Dual citizens often cannot run for public office to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure national allegiance. Many countries have laws mandating this restriction to preserve national security. However, they may run for public office if they meet the qualifications outlined in the Constitution and existing statutes of that specific country.
Navigating the complex landscape of politics, certain regulations stand in place to ensure that the individuals representing a nation have its interests as their sole priority. While beneficial in a personal context, the concept of dual citizenship raises questions of loyalty in politics.
This is why legal barriers exist to limit the political involvement of dual nationals in many countries. Nations often require public officials to possess an undivided allegiance, which is imperative for safeguarding a country’s classified information and strategic interests. The eligibility criteria for holding public office are set with rigorous scrutiny, reflecting a nation’s need to foster a government whose members are dedicated exclusively to its cause. This policy is a common practice worldwide, reflecting the prioritization of national security and a clear dedication to one’s country in the public sector.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- The debate surrounding dual citizenship and public office hinges on concerns about divided loyalties, national security risks, and transparency. Arguments against dual citizens holding office often cite potential conflicts of interest, vulnerability to foreign influence, and lack of exclusive national identity.
- Despite these concerns, proponents of dual citizen eligibility highlight the potential benefits of their unique perspectives and skills. They emphasize their enhanced global understanding, ability to foster cultural exchange, and contribution to richer representation and inclusivity in government.
- Eligibility for dual citizens to hold public office varies widely across countries, reflecting individual legal frameworks, historical contexts, and cultural considerations. While some nations like Canada and Australia embrace dual citizenship in government, others like the United States have stricter regulations or outright bans for specific positions due to concerns about national security and undivided allegiance.
Defining Dual Citizenship
In today’s increasingly interconnected world, people are forging lives across borders, embracing cultural blends, and, in some cases, acquiring more than one national identity. This brings us to the fascinating concept of dual citizenship, a legal recognition that grants an individual the rights and responsibilities of citizenship in two countries simultaneously. If you understand the concept of dual citizenship clearly at first, it will help you get an idea and answer the question in your mind about why can’t dual citizens run for public office.
Understanding the Core:
At its heart, dual citizenship is born from various factors, such as:
- Birth: Children born to parents of different nationalities may automatically inherit citizenship from both countries.
- Naturalization: An individual who migrates and fulfills the legal requirements of a new country can acquire citizenship while retaining their original one.
- Historical Treaties: Agreements between nations may confer dual citizenship status upon specific groups or individuals.
Shades of Duality:
Dual citizenship isn’t a monolithic concept. Here are some key variations:
- Full Dual Citizenship: Both countries recognize and grant all rights and responsibilities of citizenship to the individual.
- Limited Dual Citizenship: One or both countries may restrict certain rights or impose obligations unique to dual citizens.
Navigating the Legalities:
The implications of dual citizenship vary depending on the specific laws and policies of each country involved. Key aspects to consider include:
- Voting Rights: Can a dual citizen vote in elections in both countries?
- Holding Public Office: Are there restrictions on dual citizens running for or holding public office?
- Military Service: Which country’s military obligations, if any, does a dual citizen have?
- Taxation: How are dual citizens taxed by both countries?
Beyond the Legal Maze:
The complexities of dual citizenship extend beyond legalities. Individuals may navigate cultural nuances, navigate family ties across borders, and grapple with questions of identity and belonging. These experiences can be enriching and challenging in equal measure.
A Glimpse into the Future:
As globalization continues its march, the number of dual citizens is expected to rise. This trend raises crucial questions about how societies will adapt to accommodate diverse lived experiences and ensure equal opportunities for all, regardless of their passport collection.
Exploring The Restrictions On Dual Citizens
Politics often holds a magnifying glass to citizenship. Certain countries set strict rules for those running for public office, especially when it comes to dual citizens. This section delves into why these restrictions exist and what laws are at play.
Origins Of Citizenship Requirements
Understanding why single citizenship is a must for public office starts with history. Early government structures favored clear loyalty. Countries feared divided allegiances. This sentiment paved the way for current restrictions.
