Replies

I have tried to stay out of the colb debate, but as a person who was born and mostly raised in Kenya, just know whoever said Obama's father was a 'British citizen' under ANY law is either seriously misinformed, or lying to you. Mentioning that to people born at the time elicited laughter

Your perception is mistaken according to the letter of the law, spetznaz. Even the online resource that is most dubious of "birther" claims, FactCheck.org, clearly validates what FReeper ExtremelyExtremeExtremist has claimed:

When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom's dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.'s children:

British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.

Obama's British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:

1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963...

2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.

As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama's father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama's father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html

You've made some salient points. What I will do is do some research, and I will probably have some initial feedback tomorrow (if I get nothing, I will do a more thorough search at the Kenyan National Archives). I have a nagging suspicion that those rules pertained to Whites settlers, who had already gone through at least one generational cycle, as pertains to their citizenship. I say this because after independence White Settlers (such as Lord Delamere) had to decide whether they wanted to stay as British Citizens, or get Kenyan Citizenship (some went back to British, some - like Delamere - decided to become Kenyan); as well as the fact that Kenyan law treated White Kenyans quite differently from Indian and African Kenyans. Furthermore, the act of making millions of natives (in all the areas that were under the British Crown) citizens seems quite expansive, while allowing White settlers who had gone through generational cycles (in places like India quite at least a couple of such) makes more sense.

However, that is me speculating. I will do some background research on what that law entailed, and get back to both of you. I have my suspicions that it did not pertain to the Indian dukawalahs and railway laborers, or the African clerks and farmhands, but rather to the settlers who, if you know British law then, knew that citizenship would 'expire' after one generation cycle.

However, you posted information, while all I am doing is speculation. To remedy that I will rout about and see what I dig up. After all, this is FR and not DU.

As for the rest of the COLB matter, I think that whether or not it is a rope-a-dope, it is still an important issue that deserves merit. After all, it is important that the head of a country, be he/her real or ceremonial, be OF AND FROM that country. Commonsense stipulates that. Have a blessed day.