(a) Examine the definition, meaning of 'Nationality' and modes of acquisition of nationality. Also, make a distinction between…

Nationality: Concept, Modes of Acquisition, and Citizenship

Under international law, nationality represents the juridical bond between an individual and a sovereign state. In the Nottebohm Case (1955), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) defined nationality as a legal bond having as its basis a social fact of attachment, a genuine connection of existence, interests, and sentiments, giving rise to reciprocal rights and duties. It operates externally as the primary condition enabling a state to exercise diplomatic protection on behalf of its nationals.

International law recognizes five primary modes of acquiring nationality:

1. Birth: through jus soli (place of birth) or jus sanguinis (bloodline/descent).
2. Naturalization: an act of formal grant upon fulfillment of municipal statutory criteria.
3. Cession: where inhabitants of a transferred territory acquire the nationality of the acquiring state.
4. Subjugation (annexation): incorporation of territory through conquest resulting in imposed nationality.
5. Resumption or Option: reinstatement of original nationality by declaration.

Nationality differs fundamentally from citizenship. Nationality is a status governed by international law determining an individual’s international allegiance and entitlement to protection against foreign states. Citizenship is a creature of domestic municipal law, governing civil and political rights (such as voting and holding public office). All citizens are nationals, but not all nationals are necessarily citizens with full political franchise. In India, the Constitution (Articles 5–11) and the Citizenship Act, 1955 regulate citizenship, not nationality. The Supreme Court affirmed this conceptual divide in State Trading Corporation of India v. CTO (1963), holding that nationality denotes international status whereas citizenship confers municipal constitutional entitlements.

Reservations under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969

Under Article 2(1)(d) of the VCLT, 1969, a reservation is a unilateral statement made by a state when signing, ratifying, or acceding to a treaty, purporting to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions. Articles 19 to 23 codify the balance between sovereign consent and treaty integrity, embodying the standard articulated in the Genocide Convention Advisory Opinion (1951).

Under Article 19, a state may formulate a reservation unless: (a) it is prohibited by the treaty, (b) the treaty provides that only specified reservations may be made, or (c) the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty. Reservations differ from interpretative declarations, which merely clarify a state’s understanding without excluding treaty obligations.

The legal effects under Articles 20 and 21 depend on the reactions of other contracting states:

1. Acceptance: Modifies the reserved provisions reciprocally between the reserving and accepting states (Article 21(1)).
2. Objection without opposing entry into force: The provisions to which the reservation relates do not apply between the two states to the extent of the reservation (Article 21(3)).
3. Objection with opposition: The entire treaty fails to enter into force between the two states (Article 20(4)(b)). In human rights treaties, international monitoring bodies increasingly assert that invalid reservations are severable, preserving the treaty’s application.

Non-Discrimination in International Trade Law and WTO Dispute Settlement

The core of multilateral trade rests on two non-discrimination pillars:

1. Most Favoured Nation (MFN, GATT Article I): Any advantage, favour, or privilege granted to products originating in or destined for any country must be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the like products of all other WTO members.
2. National Treatment (GATT Article III): Imported products, once they have cleared customs, cannot be subjected to internal taxes or regulations less favourable than those applied to like domestic products.

A WTO member cannot unilaterally impose different reciprocal tariffs on other members, as Article I mandates unconditional MFN treatment, and Article II binds maximum tariff concessions. However, differential tariffs are permissible under recognized exceptions:

1. Regional Trade Agreements and Customs Unions satisfying GATT Article XXIV.
2. Preferential tariffs for developing and least-developed nations under the 1979 Enabling Clause (Generalized System of Preferences).
3. Tariff renegotiations conducted pursuant to GATT Article XXVIII.

An affected member state can file a complaint with the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) under Article 23 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) and GATT Article XXIII for violation of MFN or tariff bindings. The mechanism provides for consultations, panel establishment, Appellate Body review (subject to current institutional blockages), and authorization of retaliatory countermeasures (as illustrated in disputes like India–Solar Cells and EU–Sugar).

Conclusion

Contemporary international law navigates a continuous dialogue between state sovereignty—expressed through nationality laws and treaty reservations—and multilateral rule-based obligations governed by pacta sunt servanda (VCLT Article 26) and WTO disciplines. While states retain sovereign latitude in defining their body politic and scoping treaty commitments, this discretion remains bounded by the overarching imperatives of non-discrimination and international accountability.