Prosecution Of Fraudulent Citizenship Applications
Introduction
Fraudulent citizenship applications involve individuals illegally obtaining citizenship through deception, forgery, or misrepresentation. In Nepal, such offenses are particularly concerning, as they undermine the integrity of the national identity system, threaten national security, and contribute to various forms of social and economic fraud. Fraudulent citizenship applications typically involve falsifying documents, providing false information about residency or ancestry, and bribing officials to bypass legal processes.
The legal framework governing the issuance and regulation of citizenship in Nepal is primarily found in the Citizenship Act (2006), the Constitution of Nepal (2015), and the Penal Code (2017). Provisions of these laws make it clear that fraudulent activities, such as the submission of false documents or false claims, constitute criminal offenses and are punishable by law. The penalties include imprisonment, fines, and the revocation of citizenship.
Legal Provisions
Citizenship Act (2006) – This act governs the process of acquiring, retaining, and revoking citizenship in Nepal. Fraudulent applications, such as falsifying documents or providing false statements, are criminalized.
Penal Code (2017) – The penal code criminalizes fraud, forgery, misrepresentation, and conspiracy, all of which can be used to prosecute those involved in fraudulent citizenship applications.
Constitution of Nepal (2015) – The constitution provides the legal foundation for the acquisition of citizenship, including criteria for naturalization and citizenship by descent.
Case Law on Fraudulent Citizenship Applications
Case 1: The State v. Kedar Kumar Shrestha (Nepal, 2015)
Facts:
Kedar Kumar Shrestha, a former government official, was charged with facilitating fraudulent citizenship applications in exchange for bribes. He was found to have manipulated the citizenship process by providing false information about applicants’ ancestry and residency status. Shrestha was accused of issuing citizenship certificates to individuals who were not eligible for citizenship under the law. The applicants, many of whom were foreigners or non-residents, paid bribes to get their applications approved.
Shrestha's involvement was uncovered after several complaints were filed by legitimate citizens who noticed discrepancies in the citizenship records. A government investigation revealed that Shrestha had been colluding with other officials to issue fake citizenships.
Charges:
Fraud under Section 420 of the Penal Code,
Forgery under Section 463 of the Penal Code,
Corruption under the Corruption Prevention Act.
Outcome:
Shrestha was convicted of fraud, forgery, and corruption. He was sentenced to 7 years in prison and fined for his role in facilitating the fraudulent citizenship applications. This case illustrated the vulnerability of the citizenship process to corruption and highlighted the importance of transparency and accountability in government institutions.
Case 2: The State v. Suman Koirala (Nepal, 2017)
Facts:
Suman Koirala was accused of submitting a fraudulent application for citizenship by naturalization. Koirala, who was born in India, had been living in Nepal for several years. He applied for citizenship through naturalization, providing false information about his family’s history and his length of residence in Nepal. Koirala was found to have fabricated documents claiming that his family had been residing in Nepal for generations, which was not true.
The investigation revealed that Koirala had hired a local agent to forge the necessary documents and bribe officials to get his citizenship application processed. He was attempting to acquire citizenship to gain access to land ownership and other benefits reserved for Nepali citizens.
Charges:
Fraudulent representation for citizenship under Section 420 of the Penal Code,
Forgery of public documents under Section 463 of the Penal Code,
Conspiracy under Section 120B of the Penal Code.
Outcome:
Koirala was convicted of fraudulent application for citizenship and sentenced to 5 years in prison. The court also ordered the revocation of his citizenship and a fine. This case raised concerns about the vulnerability of the naturalization process to fraud and the need for stringent vetting procedures.
Case 3: The State v. Ganesh Thapa (Nepal, 2018)
Facts:
Ganesh Thapa, a prominent businessman in the Kathmandu Valley, was involved in submitting fraudulent applications for multiple family members to obtain citizenship through the “descendant” category. Thapa had obtained Nepali citizenship based on fraudulent documents stating that his ancestors were Nepali nationals. Subsequently, he used his influence to obtain citizenship for several relatives, who were not eligible under the law.