- Protection of national interests – A strong focus on security concerns
- Maintaining clear loyalty – To avoid conflicts of interest in governance
- Historical distrust – Rooted in the fear of foreign influence in politics
Current Laws And Regulations
Today, laws often reflect those old worries. Each country has its own set of rules. In the U.S., the Constitution requires a single allegiance for the presidency. Other countries have similar or even stricter laws.
| Country | Office | Requirement |
|---|---|---|
| United States | President | Natural-born citizen |
| Canada | MPs and Senators | Citizens only |
Rules vary but the trend is clear. Countries insist on single citizenship to ensure leaders prioritize national over personal or foreign interests.
National Loyalty And Conflict Of Interest
National loyalty stands as a cornerstone in the realm of public office. Individuals elected to serve their country must portray undivided allegiance. This concept goes beyond mere patriotism; it is an assurance of a singular, unwavering commitment to one’s nation. Public positions, especially those woven into the fabric of national governance, come with a hefty responsibility. These roles require transparency and dedication to the nation’s best interests.
A conflict of interest arises when an individual’s obligations to other nations taint decision-making. The essence of public office is serving one’s country without the interference of external allegiances. With dual citizens, the anxiety emerges that one’s duties to another nation could precede national policy or security. Therefore, some countries restrict dual citizens from running for specific public offices to safeguard national interests.
Concerns Over Divided Allegiances
Total commitment to one’s nation is paramount when holding public office.
- A dual citizen might face a situation where two countries’ interests clash.
- This could lead to decisions that are not 100% in favor of the country one serves.
This prompts regulations prohibiting dual citizens from running for public positions. The aim is to avoid any potential allegiance splits that might impair national loyalty.
Historical Cases Of Dual Citizens In Government
The question of whether individuals with dual citizenship can hold public office isn’t new, with roots stretching back centuries and revealing a fascinating trajectory. Buckle up for a whirlwind tour through time:
Early Echoes of Conflict:
- Ancient Greece: While not a nation-state as we know it, Athens’s strict “Citizen Law” restricted public office to those born of both Athenian parents, barring dual citizens.
- Medieval Europe: Similar concerns about loyalty and allegiance plagued early monarchies, with rulers often viewing dual citizens with suspicion. However, some countries of modern Europe like Grenada and Latvia are quite welcoming of the concept of dual citizenship.
- Early American Republic: The newly formed United States initially embraced a more inclusive approach, with Founding Fathers like Alexander Hamilton holding dual citizenship (British and U.S.). However, concerns about divided loyalties led to the Naturalization Act of 1790, requiring a 14-year residency period for immigrants to hold public office.
The Pendulum Swings:
- 19th-20th centuries: As immigration surged and globalization blossomed, questions of dual citizenship arose in various nations. Some, like Canada and Australia, adopted relatively relaxed stances, accepting dual citizens in public office. Others, like the United Kingdom, maintained stricter regulations.
- Post-WWII: The Cold War era, with its focus on national security, saw stricter regulations enacted in several countries, including the U.S. The Hughes-Ryan Amendment of 1967 barred dual citizens from holding national security-sensitive positions in the U.S. government.
Nuances and Exceptions:
- The concept of “de facto” dual citizenship: While some countries explicitly acknowledge dual citizenship through legal channels, others may not. This creates the situation of “de facto” dual citizenship, where an individual fulfills the requirements for citizenship in two countries without formal recognition. The legal implications of this in terms of public office eligibility can be complex and vary by case.
- Historical exceptions: Despite general restrictions, several prominent historical figures with dual citizenship held public office. Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, was born a British subject to Jewish parents and later converted to Christianity. Henry Kissinger, U.S. Secretary of State, was born in Bavaria and became a naturalized U.S. citizen after fleeing Nazi Germany. These examples highlight the nuances and sometimes contradictory application of regulations.
As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, the discussion around dual citizenship and public office continues to evolve. While historical precedent offers valuable insights, it’s crucial to recognize that societal attitudes and national security concerns are constantly shifting. The question of whether dual citizens can truly serve two masters or bring unique perspectives to the table remains a captivating topic for ongoing debate.
Throughout history, countries have grappled with such challenges. These cases sometimes led to changes in law or policy, reflecting evolving perceptions of national loyalty and conflict of interest.
