Found at the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic No. 207 / 1994 Coll.

Motion denied.

On 14 April 1994, the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic received a proposal from a group of 46 Members of the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic to initiate proceedings for the annulment of the provisions of Sections 6, 11, 12 (3), 18 (1) (a), (c) and 18a (a), (b) of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., on the acquisition and withdrawal of citizenship of the Czech Republic, as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll.

Since the submission of the motion fulfilled the conditions laid down in § 64 of Act No. 182 / 1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, and the proposal was admissible under § 66 of the same law, the Constitutional Court initiated the procedure and asked the Parliament of the Czech Republic to comment in writing on the proposal within the legal period. According to the provisions of Articles 42 (3) and 69 of Law No 182 / 1993 Coll., he sent this proposal to the Chamber of Deputies for observations. The President of the Chamber of Deputies, Dr Milan Uhde, has confirmed the position of the Chamber of Deputies expressed by its vote. He stated that the purpose of the adopted Act is - due to the creation of a separate state - the Czech Republic, to modify the new citizenship institute and to deal with it comprehensively. It points out that the law is based on the principle that every citizen should have only one citizenship, where such legislation exists in many other countries of Europe and is not new even in our legal order. It also stresses the principle that every citizen should be able to acquire or lose citizenship of the Czech Republic under the statutory conditions. Therefore, in addition to establishing the conditions, the reasons on which certain conditions for citizenship could be waived had to be set out as precisely as possible. In relation to the Slovak Republic's citizens, the law then contains a special procedure which allows the acquisition of citizenship of the Czech Republic to be carried out when the conditions laid down are fulfilled. The adopted amendment to the law then addresses the situation arising from the application of the law, where the knowledge gained has shown that certain provisions of the law may be considered too harsh by certain groups of citizens. Finally, it states that the law adopted is closely linked to the creation of a separate Czech state, containing a complete legislation on citizenship in accordance with internationally protected human rights and fundamental freedoms. In its observations, the President of the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic also confirmed from the point of view of the provision contained in Section 68 (2) of Act No. 182 / 1993 Coll., that the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll. was approved by the necessary majority of Members on 29 December 1992 and Law No. 272 / 1993 Coll. was approved in the same way on 12 October 1993. Both laws have been signed by the relevant constitutional authorities and have been duly declared.

Pursuant to Article 42 (2) of Act No. 182 / 1993 Coll. the Judge-Rapporteur requested, as documentary evidence from the Chamber of Deputies, appropriate prints in connection with the discussion of the above laws (Czech National Council, 1992, VII. Election, Press No. 208, Parliament of the Czech Republic, Chamber of Deputies, 1993, I. Election, Press No. 473), containing speeches by Members to the draft law.

In order to obtain an overview of the practical application, or the impact of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll. and Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., the Judge-Rapporteur also requested a report from the Ministry of the Interior on the number of persons who have chosen the citizenship of the Czech Republic by a declaration within the meaning of the provisions of § 6 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., or how many of them were unsuccessful, then a report on the number of exceptions granted by the Ministry of Interior in terms of § 11, § 12 (3) of the Act and its composition, and, finally, on the communication on how many citizens of the Slovak Republic of the Czech Republic have applied for national citizenship in terms of § 18 (1), (c) of the Act and Article 18a (1), (b) of Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll.

From the report of the Ministry of the Interior, the Chief Director of Section II, it follows that between 1992 and June 1994, the Ministry of the Interior and the district authorities have handled about 319 thousand submissions concerning citizenship of the Czech Republic. From the point of view of the provisions of § 6 (1) of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll. the report states that these are quite exceptional cases, in the maximum number of 10 persons for the period 1993, 1994, when they were persons who had the citizenship of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic on 31 December 1992, but were born abroad, never lived in the Czech Republic or in the Slovak Republic, nor their parents before going abroad. In view of this, it was therefore not possible to determine, under the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll., on the acquisition and renunciation of citizenship of the Czech Socialist Republic, that they were nationals of the Czech Republic, and it was not possible to determine under the Act of the Slovak National Council No. 206 / 1968 Coll., on the acquisition and renunciation of citizenship of the Slovak Socialist Republic, that they were citizens of the Slovak Republic.

