Toothless European Citizenship / Šimon Uradnik

for the termination; hence, notwithstanding Union citizenship being autonomous in its existence on the Member State’s nationality, at the point of ‘non-possession’ of the nationality of a Member State, it would terminate derivatively again by reasons of ius tractum . Whence it follows that, to confirm or to refute one or the other premise, it is essential to examine whether the legal title for the termination exists or not. The only legal title for the termination, in the current wording, might be again ius tractum . 236 To explore its (non-)presence, the issue must be perceived through legal interpretation. Yet, since the wording is not exhaustive in terms of defining all imaginable legal status of all thinkable legal subjects, the grammatical interpretation would not be sufficient. Hence, it is inevitable to delve into logical interpretation, that is, by argumentum a contrario , which stands on two Roman brocards: 237 ubi lex voluit, dixit; ubi noluit, tacuit , 238 and expressio unius est exclusio alterius . 239 Whereby it is meant that if the law enshrines that a specified set, for instance, a specified group of legal subjects does possess specified rights or specified status, all other legal subjects, which are not included in the specified group, do not possess such rights or status. Wherefore, by argumentum a contrario to: ‘Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union.’, 240 one should conclude that every other person, who does not hold the nationality of a Member State, shall not be a citizen of the Union. Although V. Knapp and A. Gerloch argue that the statement must be expressed exclusively; 241 hence, the specified group of legal subjects must be specified exclusively without any consideration. In order to 236 Except of a death. The author intends to omit that, for that is more than obvious and is not related to the deprivation of Union citizenship during a lifetime. 237 A brocard is a legal principle or maxim. To that effect, see John Webster Spargo, ‘The Etymology and Early Evolution of Brocard’ (1948) 23/3 Speculum 472-476 accessed 8 th June 2023. 238 ‘[W]hat the law wishes, it states, what the law does not want, it keeps silent upon’, for this purpose, see Fabrizio Macagno and Douglas Walton and Giovanni Sartor, ‘Argumentation Schemes for Statutory Interpretation’ (Argumentation 2012: International Conference on Alternative Methods of Argumentation in Law, Brno, 2012) 66 accessed 8 th June 2023. 239 ‘The expression of one is the exclusion of the other.’ Translated by the author. 240 Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2012] OJ 326/47, article 20 paragraph 1. 241 ‘[…] nestačí o něčem něco tvrdit, nýbrž je nezbytné, aby to, co se o něčem tvrdí, se tvrdilo výlučně o něm.’ For this purpose, see Viktor Knapp and Aleš Gerloch, Logika v právním myšlení (Eurolex Bohemia, 3 rd edition 2000) 213.

60