The author of the amendments on the deprivation of citizenship by birth will not withdraw the bill
[ad_1]
Senator from Crimea Sergei Tsekov does not plan to withdraw the bill on the deprivation of citizenship by birth in a number of cases, three other authors of the initiative withdrew their signatures from the document. Tsekov told RIA Novosti about this.
“I’m not going to withdraw” informed he agency. Tsekov did not comment on why other authors of the bill withdrew signatures, advising to clarify this issue with them.
A group of senators on July 21 contributed to the State Duma a bill that proposes to deprive citizenship by birth for desertion or discrediting the army. Among the authors of the amendments when the document was introduced, in addition to Tsekov, were also Ekaterina Altabaeva and Sergei Kolbin from Sevastopol, as well as Olga Bas from the Luhansk People’s Republic. According to the Duma electronic database, the next day they removed their names from the bill.
The explanatory note to the amendments states that the federal law on citizenship, adopted in April 2023, establishes cases for the termination of acquired citizenship. The document provides examples of such situations – the commission of a crime, desertion, discrediting the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, calls for extremism. But these measures apply only to those who have been granted citizenship of the Russian Federation. The authors suggested extending this to citizenship acquired by birthright.
On the same day, Andrei Klishas, Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Building, criticized the bill and advised senators to read the Russian Constitution, according to which a Russian citizen cannot be deprived of his citizenship or the right to change it. Also, according to the law “On Citizenship”, a person who has received citizenship by birthright can leave it only at his own request. In addition, in his Telegram channel, Klishas emphasized that if a federal politician introduces a law that contradicts the Constitution, then “for such a politician, this is a serious reason to think about whether he can hold his office.”
[ad_2]
Source link
