Since the publication of The Origins of Totalitarianism in 1951, Hannah Arendt’s phrase the ‘right to have rights’ and her claim that having rights depends on belonging to and being recognized by ‘some kind of organized community’ have become key provocations on citizenship, statelessness and human rights. Arendt, however, has been criticized as perpetuating a state-centric framework that scholars and activists alike have sought to reimagine. In particular, the French political theorist Jacques Rancière argues that Arendt’s ‘right to have rights’ formula is based on an artificial distinction between the social and the political, which creates an overly narrow definition of the political subject. This article contends that in the post-9/11 era, the distinction, often attributed to Arendt, between ‘Man’ and ‘Citizen’ is increasingly blurred; yet it suggests that this blurring does not necessarily offer any emancipatory potential. It argues that while national citizenship is still meaningful, being a citizen may not be so different from being a mere human in certain contexts. The article examines three sets of cases shaping the United Kingdom’s ‘regime of nationality deprivation’ in which people are stripped of their UK citizenship for terrorism-related offences: Al-Jedda (2013), Pham (2015, 2018) and K2 (2015). First, it explores the tensions in the regime’s attempt to reconcile a fundamental inconsistency between the recognition of the human right to nationality and the sovereignty of the state to define the citizen; and second, it considers the regime’s spatial control of the denationalization process whereby denationalization orders are commonly issued and thus also contested when the targeted citizen is outside the UK’s jurisdiction.

自《极权主义的起源》出版以来1951年，汉娜·阿伦特（Hannah Arendt）的“拥有权利的权利”一词以及她主张拥有权利取决于对某种“有组织的社区”的承认并得到人们的承认已成为公民，无国籍和人权的主要挑衅。然而，阿伦特一直被批评为以国家为中心的框架，学者和激进主义者都试图重新构想这种框架。特别是法国政治理论家雅克·兰西埃（JacquesRancière）辩称，阿伦特的“拥有权利的权利”公式是基于社会与政治之间的人为区分，从而对政治主体的定义过于狭窄。本文认为，在9/11后时代，“人”与“公民”之间的区别（通常归因于阿伦特）变得越来越模糊。但它表明这种模糊并不一定提供任何解放的潜力。它认为，尽管公民身份仍然有意义，但在某些情况下成为公民可能与仅仅作为人类没有太大不同。本文研究了构成英国“国籍剥夺制度”的三组案件，其中因恐怖主义相关罪行而被剥夺了英国国籍的人：Al-Jedda（2013），Pham（2015、2018）和K2（2015）。首先，它探讨了该政权试图调和在承认国籍权与国家主权界定公民之间的根本矛盾的过程中的紧张关系；其次，它考虑了政权对非国有化过程的空间控制，据此，通常会发布非国有化命令，从而在目标公民不在英国管辖范围之外时也会提出质疑。