Everybody but (the answer is at the end of this article, don't cheat,
wait till the last line!) wants Sonia Gandhi to become prime minister
of India.
It is true there is nothing wrong with Sonia Gandhi, not even her
white skin, contrary to what the RSS may say. In fact she is probably
a good person, certainly a devoted mother, who educated her children
with dignity and protected them the best way she could, after the
terrible death of her husband (and her mother-in-law before) which
must have shattered them all.
Surely also, she possesses other qualities which endear her to fellow
party workers. She may even like India in her own way. Thus her
Western origin is no bar to her becoming PM of India.
After all, India had a Sister Nivedita, born in Ireland, very white
looking, who was not only the most faithful disciple of Swami
Vivekananda, but also loved her adopted country so much that she -- a
member of her Majesty's empire -- did not hesitate to encourage and
help nationalists such as Sri Aurobindo. In the early 1900s, people
like Sri Aurobindo were advocating throwing the British out, by
force if necessary, when the Congress was only timidly asking for a
few crumbs in the framework of an English India.
Definitely, Nivedita could have been the leader of the Opposition --
and why not -- one day prime minister of India.
Is this why most of the Indian English speaking media is projecting
Sonia and her children in a big way, giving them diplomas,
achievements and an aura which they don't necessarily have?
Look, for instance, how they often portrayed L K Advani's yatra in
unfavourable light, or showed him with a frowning expression, while
The Times of India kept printing such sweet photos of Rahul lovingly
wiping his mother's face, as she was filing her nomination in Rae
Bareli, or how NDTV interviewed Priyanka, with Rajdeep Sardesai
asking her all the right questions, so that she came out as the
loving sister and daughter wanting only to help an India beleaguered
by castes and Hindu militantism?
Rahul has become their darling: nothing can be wrong with him, his
looks, his innocence, his Spanish girlfriend (shows he is open-minded
and not casteist), his diplomas (even though most Indian youth are
much more educated than him). In the US, one would ask about his
religion: can an American president be anything than Christian, as he
has anyway to swear on the Bible when taking office? And what if
Rahul is a Christian? 'We media persons, even though we may be born
Hindus, are against Brahmanic intolerance.'
The BJP should not be complacent here: the Congress has scored quite
a few points, thanks to Sonia's children and the help they get from
the press. India loves nothing more than good children looking after
their widowed mothers. And what the Western press calls dynasty --
with the Indian press promptly aping the word without thinking
twice -
- is nothing more than the innate respect that Hindus have for family
bonding and family values.
The Indian media has redeemed itself, in some manner, by having
printed the damaging article of the Swedish policeman who pointed a
direct finger at Quattrochi and Rajiv Gandhi in the matter of the
Bofors bribe. But then, editors like N Ram of The Hindu, had little
choice, however much they may root for Mrs Gandhi: after all, The
Hindu broke the story!
However, not all newspapers gave space to the new accusations and
some chose to ignore them, or to put them on the seventh page in
small characters, with the result that the story fizzled out and once
more Quattrochi is off the hook.
The Western press loves Sonia even more -- I know, I am a Westerner
myself! I remember one of my ex-colleagues at Le Figaro, one of the
leading French newspapers, once wrote: 'She will bring sanity to
Indian politics.' By sanity he meant probably that she will usher
sound Western good commonsense in the muddy world of Indian politics.
It may be also an unconscious colonial superiority complex that
reincarnates itself in a politically correct manner, as it was
already expressed by industrialised powers when India became
nuclear: 'We can handle this, but not you, you underdeveloped
Brownies!'
There is certainly also an element of secret Christian
prosetylisation in it, although many foreign correspondents preach to
be atheists, [they see] a covert battle between the virtue of the
only true monotheistic faith, Christianity, as symbolised by Sonia,
versus the polytheist pagans, as incarnated by the BJP's
Gods. Many Western embassies are also furtively hoping for her
ascending the Indian throne. Their mouth is watering when they
visualise an Italian as the prime minister of a billion people: it
will all throw them back to the glorious times of the British Raj,
for which many Westerners are nostalgic, without mentioning the fact
that it would make their task much easier ('after all, we
belong to the same White Exclusive Club').
Even many of my friends in Auroville, Pondicherry, are hoping for the
BJP's downfall and Sonia's ascent, not understanding that such a
controversial and spiritualised project as Auroville finds more
sympathy within the BJP than with Sonia Gandhi, who does not care
much about Indian spirituality.
And lastly but not least (it goes without saying that most of India's
Muslims and Christians are going to vote for her), many of the world
Indologists, that is the experts on India, have bet their shirts that
she will win. In fact most of them have been predicting the BJP's
downfall for the last seven years!