As regards cases where the Ministry of the Interior has been waived the condition set out in Sections 11 and 12 (3) of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., the report states that the registration is not kept in this respect and, given the number of requests and the extent of the detection of the required data, it is unrealistic to process it. Only with regard to the remission of the composition of the State's citizens' promise pursuant to Article 12 (3) of the Act is stated in the report that this provision is used in a very rare manner and that the composition of the promise is forgiven only by the elderly and disabled.

As regards the use of the Czech Republic's national citizenship choice, the report states that this choice took place until 30 June of this year and up to now there has been a positive solution to about 319 thousand submissions. In this way, the citizenship of the Czech Republic under the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll. (i.e. the application lodged at the end of 1992) gained 65 000 persons, pursuant to § 18, 18a of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., i.e. the choice of citizenship, 240 thousand persons and pursuant to § 19 and 7 of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., i.e. the grant, 14,000 persons. At the same time, about 100 negative decisions were taken on the granting or election of citizenship of the Czech Republic. From this point of view, it is clear that the vast majority of Slovak citizens who applied for Czech citizenship were granted the conditions for choosing and granting citizenship.

From a general point of view, citizenship can be defined as a permanent, locally unrestricted legal relationship between a natural person and a State which is generally irrevocable against the will of a natural person, on the basis of which its entities derive reciprocal rights and obligations, consisting in particular of the right of a natural person to protection by a State within and outside its territory, the right of residence in its territory and the right of participation in its administration of public affairs. The duty of a citizen is primarily the loyalty of the State, the obligation to defend it, the exercise of certain functions for which it is called and compliance with the law of the State and outside its territory. The specific content of citizenship is determined by the legislation of an individual sovereign state. It is the sovereign right of the State to determine the conditions under which citizenship is acquired and withdrawn.

Citizenship is clearly an institution of national law, other states are guided by the principle of not interfering in the internal affairs of the state. However, the consequences of citizenship also have an impact on the outside, given that citizenship guarantees protection for the natural person who is its carrier and for the territory of another State. In this case, of course, there may be a conflict of interest and the Institute of Citizenship is thus also in the interest of international law. The international application of the recognition of citizenship in each individual case must be based on the national law of the State concerned; the decision of the State to grant its citizenship does not need to be taken internationally without questions. In the case of Nottebom, the International Court of Justice ruled that "the State cannot expect that the rules (governing the acquisition of citizenship) which it will establish are entitled to the recognition of another State unless it acts in accordance with the general objective of the legal obligation of citizenship, according to which the individual is in a" genuine '(a genuine) connection with the State which protects its citizens against other States'. (ICJ Rep, 1955 p. 23). In other words, from an international point of view, another State may not be accepted in the case of granting citizenship to a natural person who is not close to the State granting citizenship. Although the decision of the International Court of Justice only obliges the States involved in the dispute, it can be held from the point of view of general international law that, with the exception of the application of certain international contractual obligations (the arrangements for the granting of citizenship, including the definition of categories of persons to whom citizenship may be granted, the conditions and procedure for the granting of citizenship to such natural persons must be fulfilled), it is for each State to determine them separately (ICJ Rep. 1955, p. 20).

