On 19 March 2004 the Czech Republic ratified the 1997 European Convention on Nationality, which has been applied in the Czech Republic since July 2004. According to Article 16 of this Convention, a Member State should not make the acquisition or retention of its nationality conditional upon renunciation or loss of another nationality in cases where such renunciation or loss is not possible or cannot reasonably be required.
Also Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union explicitly prohibits any discrimination, including on the basis of nationality. The Charter is binding and applies to all EU member states in cases of implementation of EU law.
In the meantime, a discriminatory bill on amending Act No. 65/2022 Sb., “On certain measures in connection with the armed conflict on the territory of Ukraine caused by the invasion of the Russian Federation troops”, is being debated in the Parliament of the Czech Republic, which sets renunciation of Russian citizenship as a condition for one group of persons, namely persons with Russian citizenship, to obtain Czech citizenship.
The said draft law in the part of § 7x, § 7y, Přechodné ustanovení does not comply with the criteria of legality, European and international human rights standards and represents an example of poor legal technique. This draft law lacks the attributes of legal certainty and enforceability. See also: Legal analysis of the amendments
Also, since the amendment is formulated in a rather confusing and legally illiterate manner, it can be interpreted in such a way that it implies stopping the consideration of all applications for citizenship from citizens of the Russian Federation until the end of the mentioned law, which may be valid for many more years. Thus, Russian citizens residing in the territory of the Czech Republic may be completely deprived of the possibility to apply for Czech citizenship for an indefinite period of time, and since the amendment also affects the consideration of already submitted applications, the principle of non-retroactivity of the law is violated. Legal analysis of the amendments shows that suspending the law for a group of persons, depriving them of their rights and imposing obligations not provided for by the special Citizenship Act regulating these relations is illegal, unjustified and cannot take place in a democratic country.
The proposal states that its aim is to “protect the security and foreign policy interests of the Czech Republic”. However, the authors of the draft law do not explain how the acquisition of Czech citizenship by persons who have lived in the Czech Republic for a long time, have been integrated into Czech society and fully meet the requirements of Act No. 186/2013 Sb., “On the State Citizenship of the Czech Republic”, could endanger the Czech Republic, which is not a party to the armed conflict. It is not even clear how the proposed amendments will contribute to the objective of “protecting the security and foreign policy interests of the Czech Republic”.
Also, no analysis of the possibility of renunciation of Russian citizenship on one’s own volition has been carried out in the preparation of this draft law. However, according to the provisions of the European Convention on Nationality, this step is obligatory when introducing this condition into national law.
It should be noted that this is a renunciation of citizenship of a country for which the Czech Republic is an enemy state. All people who have left Russia are widely condemned in Russia, Russia has minimised the provision of consular services both in the Czech Republic and in other European countries, there is no direct air connection (the journey takes several days) and the delivery of mail is extremely complicated.
Objective of the law
The first comment concerns the objective of the law.
- The Czech Citizenship Act already contains a provision §13(2) according to which “citizenship of the Czech Republic cannot be granted to an applicant who threatens the security of the State, its sovereignty and territorial integrity, democratic foundations, life, health or property values”. Corresponding legislation excluding the granting of citizenship in the event of a threat to the security of the State has already been adopted and is in force. The legislators did not present any reasons to justify the inadequacy of these measures or their imperfection in the context of the proposed amendment. There is no justification for the duplicative denial of citizenship applications in cases of national security threats. The only innovation is the introduction of the principle of collective responsibility, the inadmissibility of which was recently emphasised by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic when it granted the request of a group of seventeen senators to repeal several articles in the law on assistance in cases of material hardship. The members of the upper chamber pointed out that the sanctions penalised not only the offender but also other persons living in the same household, which constituted an inadmissible collective punishment. The Court described this law as “inadmissible in a democratic state governed by the rule of law”. Similarly, in a democratic state governed by the rule of law such as the Czech Republic, Russians, who had no connection with the outbreak of the war, should not be held collectively responsible for the persons who started the war.
- There is no evidence that a group of people living in the Czech Republic and holding Russian citizenship as a whole or individually pose any threat (and yet, on the basis of a long-term or permanent residence permit, they do not pose such a threat). Not a single piece of evidence or example has been presented that any of these persons publicly support the war or openly support the current regime in Russia, as is the case in Germany, for example. On the contrary, those with Russian passports who have more or less suffered losses and hardship as a result of the war are clear opponents of the war and play a key role in the fight against Russian propaganda.