Leading India specialists, such as Frenchman Christophe Jaffrelot,
who has devoted entire volumes to Hindu fundamentalism, has been
persistently advising the French government since the first BJP
government in 1997, 'that Hindutva is a passing phenomenon, because
Indian society is basically "secular" and that the Congress, the
truly pro-minority party of India is bound to come back to power.'
In fact there is not an election, an important event in India,
without Mr Jaffrelot and his peers, all belonging to the French
government-sponsored CNRS and his affiliates (which have close ties
with JNU and Romila Thapar), publishing some articles in prestigious
newspapers like Le Monde on the dangers of Hindu nationalism 'which
promotes casteism, untouchability and hatred towards Muslims'
(remember Ayodhya, they have been saying for 12 years).
No wonder the French are only the 11th biggest investor in India,
when after the nuclear test and the World Cup, they were hugely
popular here and could have done anything.
What are then the criterion to become an Indian prime minister, if
colour and origin are no bar?
First, to know the reality of India. This country is so diverse, so
huge, so contradictory sometimes, that unless you physically
experience it, from Cape Comorin to Ladakh, unless you have met its
people freely, shared their joys and problems, suffered form the heat
and the cold, and hunger, you do not know India. The trouble with Mrs
Gandhi, her children -- and most Western correspondents -- is that
they sit in Delhi, an arrogant city which thinks it understands
everything, which wants to decide on everything, whereas it is
totally decentered from the rest of the country.
There, you bathe in the vicious circle of journalists' parties and
embassies' cocktails, where the same ideas, the same small talk is
perpetually floating around. And unfortunately for Sonia, first
because she lived a sheltered life in Delhi with her friends when her
husband was a pilot, and then later because of security which totally
cut her off from the real people of India, except in sanitized bits,
she is hopelessly ignorant of the reality of India, like her
husband was before her and her children will be after her.
In fact, as a fellow Westerner and European (and Latin, as Italy and
France share the same linguistic roots), everytime I pass her
fortress of 10, Janpath, I am shamed by the fact that she lives there
like an empress of medieval times, brazenly surrounded by hundreds of
security guards and sycophants fawning around her, while at the same
time innocent Hindus in the valley of Kashmir are still being
butchered without anyone giving a damn. I don't understand how she
cannot see it herself.
Secondly and most important, you cannot comprehend India unless you
practice, at least in some measure, its spirituality. For the
greatness of India, whatever the foreign correspondents or the
Indologists say, is its dharma, not Hinduism, but beyond Hinduism,
the timeless Vedic spirituality, which has given the world
hatha yoga, meditation, Pranayama, Ayurveda and the concept of the
Avatar which allows for religious tolerance. And you don't have to be
some highhanded guru or yogi meditating in his cave. No, the most
humble villager in India practices spontaneously this spirituality.
He is born with it, it is in his genes. He accepts innately that God
may be Krishna, or Jesus, or Buddha, or even Mohammad, who said right
things for his epoch, but whose words were never adapted to
modern times.
Whereas the Delhiwallah thinks he is tolerant and secular because he
accepts the fact that Sonia Gandhi, an Italian, and a Christian can
become the prime minister of his country where they are 850 millions
Hindus, one of the most tolerant, spiritualised, brilliant people in
the world today. But by this he only shows that he still has a
colonised mentality and that Macaulay did good work. And you don't
even have to be a Hindu: most of India's minorities, had, once upon a
time, soaked a little bit of that tolerant and all inclusive
outlook, so that a Syrian Christian would live in harmony with his
Brahmin brother, or a Sufi saint would quote from the Gita. But then,
the Portuguese Jesuits and the Mughals descended upon India with the
sword in one hand and the Cross and the Koran in the other.
Can Sonia Gandhi, a Christian, understand that? It is doubtful. And
this is why she can never become prime minister of India, it would
set back India a hundred years, because whatever her goodwill and
sincerity -- and nobody should doubt that -- she is totally unaware
of the greatness and genius of India, for she does not embrace her
ideals of dharma and spirituality. Nor her children.
And finally let me repeat my first sentence while filling up the gap:
<b>Everybody -- Indian journalists, foreign correspondents, Indologists,
embassies, Muslims, Christians -- want Sonia Gandhi to become prime
minister of India. But for a larger majority of the people of India -
-
let them triumph.</b>
The author is the correspondent in South Asia for Ouest-France, the
largest circulation French daily (1 million copies).
