Search results

Timorese citizenship was born with the new independent state, on 20 May 2002. The Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (Constituição da República Democrática de Timor-Leste), which entered into force on that same day, set the criteria for the attribution of Timorese citizenship by birth (cidadania originária) and referred to ordinary legislation the definition of the rules on acquisition, loss, reacquisition, registration and proof of Timorese citizenship (Article 3, under the heading 'citizenship'). Much like the rest of the constitutional text, Article 3 reflects the combined influences of the Mozambican Constitution of 1990 and of the Portuguese Constitution of 1976. The first is reflected in the Constituent Assembly's option for setting substantive criteria for the attribution of citizenship, while the second is evidenced by its option for referring the bulk of the citizenship regime to ordinary legislation. The combination is not without difficulties. Article 3 of the Timorese Constitution adopts the traditional jus soli and jus sanguinis principles for the attribution of citizenship by birth. Both principles are enunciated in very broad terms, making access to Timorese citizenship by birth remarkably easy. This may be explained by the fact that Timor-Leste is a small and poor country with a vast diaspora, but later legal developments, i.e. the adoption of the 2002 Nationality Act and of the 2004 Nationality Regulation, suggest that the Constituent Assembly might have come across as more inclusive than what was actually intended. The attempts made by the National Parliament and by the Government to introduce restrictions in the access to Timorese citizenship by birth lack a constitutional mandate and should be deemed unconstitutional. The issue, however, has not yet reached the Timorese courts and seems to be absent from academic and political debates in the country. The chapter provides historical background to the current citizenship regime in Timor-Leste, covering membership criteria ...

This article analyzes the development of a large population of displaced persons resulting from violence in East Timor. The article discusses how various attempts at controlling the flight of people from East Timor into the mountains or to other nations has resulted in violence & destruction of property & loss of life. The article also discusses the economic impact of such a large proportion of internally displaced persons moving about in an economically underdeveloped country. The article offers solutions to the problem & an analysis of legal approaches to independence for East Timor. 1 Table. E. Miller

Argues that the 1999 international military intervention in East Timor was strikingly different from the international intervention in Kosovo during the same year. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) intervened in Kosovo over the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's claim to sovereignty that NATO insisted it would continue to recognize. In contrast, although Indonesia's claim to sovereignty over East Timor was not recognized by the UN, the international community claimed Indonesia's consent was necessary for intervention. Attention is called to the extreme suffering of the people of East Timor during the years of non-intervention; Indonesia's resistance to any international security presence in East Timor; & Indonesian President B.J. Habibie's decision to allow the East Timorese to choose between autonomy within Indonesia or independence. The violence that erupted after the ballot prompted criticisms that Australia, the US, & the UN should have exerted more pressure on Indonesia to accept an international force to maintain security in East Timor. Further contrasts between the East Timor & Kosovo interventions are pointed out along with their implications for humanitarian interventions. J. Lindroth