National Allegiance: A Balancing Act for Dual Citizens Holding Office
Dual citizens holding public office often find themselves at the intersection of complex legal and ethical considerations regarding national allegiance. The concept of allegiance is deeply rooted in the responsibilities and duties that individuals owe to their respective countries. Here’s a comprehensive exploration of the factors influencing national allegiance for dual citizens in public office:
Legal Framework
Understanding the legal framework is paramount. In some countries, dual citizens may be required to prioritize the interests of the nation in which they hold public office. The legal obligations may vary, ranging from loyalty clauses in the constitution to specific legislation addressing the allegiance of dual citizens.
Requirements to Renounce Citizenship
In some countries, dual citizens are required to officially renounce their other citizenship before running for high public office. This is done to avoid split national loyalties. However, the process for renouncing citizenship can be complex. It may require meeting residency requirements, hiring lawyers, paying fees, and waiting through long processing times. Dual citizens need to research well in advance what they would need to do to renounce their second citizenship if required for an office they seek.
Affirming Primary Loyalty
For dual citizens pursuing office where they aren’t required to officially renounce their second citizenship, it is important to still affirm their primary loyalty is to the country they are seeking office. They can do this by highlighting longstanding residency, deep business, and family ties, prior public service, and a genuine commitment to the interests of that nation. Affirming their devotion can reassure voters that dual citizenship won’t undermine their allegiance if elected.
Ethical Considerations
Public officeholders are expected to act in the best interest of their constituents and the nation. Ethical considerations come into play when balancing dual citizenship and national allegiance. Officials must navigate potential conflicts of interest, ensuring that decisions prioritize the well-being of the country they represent.
International Treaties and Agreements
Bilateral agreements and international treaties can shape the expectations and obligations of dual citizens in public office. These agreements may provide guidelines on the exercise of rights and responsibilities, contributing to a harmonized approach to dual citizenship and national allegiance.
Transparency and Accountability
Transparency in disclosing dual citizenship and potential ties to other nations is crucial for maintaining public trust. Public officials often face scrutiny, and being forthright about dual citizenship can demonstrate a commitment to transparency and accountability.
Constitutional Provisions
Examining constitutional provisions is essential. Some countries may have explicit clauses addressing the eligibility and responsibilities of dual citizens in public office. Understanding these provisions is vital for dual citizens navigating the legal landscape.
Public Perception and Trust
The perception of the public plays a significant role. Dual citizens holding public office should be mindful of public sentiment and work to build and maintain trust. Clear communication about their commitment to the nation they serve can contribute to positive public perception.
Country Specific Examples
Here is an overview of the national allegiance for dual citizens who might run for office in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, and the Philippines.
United States
- The United States allows dual citizenship, meaning an individual can be a citizen of the U.S. and another country at the same time.
- Dual citizens owe allegiance to both the U.S. and the other country and must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the U.S.
- The eligibility for dual citizenship depends on the policies of the second country, and individuals seeking dual citizenship must find out if the other country recognizes dual citizenship with the United States.
Canada
- Canada also allows dual citizenship and individuals with Canadian-American dual citizenship must obey the laws of both countries.
- To gain Canadian-American dual citizenship, an applicant must have citizenship in one country and gain citizenship from the other through birth, marriage, or naturalization.
United Kingdom
- The United Kingdom allows dual citizenship between itself and other countries, including the U.S.
- Individuals applying for U.S. or UK dual citizenship need to follow the specific requirements of both countries and ensure that both countries allow dual citizenship.
Australia
- Australia’s laws regarding dual citizenship are complex, and the eligibility to serve as a member of the Federal Parliament is affected by the Constitution, which prohibits individuals with dual citizenship from being elected.
- The concept of dual nationality and its implications for running for office in Australia has been the subject of legal and constitutional debates.
Philippines
- The Philippines also allows dual citizenship and individuals with dual citizenship must comply with the laws and regulations of both countries.
- Naturalized Filipinos living abroad may choose to maintain or regain their Philippine citizenship in the Philippines. They are also restricted from holding public office until they have sworn allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and its duly established authorities, and have renounced their allegiance to the nation from which they originally took the oath.
International Perspectives On Dual Office Holding
The question of whether dual citizens should hold public office stirs global debate. Each country’s policy reflects its legal, historical, and cultural considerations. This section explores these differences and how countries around the world handle dual nationals in office.