Just because that Rajiv Gandhi,has married Antonio Mano and we can't pledge india for his foolishness.More than Sonia Gandhi,Rajiv Gandhi is a greatest betrayer to India,because,he was the person who christined himself as "Robert" from Rajiv" and who became ready to leave his own motherland,for just marrying Antonio Mano.That was the type of great "love" he had for his country.India is not the cost surely to be paid for Rajiv Gandhi's senseless actions.Are we to believe,indians have not learnt by experience despite of being ruled by brutal kings and facing their tortures which has become the history.To elect a "so-called communal" to rule us is far better than being ruled by a foreign pub worker.This letter is not to criticise antonio mano or the so-called sonia gandhi of italy,but this letter is an true and heartful outrage of a true indian who loves his motherland than anything else,but also a message that good majority of Indians love india and sooner or later will punish congress and express their feelings against this useless,unpatriotic judgement(mind you,this is no way exaggeration,but a highly sanctified emotion,which has always brought down govts)which doesnt reflect the real mood of the majority of the people but only,the wish and "jee-huzoori" of some useless leaders like laloo prasad yadav,sharad pawar.Sometimes I start doubting is Sharad Pawar a true maratha.Being in Maharashtra,where great great ruler Chatrapati Shivaji was born and surrendered his life for this country we also see such,great Desh Drohi Sharad Pawar's who becomes easily ready to pledge Maharashtra as well as India for his love to towards kursies(seat).You think about a situation if by chance instead of marrying sonia ,rajiv had fell in love with a pakistani salma,he had left her in the same position with two children,say one sultan and other nazmi will salma would have come to power in the same fashion as sonia is today?.If situation was such BJP would have won with thumping majority.Even,people would have not even left the so-called salma to come to power.This Election 2004 is a fractured verdictwhen it doesnt give opportunity to BJP to rule the country,it neither gives the reins in the hands of the congress and that too with Antonio Mano as the PM.Any manipulation by Italian Sonia Gandhi will never go unpunished in future elections.Within 48 hours of Sonia Gandhi's possibility of being the PM is released,all people who have voted for congress will be thinking that what foolish thing they have done.Not only,this Sonia Gandhi,in an interview with Shekhar Gupta in walk the talk told that she is an indian,but within 48 hours she has given an interview to an italian channel,what a true "indian" she is.This shows that she is not able to control her love towards her motherland-the italy.No doubt today many Indians are hanging their heads in shame(including me)but that day is not far off,when we will be seeing the end of all these traitors who are pledging the country for the benefit of their own positions.Actually these fellows,who are having praise for antonio mano will go into the history as the great Indian betrayers who have laid the foundation stone for the end of democracy,which great patriotics like the great bhagat singh,subash chandra bose,lala lajpat rai,Sardar Vallabhai Patel,have dedicated their lives for getting us freedom.Does the crowning of sonia gandhi mean to say that whatever tortures the great patriotics are of no consequence and are so weak that they can be pledged so easily by few laloos and mulayams,communiststs,karunanidhis,who will do anything to the extent of even pledging their own country to saveguard their positions.Not only this,congress decision of electing sonia gandhi as the prime minister is a clear betrayal of the great faith which people had on them.Not only this,more than mulayams,and even laloos,the names of Ambika Soni,Jaipal Reddy,Kapil Sibal will rank themselves as the great betrayes of india who never opened their mouth when Ram devotees were burnt alive in godhra,but were crying wolf for gujarat riots.Probably,unrightful hijacking of the government,by congress,will be the real cause for its total elimination from the indian politics very soon.Atleast in the future congress had some chances of coming again,but by their action of electing antonio mano as the prime minister they have proved that they are not only spineless but they lack the basic intelligence,which is needed for them for call themselves as the leaders of a party.The basic question which nobody has asked is below here.We have no objection in any indian ruling the country but can we allow a person who holds dual citizenship to rule the country?.Can Dawood Ibrahim with dual citizenship of Pakistan and India rule India just because he is being led support by some communists and laloos,sharads,and karunanidhis?.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Italians Greet Sonia Victory With Pride
Denis Barnett, Agence France Presse
ORBASSANO, Italy, 15 May 2004 â Italy greeted Sonia Gandhiâs triumph with a mixture of pride and apprehension yesterday as her family rejoiced in the return of Indiaâs most powerful political dynasty and recalled its tragic past.
The people of this quiet suburb of Turin will always claim her as their own, even if she has long traded the political innocence of her espresso days for the political tumult of India.
Mayor of Orbassano Carlo Marroni said he had sent a telegram of congratulations. âWe are proud of her victory,â he said. âIf she becomes prime minister, we will have a party.â
As the dust settled on an election battle a world away, the media briefly laid siege to her childhood home, but family members at the mustard colored three-story house were keeping a low profile yesterday.
Gandhiâs mother Paola, recently returned from India, lives here, but the doorbells by the garden gate, under the overhanging rose bushes, went unanswered.
Italyâs newspapers trumpeted her and the Congress partyâs triumph in Indiaâs elections, but for at least one member of her family, the Gandhi name casts a long and fearful shadow over this verdant little town.
