renunciation/70326/1

In their reasons for rejecting my original CEPD-endorsed proposal for revision of the renunciation provisions of the Nationality Act, the MOI said that Taiwan’s law was in alignment with a number of other countries, and listed Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, China, Belgium, Sweden, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Germany, Austria and Italy as 14 countries that require renunciation.

If I take up this matter again (as I strongly intend to, if I can find the time to attend to it), I will need to specifically rebut all of the reasons given by the MOI for rejecting the first proposal. Hence, I have been looking at the relevant provisions of the law in the more advanced of the countries they listed. And I have found that the MOI was fundamentally wrong about the nature of the law in nearly all of them, while even in those that do require renunciation to any extent, the conditions are far more lenient and subject to far more exceptions than the corresponding provisions of the law here.

This is what I’ve found from my initial research on the listed European countries and Japan:

Belgium
In Belgium, naturalization is discretionary. Discretionary naturalization is, in essence, not a right but a favour which one can be granted. Renunciation of the previous nationality is, in principle, not a condition of acquiring Belgian nationality. All adults who have been residing in Belgium for 3 years (reduced from 5 years in 2000) can apply for naturalization.
(From: European Immigration: A Sourcebook)

Italy
A foreign national who marries an Italian national and lives in Italy can apply for citizenship after 6 months of marriage. In such case, the conferral of citizenship is a right unless the person has been convicted of a crime or divorces before the naturalization proceedings are completed. In other cases, conferral of citizenship is discretionary.

Naturalisation is at the discretion of the government, which expresses its willingness to accept the foreign citizen on Italian soil. This acceptance is based on the participation of the applicant in Italian society, the applicant’s personality (lack of social danger, police record) and financial self-sufficiency.
The general requisites are:
• Ten years’ legal residence in Italy (five for those who have the status of stateless persons or refugees and four for citizens of the European Community)
• Three years of payment of state contributions
• Financial self-sufficiency
I can find no mention of any requirement to renounce other nationality.

Sweden
According to the relevant official Swedish government website, to become a Swedish citizen you must:
be able to prove your identity
have reached the age of 18
have a permanent residence permit
have lived in Sweden for a specified period (3 years if married to Swedish national, 5 years for others)
have conducted yourself well in Sweden.
There is no requirement to renounce any other nationality.

Austria
Generally requires renunciation of foreign citizenship “unless impractical.” Among those exempted from this requirement are those who acquire Austrian citizenship on the basis of being appointed a professor at an Austrian university.

Germany
The provisions governing naturalization as a German citizen are set out in the Nationality Act (Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz). Although the renunciation or loss of previous citizenship is included in the list or requirements set out in Section 10 of the Act, it is subject to many exceptions as set out in Section 12. Here is the full text of the Section 12 exceptions:

[quote] Section 12 [Naturalisation accepting multiple nationality]
(1) The condition stipulated in Section 10 (1), sentence 1, no. 4 shall be waived if the foreigner is unable to give up his or her previous citizenship, or if doing so would entail particularly difficult conditions. This is to be assumed if

  1. the law of the foreign state makes no provision for giving up its citizenship,
  2. the foreign state regularly refuses to grant release from citizenship,
  3. the foreign state has refused to grant release from citizenship for reasons for which the foreigner is not responsible, or attaches unreasonable conditions to release from citizenship or has failed to reach a decision within a reasonable time on the application for release from citizenship which has been submitted in due and complete form,
  4. the subsequent multiple nationality represents the sole obstacle to the naturalisation of older persons, the process for release from citizenship entails unreasonable difficulties and failure to grant naturalisation would constitute special hardship,
  5. in giving up his or her foreign citizenship the foreigner would incur substantial disadvantages beyond the loss of his or her civic rights, in particular such disadvantages of an economic or property-related nature, or
  6. the foreigner holds a travel document in accordance with Article 28 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951 (Federal Law Gazette 1953 II, p. 559).
    (2) The condition stipulated in Section 10 (1), sentence 1, no. 4 shall further be waived if the foreigner holds the citizenship of another member state of the European Union or Switzerland.
    (3) Further exemptions from the condition stipulated in Section 10 (1), sentence 1, no. 4 may be granted pursuant to the provisions of agreements under international law. [/quote]

Hence, the requirement only applies to roughly half of all applications for naturalization.

