Kathmandu School of Law Review

P-ISSN : 2091-2110, E-ISSN : 2773-8159, DOI : 10.46985, Publisher : Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal
Annual flagship journal of Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal

Volume 5, Issue 2, November 2017
Articles

Citizens of an Enemy State: The Enemy Alien Disability Rule in the Constitution of Nepal

PDF
  • Prakat Khati
    ,
  • Kundan Raj Sharma
Prakat Khati
Kathmandu School of Law
Bio
Kundan Raj Sharma
Kathmandu School of Law
Bio

Published 2017-11-30

How to Cite

Khati, P., & Sharma, K. R. (2017). Citizens of an Enemy State: The Enemy Alien Disability Rule in the Constitution of Nepal. Kathmandu School of Law Review, 5(2), 53–62. Retrieved from https://kslreview.org/index.php/kslr/article/view/984

Abstract

The Enemy Alien Disability rule has been a constantfeature of many of Nepal’s constitutions in the past and is also featured in its present Constitution. Under this rule, citizens of an enemy state are not protected by the fundamental guarantees of the right to criminal justice and are disabled from seeking constitutional remedies such as a writ of habeas corpus. In this context, a legal and normative analysis of this rule and its compatibility with current norms of Human Rights and of Humanitarian Law is warranted. This article intends to conduct analyses of the historical, normative and legal aspects of this rule.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. The Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063 B.S., art 24 (2) and (3).
  2. The Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal, 2047 B.S., art 14 (5), (6) and (7).
  3. Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal, 2015 B.S., art 3 (6), (7) and (8).
  4. Constitution of Nepal, 2072 B.S., art 20.
  5. Constitution of Nepal, 2072 B.S., art 20 (2) and (3).
  6. Constitution of India, 1949, art 22 (1), (2) and (3).
  7. Federal Constitution of Malaysia, 1957, art 5 (3), (4) and (5).
  8. The Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063 B.S., art 24 (2) and (3).
  9. Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal, 2047 B.S., art 14 (5), (6) and (7).
  10. Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal, 2015 B.S., art 3 (6), (7) and (8).
  11. Treaty Act, 2047, Nepal, art 9(1).
  12. The Constitution of Nepal, 2063 B.S., art 133.
  13. See for example, The Constitution of Sweden, where an alien lawfully staying in Sweden enjoys equal freedoms of expression, congregation, political and religious opinions, association, demonstration and all rules to protect integrity and rule of law as well as protection of property vis-a-vis a Swedish citizen in Peter Nobel, ‘The Alien Under Swedish Law’, 11, COMPo L. Y.B. 165, 1992, p. 168.
  14. The Canadian constitution guarantees basic human rights to "everyone", which has been read to protect non-nationals living in the country; See, e.g., Yamani v. Canada, 1995,1 F.e. 174 (Can.).
  15. La Costituzion, Nepal, arts. 13, 14, 17-21, and 24.
  16. Germany's Basic Law establishes "human rights" and "everyone's rights" that apply equally to all persons without regard to citizenship. See, Ruth Rubio-Marin, Immigration As a Democratic Challenge; Citizenship and Inclusion in Germany and the United States, pp. 187-88.
  17. See, in context of Italian constitutional law, Bruno Nascimbene, ‘Lo Straniero nel Diritto Italiano’, Cass.,sez. Un., 21 February 2002, p. 2513.
  18. Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950, ETS 5, art. 14.
  19. Jonathan Elliot, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Taylor & Maury, 1836.
  20. Act of July 6, 1798, ch. 66, § 1, 1 Stat. 577, 577 (codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. § 21 (2000)).
  21. Act of July 6, 1798, ch. 66, § 1, 1 Stat. 577, 577 (codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. § 21 (2000)).
  22. See, Gerald L. Neuman, Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants. Borders, and Fundamental Law, 1996, pp. 52-63.