âWe are worried and itâs pointless to hide it, we fear for her life,â said Gandhiâs niece, Aruna Vinci.
âBut auntie is an exceptional woman. Sheâll face up to anything, whatever happens, and remain in India, continuing to believe in her mission,â she told the daily La Repubblica.
âSonia is an admirable woman. They wiped out half her family, and despite that, instead of returning to Italy, she stayed there with her children, because now she feels (like) a true Gandhi. Sheâs a foreigner, but is accepted by the Indians. And the vote demonstrates that,â she added.
Soniaâs victory will not change the life of her family in Orbassano, though.
âWeâll go on as before, as we have always have, even when Rajiv was in government,â said Aruna, daughter of Soniaâs elder sister Anuska.
Throwing discretion to the winds, Gandhiâs aunt, Dorina Maino, told Italyâs national Ansa news agency that her niece âhas got herself into a nice messâ.
Gandhiâs husband Rajiv, scion of Indiaâs political first family, was assassinated in 1991 when they had been married for23 years, and Maino disclosed that her Italian relatives had tried to persuade her not to run for office.
But, the aunt went on, âI hope this great victory will help her get over the death of her husband. He was a marvelous boy and we all wish her success in her new venture,â she added.
Born in1946 , Sonia Maino, daughter of a middle class builder, married into Indiaâs most powerful family in 1968. Her mother in law, Indiaâs Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, was assassinated in1984 .
The girl from Orbassano then became Indiaâs first lady when her husband and Indiraâs son, Rajiv, took over on his motherâs death.
A reluctant politician, Sonia Gandhi took over the leadership of the Congress Party in1998 .
The familyâs local newsagent, Giuseppe Tognin, was proud of Gandhiâs political pluck but also fearful now that she was a political target.
âSheâs a great woman, and her victory is a great thing for Orbassano. But we hope she doesnât end up like the others, like her mother-in-law and her husband.
âOf course, itâs on our minds, given whatâs already happened. Letâs hope history doesnât repeat itself.â
âGandhis never seem to die in their beds,â Pierluigi Sacci, a local tobacconist, said. âSo, of course, thereâs a lot of concern for her here, given what happened to the others.â
The63 -year-old remembers Sonia as âan outgoing, jovial girl, though I havenât seen her for years now,â as he proudly displays a photograph of his wedding in1965 , with Gandhi and her elder sister flanking bride and groom.
Itâs nearly 40 years and a world away in time since Sacci remembers a young Sonia as a âlittle girl who used to come in for a âgelatoâ with her friendsâ.
Now, for business daily Il Sole 24 Ore, the local girl has become a champion of democracy. âIn that strange country of sadhus and engineers, Hindus and Muslims, exists that priceless good for which we Westerners claim to be fighting in the Middle East â democracy.â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
SONIA GANDHI, the daughter of an Italian housebuilder, is likely to become Indiaâs new Prime Minister this week â the culmination of a political career that had its beginnings in a Greek restaurant in Cambridge.
<b>Mrs Gandhi was an 18-year-old student at a small language college in Cambridge in 1965, making ends meet by working as a waitress in the Varsity restaurant, when she met a handsome young engineering student.</b>
That first encounter with the future Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, has remained imprinted on her mind as the most romantic moment of her life.
âAs our eyes met for the first time, I could feel my heart pounding . . . as far as I was concerned, it was love at first sight,â she wrote later in a rare moment of self-revelation.
âI had a vague idea that India existed somewhere in the world with its snakes, elephants and jungles, but exactly where it was and what it was really all about, I was not sure.â
The man she had met in Cambridge belonged to Indiaâs greatest political dynasty â the son of Indira Gandhi and grandson of Nehru. She, on the other hand, was Sonia Maino, the daughter of a modest Roman Catholic family from Orbassano, near Turin.
But as well as being the source of happy memories, her time in Cambridge has in recent weeks created some political difficulties for Mrs Gandhi.
<b>Her entry in the Indian parliamentary Whoâs Who contains the false claim that she was a Cambridge University scholar. The mistake has been repeated frequently in the media. George Fernandes, the former Indian Defence Minister and an arch-opponent, has accused Mrs Gandhi of allowing the confusion to arise.
âCambridge does not have a diploma course in English,â Mr Fernandes said. He added that the incorrect biography showed that Mrs Gandhi was âa woman who lies about even small thingsâ.
Cambridge has confirmed that it has no record of her attending the university.</b>
The row has echoes of Jeffrey Archer, the disgraced Conservative peer who was slow to correct people who believed that he had gone to the historic Wellington College, Berkshire, rather than the minor independent school with the same name near Taunton, Somerset.
