Affiliation:
1. PhD Candidate, University of Sydney, Australia; Diplomatic Career, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation, Spain (on leave)
Abstract
When discussing ‘golden passports’, modern-day academics and practitioners frequently and erroneously cite Nottebohm to claim that international law demands a ‘genuine link’ to grant nationality. Despite Nottebohm's central status in international law, such a view misrepresents the ruling of the majority of the International Court of Justice in the 1955 case. Nottebohm does indeed open very effective avenues to address some of the legal issues derived from citizenship-for-sale schemes, but not as is often assumed. This article reflects instead on Nottebohm's insightful distinction between the competence to grant a nationality, and the effects due under international law norms to that new nationality by third States. On that basis, the article proposes a number of options working within the bounds of international and EU law to protect those third States from some of the undesired trans-boundary effects of golden passports.