
Our rights to EU citizenship are worth fighting for – despite Brexit - mbethell
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/01/eu-citizenship-brexit-ecj-netherlands
======
whack
Would have liked to see a bit more nuance in the article. _" European Union
citizens have the right to free movement, settlement and employment across the
EU."_

I can understand exceptions being made for British citizens who have been
living in the continent for many years. However, it hardly seems fair for all
British citizens to be granted free employment/settlement rights in EU states,
when other EU citizens aren't afforded the same rights in Britain.

~~~
lkramer
As an EU citizen I would have no issue granting free movement to British
Citizen even after Brexit. The British are valuable for Europe both
economically and culturally and I don't see why a bunch of Xenophobes should
be allowed to punish all Brits, including those who are curious and
adventurous and wishes to live and work in other parts of Europe.

~~~
espadrine
As an EU citizen, I would not accept granting free movement to British
citizens unless I be granted free movement through the UK borders.

I do not want a one-way street where I am given the shorter stick.

It is not like the British citizens were a voiceless majority led by a
xenophobic minority: they voted and the majority spoke.

~~~
lkramer
Well, you as an individual would be given the shorter stick, I can see that.
But I feel Europe as a whole would be richer for it, just as Britain have
benefitted from immigration (despite their refusal to acknowledge this). In
addition, as certain elements in Britain hijacks the process and tries to
distance Britain more from the EU than even the Brexit vote mandates, showing
the British people that we still consider them part of us, despite the
shortcomings of their government would be better than play the eye for an eye
game. In addition I feel it would facilitate Britain rejoining the EU which I
hope happens sooner rather than later.

I can understand why you would not share this view though.

~~~
espadrine
Immigration is an entirely different subject.

British citizens are very welcome to immigrate to the EU, and commit, and get
citizenship.

------
lumberjack
They should get naturalised then.

I have met a lot of these British expats, both in the Netherlands and
elsewhere. They do not want to get naturalised, even though they are long term
residents of their host country. I don't know why, but probably something to
do with tax reasons. Anyway, they do not want to get naturalised, yet they
want to gain all the rights of citizenship.

And actually this has nothing to do with the EU. These complaints from these
people were present before Brexit was a thing. Freedom of movement is the
least of their demands. They want the right to vote and the full package.

~~~
gambiting
"X should just get naturalised" is an argument that makes my blood boil
though. Becoming a citizen is an extremely difficult bureaucratic process that
can often fail or be delayed due to no fault of your own.

Case in point: I've lived in UK for 8 years now, fully legally as an EU
citizen. On paper, I should be able to apply for British citizenship tomorrow
and get it without any issues. But I can't, because the Home Office completely
disregards EU directive on the freedom of movement and the right to settlement
- and yes, I have spoken to many immigration lawyers in the UK about it and
they all say that Home Office is breaking the law in this specific case. There
even is a case going on against the Home Office in the ECJ - but in the
meantime, the reality of the situation is that I _can 't_ get a citizenship
despite calling this country my home, paying all my taxes and being a law-
abiding citizen with 8 years of residence here under my belt. Does that mean
that my rights should not be protected, just because I don't have a British
passport in my pocket?

I'm sure it works exactly the same way in reverse - there are British people
who lived in Netherlands, Spain or elesewhere in EU for years, but for many
many different reasons they can't become naturalized, because rules are what
they are. Doesn't mean we should be suddenly stripping them of the rights they
have been able to have for decades. Telling people to "just get naturalised"
is not the solution.

~~~
dazc
'...there are British people who lived in Netherlands, Spain or elsewhere in
EU for years, but for many many different reasons they can't become
naturalized'

Because a lot of countries do not allow dual-citizenship and, broad
generalisation accepted, people don't want to give up their UK status.

------
trosi
> European citizenship confers a number of privileges: the right to live in
> and move freely between member states, the right to diplomatic and consular
> assistance from other member states, and the right to participate in
> elections to the European parliament. The shared assumption of the European
> Union and the UK government is that Brexit will mean British citizens will
> automatically forfeit these rights.

I'm having a hard time imagining how it could be otherwise. The EU and the UK
could certainly come to terms on some of these issues but I seriously doubt
that UK citizens will be allowed move freely between member states if the
converse is not allowed as well (i.e. EU citizens entering and leaving freely
the UK). I seriously doubt that UK citizens will be represented in the
European parliament.

~~~
beojan
> I'm having a hard time imagining how it could be otherwise.

A Northern Ireland (GFA) like scenario, where current UK citizens can choose
whether they consider themselves British, European, or both. I don't think
this would be possible without allowing citizens of other EU nations to
continue enjoying freedom of movement into the UK (as Irish citizens are
allowed to live and work in the UK, and UK citizens can live and work in
Ireland, independent of EU freedom of movement:
[http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/moving_t...](http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/moving_to_ireland/rights_of_residence_in_ireland/residence_rules_UK_citizens.html)).

------
mabbo
The benefits of being an EU member are primarily given to the citizens (free
movement, ability to work). The costs to be a member are paid, effectively, by
the state (migrants moving in, adherence to EU laws, etc). This is a very
hand-wavey generalization, I agree, but let's consider it kind of true for a
moment here.

If states can leave the EU, and stop paying the costs while maintaining the
benefits to their citizens, what democracy would ever vote to stay?

In short, if this trial is to find that the British can all retain their EU
status, regardless of whether the law is correct on doing so, it would mark
the end of the European Union in very short order.