Japan
In principle, Japan does not allow dual nationality for any of its citizens, and hence requires naturalizing foreigners to renounce previous citizenship (since no Japanese national is permitted to hold any other nationality).

However, in contemporary practice, the authorities do not actively request dual national Japanese to give up other nationalities, and do not impose any punishment on those who are revealed as dual nationals.

Significantly, there are moves afoot to liberalize the nationality law and formally allow dual nationality. A senior LDP politician, Taro Kono, has submitted a proposal to an LDP panel he heads calling for the Nationality Law to be revised. His proposal includes allowing foreigners to obtain Japanese citizenship without giving up their original citizenship.

Here are the details of Kono’s proposal, which passed initial deliberation in the Diet in December 2008, but was then referred to a panel of lawmakers for further consideration. I can’t find any news about its subsequent status, but since there were many more urgent matter on the ruling party’s agenda, it wasn’t expected to be formally submitted to the Diet as a bill within a near timeframe.

Kono’s multiple citizenship plan

The conditions and procedure for naturalization as a Japanese citizen are described in this excerpt from a December 2011 article in The Japan Times:

[quote] According to the Nationality Law, a foreigner seeking Japanese nationality must have permission from the justice minister. He or she can become a naturalized citizen after clearing several conditions, including being at least 20 years old, residency in Japan for at least five consecutive years, a history of “upright conduct,” and no plans to join groups interested in overthrowing the Constitution or the government.

To file for naturalization, you must submit many documents to the local legal affairs bureau detailing your relatives, your livelihood, job or business, your motive for wanting to become a Japanese citizen, your tax payments, and an oath.
The Justice Ministry says the whole process takes about six months to a year, but some naturalized Japanese have noted it took about a 18 months to get the final seal of approval.

Are most requests approved?

Yes. About 99 percent of all applications are approved. In 2010, for example, 13,072 were recognized as naturalized citizens and 234 were rejected. Of those approved, 6,600 were North or South Korean nationals and about 5,000 were Chinese.

A Justice Ministry official said having a criminal history is often regarded as bad conduct, but that applications are examined on a comprehensive basis to take into account the seriousness of the crime, when it was committed and other details.

Those who chose to become naturalized citizens include Softbank Corp. President Masayoshi Son, author and naturalist C.W. Nicol, originally from Wales, politician Tsurunen Marutei from Finland, and TV personality Bobby Ologun from Nigeria.
[/quote]

This does not make any mention of the renunciation requirement. However, in Japan, unlike Taiwan, renunciation of original citizenship is not a precondition for naturalization, but a step that the new citizen is required to take after he has been naturalized. As part of the application process, the candidate must sign the following oath:

It seems that a two-year period is allowed for the renunciation. But what happens if you don’t carry out the oath, and retain your original citizenship?

Under Japanese law,

[quote] While there are no penalties, financial or incarceration, for breaking the naturalization requirements regarding renouncing, the Japanese government can strip you of your Japanese citizenship if you “forget” to renounce your other citizenship(s). The process is called “administrative denaturalization,” and is basically done when someone commits fraud or fails to fulfill all the requirements of naturalization or voluntarily (not automatically or involuntarily) acquires another citizenship as a Japanese.

[However], administrative denaturalization has never occurred under modern Japanese nationality laws (1950 onwards). Nobody knows why, but the most common theory is that in the case of naturalization, there are not (yet) enough cases of naturalization abuse to make it a priority for enforcement. Furthermore, there are few egregious cases of dual-citizenship privilege abuse (for example, attempting to vote twice — which is by definition undemocratic — in two countries on the same issue such as an international trade or military agreement) to make the non-trivial administrative process worth it. [/quote]

So, Japan’s naturalization law is evidently far more lenient than Taiwan’s, and there’s a fair possibility that it will become substantially more so if Taro Kono’s proposed changes to the law are enacted.