<b>Mrs Gandhiâs supporters dismiss the controversy. They say that the entry in the book was either an editorial error or just a âthoughtless mistakeâ.
They prefer to emphasise that, unlike most Indian politicians, Mrs Gandhi has a <span style='color:red'>âclean reputationâ</span> and say that she is being singled out for vitriol because of her foreign origins, Catholic religion and gender.
In 1965 Mrs Gandhi was briefly a student at the Bell School of Languages. It is understood that she studied for the Cambridge diploma, a now defunct six-week course in English literature and language for overseas students.
The young Miss Maino took work babysitting and as a waitress at the Greek restaurant â âthe only place in Cambridge that you could have something close to home foodâ â and found life in the university city quite different from small-town Piedmont.
She was eating at the restaurant one evening when Gandhi â whose place at Trinity College had been achieved through family connections with the Master, Lord Butler of Saffron Walden</b> â slipped into the chair beside her. She later told her family: âIâve fallen in love with an Indian. He is a sportsman. Heâs the blue prince I always dreamt of.â
There were difficulties from both families but three years after they met, Sonia and Rajiv married.
Politics was not meant to be their life â Gandhi was an airline pilot â but everything changed when his mother was murdered and his brother, Sanjay, died in an air crash.
Mrs Gandhi, who had become an Indian citizen in 1983*, pleaded with her husband not to enter the dangerous maelstrom of Indian political life. But the weight of the Gandhi family history and sense of responsibility compelled him to take the reins of the Congress party in 1984. He was Prime Minister until 1989.
When Rajiv was killed by a Tamil Tiger suicide bomber 13 years ago Sonia retreated into a life of privacy and seclusion.
Coaxed out of her reclusive lifestyle to save the Congress movement, Mrs Gandhi, 57, now finds herself on the brink of power. She will become the fourth Gandhi to hold power in India and <b>the first European to rule since Lord Mountbatten of Burma.</b>
It has been a long journey from the days when she was a carefree teenager who once shocked India by wearing a miniskirt. Today she regards herself as âcompletely Indianâ.
<b>* The grant of Indian Citizenship to her is Illegal as she could not ârepudiate-return-surrenderâ her Italian Citizenship in 1983</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This means that the President is required by the Constitution to undertake an elaborate process of examining the legal and constitutional issues involved. Thus, Ms Gandhi's swearing-in could not happen before the matter was fully clarified and resolved.
Â
Another point that came in the way of Ms Gandhi was Section 5 of the Citizenship Act. Under this, there is a reciprocity provision whereby citizenship granted by India to persons of foreign origin is circumscribed by the rights that particular country confers upon foreigners seeking citizenship there.
Â
The crux of this provision of <b>"reciprocity"</b> is that a person of foreign origin, who has acquired the citizenship of India through registration by virtue of marrying an Indian national, cannot enjoy more rights (like becoming Prime Minister), if the same opportunity is not available to an Indian-born citizen in that particular country.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Article 102 of the Constitution says: "A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament - (d) if he or she is under any acknowledgement of allegiance or adherence to a foreign state." Sonia Gandhi, in her affidavit, had declared she owned a house in Italy and may thus invite, the term "adherence" of the said provision.
Under Article 103, the President is the sole adjudicator on the issue who has to decide on such matter in consultation with the Election Commission.
Section 5 of the Citizenship Act, dealing with the reciprocity clause for a person who registered herself as an Indian citizen, says the said person could not enjoy more rights than those available to an Indian born person in that other country if he/she acquires citizenship of that country, like Italy for instance.
The clauses of the Citizenship Act were apparently not fully met when Ms Gandhi relinquished her Italian citizenship.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If this article is to be believed (and I do since it is a Canadian government site), even Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi are to be considered Italian Citizens. In the example shown, a person born in Canada of Italian parents went to Italy. The Italy govt. considered him (the Canadian-born person) to be an Italian citizen and he was asked to serve in the Italian Army. What if Rahul and Priyanka visit Italy and are asked by the Italian govt. to serve Italy in their war against another European country.
A Canadian from Toronto went to Italy with his Italian-born parents. He was informed by the Italian authorities that he was considered an Italian citizen and would be required to perform military service. He had to have family members in Toronto obtain certain documents and then have them certified by the Italian consulate before he was allowed to leave Italy.
The more I read about Italian citizenship issues, the more I am convinced that Rahul and Priyanka are both Italian citizens as well.
<b>One is an Italian citizen if he/she is born to a parent who is an Italian citizen. Citizenship may be transmitted through the child's mother, father, or through both parents. However, a claim to Italian citizenship is made only through one parent per generation.</b>
Now some Indian jouro/leagl brains/courts have to find out from Sonia if she ever petitioned the Italian government for her children to be considered Italian citizens.
