Germany is joining a long list of European democracies that have modified or expressed a willingness to modify their citizenship laws to denationalize first and then prevent the return of or expel those citizens accused of having participated in terrorist activities abroad. The formal labelling of citizenship deprivation as an administrative measure outside the scope of criminal justice has prevented scholars of criminal law from undertaking a thorough scrutiny of its legitimacy. In this paper I seek to fill this gap. Specifically, after demonstrating why deprivation of citizenship is a measure of a criminal nature, I argue against its legitimacy, either as a punishment or as a risk-based measure. Instead I propose that we should understand citizenship deprivation as a paradigmatic response from an illegitimate enemy criminal law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, I claim that states that choose to denationalize terrorists should do it within the framework of a process with the highest (criminal procedural) guarantees.

中文翻译：

---

我们在大门口的“野蛮人”：将低犯罪化的公民权剥夺作为反恐工具

德国加入了一长串欧洲民主国家，这些民主国家已经修改或表示愿意修改其国籍法，以首先取消国籍，然后阻止被指控参加过海外恐怖活动的那些公民返回或驱逐出境。正式将公民身份剥夺标记为刑事司法范围之外的一项行政措施，这使刑法学者无法对其合法性进行彻底的审查。在本文中，我试图填补这一空白。具体而言，在说明了为什么剥夺公民权是一种犯罪性质的措施之后，我反对将其合法性作为惩罚或基于风险的措施。相反，我建议我们应该将公民权的剥夺理解为对非法的敌对刑法的一种范式反应。