[quote=“Charlie Jack”]I don’t know about Germans, but there seem to be some people in the world who think that way:

[quote] Among the options in a survey, the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission of the Executive Yuan’s Division of International Affairs wrote:Current Status:
Foreigner with ROC nationality[/quote]

michaelturton.blogspot.com/2009/ … -fail.html[/quote]

I would have told them I’m not a foreigner, therefore don’t need said information, nor would I be able to aid in the survey as a result. So moot point as far as I’m concerned.
If they pressed the issue I would have asked questions about CKS and the like being foreigeners with ROC nationality, and would have asked how come Taiwan still uses 民國年 when the ROC died an early death in 1947-1949, or what the fuck did SYS ever have to do with Taiwan, as that bugger was clearly a Mainlander and hence a bloody foreign devil!

And Jiayou, Omni! Keep us posted, although I strongly suspect it’s much like pissing against the wind. :idunno:

[quote=“Omniloquacious”][color=#0000FF][i]Mod’s note: Part one of this discussion is [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/taiwanese-citizenship-and-renunciation/70326/1 If I take up this matter again (as I strongly intend to, if I can find the time to attend to it)…[/quote]

Omni, you have my full support.

I know an individual here in Taiwan who arrived as a child from Japan, and has successfully retained their Japanese citizenship while gaining ROC nationality.

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?

[quote=“StevenCrook”][quote=“Omniloquacious”][color=#0000FF][i]Mod’s note: Part one of this discussion is [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/taiwanese-citizenship-and-renunciation/70326/1 If I take up this matter again (as I strongly intend to, if I can find the time to attend to it)…[/quote]

Omni, you have my full support.

I know an individual here in Taiwan who arrived as a child from Japan, and has successfully retained their Japanese citizenship while gaining ROC nationality.[/quote]
AFAIK Japan, and countries like it, are an exception. If you can prove that for some reason you are unable to renounce then that is waived.
The entire thing is a bit of a balls up, because as a born South African I technically can’t renounce citizenship. Sure, they gave me a renunciation certificate, but it clearly states on there that being born there I retain Permanent Residence in the Republic and can resume at any time (including my son, who lost his along with me being under 18).
So, other than the mafan of waiting 42 weeks for my renunciation certificate and the expenses involved in getting it, it was really a pointless exercise. The only people, AFAIK, that are really fucked by the whole process are Americans and possibly Canadians, who can’t resume. And where’s the benefit of excluding that particular group (because that’s what it really comes down to), i.e. North Americans, from the naturalization table? And once a citizen you’re free in any case to apply for any other citizenship, or to resume (if able) in any case.
So, in summary, the only people that get screwed are North Americans, it’s just mafan for everyone else, and as a citizen you can gain any number of other nationalities, so what’s the difference in the long run? Not really sure why the government is so persistent in this.

IMVHO, if they keep the renunciation article, then all Taiwanese who have attained another country’s nationality should have to choose, or at the very least (if they are non-resident) lose HHR, their ID Card (and if they still hold a passport, have no ID number in it, like a TARC Taiwan passport) and their voting rights. But that too would be ridiculous, so just waive the bloody renunciation already!

Omni, I would suggest, in interests of greater assimilation, that you also add other requirements like:

  1. A much more difficult Immigration exam, to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Make the exam written and oral, as the written exam is too easily hacked.
  2. Military service, alternative service or community service (working at NIA branches, HHR offices, District Offices, the GIO, the FAP and the like) should be absolutely compulsory, and in the case of married people who can’t afford a year off to bugger around with 22 year olds, a certain number of hours should need to be fulfilled on weekends, for example. If over 36, like myself, alternative service should be done as described above. I would be totally willing to take the time to serve with the local Coast Guard in Anping.