In connection with the provision of § 6 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll. the promoters object to its contradiction with Article 1 of the Constitutional Act of the Czech National Council No. 4 / 1993 Coll., on measures related to the disappearance of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. Paragraph 6 of the Act governs the way in which citizenship of the Czech Republic was acquired by a declaration by persons who, at 31 December 1992, were nationals of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, but it was not possible to determine either the citizenship of the Czech Republic or the citizenship of the Slovak Republic. In the opinion of the appellants of the formulation of Section 6 of the Act, he admits that Czech citizenship should be acquired by foreign nationals by mere declaration. They further state that "as of 1 January 1969 and 31 December 1992 it was therefore impossible for someone to be a Czechoslovak national citizen and not also a Czech (or Slovak) citizen. There was no set of individuals who were Czechoslovak state citizens and who were not Czech or Slovak state citizens at the same time." However, this claim will not stand. Paragraph 6 of the Act is not applicable in its wording to foreigners (i.e. persons with foreign nationality), since the basic condition for the application of this provision is citizenship of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic existing on 31 December 1992. Only a legal situation would be considered where a citizen of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic would also be a national of another state (i.e. a biopolita). However, from the point of view of the provision of § 6 of the Act, the objection of foreign citizenship is not taken into account, since this provision does not contain a new acquisition of citizenship by a foreign citizen, when the condition of dismissal from the original state union must be fulfilled, but only the confirmation of the existing original citizenship of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and its transformation into citizenship of the Czech Republic. The existence of second (foreign) citizenship is not decisive in this case.

However, it is important to answer the question whether, on 31 December 1992, there may have been natural persons who were nationals of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic without their citizenship being determined by the Czech Republic or the Slovak Republic. The analysis of previous legislation on the acquisition and withdrawal of citizenship can undoubtedly conclude that such a legal situation was actually possible. The Institute of Citizenship of the Czech Socialist Republic was established by the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll. According to Article 2 (1) of the Act, the national citizen of the Republic was the one who had the citizenship of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic on 1 January 1969 if he was born in the territory of the Czech Socialist Republic. According to Article 2 (2) of the Act, the national citizen of the Czech Socialist Republic and the national citizen of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, who was born abroad, was registered for permanent residence in the Czech Socialist Republic on 1 January 1969, possibly if he or his parents had the last permanent residence in the Czech Socialist Republic before going abroad. However, the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll. also contains a provision (in its § 3) dealing with the situation of natural persons who had citizenship of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, but citizenship (Czech Republic or Slovak Republic) could not be determined. The above legal status, namely the existence of citizenship of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, without the possibility of determining the citizenship of the Czech Socialist Republic or the Slovak Socialist Republic, could actually exist, since the citizenship of the national Republic was created retrospectively in 1969. According to the previous legislation (Act No. 194 / 1949 Coll., on the acquisition and renunciation of Czechoslovak citizenship), citizenship was acquired by birth in the territory of the Czechoslovak Republic from parents who are citizens (the basic method - § 1 paragraph 1 of the Act) even if, according to § 1 paragraph 1 of the Act, the child was born abroad, if both the father and mother were citizens of the Czechoslovak Republic. Under this condition, a natural person could have Czechoslovak citizenship (according to the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll. also the citizenship of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and subsequently the Czech and Slovak Federal Republics), but the conditions of permanent residence with him or her or her parents were not fulfilled. Even with these parents, Czechoslovak citizenship could have been "inherited" by ancestors. According to the provisions of § 3 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll. these natural persons could acquire citizenship of the Czech Socialist Republic by a declaration. However, this declaration is a right of a natural person, in this case a state citizen of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, not his duty. At the same time, however, it should be pointed out that the legislation cited did not set any time limit for the exercise of that right and did not set any legal consequences for the possible non-use of that right. From these facts, it can then be easily concluded that the right to declare citizenship of the Czech Socialist Republic has been established as an unlimited right of time and does not expire. It is therefore clear that there may be a legal situation where a natural person has citizenship of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic (and subsequently of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republics) and at the same time does not have citizenship of the Czech Republic or the Slovak Republic, and when, under current law, he can therefore declare whether his national citizenship is bound to the Czech or Slovak Republic. The Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll.

