Introduction
Citizenship serves as a legal mechanism through which individuals are formally recognised as members of a political community and placed under the protection of a state. Bearing legal status, citizenship confers rights and obligations, enabling individuals to participate politically and socially with protection. Consequently, the loss or exclusion from citizenship carries profound legal and social implications. Individuals deprived of nationality face legal uncertainty, exclusion from basic services, and even criminalisation.
In recent years, nationalist politics and security-driven governance have led several states to adopt restrictive nationality policies. These practices have contributed to “manufactured statelessness”, whereby citizenship is deliberately excluded from certain groups or individuals (Džankić, 2023). While increased state practice continues to visibly deprive individuals of national status, it remains a constraint under international law.
In the last month, as of the date of this article, the Algerian state adopted a revised version of its Nationality Code, granting the state the authority to strip citizens of their citizenship gained through naturalisation or by birth. While the government has justified the reform on grounds of national security and the protection of unity, the amendment emerges within a broader political context. This came into force amid a trend of oppressive policies, silencing critics and activists, since the Hirak movement. Repressive measures seek to target individuals voicing criticism against the regime and/or encouraging peaceful demonstrations. By threatening individuals with potential statelessness, the amendment raises significant human rights concerns.
The Right to Nationality
The fundamental right to a nationality is recognised in several international instruments. It constitutes the legal bond between an individual and a state, through which the state carries out its human rights obligations. Hence, the “right to have rights” (Arendt, 1951). Citizenship thus distinguishes nationals from foreigners, providing a national identity and a guarantee of protection.
Although nationality traditionally falls within the domestic jurisdiction of states, they remain governed by and subject to international human rights law. Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that “everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality” (UNGA, 1948). Similarly, Article 9 of the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (1961) expressly prohibits the deprivation of nationality “on racial, ethnic, religious or political grounds”.
The absence of nationality not only excludes individuals from basic rights, such as access to health care and education, but also renders them stateless and outside the protection of any state. Article 1 of the United Nations (UN) Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (1954) defines a stateless person as someone who is “not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law”. Despite the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality, over 75 percent of the global stateless population results from discriminatory state practice and policies (UNHCR, n.d.). Statelessness further marginalises minority and vulnerable groups due to their lack of legal attachment to a state, restricting their access to public services and further exacerbating their stigmatised experience deemed as second-class citizens (Brennan and McGee, 2023). Statelessness therefore functions not merely as a legal anomaly, but as a structural tool of exclusion that governments use, reinforcing systemic oppression.
Background and Developments
After Algeria gained independence from France in 1962, the country has been predominantly governed by military elites despite its Constitution formally recognising a multi-party-political system. The 1990s witnessed the rise of Islamist parties, reflecting a broader societal desire to revive aspects of Algerian identity perceived to have been suppressed during French colonial rule (Ottaway, 2021). In practice, however, Algeria has largely operated under an authoritarian regime since independence, seeking to restore elements of Islamic political and social life while maintaining a fragile facade of electoral democracy.
The fragile balance was fundamentally challenged in 2019, when a mass civilian protest movement, the Hirak, emerged, aiming to prevent President Abdelaziz Bouteflika from seeking a fifth term (Ottaway, 2021). The movement evolved into a broader demand for systemic reform and the dismantling of the military-civilian power structure. Although the Hirak successfully forced Bouteflika to resign, it failed to transform the underlying political system. Civilian institutions remain under military influence with limited checks and balances.
Abdelmadjid Tebboune subsequently assumed the presidency. Under his leadership, governance continues to be characterised by restrictions on public freedom and the containment of social movements. With the support of domestic political Islamist groups, the regime has systematically reduced media and civil space, dissolved opposition parties, and replaced French with English (Aït-Larbi, 2025). While Tebboune presented reforms as a modernisation effort, these measures have occurred alongside the systematic restriction of civic space. Essentially, they reflect a broader strategy to consolidate control over the social and political sphere and to suppress dissent.
The 2021 constitutional amendments further illustrate this dynamic. Article 2 of the Algerian Constitution now reaffirms that “Islam shall be the religion of the State”, while Article 51 guarantees the freedom of conscience. The tension between these provisions raises concerns regarding the effective protection of religious pluralism. Despite Algeria being a party to the UDHR and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which ensures the “right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religious”, limited protection of minority religious communities has contributed to a pattern of religious persecution.
Against this backdrop, the expansion of terrorism-related crimes and the use of counter-terrorism legislation to suppress civil society have not come as a surprise (OHCHR, 2025). Broad and vague definitions of terrorism have created significant space for abuse, enabling the authorities to target political opponents, labour unions, and human rights defenders under the guise of national security (OHCHR, 2025). These practices clearly illustrate how security discourse has been strategically adopted to legitimise the suppression of opposition while maintaining the appearance of governance.