Can’t think of anything else at this time, but I just feel uncomfortable with the idea of citizenship being conferred as easily as an APRC. And I don’t think renunciation is the key here.

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?[/quote]
See what I wrote above.

Article 9 of the Nationality Act:

[quote]Article 9 A foreign national who applies for nationalization according to Article 3 to Article 7 shall provide the certification of his/her loss of previous nationality. [color=#FF0000]But if he/she alleges he/she can’ t obtain the certification for causes not attributable to him/her and foreign affairs authorities investigate and determine that this is true, then he/she needs not to provide the certification.[/color]

第 九 條 外 國 人 依 第 三 條 至 第 七 條 申 請 歸 化 者 , 應 提 出 喪 失 其 原 有 國 籍 之 證 明 。 但 能 提 出 因 非 可 歸 責 當 事 人 事 由 ,致 無 法 取 得 該 證 明 並 經 外 交 機 關 查 證 屬 實 者 , 不 在 此 限 。 [/quote]

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?[/quote]

From what that person told me, I think the key to success was “deceit.”

I think Bismark is correct and that this provision was put into the law to deal with the problem of Japanese nationals who were spouses of Taiwanese citizens and had lived in Taiwan all their lives but could not renounce Japanese citizenship because Japan does not allow them to do so.

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?[/quote]

From what that person told me, I think the key to success was “deceit.”[/quote]
Not necessary according to Article 9 of the Nationality Act, and deceit wouldn’t work as the MOFA folks will check the details. Countries like Japan aren’t allowed to renounce. They simply get a letter from their government stating that and hand that in with their naturalization package.

I wouldn’t advise “deceit” as they do check everything diligently, and if (even after you have acquired your ID Card and passport) discover that any instances of fraud was committed in the naturalization process you will be stripped of nationality. Point is, unless you are a citizen of a country like Japan that either doesn’t allow renunciation, or won’t allow it as they don’t consider Taiwan to be an official country (one of the SE Asian countries has this issue, not sure which one, possibly Laos or Cambodia), then an official authenticated and translated letter to that effect from said government is all that is needed. This will NOT work if you are a national of the UK, US, Canada, SA, Aus, NZ etc.

[quote]Article 19 If it is found that the nationalization, loss or restoration of the nationality of the Republic of China is not conforming to the provisions of this Act within 5 years, the nationalization, loss or restoration shall be withdrawn.

第 十 九 條 歸 化 、 喪 失 或 回 復 中 華 民 國 國 籍 後 , 五 年 內 發 現 有 與 本 法 之 規 定 不 合 情 形 , 應 予 撤 銷 。[/quote]

Nationality Act

國籍法

Seriously, just read the Nationality Act. It’s fairly clear and simple.

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?[/quote]

I knew a couple of Singaporeans who also had Taiwanese passports.
I have no idea how they did it.
They came to Taiwan about 25 years ago and live in Taiwan. They only went back to Singapore to renew their passports.

It seems that Japanese can renounce their citizenship. This is what “The Embassy of Japan in the United States of America” has to say about it:

[quote] If Japanese citizen has an intention and would like to perform voluntarily with the firm decision to renounce Japanese citizenship, on this page we’ll tell you what you need to do to get started and the whole procedure.

  1. How to renounce the Japanese Nationality

Please obtain renunciation forms from the Consular Section, Embassy of Japan. (See following category below No.2)

Please provide us with following necessary documents as requested by our office (See following category below No. 2)

Once you have assembled all the necessary documents, you’ll need to call us and make an appointment with us before you come.
You cannot apply by mail. Formally you have to come to our office in person and renounce Japanese citizenship before a consular officer. Office hour is between 9:30 to 12:30 and 13:30 to 16:00.
Please make sure you have all of the necessary items for renunciation so as to avoid making a repeated visit to our office.
You will receive a notification that you formally renounced Japanese Nationality from our home government.