The legal requirements for recognition of Italian citizenship claims made by persons born abroad, but whose births were never registered with an Italian consular agency, vary considerably according to particular circumstances, and also depend upon existing treaties between the Italian Republic and various states. Therefore, if claimants born in Great Britain, the United States and Argentina each queried an Italian consular officer in their respective countries with regard to this procedure, each would receive different answers to some of the same questions. It is our intention to present a general description of the procedures involved, and particularly the genealogical requirements, especially for claimants born and resident outside Italy. For our purposes, we shall consider births under normal conditions, as opposed to circumstances such as adoption.
<b>Italian citizenship is based primarily on lineage, as opposed to geography (i.e. birth in Italy) or naturalization.</b> However, an Italian bloodline is not, in itself, sufficient grounds for claiming Italian citizenship. One is an Italian citizen if he/she is born to a parent who is an Italian citizen. <b>Citizenship may be transmitted through the child's mother, father, or through both parents.</b> However, a claim to Italian citizenship is made only through one parent per generation. Legitimacy of birth is not required if the citizenship is claimed through the mother; it is normally required if claimed through the father of a child born outside Italy. <b>It is also necessary to establish definite identification of the person(s) through whom citizenship is claimed.</b> If, for example, Christina Clark seeks to claim citizenship through her father, born in Italy as Giuseppe Calarco, but her own birth registration indicates his name as Joseph Clark, it would be necessary for her to establish to the satisfaction of consular authorities that Giuseppe Calarco and Joseph Clark are in fact the same person; this may require that particular records (for example, a legal document authorizing a change of name) be produced in addition to normal genealogical records (i.e. certificates of birth, marriage and death).
Descent must be proven from the last ancestor recognized as an Italian citizen. Under normal circumstances, Italian residency of his/her descendants is not required for them to claim Italian citizenship. It should be noted that when a family has resided outside Italy for several generations, the last ancestor recognised as an Italian citizen may have been born more than a century ago. If born before 1860, he would have been a citizen of one of the nations (Kingdom of Sardinia, Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, etc.) to which the Kingdom of Italy and subsequently (since 1946) the Italian Republic are successor states.
The most important acts and documents relate to births, marriages and citizenship for each ancestral generation. A renunciation of Italian citizenship may influence the claim. An example best explains this. Giuseppe Rosso is born in Italy in 1895, and emigrates in 1925. In 1927, he weds in the United States Karen Volker, an American citizen, who gives birth to a son, John, in 1929. Giuseppe becomes an American citizen in 1932, having renounced his Italian citizenship the year before. John, however, was already an American citizen because he was born in the United States (where geography is the principal determinant of citizenship). John is likewise an Italian citizen because he was born to an Italian citizen. As an infant, he could not renounce his Italian nationality, and his father could not do so for him. John remains an Italian citizen unless he ever decides to renounce this right legally. Another child, Carl, is born to the couple in 1934. Carl is not an Italian citizen because he was born to a father who is no longer an Italian citizen. John, being an Italian citizen, transmits this right to his children. Carl, however, is not an Italian citizen and has no citizenship right to transmit. In the event, John and his children cannot exercise their rights as Italian citizens unless they are recognized as citizens by the Italian Republic. If John's birth or citizenship was never registered with an Italian consulate, his children must demonstrate their status (and their father's) as Italian citizens if they wish to obtain the exercise of these rights.
<b>The basis for obtaining these rights outside Italy is usually a petition for a certificate of citizenship (certificato di cittadinanza), normally a prerequisite for an Italian passport.</b>
Which documents will you need? You will be required to produce, at the least, a certificate of birth and a certificate of marriage for each foreign-born ancestor through whom your claim is made, as well as the Italian-born ancestor. These documents must indicate parentage. They might relate to a father, grandfather and great grandfather. In most countries, you must provide proof of the date of naturalization for any ancestor who renounced his/her Italian nationality. (In the United States, for example, an act of naturalization can be obtained through the local court before which the ancestor swore allegiance to the government, and a document indicating that a foreign-born ancestor never became an American citizen is obtained through the Immigration and Naturalization Service.) All documents must be properly sealed.You may be required to provide an apostille certification (a form of notarization recognized internationally) for documents released by a nation outside the European Community. Non-Italian documents usually must be translated officially for a fee by an Italian consular officer or authorized agent. Within the European Community, however, it is usually possible to obtain multi-lingual vital statistics certificates which obviate the need for this service. A simple family tree clearly indicating the line of descent and acts for which supporting documents are provided should accompany these items.
How much will the procedure cost? This depends upon various factors, such as the number of generations involved. At the minimum, a petition involving several generations and various supporting documents, with the required translations, certificates and fees, will cost several hundred dollars or pounds.
