Post-independence political crises in Africa have shown a similar pattern; leaders seek to buttress their support among one part of their country’s population by excluding another from the right to belong to the country. This publication argues that the denial of a right to citizenship has been at the heart of many of the conflicts of post-colonial Africa, and examines the ways in which citizenship is denied. While adopting new laws is only a first step towards overcoming past and present injustice, legal citizenship reforms, in South Africa in particular, point the way toward redefining national citizenship and moving beyond these crises.
Hundreds of thousands of people living in Africa find themselves non-persons in the only state they have ever known. Due to the manipulation of citizenship laws, they cannot get their children registered at birth or entered in school or university; they cannot access state health services; they cannot obtain travel documents, or employment without a work permit; and if they leave the country they may not be able to return. Neither can they vote, stand for office or work for state institutions. Ultimately such policies can lead to economic and political disaster, or even war. Even where such policies do not result in violent conflict, they have been used to subvert the democratic process and to reinforce or prolong the hold on power of one group at the expense of another.
The use and abuse of the law frames and enables the politics of ethnic exclusion. Control over citizenship has been used to prevent specific individuals from challenging for political position or to silence those who criticise the government. It has also exacerbated gender inequality; citizenship laws may disallow women who marry noncitizens from passing their own citizenship to their children or their husband, though men can do so without question.
These patterns of citizenship crises are not haphazard. They are closely linked to the colonial heritage of each country; and in particular the migration and land expropriation that was implemented or facilitated by the colonial authorities.
Citizenship is, however, a dynamic concept. The notion of ‘who belongs’ can change over time, especially where those in authority lead the effort to redefine the rules. Different approaches to citizenship are possible. For example, a series of reforms since the mid-1990s has brought increasing gender equality to citizenship law. The steady changes to the rules on dual citizenship are also positive developments.
However, as can be seen in South Africa, adopting new laws is only a first step towards overcoming past and present injustice. As part of efforts to dismantle the economic and political legacy of apartheid, South Africa’s government has offered citizenship to many long-term migrants brought to the country under apartheid labour policies; implemented affirmative action and economic empowerment policies for black people; and granted a right to asylum and eventual grant of citizenship to recognized refugees. Nonetheless, the transition to an equitable democracy in South Africa has still been tested by continuing racial inequality and prejudice. Keeping to the vision of the 1955 Freedom Charter that ‘South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white’ remains a challenge. The integration of the Freedom Charter’s vision into the laws of some other African countries, though, could provide a basis for the resolution of violent conflict.
