This research explores the political debates surrounding changes in the law regulating citizenship revocation in Canada and how they reflect the tensions in the meaning of citizenship for dual national citizens. Borrowing from citizenship studies and critical criminology, the main argument in this thesis is that Bill C-24 seems to be an attempt on part of the Conservative Party to recalibrate the meaning of citizenship from a more liberal understanding (based on civic rights) to one that is more republican (based on civic duty). This research also demonstrates how this recalibration in the conception of citizenship from a more liberal notion to a more republican one parallels the shift in crime control policies of the state that were geared more toward prioritizing the welfare and equality of all citizens under the law in the 1960s-70s to ones that are presently oriented toward punishment, control and management of “dangerous groups”. The scholarly literature suggests that the modern conception of citizenship tends to draw from the republican and liberal traditions that are complementary but are also in tension, and the recent political discussions surrounding citizenship involves arguing for the best balance between rights and responsibilities of citizens. The analysis of the parliamentary debates surrounding Bill C-24 reveals that, in light of Canada’s current political landscape that is heavily influenced by penal-populist notions of punishing the offender populations and making “responsibilized” citizens, the pendulum of citizenship is generally being tilted toward the republican model (based on restoration of civic duties of citizens to the state and their fellow citizens) more so than the liberal model (based on preserving the welfare, liberty and equality of all citizens under the law).

The colonial formation and imagination of the Canadian nation and its citizenry has historically been rooted in processes of racial inclusion and exclusion. This thesis considers the ways in which the historical exclusionary process of citizenship manifests within today’s “War on Terror” through the language of national security. The analysis focuses on the discourses of two former Conservative bills: Bill C-24 – Strengthening the Canadian Citizenship Act and Bill C-51 – Anti-terrorism Act. Mobilized through a critical race perspective, my thesis documents first, the narratives that are told, and second, the discursive strategies that are used, to construct those deserving and undeserving of inclusion. My findings demonstrate that the ideal nation and its ideal citizens, who are deserving of inclusion within the nation, are fundamentally constructed in Whiteness. Meanwhile, the threatening ‘Other’, who is to be excluded and expelled from the nation, is imagined as a racialized Muslim, Arab and brown terrorist in the “War on Terror”. By examining their respective parliamentary debates, my research reveals how the political discourses utilized in both bills uphold the racial exclusionary mechanisms of citizenship. As such, my research speaks to the evolving relationship between citizenship, national security, surveillance, and securitization by demonstrating how citizenship is used as a tool within the broader security regime of the state to fight the “War on Terror”.