It is therefore not possible to agree with the assertion of the applicants that any foreign citizen may acquire citizenship of the Czech Republic by a declaration pursuant to § 6 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll. of the Czech Republic. The link to the original state (Czech Socialist Republic, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, Czech and Slovak Federal Republic) must always be expressed and this link must be continuous and lasting from the point of view of the principle of cives origo facit. The statement does not examine the question of any other citizenship that a natural person may have acquired because it is based on the legal basis of the existence of citizenship of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and only the citizenship of the newly created Czech Republic is specified. The condition of dismissal from another civil union, as mentioned above, is not examined because this is not a newly granted citizenship. It should also be recalled that the Ministry of Interior's report confirmed that there are very exceptional cases (maximum 10 persons within one year).

From the above, it cannot be concluded that the provision of Section 6 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll. is contrary to the provision of Article 1 of the Constitutional Act of the Czech National Council No. 4 / 1993 Coll., since, on 1 January 1969 as well as on 31 December 1992, there was a legal status that allowed the Czech National Council Act No. 39 / 1969 Coll. to state citizens of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic with an unlimited right to choose a declaration of citizenship of the Czech Socialist Republic.

The proposal by the group of Members is further directed against the provisions of § 11 and § 12 (3) of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., which according to the applicants are contrary to the provision of Article 67 (1) of the Constitution of the Czech Republic, and states that according to this provision, the government is responsible at the highest level for the exercise of state authority, not the Ministry of Interior. It further states that it is a contradiction with the provisions of Articles 2 (2), 9 (2) of the Constitution and Articles 1, 2 (1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as the "Charter '), and that state authority must serve all citizens in accordance with the essential requirements of a democratic rule of law without being bound to any exclusive ideology or religion, while respecting the equality of all people in law.

Paragraph 11 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., contains the right of the Ministry of Interior to forgive the applicant

- the condition laid down in § 7 (1) (a) of the Act (i.e. a permanent residence of at least five years in the territory of the Republic), provided that the other conditions set out in § 11 (1) (a) to (f) are fulfilled, that he was born in the territory of the Czech Republic or lived in the territory of the Czech Republic continuously for at least 10 years or had a history of citizenship of the Czech Republic, or that he has been a citizen of the Czech Republic or his spouse is a national citizen of the Czech Republic or at least one of his parents is a national citizen of the Czech Republic,

- the condition laid down in Article 7 (1) (b) of the Act (i.e. the release from the State Union of another State), subject to the fulfilment of the other conditions set out in Article 11 (2) of the Act (that is to say, if the applicant has a continuous permanent residence in the Czech Republic for at least five years, if the legislation of the State of which the applicant is a national citizen does not allow release from the State Union or if that State refuses to issue proof of the release of the applicant from the State Union),

- the condition laid down in § 7 (1) (d) of the Act (i.e. knowledge of the Czech language) in cases of special consideration.

Paragraph 12 (3) of the Act then contains the right of the Ministry of the Interior to forgive the composition of the State's citizens' promise.

The motion of a group of Members contends that "the exercise of this right has been entrusted to the exclusive and government-isolated powers of the Ministry of Interior and has not been regulated by law to examine the legality of its decisions in these matters, which is in breach of the provisions of Articles 2 (1), 67 (1) of the Constitution and Article 2 of the Charter, according to which state authority must be exercised in a hierarchical manner in such a way that the government is responsible at the highest level and serves all citizens in accordance with all the essential requirements of the democratic rule of law (Article 9 (2) of the Constitution). When deciding on the granting of citizenship, the priority public interest, which is defined by the division of state power (Article 2 of the Constitution) and democratic values, must not be dictated by ideological or religious motives (Article 2 (1) of the Charter) or by the individual interests of only certain natural persons (Article 1 of the Charter on equality of people in rights)."

