More than 50 Cambodian civil society organizations have issued a joint statement urging the government to repeal recent amendments to the nationality law. They argue that provisions allowing authorities to strip citizens of their Cambodian nationality violate international standards and could have severe consequences for the population.
In a statement released on September 9, a coalition of 54 organizations said Article 29 of the amended law empowers authorities to revoke nationality under vague and ambiguous conditions, without providing clear definitions or legal safeguards.
The groups stressed that such broad and undefined terms amount to an overly expansive definition of criminal acts, leaving wide discretion for authorities to interpret and apply the law arbitrarily. They warned that this opens the door to abuse and undermines legal certainty.
The statement further argued that Article 29 offers no due process protections for those accused and provides no clear procedures to challenge or review decisions, raising concerns about fairness and accountability.
Civil society groups noted that under international law, revocation of nationality must be applied without discrimination based on political opinion, ethnicity, or social status. They said the current law fails to meet these standards and risks being used for political purposes.
Cambodia’s amended nationality law was promulgated on September 5 by acting head of state Hun Sen after revisions to Articles 1, 7, 16, 28, 29, and 34 were passed by the National Assembly on August 25 and endorsed by the Senate on September 1.
The groups pointed to Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms that everyone has the right to a nationality and that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of nationality or denied the right to change it.
Adding to the criticism, Kang Rithikiri, a former professor and former defense lawyer at the Khmer Rouge tribunal, wrote on Facebook on September 8 that stripping Cambodians of their nationality by birth—whether justified by law or decree—remains, in his view, part of a wider act of genocide.
