What is the difference between "Country of Issue" and "Country of Citizenship" of a passport?
On multiple occasions I have seen forms where it needs to be stated what the Country of Issue and what the Country of Citizenship is. What is the difference between the two, if your passport is issued by a consulate in a foreign country. Technically the soil of a consulate belongs to its own country. So both the country of issue and citizenship should be the same. At least that is what I would say. But if this is the case, why do some forms require to fill in both?
I am not sure it makes much sense to claim that the soil of a consulate *belongs* to that consulate's country (incidentally, consulates usually simply rent their facilities!).
"Technically the soil of a consulate belongs to its own country." This statement is ambiguous but the idea that country X's diplomatic mission (embassy, consulate, whatever) in country Y is part of X's territory is persistent but false. The diplomatic mission remains part of the host country Y's territory but is afforded certain privileges under the Vienna Convention. Y's laws usually don't apply in the mission and Y usually cannot enter it without permission. See Wikipedia and the various links and sources there for more information.
@DavidRicherby Would that imply that Country of Issue is Country Y if that consulate issues a passport for Country X?
@andra I don't know for sure but the answers suggest not: they seem to be saying that, if your passport was issued by officials of country X, then the country of issue is X, regardless of whether those officials were sitting in a diplomatic mission in some other country or anywhere else.
When I got my passport at a consulate, they didn't technically issue it themselves. They just helped with forwarding the request to the home country and mailing the documents and passport so I could pick it up at the consulate. I know that this is true for at least two countries.
@Szabolcs I know that for my country the actual booklet is manufactured at some central facility and shipped back to the consulate but the consulate is still considered to be the “authority” issuing the passport.
@Relaxed Are you sure? Wikipedia explicitly says that local laws usually don't apply (regardless of the fact that they'd be largely unenforceable, even if they did apply).
@DavidRicherby I am not a specialist but the Convention includes language like “The premises of the mission shall be inviolable” or “The premises of the mission […] shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution” It's always very practical, no sweeping statements about laws applying or not, which are not needed and would be much more open to interpretation.
Based on my study, possession of a French passport is not regarded as proof of French citizenship, but a supposition of French citizenship! All other countries regard possession of their respective national passports as proof of citizenship. Why are the French different? After all, we have to remember that the French are the ones who invented the "bureaucracy" G.M.Gersoppa
Although not common, some countries issue passports to non-citizens as well. As you may have noticed, the data page of a passport often states the nationality or citizenship of the holder in a separate field and the citizenship may actually differ from the issuing country.
One example is laissez-passer documents or emergency passports, which may be issued by foreign governments. For example, if you travel to a country without a diplomatic representation from your home country and lose your passport, your home country may have an agreement with a third country to help you with a temporary emergency passport.
Another example is the British Passport, which can be issued to all British nationals, even if they are not British citizens (British nationality law makes a clear difference between "nationals" and "citizens").
This is more common in the Middle East. Most people I've met on my travels who identify as Palestinian had a passport of some other country - I think Jordan was such. And all but one person I've met from Kuwait don't have Kuwaiti citizenship but either had Kuwait passports or passports from other Middle Eastern countries.
It's certainly possible to seek assistance from another consulate or to get a laissez-passer from a third country but do you have any concrete example of emergency passport issued for this purpose?
From the ESTA website (which I was reading just as you posted the question!):
Your "Country of Issue" is the same as your "Country of Citizenship". For instance, if you are a citizen of the United Kingdom, but are getting your passport from the UK Consulate in Hong Kong, the UK is your country of issue. The UK Consulate may be located in Hong Kong, but Hong Kong is not the country issuing you the passport.
However, it's worth noting that some forms word this differently, and ask for place of issue or authority who issued it. Then it could be different.
For example, my current New Zealand passport.
Country of citizenship: New Zealand, clearly.
But where it was issued? I was in London, UK, and the field in the passport says "DIA LON". (Department of Internal Affairs, London). This is the Identity Services Office in London - often referred to as the London Passport Office - and is responsible for the issuing and renewals of New Zealand Passports in the United Kingdom and Ireland.
So when it says place of issue, that's usually what gets put down for me, or when it asks for 'Authority' as that's the specified field in the passport as well.
Country of Issue, however, would still be New Zealand.
It's difficult to know precisely without context but there are few cases where this could be relevant, in particular:
- Travel documents other than passports (e.g. refugee travel documents) are issued by the country where the person resides and indicate that the holder can be readmitted to the country of issue even though they are still citizens of another country. Formally, these documents are typically not called “passports” but they look like one and are often informally called “refugee passports”.
- Some countries like the UK and the US have a distinction between “citizens” and “nationals”. For the US, some people from the American Samoa can for example get a passport issued by the US Department of State but cannot claim the US as their “country of citizenship”.
- People living in countries that are not recognized as such by many other countries in the world (e.g. Palestine, Northern Cyprus) sometimes travel with a passport from another country (e.g. Jordan, Turkey) where they might or might not be considered a citizen. However, it would be difficult to accept “Palestine” as “country of citizenship” if it's not officially recognized wherever you are so that's probably not the intent of the form.
On the other hand, if you have a regular passport, issued by your country's authorities, then I would tend to think that “country of issue” and “country of citizenship” are the same even if you got your passport through a consulate abroad (that's certainly the terminology used by the US authorities, as shown in the link provided by Mark).
Any country can emit a passport for any person regardless of its citizenship. Case in point, France does not recognize a passport as a proof of citizenship for its own citizen. (In BOLD here and here for french readers)
The passport is an official travel document stating to other countries that the holder is recognized as specified. Having a passport from a certain country entails some prerogatives, like being exempt of visa, or having a passport automatically purported to be valid 6 month after expiration etc....
But holding a passport and having a citizenship are in theory completely different notions. Although practically, 99.9% of the passport are issued by the country of citizenship, there are no international laws to my knowledge which prevent a country to issue a passport to non-citizen, (although some local legislation may prevent doing so.)
exemple : UK passport for Hong Kong, US passports, any diplomatic passport, which are issued on a mission basis for representation of the said State, who is sovereign in deciding who represents it....
France does recognize its passports as a proof of nationality and, to my knowledge, does not issue them to anybody but French citizens.
While I might believe your assertions, could you provide any sources to back up what you say, especially in light of the much more rigorous security screenings in effect worldwide these days.
I really do not know anything about French citizenship and/or passports. But I would imagine that it would be similar to US citizenship and/or passports. There are non-US citizens who legally hold US passports. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_passport Why would France be different?
I removed all other comments. Remember that extended discussion in the comments should be avoided. Use the chat for that.
@CGCampbell is right, it's on the posters to provide sources for their statements, not on any one else to disprove them.
@emory It's mainly a question of terminology, the documents issued to non-citizens are simply called “titre de voyage”. It's a good point, though, I think this would deserve a new answer as the question is in fact about a US form, so this might explain it.
Once again I removed almost all comments. Please remember that comments are not here for extensive discussions. Take this to the Travel Chat.
Just for the record and without rehashing arguments : the proposition "france only issues passport to french citizen" and "passport proves nationality" are related but different propositions. Its a very trivial assertion, and even if the difference is not understood, one just needs to recognize that it was until recently not sufficient to have a passport to prove nationality to know, if not understand, the distinction...