In 2021, Algeria amended its Penal Code by introducing Article 87bis, which defines terrorist acts as those “targeting state security, national unity, or institutional stability”, with penalties ranging from imprisonment to death (UNODC, n.d.). In a similar notion, amendments to the Algerian Nationality Code introduced provisions allowing the withdrawal of citizenship from nationals residing abroad who allegedly harm Algerian interest. The ambiguous language mirrors that used in the Penal Code, reflecting an expanding pattern of repression and restriction of fundamental rights (Amnesty International, 2024). The international community has raised concerns over this legislative development, as it criminalises lawful and peaceful activism.
Most recently, amendments to the 1970 Nationality Law further entrenched this trend. Citizenship increasingly appears conditional upon loyalty to the regime. The newly introduced Article 22bis grants the state broad authority to strip both naturalised and native-born citizens of their nationality. Framed in expansive terms, it targets individuals who commit acts deemed to “harm the fundamental interest of Algeria, national unity, state security”, thereby institutionalising a mechanism where nationality may be weaponised against political dissent (APS, 2026).
Legal and Human Rights Implications
The recent amendment to Algeria’s Nationality Code raises serious concerns regarding international human rights law, particularly the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality and the protection of civil and political rights. By granting the state broad discretionary power to deprive citizenship on vague grounds, the law creates an environment where nationality is used as a tool of political control (SHOAA, 2025).
Under international law, a state is not allowed to strip one’s nationality to render one stateless. While states have legitimate claims to take measures against national security threats, the absolute prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality remains sacred. Thus, while international law allows for the deprivation of one’s nationality in certain circumstances, the fundamental right to nationality must be respected and it should not render the individual stateless.
In Algeria’s case, however, this requirement is not always met. The Algerian Nationality Code allows the acquisition of nationality either through birth to Algerian parentage, jus sanguinis, or by naturalisation for foreigners after residing in Algeria for more than seven years (Algerian Citizenship Code, 1970). In this sense, the new law permits Algerian-born citizens to be stripped of their nationality if they are considered to have acted against “state interest”.
This new law is especially detrimental to journalists, human rights activists, and regime critics and Algerian activists abroad. Looking at the law against the context where activists like Boualem Sansai, Kamel Aissat, and Ferhat Mehenni have been arrested and imprisoned simple for wielding a pen and speaking out against the regime, Article 22bis of the Nationality Code hereby sends a clear message that no one is beyond reach (OHCHR, 2025b). By threatening with statelessness, those in exile are no longer out of grasp. This amendment expands the state’s ability to silence critics beyond its territorial jurisdiction, heightening the risks of citizenship deprivation (Cairo Institute, 2024).
This should also be taken in parallel with the regime’s desire to put into force a new law on political parties, effectively banning political activities of other party groups (Ayoub, 2026). Article 19 of the ICCPR and Article 15 of the UDHR protects the freedom of expression, while Articles 21 and 22 of the ICCPR protect the rights to peaceful assembly and association (Human Rights Watch, 2020). The combination of the criminalisation of human rights defenders and the new amendment of Article 22bis function as punitive restrictions of these rights.
The amendment also raises concerns about discrimination and equality. Not only does Article 26, ICCPR establishes that all persons are equal before the law, Article 18 of the ICCPR also protects the freedom of thought and religion, raising concerns for individuals belonging to minority groups. Considering the constitutional amendment recognising Islam as the religion of the state, individuals of other religions also stand to be disproportionately targeted by the new Nationality Code.
The arbitrary deprivation of nationality is thus not a standalone crime, but part of the bigger picture where basic human rights are transformed into a weapon of war by the regime. The potential creation of statelessness and the violations of other fundamental rights clearly illustrate the implications of the new law. Citizenship serves as a legal foundation, yet in Algeria, it becomes contingent upon political loyalty to the state. This transforms citizenship into a conditional privilege and further weakens the democratic structure of governance.
Conclusion
Citizenship represents one of the most sacred bons between individuals and the state. When states seek to take away citizenship on vague political and security grounds, it risks becoming a conditional privilege dependent on unconditional loyalty. The recent amendment of the Algerian Nationality Code, considering the legislative developments and political environment, introduces a mechanism to silence political dissent and deter criticism against the regime. Within the broader context of shrinking civic space, it raises concerns not only about arbitrary deprivation, but also the wider violations of fundamental rights. The absence of clear safeguards and effective judicial oversight intensifies the concerns on the compatibility with international human rights law, contributing to patterns of the erosion of fundamental rights protections.