~~~
beojan
> In short, if this trial is to find that the British can all retain their EU
> status, regardless of whether the law is correct on doing so, it would mark
> the end of the European Union in very short order.

The idea is to find out if EU citizenship is independent of national
citizenship.

I don't think this would lead to the end of the EU, because if all the member
states decide to leave the EU, and all their citizens decide they want to keep
EU citizenship anyhow, have they not just demonstrated that the EU is then the
democratic state with sovereignty over that territory?

~~~
mabbo
Right, but this is hacker news so think like a hacker.

I'll have my state join, get all my citizen EU citizenship, then leave the EU.
Now I don't have to allow free movement of EU citizens in my country, but so
my people can have free movement in EU member states.

~~~
beojan
My point was that, if, after your country leaves the EU, all your citizens opt
to keep EU citizenship, then (through self-determination) they have given the
EU a claim to continued sovereignty over your territory.

------
AndyMcConachie
I'm a Dutchie and I feel for my friends in the UK. Brexit will only hurt the
UK. My fear however is that we're too easy on the UK when they leave and this
makes other countries also want to leave. So I feel that as an EU citizen it
is in my best interests to make it as painful as possible for Brexit. I don't
feel any consessions are owed to Britain, and specifically I want to
discourage other nations from leaving. Entering and leaving the EU isn't
something that countries should get to do every couple decades or so.

Not to say that Brexit needs to be especially painful for the British just for
the sake of being painful. Just that they shouldn't get any special breaks.
Either Britain is part of the EU or it isn't. None of this, half in, half out
nonsense.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
You don't need to worry about being too soft on the UK, we seem to be driving
ourselves off a cliff at the moment. If anything the EU is probably more
worried about having a basket case on its doorstep.

~~~
AndyMcConachie
I'm sorry. It's not fair to the sane people in the UK that this Brexit
nonsense is happening.

------
namelost
The central question is whether EU citizenship is a relationship between
individuals and the EU, or whether it is simply an artefact of the treaties
between the EU states.

If the former, then the action of a member state deciding to leave the EU
could not remove EU citizenship from individuals, any more than one someone
holding joint French and British citizenship could have their lawful French
citizenship voided against their will by an action of Britain.

If the latter, then EU citizenship is not really a separate concept _per se_ ,
but merely a term to describe an individual who has national citizenship of an
EU state at a particular moment in time. Their individual rights exist through
a layer of indirection: individuals derive their EU rights from their national
citizenship only.

I believe the latter is closer to how it works in practice, however I can
definitely see how such an interpretation could sit uncomfortably with the EU
-- if there is no legal relationship between individual EU citizens and the
EU, then one could start to doubt whether the EU itself is an entity _per se_
, or if it is just a convenient term we use for the collective effects of the
treaties between member states.

~~~
masklinn
> I believe the latter is closer to how it works in practice

AFAIK people who lose citizenships to EU members also lose EU citizenship, so
yes. It's also very much the wording of Article 20:

> Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the
> nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union.

EU citizenship is not independent from nationality of a member state.

> Their individual rights exist through a layer of indirection: individuals
> derive their EU rights from their national citizenship only.

> I can definitely see how such an interpretation could sit uncomfortably with
> the EU -- if there is no legal relationship between individual EU citizens
> and the EU

I fail to see why such an interpretation would sit uncomfortably with the EU,
it's pretty much how everything is worded.

> then one could start to doubt whether the EU itself is an entity per se

That makes no sense at all. The WTO is a thing regardless of my personal
relationship to it. So is the Coast Guard, or IG Metall.

------
acd
Does this work both ways? So that if British citizens has the right to live in
EU, then EU citizens also have the same EU citizenship right to live in
Britain?

EU would benefit most if it cooperates with Britain.

According to Prisoners dilemma which is a theoretical game theory construct
both EU and Britain will benefit the most from cooperation. Otherwise both EU
and Britain will loose.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma)

~~~
dazc
'Does this work both ways?'

It does at the moment. But, as per current plans, people from the EU who
arrive after a certain date will not have this right.

The date has not been decided, nor have the rights of UK citizens who
currently reside in other member states.

------
nugi
Whenever people speak of birthrights, I get nervous.

