According to Vohra, passport is basically a travel document and should not be linked to citizenship. He said that nationality and citizenship are two different concepts, which people often consider to be the same.
Vohra said citizenship is a legal status acquired by birth, citizenship of parents or naturalization. Conversely, nationality can also be related to a person’s ethnic, cultural or regional identity.
Referring to his experience in the Soviet Union, he said, “When I went to the Soviet Union in my first posting there, I was asked about my nationality. Then I told myself that I was an Indian, then I explained to them that the meaning of nationality was to know which region or community of India I belong to. They told me that it means ethnicity, that is, which province or region of India you belong to.”
Vohra said that the history of passport is very old. In ancient times, kings used to give letters for protection while sending their messengers to other states. With time this system evolved and transformed into the modern passport. The League of Nations formalized the modern passport system in 1919 after World War I.
The former diplomat explained the main purpose of the passport. He said, “It allows a person to travel out of his country and enter another country. So it is basically a travel related document. Although in some cases it may mention citizenship or nationality, it does not mean that the passport itself is proof of citizenship.”
Citing his long diplomatic experience, Vohra said that in special circumstances, governments can also issue temporary or special passports. Vohra said, “I have worked in that department. I have been in the Foreign Service and related work for 53 years.
He also told that he is a special advisor to three African countries. One of these African countries issued diplomatic passports to special advisors. “Passport” is a French word, meaning “port crossing.” According to Vohra, when he asked the Prime Minister of that country, “Sir, what are you doing? I am a citizen of India.” He said, “Open it and see what is written inside it.”
It was written above – Deepak Vohra, Special Advisor etc. And at the bottom, Indian was written in front of the citizenship, after which I said, “Now I am satisfied.”
The PM of that country said, “The document I am giving you is only for travel to and from my country. It is like a kind of visa. You will not have to apply for a separate visa.” I said, “Thank you very much, sir.”
This makes it clear that it is not necessary that the passport issuing country and the country of citizenship should always be the same.
Giving the example of his granddaughters, Vohra said that they were born in America, hence they are American citizens. His father is a British citizen and his mother is Indian. In such a situation, they may have rights and documents related to different countries, but the question of citizenship and nationality should be considered separately in legal and practical terms.
According to Vohra, unnecessary political controversy is being created regarding passport and citizenship. He urged people to study international law, UN documents and international agreements related to consular and diplomatic relations before commenting on the issue.
He reiterated that passport is a travel document, while citizenship is a matter related to the legal identity of the person and his rights and responsibilities. Therefore both should not be considered synonymous with each other.
Sadhus and saints angry, FIR demand supported in Ram temple donation case!
Comments are closed.