Comparative Analysis Of Global Policies
Countries vary widely in their approach to dual officeholding. Some allow it under all circumstances; others prescribe conditions or ban it outright. This comparative analysis will uncover the underlying reasons behind these policies, showing the diversity of international standards.
| Country: | Dual Office Holding Allowed? | Restrictions: | Public Perception: | Notable Examples: |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA: | Yes, with some restrictions | Prohibited for specific positions in the executive branch and Congress due to potential conflicts of interest. State and local levels vary. | Mixed, with concerns about divided loyalties and conflicts of interest. | Madeleine Albright (Secretary of State, held dual Czech and US citizenship) |
| UK: | No, except for specific positions | Dual citizens must renounce other allegiances before holding most public offices, with exceptions for certain roles like local councilors. | Negative, with strong opposition due to concerns about national security and undivided loyalty. | Boris Johnson (Prime Minister, renounced US citizenship before taking office) |
| Canada: | Yes, with no restrictions | No legal restrictions on dual citizens holding any public office. | Positive, seen as enriching diversity and reflecting multiculturalism. | Jagmeet Singh (Leader of the New Democratic Party, Canadian-Indian) |
| Australia: | Yes, with no restrictions | No legal restrictions on dual citizens holding any public office. | Positive, seen as a reflection of multiculturalism and global perspectives. | Barnaby Joyce (Deputy Prime Minister, Australian-New Zealand) |
| Philippines: | Yes, with some restrictions | Dual citizens who acquired Filipino citizenship through naturalization are prohibited from holding certain positions, including President and Vice President. | Mixed, with concerns about specific countries and potential divided loyalties. | Leni Robredo (Vice President, Filipino-American) |
Countries That Allow Dual Nationals In Office
Select countries embrace the notion of dual nationals participating in government. These nations recognize the potential benefits that come from inclusive representation.
Noteworthy countries that permit dual citizens in office include:
- United States: Dual nationals can serve, even at the highest levels.
- Canada: No restriction against dual citizens holding office exists.
- United Kingdom: There’s a green light for dual nationals in Parliament.
Each nation applies distinct standards about who qualifies to serve their people. The tables below compare these policies in detail.
| Country | Policy on Dual Nationals | Restrictions/Notes |
|---|---|---|
| United States | Allowed | No explicit restrictions |
| Canada | Allowed | Must disclose dual citizenship |
| United Kingdom | Allowed | Potential conflict-of-interest considerations |
Challenges And Legal Battles Faced By Dual Citizens
Navigating the political landscape is a daunting task for any hopeful. It’s even more complex for dual citizens. They often face rigid ethnic stipulations, allegiance concerns, and extensive legal hurdles. Let’s delve into the trials they undergo, including notorious court cases and impacts on their political journey.
Notable Court Cases
Historic rulings have shaped the field for dual citizens vying for office.
- United States Vs Wong Kim Ark: A watershed case questioning loyalty and eligibility.
- Kawakita Vs United States: The United States Supreme Court decided in 1952 that conducting acts of war against the US could result in a dual citizen being found guilty of treason against the US.
Impact On Political Aspirations
Dual citizenship can vastly limit political goals. For instance:
- Eligibility challenges pose serious campaign delays.
- Legal fees can deplete campaign resources.
- Public perception of dual citizens can sway voter opinions.
Reforming The Rules For Modern Politics
Politics mirrors the dynamic tapestry of a nation’s populace. Changes in societal norms and global connectivity challenge traditional political eligibility rules. One such hot-button issue is the eligibility of dual citizens to run for public office. Current legislation in many countries bars dual citizens from holding public office, fostering debate on whether these rules need to evolve. Let’s dive into the discussions encouraging reform and modernization.
Push For Inclusivity And Change
Dual citizens offer unique perspectives and skills that can benefit government functioning. Their transnational experiences can contribute to better diplomacy and global policy-making. Despite these advantages, laws have historically restricted their participation in politics, sometimes out of concern for national security or conflicting loyalties. Advocates argue that inclusivity in politics paves the way for a diverse leadership reflective of society’s composition.
- Broader representation in government
- Richer foreign policy debate
- Integration of international best practices
These points stress the importance of assessing an individual’s merits over their national affiliations. The push for change steadily gains momentum, echoing the corridors of power and the voices of the global citizenry.