We will send it to you when you receive it from Japan. Please allow one to two months for the notification in Japanese to arrive. Please make sure that it will be received by you and return a note with your signature to our office.

Should you have questions, please contact Kokuseki the Consular Section at 202-238-6700, Monday through Friday (except holidays), between 9:00 to 12:30 and 13:30 to 17:00. [/quote]

As I understood it, Japan does not allow its citizens to hold dual nationality, and hence requires anyone who obtains foreign nationality to renounce their Japanese nationality (though they don’t actively enforce this).

But it may be that they require you to prove that you have already obtained foreign nationality before you can renounce your Japanese nationality, and Taiwan’s Certificate of Candidature doesn’t suffice for that purpose. Or it might be that, since the Japanese government does not formally recognise Taiwan or the ROC, it does not recognise Taiwanese/ROC nationality for this purpose.

Another on the MOI list, and the last of the developed countries on the list:

Singapore
Singapore’s law on dual nationality is quite distinct from Taiwan’s. It requires foreigners who naturalize to renounce all foreign citizenships, but that is because it does not allow any dual citizenship, and enforces this strictly against all Singaporeans – which is totally different from the situation in Taiwan, where countless Taiwanese citizens enjoy and are freely allowed to enjoy dual or multiple citizenships. Hence, it cannot be correctly cited by the MOI as an example of a country where the relevant provisions of nationality law are in alignment with Taiwan’s.

Here are some of the reasons why many Singaporeans (including non-citizen immigrants) are unhappy with this law and would like to see it changed.

Here is the Singaporean government’s official stance on the issue:

Rather a weak rationale, I’d say. And hardly applicable to Taiwan’s situation. If they do revise the law to allow dual citizenship, they surely won’t do so on a double-standard basis of allowing Singaporeans to obtain multiple citizenships while not allowing naturalizing foreigners to keep theirs.

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?[/quote]

From what that person told me, I think the key to success was “deceit.”[/quote]

:laughing:

Do you know how the person pulled this off? Is there some loophole in the law that we haven’t noticed?[/quote]

From what that person told me, I think the key to success was “deceit.”[/quote]
Not necessary according to Article 9 of the Nationality Act, and deceit wouldn’t work as the MOFA folks will check the details. Countries like Japan aren’t allowed to renounce. They simply get a letter from their government stating that and hand that in with their naturalization package.

I wouldn’t advise “deceit” as they do check everything diligently, and if (even after you have acquired your ID Card and passport) discover that any instances of fraud was committed in the naturalization process you will be stripped of nationality. Point is, unless you are a citizen of a country like Japan that either doesn’t allow renunciation, or won’t allow it as they don’t consider Taiwan to be an official country (one of the SE Asian countries has this issue, not sure which one, possibly Laos or Cambodia), then an official authenticated and translated letter to that effect from said government is all that is needed. This will NOT work if you are a national of the UK, US, Canada, SA, Aus, NZ etc.

[quote]Article 19 If it is found that the nationalization, loss or restoration of the nationality of the Republic of China is not conforming to the provisions of this Act within 5 years, the nationalization, loss or restoration shall be withdrawn.

第 十 九 條 歸 化 、 喪 失 或 回 復 中 華 民 國 國 籍 後 , 五 年 內 發 現 有 與 本 法 之 規 定 不 合 情 形 , 應 予 撤 銷 。[/quote]

Nationality Act

國籍法

Seriously, just read the Nationality Act. It’s fairly clear and simple.[/quote]

I haven’t read the Act. I trust your interpretation of it. Maybe this person cut some corners, I’m not sure. But if I’d done such a thing, I wouldn’t go around telling people, like they did!

[quote=“bismarck”][quote]Article 19 If it is found that the nationalization, loss or restoration of the nationality of the Republic of China is not conforming to the provisions of this Act within 5 years, the nationalization, loss or restoration shall be withdrawn.

