Search

Begin New Search Topic Nationality Publication Year within 3 Years

1. Progress in Ending Statelessness in Europe

Author:
Sam Mosallai
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
Europe is home to almost 500,000 stateless people or people with undetermined nationality, mainly due to the dissolution of the former Soviet Union and the former Yugoslavia over three decades ago. Other causes of statelessness in Europe include the lack of safeguards to prevent children from being born stateless, gaps in universal birth registration, and, to a lesser extent, the deprivation of nationality as a counterterrorism measure. Many Roma, particularly those residing in Southeastern Europe, are stateless or at risk of statelessness due to persistent discrimination against them. Additionally, due to the lack of dedicated statelessness determination procedures found in many countries in Europe, many stateless migrants cannot enjoy the rights to which they are entitled under international law.
Topic:
Discrimination, Nationality, and Statelessness
Political Geography:
Europe

2. A Region without Statelessness?: How Central Asia Proved It Is Possible

Author:
Sergiu Gaina
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
Imagine living in the country where you were born but never having the right to call it home. No passport, no identity document, no access to education, healthcare, or legal employment. Every visit to a government office ends the same way: “We have no record of you.” For hundreds of thousands of people in Central Asia, this was their reality. Statelessness—where a person is not recognized as a national (citizen) by any country—left them in limbo, unable to fully participate in society. It meant exclusion from essential services, vulnerability to exploitation, and a life spent on the margins, with no clear path to change. But things have changed. Over the past decade or so, Central Asia has led the world in ending statelessness. The region has solved one‑third of all statelessness cases globally—a clear demonstration that with sufficient political will and strategic action, this problem can be eradicated. Since 2014, more than 220,000 formerly stateless people in Central Asia have acquired nationality (citizenship), making it one of the most successful regions in the world in reducing stateless populations.
Topic:
Citizenship, Services, Nationality, and Statelessness
Political Geography:
Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan

3. Nationality and the Right to Enter: Assessing the Impact of Refusal of Entry for the Purpose of Statelessness Determination

Author:
Cecilia Manzotti
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
This article considers the legal situation of migrants, including rejected asylum seekers, who are unable to enter what was, until then, regarded as their country of nationality. This is because that country, without explicitly disputing their nationality, either prohibits their entry or de facto prevents them from entering its territory by failing to issue travel documents or respond to requests for consular assistance for organising return. By examining the conceptualisation of nationality in international law on the one hand, and the international legal definition of a stateless person on the other hand, the article argues that the right to enter the territory of one’s state is so essential to the concept of nationality that refusal of entry and denial of consular assistance for arranging return should be regarded as evidence that the state does not consider a person as its national. Based on this argument, the article further assesses the suitability of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ guidance on statelessness determination in cases of direct or indirect denial of entry. Ultimately, this contribution aims to clarify the scope of the international legal definition of a stateless person by strongly grounding its interpretation in the conceptualisation of nationality in international law.
Topic:
Nationality, Migrants, Right of Entry, Refusal of Entry, Statelessness, and Asylum Seekers
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Habbal et al v Argentina: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ Test on Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality

Author:
Maria Jose Recalde-Vela
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
The right to a nationality is enshrined under art 20 of the American Convention on Human Rights (‘ACHR’),1 which states that: 1.Every person has the right to a nationality. 2.Every person has the right to the nationality of the state in whose territory he was born if he does not have the right to any other nationality. 3.No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality or of the right to change it. The two bodies that oversee the implementation of the ACHRare the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (‘IACommHR’) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (‘IACtHR’).2Despite the fact that not many cases concerning violations of art 20 of theACHRhave been heard before the IACtHR, the Court’s decisions to date have ‘reinforced guarantees against statelessness which establish limits to State discretion in this regard’.3 This is also true in matters concerning the right to a nationality. This case note discusses the case of Habbal et al v Argentina(‘Habbalet al’),4 in which several important issues were raised regarding nationality matters and broader human rights questions in the context of human mobility. This note analyses the matter of arbitrary deprivation of nationality, as the case offers an important addition to the IACtHR’s jurisprudence on nationality. Even though the ruling was not in favour of the victims, this decision is nevertheless valuable for its discussion on the scope of the prohibition of the arbitrary deprivation of nationality; an issue of growing concern worldwide.
Topic:
Human Rights, Law, Nationality, Jurisprudence, Habbal et. al. v. Argentina, and Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Political Geography:
Argentina and South America

5. Verification of nationality and rehabilitation in Upper Silesia as a point of reference for Donbas

Author:
Cezary Trosiak
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
Institution:
Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
Abstract:
In Poland, the region where the phenomenon of multiculturalism is most strongly represented is Upper Silesia. Upper Silesia, its historical hosts, have been confronted with German, Polish and Czech nationalism since the mid-21st century. Initially, they were forced to determine their ethnic affiliation, then, due to the change of borders, they were forced to move to one or the other side of the newly established Polish-German border in 1922. After 1945, they were subjected to strong repression, deportation to forced labor camps, forced displacement, degrading verification of nationality, and then they were confronted with the Polish population who came to Upper Silesia. Most often, the Poles who arrived were hostile to the Upper Silesians. The aim of this article is to answer the question whether the experiences of integration of the indigenous population of Upper Silesia into the social, cultural, economic and political structures of the Polish state after World War II can be related to a similar process that will take place after the end of hostilities in the eastern regions of the Ukrainian state. . The starting point is the thesis that the Upper Silesian experience of the rehabilitation and citizenship verification procedures should serve as a warning against the mistakes made in Upper Silesia rather than as a useful reference point.
Topic:
History, Citizenship, Nationality, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Poland