None of the above articles of the Constitution or of the Charter are violated by the contested provisions in § 11, § 12 (3) of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll. and no link has been established or proved in this respect. It is the conditio sine qua non of every democratic government that gives decisions on a number of professional issues to its members and their offices, even in terms of the normal and necessary division of labour. The Government is the supreme executive body (Section 67 (1) of the Constitution). The other executive authorities are thus naturally subordinate to the government. Ministries are governed not only by the law as generally binding normative acts, but also by internal normative instructions and individual acts (Section 21 of the Czech National Council Act No. 2 / 1969 Coll., on the establishment of ministries and other central bodies of the state administration of the Czech Socialist Republic, according to which the ministries are governed in all their activities by constitutional and other laws and resolutions of the government). The Act of the Czech National Council No. 2 / 1969 Coll. also explicitly expresses the relationship of the Ministry and the Government in Paragraph 28 (1), according to which the activities of the ministries are governed, controlled and unified by the Government of the Czech Republic. At the same time, the government is also its representative as the executive authority in relation to the Chamber of Deputies. In their sections, the ministries process the issues entrusted to them and submit them to the government as a whole in the specified areas of state policy. It acts with them in the form of general documents and reports or in the form of a legislative initiative before the Chamber of Deputies.

The Minister responsible for the constitutional political responsibility for the work of the Ministry, who is controlled in this respect by the usual means of parliamentary democracy, such as interpolation (Article 53 (1), (2) of the Constitution), the right of citation of the Chamber of Deputies and its bodies or the Commission of Inquiry (Article 30, Article 38 (2) of the Constitution). Another control mechanism, which monitors the activities and calls for constitutional liability by the Minister, is the possibility of withdrawing him from office. Article 74 The Constitution is the responsibility of the Prime Minister (motion to appeal the Minister) and the President of the Republic (appeal itself). It is clear from these facts that the activities of the Ministry as a body of state administration, which is the law (and it is doubtless that the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., so happened - Article 79 (1) of the Constitution), which is empowered to grant citizenship, are subject to all procedures which are common to the systems of parliamentary democracies, which can be controlled by these means and also the constitutional legal liability of the Minister concerned, provided that in his activity he violates the rules of conduct.

The claim that the granting of Czech citizenship was entrusted to the exclusive and government-isolated authority of the Ministry of Interior does not therefore correspond to the reality.

In view of this, it can be considered that the provisions of § 11 and § 12 (3) of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., do not contradict those of the Constitution and the Charter, as stated by the appellant, nor has the link between the assertion of the appellant and the infringement of those provisions been established.

Finally, the proposal by the group of Members also concerns the provisions of § 18 paragraph 1 (a), (c) and § 18a (a), (b) of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., when those provisions govern the choice of national citizenship of the Czech Republic by the national citizens of the Slovak Republic.

According to the provisions of Paragraph 18 of the Act, a citizen of the Slovak Republic had until 30 June 1994 the right to choose citizenship of the Czech Republic if he fulfilled the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 (a) to (c). These conditions included:

- permanent residence in the Czech Republic for at least two years,

- release from the State Union of the Slovak Republic,

- integrity (has not been convicted in the last five years for intentional crime).

In Section 18a of the Act, the acquisition of citizenship of the Czech Republic is then regulated by the choice of citizens of the Slovak Republic who were born on its territory until 31 December 1939 and whose parents, or at least one of them, were born on the territory of the Czech Republic or reached the age of 60 at the latest in 1993, while fulfilling two conditions:

- permanent residence in the Czech Republic for at least two years,

- integrity (he has not been legally convicted in the last five years for intentional crime).

According to the proposal of a group of Members, these provisions are discriminatory in nature because they provide citizens of the Slovak Republic, who were originally also nationals of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, with special conditions for the acquisition of citizenship of the Czech Republic, that is, conditions which the previous legislature of the common state did not recognise. It is thus to be contrary to Article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, according to which all people are equal and have the general right to equal and effective protection against discrimination for any reason.

