Today the Supreme Court heard an important case on the revocation of Irish citizenship.
Ali Charaf Damache v the Minister for Justice and Equality focuses on the lawfulness of the process under which Irish citizenship can be revoked.
Thread. https://twitter.com/_IHREC/status/1272914571104264199

The procedure to revoke citizenship in Ireland is set out by the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, and specifically section 19 of that law in light of the constitution, European and international law. (thanks @ihrec for the case description)

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission @_IHREC acted as amicus curiae (friend to the court), to advise on the case from a human rights perspective. It does this regularly in cases where there are significant questions of human rights.

The outcome of this case will affect 40 others almost immediately, and every naturalised citizen of Ireland from now on. Read @Bash_Rich's chapter in the book Immigrants as Outsiders in the two Irelands on the already ambiguous nature of this acquired status.

The submission by @ihrec to the Supreme Court on the revocation opined that citizenship is clearly linked with a person’s family and private life, and revocation will necessarily and seriously effect other civil rights, incl. eg right to vote, and other statutory entitlements.

"As a consequence & given the serious impact on a citizen’s rights, it is the Commissions view that robust procedural safeguards are essential to this process, spec. the right to a hearing before independent and impartial tribunal, a process not currently provided for under s19."

The 40 people who will be affected by the outcome of this case on revoking citizenship are of course part of families and communities across the country. So the impact even immediately, will be deeply felt.

The revocation of citizenship may well affect the citizenship applications of family members and their right to reside in Ireland.

What if someone does something bad to warrant having their citizenship revoked?
1. This holds naturalised citizens to a different legal and moral standard to citizens by birth. This suggests ordinary criminal law won't suffice, and naturalised citizens warrant double punishment

2. Any such process must be clearly set out in law, so that courts can properly review decisions.
At present there is no such clarity, let alone any consideration of the legal principles around criminal penalties or the human rights of the appellants and their families.

I don't hold myself out to be a lawyer, and I'm grateful to @Bash_Rich for educating me on the Act, but this is my understanding of the import of the case for naturalised citizens.