Relationship between citizenship rights and duties

Citizenship Rights and Responsibilities | USCIS

relationship between citizenship rights and duties

suprastate nexus of relations, in which rights derive from the individual, With regard to citizens' duties, the absence of their imposition in international law is. Citizenship – rights, obligations and changing citizenship ideals Magnus Dahlstedt, Mikael Rundqvist & Viktor Vesterberg Introduction Man's relationship with. Citizenship is the common thread that connects all Americans. We are a nation bound not by race or religion, but by the shared values of freedom, liberty, and.

Relation between Rights and Duties

Citizens also belong to various forms of communities. Relations between individuals and the state adapt to these new forms, in that the individual has rights and responsibilities as a citizen not only in the nation-state but also in the European Community. Like other communities, the European community is moulded by the inclusion of certain values and groups, as well as the exclusion of others Balibar Regardless of the type of welfare regime, the relationship between migration and citizenship is a perennial topic.

How will migrants have the right to enter the territory: How many immigrants should be allowed entry? What rights should be granted once they have crossed the border?

What conditions will apply before migrants can become citizens? According to this argument, a diversity of identities among the population living in the same territory represents a valuable component of a vibrant democratic public sphere. The idea of a multicultural citizenship is based not only on individual rights; it also upholds the specific collective rights of minorities.

On the other side are those who argue that multicultural citizenship undermines rather than deepens the set of citizenship rights because it is individuals and not groups who are bearers of rights and creates conflicts in society and shifts focus away from economic inequalities Barry Although the situation has not gone as far in Sweden as in some other countries there are echoes of it in the integration debate.

At the same time, it is important to underline that migrants are not in any way passive victims exposed to different forms of discrimination. Migrants should be seen as active and acting subjects, who in various ways claim citizenship and have the desire to belong to a community from which they are often shut out. They often exist in a grey area, in an in- between position.

Migrants may be citizens, formally speaking, but it does not mean they are allowed to participate fully in the country in which they live Brubaker Migrants may be citizens of a state in the legal sense but live in another country, where they have substantial rights — a category Tomas Hammar calls denizens.

This perspective can aptly be summarized by referring to Barbara Cruikshank Governing should, rather, be understood as an apparatus of complex power relations whereby citizens are shaped into subjects actively governing themselves in certain ways. In these processes the construction of the norm the ideal citizen and the construction of the others those lacking the virtues and competences of the ideal citizen are intimately intertwined.

On the basis of this particular perspective on citizenship, a number of researchers have also approached issues related to migration, ethnicity, nation alismand the inclusion and exclusion of migrants and ethnic minorities Dillon ; Stoler ; Lui ; Werry These researchers have shown how categories such as ethnicity, nation, and race have played a crucial role in thinking about and institutionalizing citizenship—and therefore in governing society.

These techniques can be designed in different ways and operate in a variety of arenas, but they are often about developing the capacity for self-government and cultivating a sense of individual responsibility among those defined as different on the basis of ethnicity, national affiliation, or race Lundstedt The classic formula for exercising power within the welfare state that Marshall described as being built shortly after World War II was, according to Nikolas Rose, state-centric. It consisted of making the state the primary agent that forms, guides, and controls events and people based on uniform policies.

However, the character of this historically specific formula has gradually changed in the latter part of the 20th century. Another type of power formula is emerging, characterized by increasingly dispersed, individualized, and non—state centric neo-liberal technologies of government. The formation of responsible citizens involves a wide range of technologies, actors, systems of knowledge, authority, and expertise operating in a number of different fields.

Such governing in the name of freedom, however, is highly ambivalent: Citizen formation is thus initiated through an extensive repertoire of practices operating throughout the entire social field in which the freedom of the citizen is calculated, shaped, structured, and made governable Dean The paradoxes of Swedish multiculturalism As mentioned previously, formal dimensions of citizenship can be quite different from substantive ones.

Compared with many other countries throughout the world, Sweden has often been described as a pioneer in the inclusion of migrants.

relationship between citizenship rights and duties

Sweden has hereby appeared as a symbol of the citizenship model described by Stephen Castles as multicultural, a model based on the principles of inclusion making it relatively easy to obtain citizenship and recognition guaranteeing minorities certain group rights. Regarding the formal civil, political, and social rights described by Marshall, in Sweden there have traditionally been no major differences between those born in Sweden of native Swedish parents and those born abroad or in Sweden to parents who are foreign born.