First of all, it should be pointed out that after the creation of the Czechoslovak Federation the legislation on the citizenship section of Article 5 of the Constitutional Act No. 143 / 1968 Coll., on the Czechoslovak Federation, as amended by the Constitutional Act No. 125 / 1970 Coll., in Act No. 165 / 1968 Coll., in the Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll., as amended by the Legislative Act No. 124 / 1969 Coll., and in the Act of the Slovak National Council No. 206 / 1968 Coll. The text of Article 5 of the Constitutional Act No. 143 / 1968 Coll. was based on the principle of the primacy of citizenship of the Czech Republic or the Slovak Republic (whereby the citizen of each republic is also a citizen of the Czechoslovak Republic), an amendment to that article by the Constitutional Act No. 125 / 1970 Coll., amending and supplementing the Constitutional Act No. 143 / 1968 Coll., on the Czechoslovak Federation, already declaring that Czechoslovak citizenship is uniform and that every Czechoslovak citizen is also a citizen of the Czech Republic or Slovak Republic; This provision should have been specified by the laws of both Republics. This was not the case, and in theory and practice, the views that republican citizenship was primordial prevailed. Furthermore, the article contained an authorisation that the principles of the acquisition and withdrawal of citizenship of the Republic were laid down in the Federal Assembly Act. This became the Act No. 165 / 1968 Coll., which established criteria for determining which Czechoslovak citizens are citizens of the Czech Republic and who are citizens of the Slovak Republic, further provided that the acquisition of the citizenship of the Czech Republic or of the Slovak Republic was (no longer) acquired at the same time as the citizenship of the Czechoslovak Republic and determined that the existing citizen of one republic, who had acquired citizenship of the other Republic (e.g. by choice or grant), had lost citizenship of the other Republic. This legislation was based on the principle that a natural person could be a citizen of only one republic, thus the loss of citizenship of one republic was automatic when the citizenship of the other Republic was acquired.

The laws of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll. and No. 206 / 1968 Coll. set out the details for determining the citizenship of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic of the existing citizens of the Unitary State, the conditions for choosing citizenship of one republic by a citizen of the other Republic (when the choice could be made by 31 December 1969), the methods of acquiring and withdrawing citizenship of the Republic. After the deadline for the choice of citizenship of the Czech Republic, a Slovak national could apply for citizenship of the Czech Republic and had to fulfil only the condition of permanent residence in the Czech Republic, which could be forgiven. Once he had been granted citizenship of the Czech Republic, he automatically lost citizenship of the Slovak Republic and therefore did not submit proof of release from the Slovak Republic.

- natural persons who, on 31 December 1992, had the citizenship of a Republic shall be nationals of that Republic as from 1 January 1993,

- to enable the Czech Republic to choose citizenship to become a national of the Slovak Republic and vice versa (a period of six months was set for the choice and the condition was a three-year permanent residence in the territory of the Republic of which the natural person chooses citizenship),

- the acquisition of citizenship of one Contracting Party automatically renounces citizenship of the other Contracting Party,

- preventing the creation of dual citizenship for children in whom one of the parents is a citizen of one Contracting Party and the other a national citizen of the other Contracting Party, where parents were allowed to make the choice of citizenship for the child and, at the same time, the criteria for determining citizenship for the child were laid down, if the choice of citizenship was not made by the parents.

The report by the Ministry of the Interior, the Head of Section II, shows that the procedure for obtaining citizenship of one Contracting Party by a citizen of the other Contracting Party would be simplified, while avoiding the creation of dual citizenship and homelessness. It follows from the same report that the Slovak Party did not accept this proposal and opted for the possibility of dual citizenship.

The Czech Republic therefore addressed the issue of the acquisition of citizenship of the Czech Republic by a national law, which is the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., where the principle of preventing the creation of double citizenship and preventing the formation of homelessness is contained. In this way, the legislation in force in the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic was based on the fact that similar principles are also applied in the legislation of other European states.

National citizens of the Slovak Republic who did not submit an application for citizenship of the Czech Republic until 31 December 1992 could acquire citizenship of the Czech Republic under the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., namely:

- the choice of citizenship provided for in Sections 18 and 18a (until 30 June 1994),

- the grant provided for in Article 19 until 30 June 1994,

- grant pursuant to § 7 (this method is not limited in time).