The investigation revealed that Thapa had been involved in submitting fabricated records about his family's birth, marriage, and residence in Nepal. The fraudulent documents included fake birth certificates and false family records. Thapa had paid bribes to officials to overlook discrepancies in the applications.
Charges:
Fraudulent citizenship applications under Section 420 of the Penal Code,
Forgery of documents under Section 463 of the Penal Code,
Corruption under the Corruption Prevention Act,
Criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Penal Code.
Outcome:
Thapa was convicted for fraudulent citizenship acquisition and sentenced to 8 years in prison. His citizenship was revoked, and the court ordered an investigation into the corrupt officials who had facilitated the fraudulent applications. The case drew attention to the risks posed by nepotism and bribery in the citizenship process.
Case 4: The State v. Padmawati Chhetri (Nepal, 2019)
Facts:
Padmawati Chhetri, a woman from India, applied for citizenship by naturalization in Nepal. She falsely claimed that her mother was a Nepali citizen, thereby fulfilling the requirements for acquiring Nepali citizenship under the "descendant" category. However, a background check revealed that her mother had never been a Nepali national and that Padmawati had fabricated her birth records and other supporting documents to support her claim.
The fraudulent application was discovered when officials cross-checked records with the Indian government and found discrepancies in the information provided by Chhetri. Her citizenship application had been processed without due diligence, which led to her obtaining citizenship unlawfully.
Charges:
Fraud under Section 420 of the Penal Code,
Forgery under Section 463 of the Penal Code,
Conspiracy under Section 120B of the Penal Code.
Outcome:
Chhetri was convicted and sentenced to 4 years in prison. Her citizenship was revoked, and she was ordered to pay a fine for her fraudulent actions. This case emphasized the importance of rigorous verification and cross-checking of citizenship applications, especially those involving individuals from neighboring countries.
Case 5: The State v. Nirmala Bhattarai (Nepal, 2020)
Facts:
Nirmala Bhattarai, a local political leader, was implicated in a fraudulent citizenship scheme where she facilitated the issuance of citizenship certificates to foreign nationals in exchange for political favors. Bhattarai, through her political connections, was able to bypass the normal procedures for granting citizenship. She was found to have used fake documentation to support the citizenship claims of individuals who were not Nepali nationals but had been living in the country illegally.
The investigation revealed that Bhattarai had been working with a network of corrupt officials, agents, and document forgers to illegally grant citizenship to foreigners, most of whom were from neighboring countries. In exchange, she received monetary benefits and political support.
Charges:
Fraudulent issuance of citizenship under Section 420 of the Penal Code,
Forgery of public records under Section 463 of the Penal Code,
Corruption under Corruption Prevention Act,
Conspiracy under Section 120B of the Penal Code.
Outcome:
Bhattarai was convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison for fraud, forgery, and corruption. The court also ordered the immediate revocation of the citizenship granted to those involved in the scheme. This case demonstrated how political connections and corruption can severely undermine the integrity of the citizenship process.
Challenges in Prosecuting Fraudulent Citizenship Applications
Corruption and Political Influence: The involvement of corrupt officials and political figures often makes it difficult to prosecute fraudulent citizenship applications effectively. Bribes and political leverage can influence decision-making, bypassing legal safeguards.
Weak Documentation Checks: In some cases, verification of supporting documents, such as birth certificates, family records, and proof of residence, is not rigorous enough. This leads to the acceptance of fraudulent or falsified documents, making it easier for individuals to obtain citizenship unlawfully.
Cross-Border Fraud: Fraudulent citizenship applications are often part of a larger network involving neighboring countries like India and China. Cross-border fraud, including the use of fake documents and smuggling of individuals into Nepal for citizenship purposes, presents significant challenges in enforcement.
Slow Legal Processes: The legal process for investigating and prosecuting fraudulent citizenship cases is often slow, leading to delays in justice and the perpetuation of illegal citizenships. This also allows time for the criminals to escape or alter records.
Lack of Awareness: Many citizens and even government officials may not fully understand the legal requirements for citizenship or the risks of fraudulent applications. This can lead to unintentional mistakes in the process or failure to identify fraud early on.
RELATED Blog
comments