Statement on recent cases
Politician Yurii Muntian commented on recent developments related to the revocation of Moldovan citizenship, including cases involving individuals who acquired it by birth.
He said the issue concerns people who obtained citizenship not through naturalisation or special merit, but by being born in the country, and argued that such cases raise serious legal and constitutional questions.
“When an official, even of the highest rank, deprives a citizen of citizenship acquired by birth, they should bear in mind that they are taking away something they did not grant and could not grant,” Muntian said.
Legal arguments and broader implications
According to Muntian, citizenship by birth is not a discretionary decision by authorities but a status linked to fundamental principles, which he associated with natural law. He referred to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, noting that it is based on such principles.
He argued that a person’s citizenship by birth arises from the fact of being born in a particular place, a circumstance that lies beyond individual or collective control.
Muntian also outlined potential consequences of such measures. In his view, revoking citizenship acquired by birth may affect other fundamental rights, including rights related to property, legal status and personal security, since certain rights are tied to citizenship.
International comparisons and political context
The politician drew comparisons with other countries, noting that in some states, such as the United Kingdom, authorities may revoke citizenship under specific conditions. However, he emphasised that such mechanisms are typically based on complex legal procedures and broad legislative consensus, and are rarely applied to citizenship acquired by birth.
He also addressed the potential political implications of such policies, including their impact on Moldova’s reintegration process. According to Muntian, measures of this kind do not contribute to dialogue between the two banks of the Dniester.
He added that reintegration remains an important factor in Moldova’s European Union aspirations and suggested that policies affecting citizenship could have implications for this process.
Conclusion of the statement
Muntian concluded his remarks with a metaphorical reference: “There is no need to open Pandora’s pithos, even if one does not know what a pithos is or who Pandora is.”
The issue of citizenship revocation, particularly in cases involving citizenship by birth, continues to generate debate in Moldova’s public and political space.