The method of acquisition of citizenship was limited by time limits, according to § 18 and 19 of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll., when this declaration could be made by 31 December 1993 at the latest, and subsequently by Decree of the Government of the Czech Republic No. 337 / 1993 Coll. of 15 December 1993, when these deadlines were extended until 30 June 1994. By the Constitutional Act No. 542 / 1992 Coll., on the demise of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic died on 31 December 1992 as a separate state and on 1 January 1993 two new independent states were created, without doubt having the sovereign power to regulate their internal affairs. This is, of course, an internal matter for the acquisition of citizenship. It is possible to fully agree with the applicant's claim that the citizens of the Slovak Republic with the disappearance of the common state have become foreigners in the Czech Republic (of course on the contrary). However, the claim that the demise of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and thus of citizenship occurred without the direct expression of the will of the citizens of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and in an undetected number of cases against their will is unfounded and speculative in the situation at hand. On the contrary, it must be stressed that on the day of the creation of the individual states, namely the Czech and Slovak Republics, the citizens of one state are becoming a stranger in the territory of another. The Czech Republic, as a separate state, can therefore lay down the conditions for acquiring citizenship completely independently of the legislation of another State (Slovak Republic). This right was expressed by the adoption of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., in which, among other things, the acquisition of citizenship by a stranger was provided for. The appellant's claim that it is not a foreigner in the case of a national citizen of the Slovak Republic will not stand up to the claim that only the subjective will of the citizen and his so-called objective relationship with the territory can make the choice of the disappearance of federal citizenship conditional. It is this relationship that must be expressed accordingly (i.e. the relationship with the Czech Republic), not only to the territory but also to the Czech Republic as such. It is this statement that is included in the conditions under which citizenship of the Czech Republic can be acquired. Once again, every sovereign state has the right to determine the conditions under which citizenship can be acquired. The assertion by the appellant that if the duration of dual citizenship of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the Czech Republic has not been conditioned by integrity, it cannot therefore be so now, is irrelevant. There are no additional legal restrictions on the legal situation and facts that occurred before the entry into force of the new law, but on the date of its effectiveness and beyond. As has already been said, when choosing citizenship of the Czech Republic, state citizens of the Slovak Republic must generally be based on a regime to which foreigners themselves are subject in connection with citizenship. The conditions laid down in these guidelines for Slovak citizens are different and more favourable to them. This, of course, in view of the past coexistence within the common state and the social, labour and family ties that have been created over that period, in general for reasons that can all be described as humane. But even in this area, it cannot be considered voluntaristically. The conditions laid down are appropriate to the situation, sufficiently objective the relationship with the Czech Republic and are not discriminatory. On these conditions, the following should then be noted: the concept of permanent residence is, in the view of the Constitutional Court, a de facto expression of permanent residence and hence permanent residence not in the sense of the register - applying for permanent residence in the competent office - but in the sense of the case. The permanent residence must be understood as such in the place of permanent residence of the person, i.e. usually in the place where he has a family, parent, apartment or job and in which he also resides with the intention of staying permanently (in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court in Prague sp. cdo. 3 Cdo 76 / 93). The two-year permanent residence as a condition for the choice of citizenship was also established in the light of the Slovak National Council Act No. 206 / 1968 Coll., which provided for a two-year stay in the territory of Slovakia as a condition for the citizenship of the Slovak Republic. At the time of the adoption of the Act on the acquisition of citizenship of the Czech Republic, this Law of the Slovak National Council was still in force and therefore, in accordance with the principle of reciprocity, this period can be considered appropriate. It is worth recalling that even in the case of a shorter permanent residence, the Ministry of Interior of the Czech Republic may have granted to the applicant pursuant to § 19 or § 7 of the Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll. On the question of a final conviction for a intentional crime in the last five years, it must be emphasised that it is a intentional crime (not a negligent crime) and, in this context, it must also be stated in the light of the explanatory memorandum to the laws adopted on national citizenship of the Czech Republic that, as regards persons who have been legally convicted for a intentional crime, they will comply with the above condition for the granting of citizenship of the Czech Republic after they have been destroyed by the court. In accordance with the criminal law and the Code of Criminal Procedure, those persons shall then be treated as persons who have not been convicted, and the criminal record shall no longer include convictions. It must also be added that, for example, petty theft is generally treated as an offence, in the case of a crime of theft it is an infringement by which the perpetrator has assumed greater value for the foreign matter. Certain specialities resulting from the disappearance of the Federation were therefore taken into account in the temporary special regime for the possibility of choosing citizenship of the Czech Republic. The more favourable terms of choice, laid down for a group of Slovak citizens who are abroad and who were resident in the Czech Republic before going abroad, must be seen again as a human gesture which respects the possible family and other general human ties that these citizens may have with the Czech Republic. It is, of course, superfluous to mention the possibilities of these emigrants to obtain citizenship of the Czech Republic at the time of the previous regime. To that effect, it should be further noted that these persons have been staying outside the Czech Republic in the vast majority of cases for more than five years, so they could not be sentenced in the Czech Republic (the criminal record only leads to a conviction which occurred in the Czech Republic), and the requirement of such a document from the foreign authorities seems problematic since some States do not give such a document to a natural person, and even if the statement had been presented, it would be difficult to assess the nature of the crime, when other problems would obviously arise when such a person would have lived in several states. There is therefore no question of discrimination against a particular group of persons in this context. If at all, then only about discrimination in the positive sense, i.e. that foreigners - citizens of the Slovak Republic - were granted a better status than foreigners - citizens of other states outside the Slovak Republic or apolites as a result of the right to divide the state from the point of view of international law.