Evolving Views On National Identity And Policy
National identity no longer solely defines political loyalty. The concept has taken on a more expansive and fluid meaning. Globalization fosters interconnectedness, viewing citizenship as a layered and complex affiliation. The debate extends into policy as countries grapple with redefining what it means to be a national representative in the modern age.
| Traditional Views | Evolving Perspectives |
|---|---|
| Single allegiance to one nation | Multiple allegiances can co-exist |
| Fixed national identity | Dynamic, layered identities |
| Rigid political eligibility | Flexible criteria based on individual qualifications |
Reforming the outdated restrictions considers both modern political landscapes and varying definitions of identity. It’s not about forsaking national loyalty but embracing a comprehensive governance model.
By adopting eligibility rules, we acknowledge that the dual citizens’ stake in multiple nations can enrich their own. Political systems should harness this potential. The discourse sets the stage for a political framework inclusive of the transnational experience.
Can A Dual Citizen Be President?
The eligibility criteria around dual citizenship and the U.S. presidency is a complex issue. Here is an overview of the key considerations:
Constitutional Requirements
The Constitution outlines only three eligibility requirements to be president – a candidate must be at least 35 years old, a resident of the United States for at least 14 years, and a natural-born citizen. It does not expressly prohibit dual citizens from running.
Legal Interpretations
There is debate around whether “natural born citizen” excludes dual citizens or only requires being born U.S. citizens. Most legal experts believe the Constitution allows those with dual citizenship at birth to run for president. However, the courts have not issued definitive rulings.
Renouncing Other Citizenships
Historically, presidential candidates who were dual citizens renounced their second citizenship to avoid questions about split national loyalty. This included candidates born with dual citizenship like Michigan Governor George Romney.
Public Opinion Factors
Even if legally allowed, a candidate’s dual citizenship could still be a major issue in campaign politics. Voters may view second citizenship as undermining true allegiance to the United States. Candidates need to evaluate if this perception could doom their viability.
Key Considerations on Dual Citizenship and the Presidency
| Issue | Description |
|---|---|
| Constitutional requirements | Does not expressly prohibit dual citizens |
| Legal interpretations | Most experts believe dual citizenship is permitted |
| Historical precedent | Candidates have renounced second citizenship |
| Public opinion concerns | Voters may question split loyalty |
Arguments Against Dual Citizens Holding Public Office
While the issue of dual citizens holding public office is multifaceted, there are legitimate concerns that deserve consideration. Here are some of the most frequently cited arguments against allowing dual citizenship and public office to coexist:
1. Divided Loyalties:
- The primary concern revolves around the potential for conflicted loyalties in situations where the interests of the two nations diverge. Can a dual citizen truly prioritize the needs of the nation they swore allegiance to when the other nation’s interests come into play? For example, would a dual citizen representing country A in diplomatic negotiations with country B feel pressured to favor their other homeland if the two countries clashed on an issue?
- Divided loyalties can compromise national security and foreign policy decision-making, potentially impacting sensitive strategic alliances and international agreements.
2. National Security Risks:
- Some argue that dual citizens, especially those with ties to countries considered potential security threats, pose a risk of espionage or foreign influence. Dual citizens may be more vulnerable to pressure or coercion from their other nation, potentially leading to the compromise of classified information or sensitive government operations.
- Concerns can be amplified for positions with access to classified information or national security secrets, raising anxieties about potential sabotage or intelligence leaks.
3. Transparency and Accountability:
- The complexities of dual citizenship can create challenges in ensuring transparency and accountability. Determining the true allegiances and financial arrangements of a dual citizen can be complex, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
- It becomes difficult to track foreign financial ties or investments that could influence their decision-making in office, undermining public trust and confidence.
4. Representation and Identity:
- A public official should solely represent the interests of the nation they serve and hold exclusive citizenship in. They express concerns that dual citizens may not fully identify with the national identity or understand the nuances of the electorate’s needs.
- This argument often ties into questions about cultural assimilation and integration, suggesting that dual citizens may struggle to represent the aspirations and values of a nation they haven’t fully embraced as their sole homeland.
5. Cultural and Political Homogeneity:
- In some nations, particularly those with strong nationalist sentiments, allowing dual citizens into public office can be seen as a threat to cultural and political homogeneity. This argument often stems from a desire to preserve specific values, traditions, and national interests, fearing that dual citizens may introduce foreign influences or perspectives that deviate from the established norms.