It is not the purpose of this guide to offer legal advice; particular queries should be addressed to the Italian consulate having jurisdiction in your locality, or to an Italian attorney qualified to represent a client in these matters. Under normal conditions, legal consultation will not be necessary, although the services of a professional genealogist may be required for document searches in Italy.
Although most governments do not prohibit dual nationality to their own citizens, certain legal conditions should be considered, and foreign-born claimants for Italian citizenship are strongly advised to consult the competent government agency regarding any questions pertaining to this matter.
Table of Contents / Introduction to Italian Genealogy
The US constitution allows for dual citizenship. However you are required to take a oath to defend the US and not to takeup arms against US.
Israel is a very interesting case, all jews are automatic citizens of Israel, no matter what. Recall the case of teenager student in Maryland who shot and killed a fellow student and then with his parents help ran away to Israel. Intially Israel refused to extradite, but after lot of pressure from SD and threats it might hold up billions in aid, the Israeli govt struck a deal on the condition that no death punishment.
IIRC there no revoking of Italian citizenship as per their constitution. Since she is dual citizen and her son and daughter are also automatic citizens of Italy and also born citizens of India. Had it been that they were born to Italian father and a Indian mother they would not be Italian citizens. (IIRC)
I take it that by stating Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka are âDual Citizensâ you mean that they hold both the Italian and Indian Citizenship.
However, a person cannot hold Indian Citizen while holding âanother Citizenshipâ.
As such the Indian Citizenship of Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka is invalid and fraudulent and as such they should be debarred from the Lok Sabha.
However if they have renounced Italian Citizenship prior to taking Indian Citizenship-Passport then Rahul and Priyanka are not Dual Citizens as they do not have Italian Citizenship.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The US constitution allows for dual citizenship. However you are required to take a oath to defend the US and not to takeup arms against US.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But there are several caveats. If a person voluntarily takes up dual citizenship after acquiring US citizenship (for instance reapplies for indian citizenship)then he is considered primarily a Indian citizen for legal purposes such as deportation etc. Of course if he or she commits a crime here , then they will be extradited to the US (provided they have extradition laws withthe country in question), but extradition has nothing to do with citizenship. One can be extradited even if one is not a citizen of a country, but you generally cannot be deported if you have birthright.
As far as election to the US presidency is concerned, the law is unambiguous. The person cannot become US president unless he/she has birthright in the territories of the US. There is absolutely no doubt in the matter. SG could never become the president of the US no matter how many years she lives in the US. Neither can Henry Kissinger nor Arnold Schwarzenegger nor Bobby Jindal , if he was born in India. But of course if you are born abroad to at least one US citizen you still have birthright, unless of course you voluntarily renounce your citizenship.
During the Argentina's financial meltdown couple years ago, a sizeable population of Argentina were knocking the doors of Italian embassy since they had Italian ancestors. Haven't followed up on the story.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Italian citizenship is based primarily on lineage, as opposed to geography (i.e. birth in Italy) or naturalization. However, an Italian bloodline is not, in itself, sufficient grounds for claiming Italian citizenship. One is an Italian citizen if he/she is born to a parent who is an Italian citizen. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If you have been a dual citizen from birth or childhood, or else became a citizen of another country after already having US citizenship, and the other country in question does not have any laws or regulations requiring you to formally renounce your US citizenship before US consular officials, then current US law unambiguously assures your right to keep both citizenships for life.
The US State Department -- traditionally quite combative in its handling of dual-citizenship claims -- has changed the way it handles these cases in recent years, and it is now much easier to retain such a status without a fight than it used to be.
The situation is slightly less clear for someone who becomes a US citizen via naturalization and still wishes to take advantage of his old citizenship. People who go through US naturalization are required to state under oath that they are renouncing their old citizenship, and conduct inconsistent with this pledge could theoretically lead to loss of one's US status.
However, the State Department is no longer actively pursuing cases of this nature in most situations. In particular, when a new American's "old country" refuses to recognize the US naturalization oath (with its renunciatory clause) as having any effect on its own citizenship laws -- and insists that the person in question must continue to deal with his old country as a citizen thereof (e.g., by using that country's passport when travelling there to visit) -- the US State Department no longer minds.
Similarly, the State Department doesn't seem to be doing anything any more to people who renounce their US citizenship as part of a foreign country's "routine" naturalization procedure (in a manner similar to what the US makes its new citizens do). However, if the other country in question requires its newly naturalized citizens to approach officials of their old countries to revoke their previous status, one will generally not be able to remain a citizen both of that country and the US.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Delhi High Court has posted the hearing on an interim application seeking to restrain Congress President Sonia Gandhi from taking over as the country's Prime Minister a week from now.
