Individuals under International Law: Position and Loss of Nationality
Key Takeaways
- Individuals have a recognised position under modern international law. They hold rights under human rights treaties and may bear direct responsibility for international crimes, although their legal capacities differ from those of States.
- International rights and access to international courts are different matters. Individuals may use certain complaint mechanisms, but they cannot become parties in contentious cases before the International Court of Justice.
- Nationality is the legal relationship between an individual and a State. It helps establish membership of a political community and is important for diplomatic protection and citizenship-related rights.
- States regulate nationality through domestic law, subject to international limits. Nationality rules must be assessed against applicable treaties, customary international law and protections against discrimination.
- Nationality may end through renunciation, automatic loss or deprivation. These processes have different legal foundations, and acquiring another nationality does not automatically terminate the original nationality in every country.
- Loss of nationality does not always create statelessness. Statelessness arises when no State considers the person its national under the operation of its law.
- Indian law distinguishes three principal routes for losing citizenship. Sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Citizenship Act, 1955 address renunciation, termination and deprivation respectively.
What Is the Position of Individuals Under International Law?
Individuals are recognised holders of rights and bearers of certain duties under modern international law. Their position is particularly important in international human rights law and international criminal law.
An entity has international legal personality when international law recognises its capacity to possess rights, bear obligations or exercise particular legal powers. These capacities need not be identical for every entity.
Add LawBhoomi as your preferred source on Google.
States possess extensive international capacities, including treaty-making and participation in inter-State litigation. Individuals possess more specific capacities arising from the relevant legal rules. Describing individuals as subjects of international law therefore does not mean that they have the same powers as States.
How Did the Traditional Position Differ?
Traditional international law largely focused on relations between sovereign States. Individuals were commonly treated as persons whose interests received international protection through their State of nationality.
For example, when a national suffered an internationally wrongful injury abroad, the State could raise a claim through diplomatic protection. The individual’s injury entered the international legal system through action taken by a State.
The development of human rights protection and individual criminal responsibility changed this State-centred approach. International law increasingly addressed individuals directly, rather than exclusively through their governments. The United Nations’ account of the Nuremberg principles identifies individual criminal responsibility as a major development in this transition.
Access subject-wise law notes for free on LawBhoomi.
What Rights Do Individuals Have Under International Law?
Individuals hold rights under international instruments protecting dignity, liberty, equality and other fundamental interests. Human rights generally belong to persons because they are human beings, rather than because they possess a particular nationality.
Nationality remains relevant to some political rights, but the absence of citizenship does not remove a person’s entitlement to basic human rights.
Can Treaties Create Individual Rights?
Treaties can create rights for individuals, even when the treaty itself is concluded between States.
In LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America), Judgment of 27 June 2001, the International Court of Justice recognised that Article 36(1) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations created individual rights.
The case concerned two German nationals who had not been informed of their consular rights following arrest in the United States. Germany brought the proceedings, but the Court recognised that the relevant treaty protected both State interests and individual rights.
The case illustrates an important distinction: an individual may possess an international right while depending on a State to invoke that right before a particular court.
Can Individuals Bring International Complaints?
Individuals can submit complaints under certain international procedures, subject to the jurisdiction and admissibility requirements of the mechanism.
Under the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, individuals may submit communications to the Human Rights Committee against a State party to that Protocol. Available and effective domestic remedies ordinarily must first be exhausted, subject to recognised exceptions.
Find the latest legal internship opportunities, updated daily.
Ratification of the Covenant alone does not automatically establish this individual complaint procedure. Acceptance of the relevant Optional Protocol is necessary.
Individuals cannot institute contentious proceedings before the International Court of Justice. Article 34(1) of its Statute restricts participation as parties to States.
What Duties and Criminal Responsibility Do Individuals Have?
Individuals may bear direct criminal responsibility under international law. A person cannot necessarily escape responsibility merely because the conduct was carried out on behalf of a State.
The Nuremberg principles recognise responsibility for crimes under international law. Principle I states the basic rule of individual responsibility, while other principles address matters such as official position and superior orders.