Arguments for Dual Citizens Holding Public Office
While concerns surrounding dual citizens in public office deserve consideration, a compelling case can be made for embracing their unique perspectives and contributions. Here are some key arguments in favor of allowing dual citizens to hold public office:
1. Enhanced Global Understanding:
- Dual citizens bridge cultural divides and bring an intimate understanding of international relations to the table. They can navigate nuances in communication, foster diplomacy, and build stronger international partnerships.
- In an increasingly interconnected world, their global perspective can prove invaluable in navigating complex international issues like trade agreements, cross-border cooperation, and cultural exchange.
2. Richer Representation and Inclusion:
- In diverse societies, dual citizens can broaden the pool of eligible candidates, reflecting the multicultural identities of the electorate. This leads to richer representation and ensures that various communities feel their voices are heard in the political sphere.
- Their lived experiences of navigating multiple cultures can contribute to more inclusive policies and legislation that benefit a wider range of citizens.
3. Unique Skills and Expertise:
- Dual citizens often possess valuable skills and expertise acquired through their diverse backgrounds and professional experiences. They can bring fresh perspectives to problem-solving, draw on international knowledge, and inject innovation into various government sectors.
- Their fluency in multiple languages and understanding of different legal systems can prove invaluable in areas like international trade, diplomacy, and legal affairs.
4. Innovation and Progress:
- Dual citizens can challenge the status quo and offer alternative viewpoints, fostering creativity and innovation in governance. Their exposure to different systems and practices can inspire new approaches to tackling complex issues.
- Their global networks and connections can facilitate collaboration and knowledge sharing, driving progress on issues like environmental sustainability, technological advancements, and economic development.
5. Fostering Cultural Exchange and Understanding:
- Dual citizens act as bridges between nations, promoting cultural exchange and mutual understanding. Their presence in public office can break down stereotypes, build trust, and encourage international cooperation.
- By serving as role models and demonstrating successful integration, they can inspire tolerance and acceptance in diverse societies, countering xenophobia and promoting inclusivity.
Frequently Asked Questions On Why Can’t Dual Citizens Run For Public Office
Can You Be A Dual Citizen And Work For The Government?
Yes, dual citizens can work for the government, but some positions may require a security clearance that restricts dual citizenship. Eligibility varies by country and specific job requirements.
Can A Dual Citizen Run For Local Government?
A dual citizen can run for local government, but eligibility requirements may vary by jurisdiction. Check local election laws for specific dual citizenship rules.
Can A U.S. Citizen Run For Office In Another Country?
A U. S. citizen may run for office in another country if they meet that country’s eligibility requirements and hold legal status, such as dual citizenship or residency rights. Eligibility varies by nation and specific office sought.
Why Does The U.S. Not Allow Dual Citizenship?
The U. S. does allow dual citizenship. There are no explicit legal prohibitions against it, and many Americans hold citizenship in multiple countries.
Can Dual Citizens Run for Public Office in the Philippines?
Yes, as long as they fulfill the requirements set forth by the Constitution and current regulations for holding public office, dual nationals are eligible to run for office in the Philippines. When submitting their certificate of candidacy, they must, however, personally and faithfully renounce any foreign citizenship in front of any public official qualified to administer an oath.
The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled recently that, independent of any further actions taken to validate foreign citizenship, Filipinos born to one Filipino parent and one foreign parent are regarded as dual nationals by birth and not by naturalization. They are therefore regarded as Filipino and eligible to run for public office because they were born with two citizenships.
It’s crucial to remember that laws about holding public office and dual citizenship are subject to change. For example, there have been talks about changing the Dual Citizenship Law so that those who are dual nationals can hold important government positions or run for public office without giving up their foreign citizenship.
Conclusion
Exploring the complexities behind dual citizens running for office reveals deep constitutional and national security considerations. Countries prioritize homogenous representation to safeguard their interests. It’s crucial to understand these legal frameworks, which garner trust and uphold national unity. Though controversial, the restrictions are rooted in a desire to maintain a singular allegiance within a nation’s leadership.
Embracing this principle can ensure a focused and united governance.