  23. David Cole, ‘Are Foreign Nationals Entitled to the Same Constitutional Rights As Citizens?’, 25 T. Jefferson L. Rev., 367-388, 2003.
  24. Rasul v. Bush 542 US 466, (2004).
  25. Rasul v. Bush 542 US 466, (2004), para. 6.
  26. Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U. S. 763, (1950),
  27. 215 F. Supp. 2d 55, 68, (DC 2002).
  28. Constitution of Nepal, 2072 B.S., art 51(m)(1).
  29. United Nations, Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS XV, art. 51.
  30. Ibid, chp. 7.
  31. Constitution of Nepal, 2072 B.S., sch. 5.
  32. Constitution of Nepal, 2072 B.S., art. 273(1).
  33. John Hart Ely, Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review, 1980, pp. 161-62.
  34. Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365, 372 (1971).
  35. Deborah L. Acomb, ‘Poll Track for December 15, 2001’, NAT'L J., Dec. 15 2001.
  36. Jean Jacques Rousseau, Social Contract, 1762.
  37. David Feldman, ‘Human Dignity as a Legal Value - Part I’, Pub. L., 682, 1999, pp. 690-91.
  38. Alexander M. Bickel, The Morality of Consent, 1975, p. 58.
  39. See, for example, Testimony of Larry Parkinson, Deputy General Counsel, FBI, before H.R.
  40. Sub-committee on Immigration of the Judicial Committee, The Secret Evidence Repeal Act, Hearings on H.R. 2121, 106th Congo 18,36 (Feb. 10,2000) arguing that foreign nationals are entitled to diminished due process protection.
  41. Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 325 (1937).
  42. Richard B. Lillich, The Human Rights Of Aliens In Contemporary International Law, Manchester University Press, 1984, p. 41; Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A(III), U.N. GAOR, 3d. Sess., Supp. No. 13, at 71, U.N. Doc. Al810 (1948).
  43. Richard B. Lillich, The Human Rights Of Aliens In Contemporary International Law, Manchester University Press, 1984, p. 43; Baroness Elles, ‘International Provisions Protecting the Human Rights of Non-Citizens’, 45, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/392lRev.l, U.N. Sales No.
  44. E.80XrV.2 (1980); David Weissbrodt, ‘Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Indigenous Peoples and Minorities: The Rights of Non-Citizens’, 30, U.N. Doc.
  45. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/20 (2001); Carmen Tiburcio, The Human Rights of Aliens under International and Comparative Law, 2001.
  46. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A(III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., at 71, U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948), preamble, arts. 7-11, 19, and 20(1).
  47. General Comment 15, The Position of Aliens Under the Covenant, Human Rights Committee, U.N. Doc. HRIIGEN/I/Rev.l, at 18 (1994), 27th Sess. 1986, para. 7.
  48. U.N. GAOR, 40th Sess., Supp. No. 53, at 252, U.N. Doc. A/40/53 (December 13, 1985).
  49. [N]ational origin' refers to a person's descent, not to his juridical nationality." See 46Richard B. Lillich, The Human Rights Of Aliens In Contemporary International Law, Manchester University Press, 1984, p. 46.
  50. Baroness Elles, ‘International Provisions Protecting the Human Rights of Non-Citizens’, 45, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/392lRev.l, U.N. Sales No. E.80XrV.2 (1980), p. 299; David Weissbrodt, ‘Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Indigenous Peoples and Minorities: The Rights of Non-Citizens’, 30, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/20 (2001), p. 30.
  51. B. G. Ramcharan, ‘Equality and Nondiscrimination’, in Louis Henkin ed., The International Bill Of Rights: The Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1981, pp. 246, 263.
  52. Jean Pictet, Commentary on the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 , Vol. IV, ICRC, 1958, p.
  54. Ibid, p. 20.
  55. Ibid, p. 47.
  56. Ibid, p. 19.
  57. Jean Marie Henckaerts and Louise Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules, ICRC, Rule 99.
  58. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention), 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287, Art. 147.