By EUDO CITIZENSHIP expert Ricky van Oers (Centre for Migration Law, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands).

On 1 March 2013, I publicly defended my PhD research entitled ‘Deserving Citizenship. Citizenship Tests in Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom’. In the book I assess the effects produced by citizenship tests in the three countries mentioned in the title. One of the main conclusions of the research is that the citizenship tests, by which I mean formalised language and knowledge of society tests as a condition for naturalisation, lead to exclusion from citizenship, in particular for certain ‘weaker’ groups in society, such as traumatised refugees, women in disadvantaged positions, the elderly, and people with no, or only a limited educational background, such as illiterates. The research generated quite a lot of media attention, and consequently triggered a parliamentary commission in the Netherlands to ask the responsible minister for a reaction on the conclusion that the Dutch ‘integration examination’, which is presented to aspiring citizens as well as those applying for a permanent residence permit, leads to exclusion.

The Minister gave his reaction in a letter of 17 June 2013. Below, I summarise his reaction, and comment on it.

In his letter, the Minister mainly repeats the formal principles of the policy, thereby avoiding a reaction on the content of the research. He claims that the examination does not appear to form a barrier to the bulk of all test candidates by referring to the pass rate, which in the past few years has been around 70%. The Minister hereby takes for granted that around a third (i.e. 30%) of all test candidates is effectively banned from acquiring citizenship because of the examination. He furthermore does not take account of the ‘dark numbers’, i.e. those who do not even attempt to take the test out of fear that they will fail anyway, or because of the financial barrier presented by the test, and who do consequently not appear in the pass rates. The number of naturalisations however clearly shows that the test effectively bans people from obtaining Dutch nationality: after the introduction of the test in 2003, the number of naturalisations halved, and has remained at the same, lower level ever since.  An issue which the Minister does not address in his letter, but which nevertheless is a strong indication that the test produces a selective effect.    

Besides being incomplete, the reaction of the Minister is incorrect on a number of points. 

•  The Minister states that those for whom the test constitutes a barrier can be exempt from the obligation to pass it. My research however shows that the exemption regulations do not function adequately, thereby failing to offer an effective ‘escape route’ for the handicapped or illiterates from the obligation to pass the exam in order to qualify for citizenship. On 1 July 2013, a new exemption ground has been introduced for those who can demonstrate to have made an effort to pass the exam. This opens up possibilities to be exempt from the obligation to pass the test for those who previously could not rely on an exemption clause, because they were not illiterate or handicapped. What needs to be understood by ‘effort’ however is unclear. Those who might have the intellectual capacities, but who lack the financial means to take part in the test or to follow preparation courses cannot rely on an exemption regulation at all. They remain effectively banned from citizenship. 

•  According to the Minister, those who are barred from naturalisation because of the examination can apply for Dutch citizenship via an option right. Those aged 65 or older and those married to Dutch people can opt for Dutch citizenship, in which case passing the examination is not required. In both cases, however, a residence of fifteen years is required. For naturalisation, the period is five years. My research shows that the number of persons making use of an option right to Dutch citizenship has indeed risen since the introduction of a citizenship test. The rise in the number of acquisitions by option is however far too low to compensate for the drop in the number of naturalisations. By consequence, the option rights do not provide a cure for the harms caused by the integration examination, as the Minister claims in his letter.

As of 1 January 2013, the government stopped funding preparation courses for the integration examination and one attempt to pass the exam. Furthermore, the coalition agreement of the current government states that the demands for integration will be increased. The minister who reacted to my research recently stated to favour an increase of the level of language skills required for naturalisation from A2 of the Common European Framework of Reference to B1 (TK 2012-2013, 32824, no. 31, p. 13). This will mean that in future, the number of naturalisations will decline further. This will not improve the integration of those immigrants who are permanently residing in the Netherlands. Because they do not have Dutch nationality, they have a weaker position in the labour and housing markets. Furthermore, the fact that they are being barred from obtaining Dutch nationality implicitly sends out the message that they do not belong. This makes one wonder what the Dutch government is trying to achieve with the integration examination: improve the integration of immigrants, or control immigration. 

Until recently, the Dutch Parliament appeared to have accepted the exclusionary effect exercised by the integration examination, as it hardly addressed the question whether the drop in the number of naturalisations was desirable, or whether a change in policy was required. The fact that a parliamentary commission asked the Minister for a reaction on a research which exposes the exclusionary effects of citizenship testing seems a reason for hope. Shortly after the Minister wrote his letter, the parliamentary year ended, to start again in September. Unfortunately, parliamentarians have so far failed to pick up the debate, for instance by pointing the Minister at the flaws in his letter.  

The monograph ‘Deserving Citizenship. Citizenship Tests in Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom’, by Ricky Van Oers, can be purchased via www.brill.com/deserving-citizenship.