Mazin Adil Ali Deng and Others v. Ministry of Interior and Another

Parties (including notable third parties)

Mazin Adil Ali Deng (First Applicant), Munzir Adil Ali Deng (Second Applicant), Mayada Adil Ali Deng (Third Applicant), Mawada Adil Ali Deng (Fourth Applicant), Mohammed Adil Ali Deng (Fifth Applicant), Mu'ayed Adil Ali Deng (Sixth Applicant); Ministry of Interior (First Respondent), Ministry of Justice (Second Respondent); Other parties: Attorney General of Sudan, Saeeda Abuzaid Mohammed Docka (mother of Applicants)

---

Summary of Facts

The Applicants are six brothers (all minors except for the eldest) born in Khartoum, Sudan, to a Sudanese mother (Saeeda Abuzaid Mohammed Docka) and a father from South Sudan. After the separation of South Sudan from Sudan, the Applicants' father acquired South Sudanese nationality and automatically lost his Sudanese nationality pursuant to Section 10(2) of the Sudanese Nationality Law 1994 as amended in 2011.

The Applicants applied to the Ministry of Interior to obtain Sudanese nationality based on their mother's Sudanese citizenship. The Ministry of Interior rejected their applications on the grounds that they had lost the right to Sudanese nationality because their father had acquired South Sudanese nationality and automatically lost Sudanese nationality. The Ministry communicated this decision orally and refused to provide a written copy.

The central issue was whether children born to a Sudanese mother could be denied nationality solely because their father lost Sudanese nationality upon acquiring South Sudanese citizenship after the 2011 separation. This case addresses discrimination in nationality laws based on gender and the risk of statelessness for children in the context of state succession.

---

Legal Arguments

Legal Arguments by the Applicants

The Applicants argued that the Ministry of Interior's decision violated Article 7 of the 2005 Interim National Constitution, which grants nationality rights to children born to either a Sudanese mother or father. They also pointed out that the Ministry failed to provide legal justification for the refusal and denied them a written decision.

The Applicants requested the Court to apply Article 16(1)(b) of the Constitutional Court Law to order the Respondent to grant them Sudanese nationality.

Legal Arguments by the Respondents

The Respondents pointed out that Article 7(3) of the Constitution states that ‘the law shall regulate citizenship and naturalization,’ restricting the granting of nationality through the mother in accordance with law. Furthermore, Section 10(2) of the Sudanese Nationality Law 1994 as amended in 2011 provides that ‘Sudanese nationality shall automatically be revoked if the person has acquired, de jure or de facto, the nationality of South Sudan.’ Section 10(3) states that ‘Sudanese nationality shall be revoked where the Sudanese nationality of his responsible father is revoked in accordance to Section 10(2).’

The Respondents argued that since the Applicants' father acquired South Sudanese nationality, there was no constitutional violation but rather correct application of the law. The Applicants should have challenged the constitutionality of Sections 10(2) and (3) of the Nationality Law rather than the administrative decision.

Outcome

The Constitutional Court unanimously ruled in favour of the Applicants (7 judges agreeing).

The Court held that Article 7(2) of the 2005 Interim National Constitution clearly states, ‘Every person born to a Sudanese mother or father shall have an inalienable right to enjoy Sudanese nationality.’ The court emphasized that the word ‘or’ provides alternative grounds for nationality.

The Court invoked Article 3 of the Constitution establishing constitutional supremacy: ‘The Interim National Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. State constitutions and all laws shall comply with it.’ The Court held that the legislature cannot pass laws that contravene the Constitution or derogate from constitutional rights.

The Court rejected the Respondents' argument that Article 7(3) (‘the law shall regulate citizenship and naturalization’) restricted nationality through the mother. The Court stated: ‘This text is very clear as it started with the phrase 'the law shall regulate' and this does not imply any blocking or prohibition…’ (page 4)

The Court also said:

‘We state clearly and unambiguously that every person born to a Sudanese mother or Sudanese father shall have the right to enjoy the Sudanese nationality in accordance with Article 7 of the Interim National Constitution of 2005 and that shall not be abrogated by law or regulation.’ (page 4)

Since the Applicants' mother was a Sudanese citizen, the Applicants has the right to Sudanese nationality regardless of their father's loss of nationality.

The application was accepted on its merits and the Ministry of Interior's decision rejecting the nationality applications was cancelled. The Court held that the Applicants had the right to submit applications for nationality based on their mother's nationality.

International, Regional and Domestic Instruments and Provisions Cited

Source	Instrument name	Provisions cited
Domestic	Interim National Constitution of the Republic of the Sudan 2005	Article 3 (constitutional supremacy), Article 7 (nationality rights), Article 7(1) (equal rights), Article 7(2) (right to nationality through mother or father), Article 7(3) (regulation of citizenship), Article 16(1)(b) (Constitutional Court powers)
Domestic	Sudanese Nationality Law 1994 as amended in 2011	Section 10(2) (automatic revocation of Sudanese nationality upon acquiring South Sudanese nationality), Section 10(3) (revocation of children's nationality when father's nationality is revoked), Section 15 (referenced in context)
Domestic	Constitutional Court Act 2005	Section 11(2) (regarding written decisions and procedural requirements)

UNHCR Statelessness Guidelines cited

This case does not cite UNHCR Statelessness Guidelines.

Available commentary

No commentary available.