6. A Teleological and Child-Sensitive Interpretation of a Country of Former Habitual Residence for Stateless Children Born Outside Their Parents’ Country of Nationality or Former Habitual Residence

Author:
Sharelle Anne Aitchison
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
The notion of a country of former habitual residence — as the functional equivalent of a country of nationality for stateless individuals and the reference point for the ‘being persecuted’ inquiry in art 1A(2) of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees — is an ill fit for stateless children born outside the country of nationality or former habitual residence of their parent(s). On a plain, ordinary reading of the definition, stateless children born in the country of refuge have neither a nationality nor a former habitual residence and fall outside the ambit of the refugee definition. In a similar fashion, stateless children born prior to arrival in the country of refuge (but not in the country of nationality or designated country of former habitual residence of their parent(s)) are unable to establish the country of reference element, as read with all other indicia of refugeehood. In the context of concurrent family claims, this predicament exposes an obvious inequity of access to refugee status and a consequent risk of refoulement to serious harm, as such children may face return to the country of nationality or former habitual residence of their parent(s). While the dominant tide of jurisprudence supports a literal interpretation of the notion, Michelle Foster and Hélène Lambert have identified a purposive pathway, better aligned with the humanitarian scope of the refugee definition. For such applicants, this interpretation allows for the determination of country of reference in combination with forward-looking considerations on their returnability and risk of persecution upon return. This article endorses such an interpretation and comprehensively charts a child-sensitive approach to applying the criteria for refugee status (historically formulated from an adult-oriented perspective), by exploring what child-specific interests might better inform the notion in the context of the individualised refugee assessment of concurrent family claims.
Topic:
Refugees, Family, Identity, and Nationality
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Customary International Law Requiring States to Grant Nationality to Stateless Children Born in Their Territory

Author:
William Thomas Worster
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
In the most recent few years, state practice and opinio juris are increasingly converging to affirm that states must grant nationality to children born in their territory if they would otherwise be stateless. In prior scholarship, this author has argued that there is a customary international law norm requiring states to grant nationality in such cases. Certainly, UNHCR’s #IBelong campaign is a significant part of this development, placing statelessness back on the international agenda, as well as encouraging states to adhere to the statelessness conventions, adopt birth registration and statelessness determination procedures and revise domestic law. Partly due to this campaign, states are increasingly adopting practice and domestic law that provides for nationality from birth for stateless children but are also increasingly stating their opinion that such an approach is desirable, necessary and morally compelling. In fact, it is effectively impossible to identify any state that claims it has the unfettered right to refuse to grant nationality to a stateless child born in its territory. This article will complete a brief survey of recent practice and expressions of opinion, mostly as documented by UNHCR as a part of the #IBelong Campaign to End Statelessness, to confirm that this norm continues to strengthen under customary international law.
Topic:
International Law, Law, Children, Citizenship, and Nationality
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Views Adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee Under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, concerning Communication No 2918/2016

Author:
Rodolfo Ribeiro Coutinho Marques
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
InDecember 2021, the UN Human Rights Committee(‘HRC’)published its views in a ground-breaking case (Communication No2918/2016),1finding that the Netherlands had violated a child’s right to a nationality by registeringthem as having‘unknown nationality’in theircivil records. The HRCreasoned that, in so doing, the Netherlands hinderedthe child’s access to international protection as a stateless child.This was the first time that the HRChas ruled on the right of a child to acquire a nationality under art 24(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(‘ICCPR’).FACTSThe case revolved arounda petition by DZ, a child born in Utrecht in 2010 to a Chinese mother. In 2004, she was trafficked to the Netherlands as a minorbut managed to escape her traffickers at the Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam. She then applied for asylum, but her application was unsuccessful. In 2006, DZ’s mother was forced into prostitution. Two years later, she broke out of her captivity and reported the situation to the police, which gave her the right to a temporary status while the investigation was undergoing. After an unsuccessful, year-long investigation, her temporary residence permit was revoked, and her status changed to ‘illegal alien [sic]’.Moreover, DZ’s biological father, who did not recognise paternity, was not in contact with themor with DZ’s mother.*Teaching Assistant and PhD Candidatein International Law at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.I would liketo thank Dr Katia Bianchini and Professor Laura van Waas for theirinsightful feedback and comments. The usual caveats apply. An earlier version of this case note was published on EJIL:Talk! as a blog post.1Human Rights Committee, Views Adopted by the Committee under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol,Concerning Communication No2918/2016, UN Doc CCPR/C/130/D/2918/2016(20 January 2021) (‘Communication No 2918/2016’).
Topic:
Human Rights, International Cooperation, United Nations, and Nationality
Political Geography:
Global Focus