Was this the case in Slovakia prior to joining the EU?

Onur,

More uninformed commentary from you. Why am I not surprised? Firstly, acquiring or maintaining citizenship of a particular country is not a human right, its not a natural right. Its a political/civil right and therefore open to change according to the laws of the state. Secondly, that was and/or still is standard practice in many states across the world. For example, up until 2004, Australian born citizens lost their Australian citizenship if they obtained citizenship of another country. Rupert Murdoch is a case in point when he acquired his American citizenship. Those laws have now changed, but the point is that citizenship is a political concept, a political relationship to the state and one subject to change. Its not an inalienable natural right which has been violated for you to claim that 'human rights' are "BS".

[QUOTE=Soldier of Macedon;114760]Was this the case in Slovakia prior to joining the EU?[/QUOTE]
The article says that he was the first person who has been stripped from his citizenship and the article is dated as today. So, it`s happened after they joined to the EU.

[QUOTE=Vangelovski;114763]Onur,

More uninformed commentary from you. Why am I not surprised? Firstly, acquiring or maintaining citizenship of a particular country is not a human right, its not a natural right. Its a political/civil right and therefore open to change according to the laws of the state.[/QUOTE]
I was just pointing out the cases in EU as an example for Big Bad Seven`s msg. Why you are trying to create a meaningless argument with me now about whether this is a human right issue or not? but i say same thing to you; Why am I not surprised?

To me, if a person gets stripped from his birth-right of citizenship and loses his insurance policy, drivers license, passport and everything "without pre-notice" [thats what it says in the article] then it becomes an human rights issue.

But like i told you b4, i have zero intention to involve any argument with you Vangelovski, so don't bother trying to create one.

Onur,

This is not the first time that you have attempted to undermine the notion of human rights. What you did was provide a fallacious example of a human rights "violation" and then claim that the notion of human rights is BS. Now you're crawling back into your hole where you belong. I have no doubt, however, that you'll be back to do the same soon.

I find the whole concept of dual citizenship unsavoury.

I can understand the advantages, and hence appeal, of dual citizenship to the individual, but I also understand, and agree with, that the state's first duty is to the state and people who make up that state (ie the first duty of the state of Slovakia should be to Slovaks, and likewise, the first duty of Hungary should be to Hungarians).

Where is the advantage to the state to have people with dual citizenship? If there is no benefit to the state, then why allow it? Also one needs to ask the opposite question (ie benefit Vs detriment equation) is it detrimental to the state? If a person cannot decide, with conviction, whether they are 'this' or 'that', then how much faith can the state have in that individual? As a citizen of a state we earn many rights, including the right to government positions and holding office. How much faith would you have of someone working in a government position with a dual citizenship? If you wouldn't have them in a government position, then why in the rest of society?

Make up your mind - you are either a 'horse' or a 'donkey', no mules allowed.

Well, I think it would be hypocritical for a country like Australia which celebrates multiculturalism to deny dual citizenship. But for other nations that do not, I don't know ... it still sounds harsh in this day and age.

Maybe i can understand that if the laws in that particular country doesn't permit that and if the state authorities gives a warning and deadline to the person by saying that he gotta choose one country and leave the other. But if they strip out people from their birth-right citizenship without a warning, then in my terms, this is a human rights violation because no country has the right of converting people in to an heimatlos status all of a sudden. I don't know if such a thing happened to Macedonians but for example, Greece did that in 1980-1990s around ~8000 Turks from western Thrace. They stripped out their citizenship and made them persona-non-grata just because they gone to Turkey for few months.

If this is happening in EU, then it`s just becomes an another example of double-standards of so-called fantasy land of EU.

[quote=Onur;114860]Maybe i can understand that if the laws in that particular country doesn't permit that and if the state authorities gives a warning and deadline to the person by saying that he gotta choose one country and leave the other. But if they strip out people from their birth-right citizenship without a warning, then in my terms, this is a human rights violation because no country has the right of converting people in to an heimatlos status all of a sudden.[/quote]Citizens need to be aware of the laws in force in their country. Ignorence is not an excuse.

[B][COLOR="Red"]Welcome to the new website of the [URL="http://www.morm.gov.mk/portal/?lang=sq"]Macedonian Army[/URL] ![/COLOR][/B]

Oh ... to be fair Niko, you have given the Albanian link.
But it still irks me. I see no need for an Albanian link there.