Page 195 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

Citizenship 181

ruled illegal under the European Convention on Human Rights. At the
same time, individuals thought to be dangerous to the state have lost their
citizenship status, as in the case of the “ accidental citizen ” Yasser Hamdi
who was detained by the US authorities, similarly without charge and
without access to lawyers, before being persuaded to give up his US citi-
zenship (Nyer, 2006 ; Nash, 2009b ). In fact, such practices are consistent
with the thesis of post - national citizenship insofar as removing citizenship
may indicate that nationality no longer counts as it once did in terms of
securing, or losing, citizenship rights. Nevertheless, Hamdi was headed
for Guantanamo Bay when it was discovered that he was a US citizen,
and in comparison with those detained there, he enjoyed privileged
treatment.
Insofar as post - national citizenship is developing, then, as rights are
granted to non - citizens, it is resulting in the growing proliferation of
citizenship statuses. The formal equality of rights once only afforded to
citizens is just one aspect of citizenship. Post - national citizenship does not
simply involve resident non - citizens gradually winning approximately the
same rights as citizens. Throughout this chapter, we have been looking
at how, even when marginalized groups are successful in winning formal
rights, inequality continues in their actual enjoyment of rights in practice.
Similarly, in post - national citizenship, the actual enjoyment of formal
rights depends on other conditions, including not belonging to a minority
about which the majority population has suspicions. In effect, post -
national citizenship means quite different things to different groups. Post -
national citizenship involves a proliferation of citizenship statuses: from
the “ super - citizens ” of the global elite; to “ quasi - citizens ” who have

formal rights but who may find themselves in anomalous situations
because they are unable to demonstrate that they “ belong ” to the majority
culture or that they are loyal to the state; through to “ un - citizens, ” who
may be long - term residents in a state, but who, without legal rights to
remain, face deportation if they come to the attention of the authorities
(Nash, 2009b ). In practices of post - national citizenship, the state does not

act in a unified and homogenous fashion. Possessing nationality, and
therefore “ full ” citizenship status, still makes a difference in relation to
state authorities, though for some people, even that may not be enough
to ensure respect for their rights.
It is not, then, that the proliferation of citizenship statuses undermines
the state. On the contrary, in some respects, it may be that the legitimacy
and scope of the state is strengthened in the multiplicity and variety of
citizenship claims. It is states that are called on to guarantee human rights.
In the case of refugees, for example, it is because states have the duty to