Diasporas who have not obtained the nationality of their State of residence retain a certain level of uncertainty. On the other hand, naturalisation may lead to the loss of the nationality of their” countries of origin”. Do they forego naturalisation, thereby “accepting” the risks associated with incomplete integration? Or do they naturalise and thereby lose (or renounce) their former nationality? Second-generation migrants may also face this situation, where they lose or do not obtain the nationality of their parents’ countries “of origin”. If they lose the nationality of their “State of origin”, they will be considered as foreign nationals in their “own” country. Many “sending” States that recognise the importance of their Diaspora have turned towards alternative means of retaining a bond with their Diaspora, even if they cannot yet fully accept dual nationality. On particular tool employed by a growing number of sending countries is to create a privileged legal status for their Diaspora. This intermediate status grants them more rights than a non-citizen resident may have, while still not going as offering them the option of (dual) nationality. It is these “Privileged” statuses for the Diaspora that forms the focus of this publication. The research in this publication examines three existing forms of external quasi-citizenship schemes, namely the Chinese “Green Card” scheme, the Indian “Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder” scheme, and the Surinamese “Person of Surinamese Origin” scheme. The research questions, namely which of the quasi-citizenship schemes of China, India and Suriname best approximate full or dual nationality as concerns the rights and duties of individuals, is approached from a comparative legal method. By employing an analytical framework, based on the selection and examination of a number of citizenship rights and duties, this publication examines the extent to which these forms of external quasi-citizenship schemes approximate the rights and duties of the Diaspora in comparison to full nationality.

Ngo Chun Luk (Hong Kong, 7 August 1989) Ngo Chun Luk obtained his Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees in Aruban Law cum laude at the University of Aruba (2008-2012). His Master’s thesis, entitled “Het Nederlanderschap na Rottmann: Over de gevolgen van Janko Rottmann v. Freistaat Bayern voor de verliesbepalingen van de Rijkswet op het Nederlanderschap” [The Dutch nationality after Rottmann: On the consequences of Janko Rottman v. Freistaat Bayern for the grounds of loss in the Kingdom Act on the Dutch Nationality], was awarded the VanEps Kunneman VanDoorne Best Thesis Award for the academic year 2011-2012. In 2014, Luk obtained his Master’s degree in International Laws cum laude at Maastricht University. During this period, he participated in exchange programmes at the University of Hong Kong (HKU, Hong Kong), and the Pompeu Fabra University (UPF, Barcelona). He also successfully attended the Honours Programme at the Faculty of Law. At Maastricht University, he was also a student- assistant for Prof. René de Groot and Prof. Maarten Vink, where he contributed to the development of the MACIMIDE Global Expatriate Dual Citizenship Dataset. He was also involved in the Involuntary Loss of European Citizenship (ILEC) project. From 2014 to 2017, Luk conducted his PhD research as an external candidate at Maastricht University within the Transnational Migration, Citizenship and the circulation of Rights (TRANSMIC) project. TRANSMIC is a project funded under the FP7-PEOPLE-2013-ITN call and is part of the Marie Curie Actions — Initial Training Networks funding scheme (Project number – 608417). He is currently a Researcher in the Justice and Home Affairs unit at CEPS (the Centre for European Policy Studies).