Eric Fripp in the article ‘Passportisation’: ECtHR finds imposition of Russian citizenship in Crimea a breach of article 8 ECHR for EJIL explains ‘passportisation’:

the practice of extending nationality to substantial numbers of individuals beyond the boundary of the state, including by forcible imposition of nationality

The article discusses the the decision of 25 June 2024 by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on imposing Russian citizenship on Ukrainian nationals. One of the conclusions of ECtHR in that case:

A. In so far as both applications are concerned (…) 3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention on account of an administrative practice of a lack of an effective system of opting out of Russian citizenship

The author comments:

An interesting feature of passportisation is that positive acts of naturalisation are at first blush relatively immune from restraint by international and regional human rights laws. From the First World War onwards enduring international concerns touching nationality have mostly focussed on its denial, especially when this produces statelessness. State concerns regarding multiple citizenship, seen as diffusing loyalty and undermining availability of citizens for military service, never found concrete purchase in international law, and since the Second World War have faded to the point of near-disappearance (…)

The relatively limited scope for international law restraint on passportisation, beyond the established but poorly appreciated requirement for volition, makes the new decision of the ECtHR Grand Chamber still more interesting and impressive than it would otherwise be.

It’s a topic that will also interest ‘accidental Americans’, the victims of US tax law and FATCA (introduction in Dutch).