第 十 九 條 歸 化 、 喪 失 或 回 復 中 華 民 國 國 籍 後 , 五 年 內 發 現 有 與 本 法 之 規 定 不 合 情 形 , 應 予 撤 銷 。[/quote][/quote]

A more precise translation:
“If the naturalization, renunciation or restoration of ROC nationality is found, within five years, to be not in compliance with the provisions of this Act, it shall be cancelled.”

So you just have to hide your deceit for five years, and after that the citizenship cannot be cancelled or lost.

Next on the MOI’s list:

South Korea

Wow!

Recent developments in South Korea’s nationality law are very interesting indeed. Given the many close similarities between the situations of the two countries, these developments are highly relevant to Taiwan, and give strongly persuasive support to my proposals for similar changes to the law here.

In a nutshell, South Korea substantially revised its nationality law in April 2010, with the new law coming into effect at the beginning of last year. Under the revised provisions of the law, the following categories of foreigners are allowed to obtain citizenship without renouncing their existing citizenship or citizenships:

  1. Talented foreign residents (who have skills that can contribute to the national interest).
  2. Foreign residents who have made a significant contribution to the country.
  3. Foreigners married to Koreans, who only need to stay in Korea for two years and pass a naturalization test in order to be eligible.

Dual citizenship will be granted on the condition that those concerned take on oath not to exercise their rights as a foreign national while staying in Korea.

And naturalized foreigners do not have to perform military service.

This is a very exciting discovery. It not only knocks for six the MOI’s assertion that Taiwan’s law is in alignment with Korea’s, but sets an excellent example of what Taiwan should be aiming to achieve.

The case for revising the law gets stronger and stronger. And I’m becoming more and more optimistic about the chances of getting it revised.

[quote]Article 9 A foreign national who applies for nationalization according to Article 3 to Article 7 shall provide the certification of his/her loss of previous nationality. But if he/she alleges he/she can’ t obtain the certification for causes not attributable to him/her and foreign affairs authorities investigate and determine that this is true, then he/she needs not to provide the certification.

第 九 條 外 國 人 依 第 三 條 至 第 七 條 申 請 歸 化 者 , 應 提 出 喪 失 其 原 有 國 籍 之 證 明 。 但 能 提 出 因 非 可 歸 責 當 事 人 事 由 ,致 無 法 取 得 該 證 明 並 經 外 交 機 關 查 證 屬 實 者 , 不 在 此 限 。 [/quote]

I wonder what would count as “causes not attributable to him/her”? For example, the U.S. government is supposed to reject applications for renunciation, if motivated by a desire to evade U.S. taxes, or if the would-be renouncer maintains significant ties with the U.S. Armed with a rejection letter, what would be that person’s chances of getting their ROC citizenship?

On a more serious note, I am very happy to see this being appealed, and would like to help if I possibly can. Probably others feel the same way, so please keep us informed and let us know what kind of help would be helpful.

Also, “Living in Taiwan” may not be the best forum for this. (I stumbled upon it by accident.) There is another forum dedicated to dual citizenship issues.

Anything new on this, Omni?

Nothing that I’m aware of.

A few months ago, I heard that the Executive Yuan had approved some minor revisions to the Nationality Act, including the renunciation provisions, and I had a wild moment of hope that the light might have finally shone into a dark place on this issue. But when I investigated, I found that it delivers next to nothing in improving the law.

Here’s the official MOI announcement about it:

[quote] 國籍法(以下簡稱本法)於十八年二月五日制定公布施行,其後歷經四次修正。為落實「公民與政治權利國際公約」及「經濟社會文化權利國際公約」保障人權意旨,維護婚姻移民者權益,並解決外國人歸化我國國籍實務上之問題,爰擬具本法部分條文修正草案,其修正要點如下:

一、增訂外國人或無國籍人對無行為能力或限制行為能力之中華民國國籍子女,行使負擔權利義務或監護者,其歸化要件與婚姻關係存續中之配偶相同。(修正條文第四條)