Article 25 of the Rome Statute provides for individual criminal responsibility before the International Criminal Court. Liability depends on the statutory requirements governing participation, intention and other elements. Article 27 addresses the irrelevance of official capacity under the Statute, while Article 33 regulates the limited circumstances involving superior orders.
The Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction covers genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression, subject to the applicable jurisdictional conditions. The existence of individual responsibility does not mean that every international offence can automatically be prosecuted before the Court.
What Is Nationality Under International Law?
Nationality is the legal bond connecting an individual to a State. It identifies the State of which the individual is legally a national.
Nationality should be distinguished from residence, ethnicity and possession of identity documents. Residence concerns where a person lives; ethnicity concerns a different form of identity; nationality concerns legal membership of a State.
Are Nationality and Citizenship the Same?
Nationality and citizenship are frequently used interchangeably, especially in international discussions. Some domestic legal systems distinguish them, making the terminology dependent on the applicable law.
Explore LawBhoomi's free law library for students and lawyers.
International law commonly uses “nationality” when discussing diplomatic protection and statelessness. Indian legislation uses “citizenship” in the Citizenship Act, 1955. The legal consequences must therefore be identified from the relevant instrument rather than assumed from terminology alone.
Who Determines a Person’s Nationality?
Each State primarily determines its nationals through domestic law. However, its authority operates within international legal limits.
Article 1 of the 1930 Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws recognises domestic competence while making international recognition dependent on consistency with international conventions, custom and generally recognised principles concerning nationality.
Nationality may be acquired through birth, descent, naturalisation or other legally recognised processes. The conditions differ between States, so birth or residence in a country does not universally guarantee its nationality.
Why Is Nationality Important for Diplomatic Protection?
Diplomatic protection involves a State invoking another State’s responsibility for an internationally wrongful injury to an individual or legal person.
The State of nationality ordinarily has the right to exercise such protection. Relevant requirements may include continuity of nationality and exhaustion of local remedies.
The International Law Commission’s 2006 Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection also address protection of stateless persons and refugees in specified circumstances. These are draft articles, rather than a treaty binding all States merely through their adoption.
What Did the Nottebohm Case Decide?
In Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), Second Phase, Judgment of 6 April 1955, the International Court of Justice considered whether Liechtenstein could exercise diplomatic protection against Guatemala for Friedrich Nottebohm.
Nottebohm had acquired Liechtenstein nationality despite having longstanding connections with Guatemala. The Court found that the nationality was not opposable to Guatemala for the diplomatic-protection claim in the circumstances.
The judgment connected nationality with a genuine relationship between the individual and the State. However, it concerned the international effectiveness of nationality for that claim. It should not be treated as automatically invalidating every nationality acquired without substantial residence in the granting State.
How Can an Individual Lose Nationality?
Loss of nationality occurs when an existing legal relationship of nationality ends. It may follow an individual’s declaration, the automatic operation of legislation or a decision by public authorities.
The applicable domestic law determines the mechanism, while international law supplies relevant safeguards.
What Is Renunciation of Nationality?
Renunciation is the voluntary surrender of nationality through a legally prescribed procedure.
A statement expressing a desire to give up nationality may be insufficient. Domestic law may require a formal declaration, registration or approval before renunciation becomes effective.
Article 7 of the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness generally links effective renunciation to possession or acquisition of another nationality, subject to the Convention’s qualifications.
Does Acquiring Foreign Nationality End the Original Nationality?
Acquiring foreign nationality ends the original nationality only where the relevant law provides for that consequence.
Some legal systems permit multiple nationality; others attach loss to voluntary acquisition of foreign nationality. The acquisition of one nationality and loss of another must therefore be examined separately.
The 1961 Convention restricts loss connected with seeking naturalisation abroad unless another nationality has been acquired or its acquisition is assured, subject to its terms.
What Is Deprivation of Nationality?
Deprivation is withdrawal of nationality through action by State authorities. Grounds may include fraud in obtaining nationality or other grounds recognised by domestic legislation.
