of colonial belongers in the future (ie those who have
a nationality status by virtue of connexion with a
territory which is for the time being a dependency for: whose international relations the UK is responsible).
On the other hand, non-belongers (ie those who possess a
nationality status by virtue of a connexion with a
former dependency which is now or hereafter becomes an
independent State) will, in the long term, be less and
less regarded as UK nationals for international purposes.
We can make no assessment of the length of time which
that process of exclusion from UK nationality will take.
If the UK Government seeks to protect such nationals or
to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction or to make
provision for their sharing in privileges granted by
treaty to UK nationals, such actions would, to the extent
that the UK would be able to do so, retard the process.
Question 2 We have studied all the materials
submitted to us by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Legal Advisers and by Professor Parry. They hold divergent
views on the question of the existence and extent of a
duty to receive nationals. Although Professor Parry's
view has not been accepted by a number of other jurists
referred to in our instructions, we do not feel that it
can be easily and totally dismissed. There is, at the
present time, no clearly established State practice nor
authoritative pronouncement by an international tribunal
upon the existence or scope of an "obligation to receive"
3.