二、外國人申請歸化,應提出喪失原有國籍證明,惟考量如依其原屬國法令,須滿一定年齡或取得他國國籍始得喪失原有國籍者,其於申請歸化當時尚無法提出上開證明,爰增訂有上開情形並經外交機關查證屬實,暫無須提出喪失原有國籍證明,惟仍應於一定期間內提出,屆期未提出者,撤銷其歸化許可。(修正條文第九條)

三、外國人為向其原屬國申請喪失原有國籍之證明,得先申請核發準歸化中華民國國籍證明。於該證明有效期限內,提出喪失原有國籍證明申請歸化時,經審查符合品行端正,無犯罪紀錄之要件者,許可其歸化。(修正條文第九條之一)

四、增訂由外國籍父、母、養父或養母行使負擔權利義務或監護之中華民國國籍無行為能力人或限制行為能力人,為取得同一國籍且隨同至中華民國領域外生活,得申請喪失國籍。(修正條文第十一條)

五、修正條文第九條第二項已對未補提喪失原有國籍證明之歸化者,定明行使撤銷權之除斥期間,爰增訂上開情形為應於五年內撤銷歸化許可之除外規定。(修正條文第十九條)[/quote]

In a nutshell, it’s just saying that, where a candidate for naturalization cannot provide proof of renunciation because his/her country does not allow them to renounce until they have gained another nationality (or reached a certain age), the requirement to furnish such proof can be deferred until after they are able to meet this condition.

In other words, it’s not giving away anything of any substance to the vast majority of would-be naturalizers.

At first, I thought it might present an opportunity to resubmit my modified and expanded arguments for a fuller revision of the law, but then I realized that, since the proposed amendment had already been approved by the Executive Yuan, there would be no chance of getting it altered. It was already too late for that. It also probably closes the door to any further revision of the law within the near future. Any push for further revision will now likely be met with a response along the lines of: “But we’ve only just revised the law, and made it much easier for you foreigners to become ROC citizens. Isn’t that enough for you already? Surely you can’t expect us to do even more for you on this so soon!”

Nonetheless, I am excited by the findings of my research on naturalization laws in other countries, particularly those cited by the MOI as examples of countries with provisions similar to Taiwan’s, but whose laws all turn out to be completely different to and vastly more liberal than those here. I believe that the case for revising the law and dropping or substantially modifying the renunciation provisions is absolutely overwhelming. When I have sufficient time available, I’ll rewrite my petition in much fuller and more persuasive form than before, and have various ideas about how to seek support for it from those whose backing might make it hard for the MOI to reject it as they did before. I am quite optimistic about the chances of getting the law changed eventually. But the time is not ripe as yet.

I am also interested in legal issues surrounding visas, passports, nationality, citizenship, etc. Perhaps you could also include/quote some case studies looking at the role of immigrants in various economies. I am not sure if this a sound legal tactic, as I don’t have any background or experience in law, but it is something to consider. I think it’s important to understand that while many countries have laws against dual citizenship, what actually happens in practice is often different, as you have pointed out.

Anyway, as far as I know for Japan, there hasn’t been any case of Japan enforcing the no dual citizenship law, as in they come knocking at your door, prevent you from entering Japan, or prevent from partaking in some government activity. However, they often do friendly reminders to dual citizens over the age of 22 that they can have another citizenship if they are Japanese citizens. I could be wrong of course, but I suggest you contact this individual debito.org/ if you want more information. I am sure he would be glad to help.

At the bottom of this page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality_law there is a collection of various nationality laws in a number of countries.

This study has a nice map of countries that allow dual citizens (though it seems out of date because Finland allows dual citizens now)
migrationpolicy.org/transatlanti … -FINAL.pdf

Here is a study on whether or not dual citizens are good citizens
ftp.iza.org/dp3008.pdf

And here is a great resource from the US government, with reference to specific laws, and a profile of each nation (most? but it’s a bit out of date 2001)
opm.gov/extra/investigate/is-01.pdf