All those granted Swedish citizenship have basically the same formal rights, regardless of ethno-cultural background. All three categories of citizenship rights are emphasized in the opening paragraphs of the Swedish Constitution SFS Government is exercised under the Law. The second paragraph expresses a desire to protect not only the civil and political rights but also the social rights of the individual: In particular, the public should secure the right to work, housing, and education, and promote social care and social security and good conditions for health.

Although they are formally citizens with equal rights, they still do not have the same substantive opportunities to exercise these rights. Two case studies The following analysis illustrates this gap between citizenship in formal and substantive terms using two different examples: In both examples, we draw attention to various practices of citizen formation, evoking certain kinds of citizens with certain values, characteristics, and abilities.

Particular emphasis is placed on the formation of citizenship ideals in relation to people who appear atypical and deviant. In this context, our focus is on the relationship between citizenship and ethnicity. One important issue is what specific meanings are given to categories such as Swedes and migrants, Swedish and non-Swedish, Us and Them.

The right to political influence? When it comes to political rights, the principle in Sweden is one of formal political equality regardless of ethnicity.

Rights and Duties of Citizen -- Civics -- 9th Std Social Science

The main patterns are visible regarding the right to participate as representatives in political bodies. Ethno-cultural under-representation is found at every level. Inmore than 15 per cent of the total Swedish population was foreign-born. The same year, the proportion of foreign- born members of the municipal councils was slightly more than half that number, 7.

The proportion of foreign-born citizens elected for office to some extent follows the status of the political position: Previous research has indicated that political representation is partly an issue of inclusion.

Citizenship Rights and Responsibilities

But the possibility of using these formal rights can also be conditioned by various institutional routines and practices that claim to offer the same opportunities to all regardless of background but are nevertheless exclusionary in their consequences.

In the following, we focus on some aspects of everyday practices in political parties that may have exclusionary consequences. As a point of departure, we consider the results of an interview study exploring the experience of participating in Swedish political parties by representatives of foreign origin Dahlstedt The representatives interviewed in this survey illustrate everyday parliamentary life through a variety of routines and conventions, roles, and expectations that in different ways make it difficult for them to truly exercise their formal civil right to engage in a political party on equal terms with Swedish-born representatives.

In the following, let us quote a number of the representatives interviewed. Khabat, one of the representatives, drew a parallel between his experience of being politically active first as a Kurd under the dictatorship of Iraq and later as a migrant in the democracy of Sweden.

When it comes to migrants, like myself, we are also second-class citizens [in Sweden]. Sweden is a democracy, while the country he was forced to escape from was a dictatorship.

Based on his own involvement in Swedish politics, Ramon described the political parties as similar to any other workplace. From his point of view, within the parties—as well as in other workplaces—there are different kinds of discrimination on ethnic and on other grounds. One can see the entire political establishment as a workplace.

When a migrant looks for a job, how is he or she treated?

relationship between citizenship rights and duties

The same thing happens in all political parties. There are all sorts of obstacles, emotional obstacles, when it comes to giving individuals equal opportunities to develop themselves as politicians. Ramon illustrated such emotional barriers by referring to a broad set of stereotypical notions about Swedes and migrants that is both widespread and well established in the political parties.

According to several of the politicians interviewed, these beliefs may in different contexts legitimize special treatment of those defined as migrants. From this point of view, politicians need to acquire certain political skills in order to make a change in the life of the party cf. The important question, however, is what is really recognized as skill in political life. What kind of behaviour is given higher status and thus made viable in different contexts?

The requirement that actors in a particular arena acquire particular skills always results from processes of classification and thus from the exercise of power, and certain actors are in a position to define the situation according to their particular interests and experiences. The political parties are therefore not neutral fields where actors meet on equal terms. The idea that Swedish political life is founded on a set of specifically Swedish cultural codes or values that representatives are expected to embrace, regardless of their backgrounds, can in itself be seen as a manifestation of citizen formation.

This idea can in practice serve as a way of dividing people based on notions of similarity and difference, of proximity to and distance from an imagined Swedish normality. Here, certain ways of thinking and being appear normal and desirable in contrast to others, which in this comparison appear to be divergent, problematic, and to a greater or lesser degree to reflect a need for re-education.

