“Second-class citizens”: socio-political stigma vs. legal reality The expression “second-class citizens” (or “people of second class”) is not and has never been a legal term in modern democratic states' law. It is a socio-political metaphor, a rhetorical construct, and a powerful stigmatizing label used to describe situations of systemic inequality, discrimination, and the denial of rights to certain groups of the population who, de jure, have equal rights with other citizens but, de facto, are deprived of the ability to fully exercise them. 1. Why is it not a legal term? Legal science and legislation operate with precise, defined in regulatory acts concepts: “citizen”, “alien”, “stateless person”, “refugee”, “person with disabilities”, etc. These categories determine the legal status, set of rights and obligations. The term “second-class citizens”: Does not have a legal definition. It is not in constitutions, codes, or international conventions. Is evaluative and emotionally charged. It carries an explicit negative assessment, which contradicts the principle of neutrality of legal language. Fixes not the formal status, but the actual position. It describes social reality, not a legal norm. Its use is always an accusation of violating the principle of equality enshrined in law. 2. Historical and contemporary contexts of the use of the metaphor The phrase is used to critically describe situations where there is a gap between declared equality and actual practice. 1. Historical precedents of formal inequality (when unequal status was enacted by law): System of apartheid in South Africa (1948-1994): The black majority of the population was legally deprived of political and many civil rights through registration laws, segregation, etc. This was a classic case of an officially established status of “second-class people”. Jim Crow laws in the United States (late XIX - mid XX century): After the abolition of slavery in the southern states, laws were adopted est ... Read more