Ultimately, the recent amendments under Algerian law illustrate not just a national trend but the broader global trend where citizenship law is mobilised as a tool of security governance. Citizenship needs to remain inclusive to all and not subject to political pressure, not only to ensure the protection and enjoyment of fundamental rights of individuals, but also to preserve the rule of law and democratic governance.
Bibliography
Aït-Larbi, A. (2025, February 28). Algeria: After the Presidential Elections, the Return of the Military Order to Civilian Life? Arab Reform Initiative. https://www.arab-reform.net/publication/algeria-after-the-presidential-elections-the-return-of-the-military-order-to-civilian-life/. Accessed March 2, 2026.
Algeria Presse Service. (2026, February 22). Adoption du texte modifiant la loi portant code de la nationalité. https://www.aps.dz/fr/algerie/actualite-nationale/mkpd4lq1-adoption-du-texte-modifiant-la-loi-portant-code-de-la-nationalite. Accessed March 2, 2026.
Algeria: Nationality Code (2005, 27 February) https://www.refworld.org/legal/legislation/natlegbod/2005/121663. Accessed February 28, 2026.
Amnesty International. (n.d.). Human rights in Algeria. https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/north-africa/algeria/report-algeria/. Accessed February 28, 2026.
Arendt, H. (2017). The Origins of Totalitarianism. Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1951).
Ayoub, A. (2026, February 27). Algeria’s guillotine of citizenship: The anatomy of a paranoid regime. Middle East Forum. https://www.meforum.org/mef-online/algerias-guillotine-of-citizenship-the-anatomy-of-a-paranoid-regime. Accessed March 3, 2026.
Brennan, D. and McGee, T. (2023). Risks of stigmatising stateless people through association and conflation: Noxious nexuses with sexual violence and terrorism. Critical Statelessness Studies Blog. https://law.unimelb.edu.au/centres/statelessness/research/critical-statelessness-studies-blog/risks-of-stigmatising-stateless-people-through-association-and-conflation-noxious-nexuses-with-sexual-violence-and-terrorism. Accessed March 3, 2026.
CIHRS. (2024, November 26). تقرير “خناق المصيدة”: حملة قمع جزائرية عابرة للحدود بحق المعارضين – مركز القاهرة لدراسات حقوق الإنسان. مركز القاهرة لدراسات حقوق الإنسان. https://cihrs.org/a-web-of-intimidation-new-report-reveals-algerian-governments-global-crackdown-on-dissent/. Accessed February 28, 2026.
Džankić, Jerena (June 30, 2023) Regulation against Weaponization: a Double-edged Sword? Global Citizenships Observatory https://globalcit.eu/weaponized-citizenship-should-international-law-restrict-oppressive-nationality-attribution/2/. Accessed March 2, 2026.
Human Rights Watch. (2021). World report 2021: Algeria. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/algeria. Accessed March 2, 2026.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (December 16, 1966). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights. Accessed January 26, 2026.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2025, January 30). Algeria: Special Rapporteur dismayed by continued criminalisation of human rights defenders after her visit. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/01/algeria-special-rapporteur-dismayed-continued-criminalisation-human-rights. Accessed Marh 2, 2026.
Ottoway, M. (2021, October 13). Algeria: The enduring failure of politics. Wilson Center. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/algeria-enduring-failure-politics. Accesses March 1, 2026.
SHOOA. (2025). Amending the Algerian nationality law: A dangerous precedent—Turning citizenship into a tool of political punishment. Shoaa. https://shoaa.org/shoaa-amending-the-algerian-nationality-law-a-dangerous-precedent-turning-citizenship-into-a-tool-of-political-punishment/. Accessed March 3, 2026.
UN Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.
UN General Assembly. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights (217 [III] A).
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (n.d.). Stateless people. UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/who-we-protect/stateless-people. Accessed March 4, 2026.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2012). Code pénal: Deuxième partie – Titre I – Chapitre I, Articles 87bis – 87bis 10 [Penal code]. https://www.unodc.org/cld/en/legislation/dza/code_penal_2012/deuxieme_partie_-_titre_i_-_chapitre_i/articles_87bis_-_87bis10/articles_87bis_-_87bis10.html. Accessed March 2, 2026.
United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. (2025, November 28). Silenced dissent: The human rights situation in Algeria. Accessed March 1, 2026.
United Nations. (1961). Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 989, p. 175. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-reduction-statelessness. Accessed March 1, 2026.