Many of the persons with Russian citizenship after the beginning of the war founded and worked in organizations helping Ukrainian refugees, organized anti-war actions, sent to Ukraine not only food and clothing, but also heating fuel, stoves (after the attack on the energy system of Ukraine), pumps (for flooded territories), transferred and sent funds, fought against Russian propaganda, and spoke in the media space. It was thanks to the efforts of these individuals that sanctions were imposed on the head of the Russian defence holding ‘Tactical Missile Weapons’, Boris Obnosov, his daughter Olga Zorikova and son-in-law Rostislav Zorikov, who lived in the Czech Republic. The Russians have created a worldwide anti-war opposition movement Free Russians Global, in which Russians living in the Czech Republic actively participate.
The anti-war and humanitarian activities of the Russians in the Czech Republic continue to this day. It can be stated that it was in the Czech Republic that the largest anti-war diaspora was created, and there is no logical way to explain that the Czech Republic would be the country that would so gratuitously drag innocent people to collective responsibility. The impression is created that in this way the authors of the draft law are trying to divert these persons from anti-war activities. The last statement stems from the understanding that withdrawal from Russian citizenship for persons who openly express an anti-war stance and support the Russian opposition is obviously impossible. While persons who do not engage in anti-war activities may be able to renounce Russian citizenship. However, even their renunciation of Russian citizenship under conditions of war and diminishing consular services, postal and transport links has simply not been analysed. This is the second major comment on the bill.
The possibility of renouncing Russian citizenship
The second comment on the draft law is that the possibility of renouncing Russian citizenship has not been analysed; in most cases it is impossible without visiting Russia.
Renunciation of Russian citizenship is regulated by Article 23 of Federal Law No. 138-FZ “On Citizenship of the Russian Federation” of 28 April 2023.
According to point 4 of this article, it is not possible to renounce Russian citizenship if:
- A citizen of the Russian Federation has unfulfilled obligations to the Russian Federation, an entity of the Russian Federation or a municipal authority, established by federal law, a law of an entity of the Russian Federation or a legal regulation of a municipal authority (for example, non-payment of fees, taxes, fines, or other obligations to the Russian Federation).
- A citizen of the Russian Federation is in enforcement proceedings in Russia.
- A citizen of the Russian Federation is under investigation as a defendant in criminal proceedings or has a final criminal judgment against him/her.
- A citizen of the Russian Federation does not have citizenship of another state or a guarantee of obtaining it.
This list shows that many citizens of the Russian Federation do not have the option of renouncing their citizenship of the Russian Federation. In addition, the absence of an independent judiciary and the persistently high crime rate in Russia mean that any Russian citizen can become a victim of a crime and therefore fall into one of the above categories. For example, foreclosure proceedings may be initiated due to a fraudulent loan that was illegally arranged by criminals on a person living in the Czech Republic.
It is also clear from point 1 that the list of “obligations” is open-ended and new obligations may arise which will prevent renunciation of citizenship. In any case, it will not be the Czech Republic that decides who is allowed to acquire Czech citizenship, but the Russian regime and Vladimir Putin personally, who must issue a corresponding decree. Vladimir Putin is officially suspected of committing war crimes in Ukraine. This fact could be regarded as interference in the internal affairs of the Czech Republic.
A list of the documents needed to renounce Russian citizenship can be found, for example, on the official website of the Embassy of the Russian Federation in the Netherlands. In addition to a valid passport, a marriage/divorce certificate (original only), a diploma (original only), documents confirming a change of surname, first name or patronymic, and an internal passport are required: a certificate from the tax authority of the Russian Federation on the absence of tax debt (with the wet signature of the official and the seal of the tax authority, valid for 6 months only), a certificate from the Federal Bailiff Service on the absence of pending enforcement proceedings against the applicant (the document must be stamped and signed by an official of the Federal Bailiff Service), and documents confirming that there are no grounds for declaring the applicant a person who has not undergone compulsory military service (for men aged 18 to 30).
