Passport Letter Of Authorization: Fill & Download for Free

A2A. It can be collected by a representative who can provide a letter of authorization along with identification proof.The letter can be along the lines of this http://passportindia.gov.in/AppOnlineProject/pdf/AuthorityLetter.pdf?bcsi_scan_05079a7e8da8f4a0=65beIRSfI0T/NBq//W5e7dF5jcYmAAAAemxAHQ==&bcsi_scan_filename=AuthorityLetter.pdf

It is generally accepted that the British were the first to issue a visa, although there is no proof of this. It is presumable based on their dominion being spread across the world and the need for travel within their 'kingdom'. The use of both passports and visas became necessary as travel documents only after the first World War, although there have been recorded instances of a 'letter of authority' (from a king) being given in special cases to people for travel beyond a particular region's borders.

I have no sympathy for this woman. She willingly joined a despicable and brutal terrorist organization, and she is only having remorse now because ISIS is on the verge of extinction, and her adventure didn’t turn out to be as rosy as she expected.There are reports that perhaps she should never have been granted citizenship in the first place. The argument is phrased thus:Children of foreign diplomats are not eligible for jus soli citizenship.She was born while her father was a diplomat in the US.Therefore, she cannot be a US citizen.But the question is not so simple.In favor of her citizenship is this: this was examined by the relevant authorities at the time she was applying for her passport in 2004. At that time, her father was able to produce an official letter from the US mission to the UN showing that his work as a diplomat had ended in September 1994, a month before she was born. This was deemed good enough, and she was granted a passport. This passport was renewed in 2004, shortly before she left for Yemen.Against her citizenship is the argument that the US government made under Obama, that the initial grant of citizenship had been a mistake, because records showed that, contrary to the letter her father was able to produce, he did not actually lose diplomatic status until 2015. Her passport was officially revoked in early 2016.What this means to me is that as of right now, the US government does not recognize her as a passport-holder.The question this raises is whether the revocation of a passport is tantamount to a revocation of citizenship. For instance, suppose that the US government decides to strip a citizen of the right to travel abroad, for fear that the citizen would escape justice. Few would argue that this amounts to a revocation of citizenship.On the other hand, if she were never a citizen in the first place, and the passport had been granted to her in error, then there is no need to formally revoke something she never really had.That being said, the grant of a passport usually serves as a recognition of citizenship. If it is lawful for any administration to simply revoke a passport as a way to revoke citizenship, what is to stop a president who stands to gain politically from ordering the mass revocation of passports from large numbers of foreign-born citizens on technicalities, and thereby making them ineligible to vote for his opponent?If she is not a citizen, shouldn’t there be a more formal process whereby this is determined? Does a simple letter of revocation such as the one her family was issued ensure enough security for naturalized citizens?[1]This is why I am glad that her father is suing, even though I expect him to lose his case. If he loses, then the revocation of her passport—and thereby of the citizenship that the US government had once accepted as her birthright—will be on more solid footing. For now, I am utterly at peace with having her blocked from entry until the case is resolved.This case also raises the issue of what the response should be if her father had not been a diplomat. No doubt, some would still find it proper to exclude her from entry. In that instance, I would disagree with them, unless a law were passed that mandated the revocation of citizenship for every American guilty of providing support for terrorism, irrespective of ethnic origins, and irrespective of whether the specific flavor of terrorism engaged in were inspired by Islam. Anything else would be an unconstitutional act of discrimination.Footnotes[1] https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/14251881/exhibit_3_hoda_mulhana.pdf