Travelling on Bangladeshi passport by dual citizens
Courtesy New Age 20/10/08
The recent letter by Rashid Sarkar (October 11) caught my eyes. Not only do I wholeheartedly support the views of the gentleman, but I would also like the Bangladesh government to go a step further and bring to an end all the confusion regarding travelling in and out of Bangladesh on a Bangladeshi passport. As Sarkar pointed out various statutes clearly state that a Bangladeshi citizen does not automatically lose his/her citizenship by acquiring the citizenship of a North American or European country. The recent announcement by the chief adviser simply reiterated this point with respect to British citizens of Bangladeshi origin.
Yet, depending on the phase of the moon and which official one talks to in which Bangladesh consulate, one gets a different embellished interpretation of the rules regarding dual citizens. Some of these Bangladeshi diplomats insist that after acquiring a non-Bangladeshi citizenship, the person of Bangladeshi origin must apply for a ‘dual citizenship’ certificate. They go on to say that the procedure is very simple but fail miserably to provide any data to support their claim. In other words, they have no specific information that is available for review by a potential dual citizenship certificate applicant on how long it has taken for such a case to be completed. Naturally the question arises as to what laws or rules support the practice by the Bangladesh missions of making persons of Bangladeshi origin jump through such a lengthy bureaucratic hoop when there are ample laws to suggest that Bangladeshis do not lose their citizenship by mere acquisition of a European or north American citizenship? Is it arbitrary? What exactly Bangladesh is gaining by making its nationals go through this painful process — aside from making some of its tax-funded tin soldiers feel powerful — defies intelligence.
Another related issue is travelling in and out of Bangladesh on a Bangladeshi Passport by a dual citizen. It is reasonable that Bangladesh departure immigration ensure that Bangladesh passport holders have the necessary visas for travel to foreign countries so that the latter are not deported at the cost of the Bangladeshi taxpayers. It is also reasonable that Bangladesh arrival immigration ensures that people entering Bangladesh are either its citizens or have the necessary visas to enter our country. What is not justified is to arbitrarily harass Bangladeshi citizens at the border check-posts. Bangladesh is our country and we expect be treated better than any national of any other country on our own soil.
Bangladesh authorities need to remind themselves that freedom of movement of Bangladeshi citizens is enshrined in our Constitution –– the supreme law of the land. Part III (Fundamental Rights), Article 36 (Freedom of Movement) states that, ‘Subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the public interest, every citizen shall have the right to move freely throughout Bangladesh, to reside and settle in any place therein and to leave and re-enter Bangladesh’.
I have heard horror stories where immigration persponnel at ZIA seized the Bangladesh passport of dual citizens on the grounds that they were travelling in and out of Bangladesh on their Bangladesh passport which did not have a visa for the country of their second citizenship. Clearly, this is a gross violation of the constitutional right of the Bangladeshi traveller on several grounds. The authorities first and foremost need to understand that no one has the right to stop a free Bangladeshi citizen from either entering or leaving Bangladesh. As I pointed out earlier, this is our birth right protected by our sovereign constitution. Secondly, seizure of Bangladesh passport – proof of Bangladesh citizenship –– is another violation of our constitutional right. Therefore, the airport authorities at ZIA need to restrain their immigration staff from violating our rights – presumably out of sheer ignorance of the relevant laws. Given that a Bangladeshi does not lose their citizenship simply by virtue of acquiring a second citizenship it seems utterly ridiculous that they not be allowed to travel in and out of Bangladesh on their Bangladesh passports. Since their second passport is ample proof to Bangladesh departure immigration that the dual citizen will not be deported at the expense of the Bangladeshi tax-payers (the only ‘public interest’ referred in the constitution), there is also no justification in harassing a person for not having a visa on their Bangladesh passport when travelling out of Bangladesh on their Bangladesh passport.
If anything, the ZIA authorities should encourage everyone to travel in and out of Bangladesh on their Bangladesh passport –– should they have one – for several reasons: all Bangladesh passport holders should contribute a higher amount in travel taxes –– thus it makes financial sense; all Bangladesh passport holders fall under the jurisdiction of Bangladeshi laws –– thus it makes legal sense; all Bangladesh passport holders have a right to enter Bangladesh without visa –– thus it also makes logistic sense by saving precious time that would e otherwise have been spent on looking for and verifying the Bangladesh visa (or ‘no visa required’ stamp) on their foreign passport. Here in the US, for example, all US citizens, including dual citizens (those who are citizens of the US and a second country), have to travel in and out of the US on their US passport; in fact, it is a punishable offence for one not to do so. Although Bangladesh has absolutely no reason to pay any attention to how another country implements its border control, it wouldn’t hurt for it to learn some lessons from established international examples.
Finally, Bangladesh authorities, including everyone from the immigration personnel, airline staff and Bangladeshi diplomats on all the way up to the president, need to understand that they cannot violate the fundamental rights of Bangladeshi citizens. Freedom of movement happens to be one such fundamental right. Any law or any rule which violates these rights is considered void by the constitution.
Shabbir A. Bashar, PhD
Ithaca, New York, USA