UNHCR distinguishes deprivation involving State action from loss occurring automatically by operation of law. The label used nationally does not resolve whether the measure complies with international obligations.
Can Marriage or Territorial Changes Affect Nationality?
Historically, some nationality laws made a woman’s status dependent on her husband’s nationality. Article 9 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women protects equal rights concerning acquisition, change and retention of nationality, and nationality of children.
State succession and territorial transfers can also raise nationality questions. Residents may face uncertainty when responsibility for territory changes. The International Law Commission’s nationality articles address this context, including the prevention of statelessness. These articles should be distinguished from binding treaty provisions.
What Limits Does International Law Place on Loss of Nationality?
International law limits the exercise of nationality powers through protections against arbitrariness, discrimination and statelessness.
Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises a right to nationality and rejects arbitrary deprivation and arbitrary denial of the right to change nationality. The Declaration is not itself a treaty.
When Is Deprivation Arbitrary?
A measure may be arbitrary even if domestic legislation permits it. International scrutiny considers its purpose, proportionality and procedural fairness.
Relevant safeguards include:
- A lawful and legitimate basis: The measure must comply with applicable law and pursue a purpose consistent with international human rights standards.
- Proportionality: Withdrawal should not impose excessive consequences in relation to the legitimate purpose pursued.
- Procedural protection: Affected persons should have a meaningful opportunity to challenge the decision through appropriate procedures.
A domestic legal power therefore does not provide unrestricted authority to withdraw nationality.
Can Deprivation Lawfully Cause Statelessness?
Article 8(1) of the 1961 Convention generally prohibits deprivation that would make a person stateless. However, the Convention contains limited exceptions, including nationality obtained through fraud or misrepresentation and specified grounds subject to its conditions.
Article 8(4) requires lawful procedures and a fair hearing before a court or another independent body when the permitted deprivation powers are exercised. Article 9 prohibits deprivation on racial, ethnic, religious or political grounds.
These treaty provisions apply to contracting States. They must not be presented as provisions of domestic law automatically applicable everywhere.
What Is Statelessness, and How Does It Differ From Loss of Nationality?
A stateless person is someone whom no State considers its national under the operation of its law, as defined in Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.
The distinction is straightforward:
- Loss with another nationality retained: The person loses one nationality but remains a national of another State.
- Loss without another nationality: The person may become stateless because no State recognises the person as its national.
- Statelessness from birth: A person may never acquire nationality, making statelessness possible without any previous nationality being lost.
The 1954 Convention protects stateless persons, while the 1961 Convention focuses on preventing and reducing statelessness.
Children receive additional protection. Article 24(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognises every child’s right to acquire a nationality. This does not automatically require every State to grant nationality to every child born within its territory.
How Is Indian Citizenship Lost?
The Citizenship Act, 1955 distinguishes renunciation, termination and deprivation.
Renunciation Under Section 8
A citizen of full age and capacity may make the prescribed declaration renouncing citizenship. Citizenship ends upon registration of the declaration.
Section 8 also affects the declarant’s minor children. A child affected by this provision may resume Indian citizenship through the prescribed declaration within one year after attaining full age.
Termination Under Section 9
Section 9 generally provides for cessation of Indian citizenship upon voluntary acquisition of another country’s citizenship through naturalisation, registration or otherwise.
Questions concerning whether, when or how foreign citizenship was acquired are determined through the prescribed statutory process.
Deprivation Under Section 10
Section 10 authorises deprivation by Central Government order for specified categories of citizens. It is not a general power applicable identically to every citizen.
Grounds include fraud in obtaining registration or naturalisation and other specified conduct or circumstances. Section 10(3) additionally requires satisfaction that continued citizenship is not conducive to the public good. The section provides notice and inquiry safeguards, subject to its conditions.
The central legal question is therefore twofold: which domestic rule ends nationality, and whether its operation complies with the international obligations applicable to the State concerned.
Note: This article was originally written by Kritika Oberoi and published on 29 December 2020. It was subsequently updated by the LawBhoomi team on 07 October 2026.
Join LawBhoomi’s 100K+ Community
