LIECHTENSTIEN VS.

GUATEMALA

1. Facts of the case:-

Nottebohn (P), a German by birth, lived in Guatemala (D) for 34 years, retaining his German
citizenship and family and business ties with it. He however applied for Liechtenstein (P)
citizenship a month after the outbreak of World War II. Nottebohm (P) had no ties with
Liechtenstein but intended to remain in Guatemala. The naturalization application was approved
by Liechtenstein and impliedly waived its three-year. After this approval, Nottebohm (P)
travelled to Liechtenstein and upon his return to Guatemala (D), he was refused entry because he
was deemed to be a German citizen. His Liechtenstein citizenship was not honored. 
Liechtenstein (P) thereby filed a suit before the International Court to compel Guatemala (D) to
recognize him as one of its national. Guatemala (D) challenged the validity of Nottebohm’s (P)
citizenship, the right of Liechtenstein (P) to bring the action and alleged its belief that Nottebohm
(P) remained a German national.

2. Issue Raised:-
Must nationality be disregarded by other states where it is clear that it was a mere device since
the nationality conferred on a party is normally the concerns of that nation?

3. Arguments advanced by both the parties:-

The Guatemalan government refused to recognize the absolute and general jurisdiction of the ICJ
over the Republic of Guatemala. Its main contention was that the jurisdiction of ICJ over
Guatemala had ended and it would be against domestic laws of Guatemala. The Ministry
however showed willingness in holding negotiations with Liechtenstein. Liechtenstein however
contended that Guatemalan communications are based on assumptions and are presenting
objections that are preliminary. The Guatemalan declaration as well as the submission to the
jurisdiction of ICJ for five years is enough to hold themselves under the jurisdiction of the Court.
Apart from that, the Guatemalan government was liable under some principles of the
international law which meant ICJ had jurisdiction over Guatemala. The other issue that arose
was with regard to the nationality of Mr. Nottebohm that was granted to him by Liechtenstein.
According to Guatemala, the Nationality that was conferred by Liechtenstein was not according
to the provisions of the law and there were fraudulent intentions involved on part of Mr.
Nottebohm in acquiring citizenship. Guatemala also contended that it was not violating any law
by not regarding Nottebohm as a citizen of Liechtenstein. In addition to all this Nottebohm still
had some remedies that he could use with regard to Guatemala which he had not yet exhausted.
Liechtenstein, on the other hand, contended that Nottebohm’s citizenship by naturalization in
Liechtenstein was valid according to the domestic laws of Liechtenstein and was also in
accordance with the laws at the international level and as Germany had withdrawn the
citizenship conferred to Nottebohm, now it was Liechtenstein that had to confer it to Nottebohm
and it was valid if Liechtenstein protected Nottebohm at the ICJ level. According to
Liechtenstein, Nottebohm had exhausted all remedies under the municipal law of Guatemala as
well as under the municipal law.

4. Judgement and reason behind it:-

The ICJ in 1953 gave the decision in the favor of Liechtenstein’s claim that and rejected the
Guatemalan objection on the citizenship of Mr. Nottebohm and proceedings were continued on a
merit basis. Then again in 1955, The Court held that citizenship was not acquired for
international law and thus Liechtenstein’s claim was held inadmissible by invoking the effective
nationality principle. The Court held that every state is free to decide who is it going to confer
the citizenship upon but at the same time when the question of the diplomatic protection arises
the process would be subject to international scrutiny. A new principle was recognized at the
international level which is known as the ‘Nottebohm principle’ which states that there ought to
be a meaningful connection presented by the national in question with regard to the state. The
Court opined that Nottebohm did not acquire the citizenship of Liechtenstein because he had
some genuine concern for the traditions and interests of Liechtenstein but Nottebohm just wanted
to protect himself by acquiring the citizenship of a neutral nation instead of a belligerent one to
protect himself in the time of war and thus Liechtenstein was not to put forward claims against
Guatemala on the behalf of Nottebohm at the international level because there was lack of a
strong link between Nottebohm’s citizenship and his connection with the country. According to
the principles of international law, there has to be a link between the one who acquires the
nationality and the state, the nationality of which the person acquires and this link is based on the
sentiments, attachment in social ways, as well as a relation of rights and duties. This is known as
the ‘principle of effectiveness’ there ought to be certain when it comes to a citizen and the matter
of the state to which he owes his allegiance and this is closely related to the matter of protection
at the diplomatic level. Thus, although it’s the State which confers nationality whether the nation
is entitled to diplomatic protection at the international level or not is dependent upon the
international law.