The plea by Rashtriya Mukti Morcha (RMM), challenging the validity of foreign-born citizens from taking over top posts, will be heard by the Division Bench comprising Chief Justice B C Patel and Justice B D Ahmad on May 26.
The application was taken up by the Bench after senior advocate P N Lekhi, appearing for RMM, said the petition will be rendered infructous if not heard before the swearing-in ceremony supposed to take place on Wednesday. The Bench said, if the court found merit in the application, appropriate remedies could be granted even after Ms Gandhi took over the post.
In the petition before the High Court, the RMM had submitted that in many countries, high constitutional posts were reserved for natural-born citizens and sought interpretation of Article 5 of the Constitution. The counsel has pointed to several documents, including constituent Assembly debates and written constitutions of various countries on citizenship, to prove his claims.
The petition was filed after former President K R Narayanan had invited Congress President Sonia Gandhi to form a government in April 1999. The High Court had even sought a reply from the NDA Government on the petition challenging the constitutional validity of the move as Ms Gandhi was not a natural-born citizen.
The affidavit filed by the Centre submitted that the Constitutions of various countries made a distinction between natural-born citizens and other types of citizens, and the Indian Constitution did not make any such distinction which shows a conscious effort on part of the framers not to make a distinction between citizens.
Earlier, the High Court preponed the hearing on the case from July 20 to May 26. But Mr Lekhi wanted an earlier hearing in the likelihood of Ms Gandhi taking over as the Prime Minister by then. Mr Lekhi said by the next date of hearing they would implead on making both the Congress and Ms Gandhi parties in the case. In view of the move by the party to elect her as its president, he would also seek derecognition of the party.
The RMM had filed a similar petition in the SC on Ms Gandhi's citizenship while its petition in the High Court questioned the right to be called to form a government on the ground that only natural-born citizens of the country could occupy high offices, Mr Lekhi said. It was a question of interpreting the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, he added.
The petition alleged that as per convention, after the BJP was ousted by a no-confidence motion, Mr Sharad Pawar, who was the then Leader of the Opposition in the Lower House, not Ms Gandhi, should have been invited by the President.
Does this mean that when Sonia acquired her Indian Citizenship in 1985 or so then here Italian Citizenship automatically lapsed?
If that is the case then Rahul & Priyanka are Indian Citizens.
Or does this law only apply to US Citizens?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
P,
From my earlier post, here is an illustration:
<b><i>Giuseppe Rosso is born in Italy in 1895, and emigrates in 1925. In 1927, he weds in the United States Karen Volker, an American citizen, who gives birth to a son, John, in 1929. Giuseppe becomes an American citizen in 1932, having renounced his Italian citizenship the year before. John, however, was already an American citizen because he was born in the United States (where geography is the principal determinant of citizenship). John is likewise an Italian citizen because he was born to an Italian citizen.</i></b>
In the Indian context, IF Priyanka and Rahul (P & R) were born BEFORE Sonia renounced her Italian citizenship, then P & R are ALSO considered Italian citizens. IIRC, both were born before 1985, the year Sonia Antonio took her Indian citizenship. The example quoted above, P & R would not be considered Italian citizens IF they were born AFTER Sonia Antonio took Indian citizenship. IMO, P & R are Italian citizens as well!
This issue merits definitely merits further investigation.
<b>Minority Forum demands Bharat Ratna for Sonia Gandhi </b> <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Kolkata, May 21. (PTI): All-India Minority Forum, a city-based platform of minorities, said Congress president Sonia Gandhi had demonstrated her spirit of "sacrifice" by refusing Prime Ministership and should be conferred the highest civilian award 'Bharat Ratna'.
"Her political sacrifice in the national interest should entitle her to be conferred with Bharat Ratna", Forum president, Idris Ali, said adding a communication to this effect had been sent to President A P J Abdul Kalam.
Ali said Gandhi would be remembered for not being power hungry and "this amply proves that she is a true Indian."
The Forum, he said, demanded that BJP leaders Sushma Swaraj and Uma Bharti be arrested for issuing provocative statements against Sonia Gandhi showing total disrespect to the Constitution.
Both Bharti and Swaraj should tender apology in public for branding Sonia Gandhi a foreigner, he added.
<b>Wajid Shamsul Hasan finds a Solution to the Sonia Gandhi Problem facing India :</b> <!--emo&:ind--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/india.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='india.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To get out of the quagmire of problemsâPakistan needs not a strong man like General Musharraf, neither a âheavy weightâ civilian prime minister aka Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali. <b>What Pakistan needs today is a Sonia Gandhi with a reservoir of high moral ground</b> or an elected and popular Dr Manmohan Singh to put Pakistanâs economy on a course that could lead the bulk of its population out of the absorption levels lower than sub-Saharan Africa. <b>That is the only way we can save ourselves from becoming a failed state.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