From the point of view of the practical situation, as is apparent from the report of the Ministry of Interior, citizens of the Slovak Republic who did not submit an application for citizenship of the Czech Republic and who had a permanent residence in the Czech Republic on 31 December 1992 and this stay lasts, may apply for a permanent residence permit in the Czech Republic. These applicants shall not submit documents for other foreigners but shall only prove permanent residence by registration in the ID card and shall prove citizenship of the Slovak Republic. The legal status of Slovak citizens with permanent residence in the Czech Republic is almost identical to that of a Czech citizen. To this end, over 40 international agreements have been concluded between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, which, as well as a number of legislation, imply that, for example, the right to free education, health care, unemployment benefits, social benefits, etc., are linked to permanent residence and not to citizenship. The National Citizenship Institute of the Czech Republic is associated with the right to vote, the right to perform certain jobs (judges, soldiers, prosecutors), a professional obligation.

Finally, it is appropriate to recall that the Czech Republic is not bound by the legislation on citizenship of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, as this institute has also ceased to exist by the demise of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republics. The Constitutional Act of the Czech National Council No. 4 / 1993 Coll., on measures related to the demise of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, which took effect on 31 December 1992, the legislation in force before the creation of the Czech Republic was adopted, but the provisions conditional only on the existence of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and its competence. Act of the Czech National Council No. 40 / 1993 Coll. came into force on 1 January 1993 and in § 28, paragraphs 1, 2 repealed the original legislation, i.e. Act of the Czech National Council No. 39 / 1969 Coll., as amended by the Act of the Czech National Council No. 92 / 1990 Coll., and Act No. 165 / 1968 Coll.

In view of the above, the Constitutional Court concludes that the provisions of § 18 (1) (a), (c) and § 18a (a), (b) of the Czech National Council Act No. 40 / 1993 Coll., as amended by Act No. 272 / 1993 Coll., do not conflict with the provisions of Article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as stated by the appellant, and the link between the assertion of the appellant and the infringement of that provision has not been established.

The right to attach a different opinion on its behalf to the decision on the annulment of § 18 (1) (a), (c) and § 18a (a), (b) of the contested law pursuant to § 14 of Act No. 182 / 1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, was used by the judges JUDr. Vladimir Čermák and JUDr. Pavel Varvarovský.