For example, several representatives emphasized the importance of not being too provocative in their appearance as politicians and of not speaking too openly about issues such as racism and discrimination. Those who do so risk being thwarted in various ways. Here, Nayib presented the picture of a certain ideal kind of citizen. According to current rules of the game, a politically active citizen should not fly off the handle but should stick to the agenda and wait his or her turn. When migrants behave in a manner that goes beyond these conventions, their behaviour tends to be interpreted as an expression of cultural differences.

For representatives of foreign origin, integration in Swedish society is an ever-present political issue—not just because these representatives are themselves genuinely engaged by issues related to the challenges and future of the multi-ethnic society but also because there seems to be a strong tendency within political parties to associate migrants with the issue of integration, and vice versa cf.

Sirkka has for many years been actively involved with issues of inclusion and diversity, but she is also very critical of the tendency in her own party, as well as in other parties, to connect migrants and the issue of integration almost automatically. As a migrant politician.

If you are from Africa, you should know how the Roma people are, how people from the rest of the world are, except for the Swedes. Thus, you are a representative of the rest of the world! And you can never in any way live up to that… You are always a representative; either it becomes your duty or you automatically make it your own mission to emphasize migrant issues. In practice, this could mean that the party gives migrants the role of specifically engaging in these particular issues—regardless of what the representatives themselves want or do not want.

Here, the representative has encountered a difficult position in which the political domain is divided into two camps: The representatives are not only given the right to speak, but they also have the duty to act as representatives of the whole world, as if all the people within the collective of non-Swedes are the same. However, as Sirkka herself emphasized, it is absolutely impossible to live up to this task—as impossible as it is for any one Swede to speak for the rest of the collective of Swedes.

In a sense, the idea of migrants as representing the rest of the world illustrates a well-established Swedish national self-image. According to this, the Swedish We represents modernity, enlightenment, and democracy — We are individuals Ehn et al. They, on the other hand, are bound to the collective, and this is truer the further from Sweden They originated. One should also bear in mind that the modern party system was developed at a time when citizenship was interrelated with the nation as one imagined community.

Within the political parties, one can still hear echoes of the citizenship ideals of previous eras, shaped according to the doctrine of cultural uniformity.

Adult Kenyans are expected to vote the right people to office by participating in elections. The electorate has the right and responsibility to recall their Member of Parliament before the end of their term in office. Citizens can also petition Parliament to consider matters within its authority and enact, amend or repeal legislation.

Citizens also have an obligation to ensure presidential candidates meet the qualifications for the post. Kenyans have the responsibility to ensure Executive authority is exercised in a manner that serves them and for their well-being and benefit.

County assemblies should facilitate public participation and involvement in the legislative and other business of the assembly including its committees. Public participation in the public finance process is expected and the government has to maintain openness and accountability through the structure to promote an equitable society. Members of the public must be involved in the public-service policymaking process. The public must also hold all public service institutions accountable for their work.

Citizens have to ensure the government protects its people rights and freedoms and the country against internal and external threats to its territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Citizens are obligated to ensure the constitution is interpreted in a manner that promotes its purposes, values and principles, advances rule of law, human rights and Bill of Rights, permits development of the law and contributes to good governance. In that way, that relationship with the nationality of the individual Member States constitutes recognition of the fact that there can exist in fact, does exist a citizenship which is not determined by nationality.

That is the miracle of Union citizenship: Access to European citizenship is gained through nationality of a Member State, which is regulated by national law, but, like any form of citizenship, it forms the basis of a new political area from which rights and duties emerge, which are laid down by Community law and do not depend on the State.

Limits of that legal heritage could be seen as resting with the national law that gives them effect. Should the UK repeal bill rescind the effects of the Treaties, they could in principle no longer be invoked in UK courts.

Scope With the exception of electoral rights, the substance of Union citizenship achieved to date is to a considerable extent simply a systematisation of existing rights particularly as regards freedom of movement, the right of residence and the right of petitionwhich are now enshrined in primary law on the basis of a political idea.

This constitutes a major difference between EU citizenship and citizenship of a Member State. Its main provisions are described in 4. As regards the procedures for the election of its Members, Parliament has always called for the implementation of a uniform electoral system in all the Member States.