The above list of documents for renunciation of Russian citizenship (which can be supplemented at any time) allows to say that in most cases a visit to Russia will be necessary for this process. This does not take into account the possibility that the submission of citizenship renunciation applications at Russian consulates may be completely suspended. Moreover, it is important to remember that in Russia now people can be detained for simply posting on social media against the war or for supporting Ukraine (for example, even for listening to Ukrainian songs). Just recall the circumstances of the detention of Alsa Kurmasheva. There are dozens of people who have found themselves in a similar situation but are not so well known (for example, in August in Russia, a Frankfurt University student, Makar Nikolayev, who had come to Russia to visit his parents, was detained for his social media posts). According to the latest data from the OVD-Info project, more than 1,000 people in Russia are persecuted for their anti-war views, and the number of political prisoners in Russia has exceeded the level since before the fall of the USSR.
For many Russians, therefore, a visit to Russia would involve the risk of arrest, putting their lives and health at risk. In particular, for men between the ages of 18 and 30, the Russian state requires a military record or proof of deferred service in the Russian army. This entails the risk of applicants being mobilised and sent to the war front. Many Russians have left Russia precisely to avoid being linked to Russia’s war ambitions. The bill thus forces them to go to war, which they openly oppose.
In addition, the proposal foresees a certain deadline for renouncing citizenship, and if the applicant misses this deadline (which depends on Putin’s decision), they can lose Russian citizenship, but not get Czech, which would make them stateless, which is contrary to international law. At the same time, children under the age of 18 cannot renounce their Russian citizenship on their own, except together with their parents.
Therefore, the only result of these changes can be that the number of Russians living in the Czech Republic who openly oppose the war and support the opposition will decrease, as some will be forced to remain silent in order to leave Russian citizenship without problems. This represents a clear intervention against the Russian opposition as well as the fight against Russian propaganda. On the contrary, this step will contribute to the spread of propaganda in the Russian media.
All this in a situation where there are currently no guarantees of withdrawal from Russian citizenship, because this issue depends not only on the will of the individual, but also on the arbitrary decision of Vladimir Putin.
In addition, legal residence in the Czech Republic depends on Russian passports, the issuance of which can be suspended and even stopped at any time for persons living abroad. There are already known cases where people with anti-war attitudes, especially representatives of the opposition, were denied a Russian passport. If these people are not allowed to obtain Czech citizenship with the possibility of preserving Russian citizenship, then there is a risk that Russia will refuse to issue them a new passport at the same time. The legal residence of these persons would thus change to illegal.
We want to point out that this letter does not take into account the social and other consequences of the loss of citizenship for Russians, especially the issue of pension security. The fact that the application of the new rules to persons who have already applied for Czech citizenship is not in accordance with the basic principles of law is also not assessed. As can be seen from the above, this law significantly restricts people’s rights and exposes them to the risk of criminal prosecution in Russia for supporting the values shared by the people of the Czech Republic. At the same time, it directly concerns only persons who have been living in the Czech Republic for many years and have repeatedly passed security checks when renewing their residence permits.
Regime change in Russia
However, there is one more important aspect related to withdrawal from Russian citizenship. In the event of a regime change in Russia and the implementation of lustration, people who could return to Russia to contribute to building a democratic rule of law, including parliamentarians, members of the executive or judges, will not be able to do so as non-citizens. At the same time, Europe places certain hopes for regime change in Russia in the Russian opposition, as evidenced by the invitation and appearance of Russian opposition leaders Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Vladimir Kara-Murza at the Globsec conference in Prague. Does this move meet those expectations?
It should also be noted that almost all agents working in the Czech Republic and Europe for Russian intelligence services who were caught had passports from other countries. And it will not be a problem for Russia to ensure the “appearance” of real agents from Russian citizenship, as opposed to ordinary citizens.
Perhaps the media should pay more attention to our anti-war and humanitarian activities, showing Czech society that, just like it, we want to live in a safe Europe, that we share democratic and universal human values, stand against war, carry out education and fight against propaganda. However, in most cases the media is very reluctant to publish materials about it.
Conclusion
Based on the above, we ask for help in ensuring that the amendment, which introduces the obligation to renounce Russian citizenship as a condition for obtaining Czech citizenship, is not adopted. This change will unfairly complicate life for people who have chosen the Czech Republic as their home, are fully integrated here, speak Czech, pay taxes, obey the laws and love this country.