4, ADDRESSING STATELESSNESS THROUGH THE RIGHTS TO EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION a few limitations. Of critical importance, while 164 States are party to the ICESCR and thus have agreed to be bound by its obligations, few States have enshrined the rights it contains within their constitutions or provided adequate protection in their national laws. This is in stark contrast to the widespread inclusion of the rights to nondiscrimination and equality before the law in national constitutions and laws. Accordingly, the rights to equality and non-discrimination have an important role to play when litigating for the enjoyment of the socio-economic rights of stateless people. Understood to its fullest extent, the right to equality applies to all areas of activity regulated by law,°° meaning that people have a right to equality in their enjoyment of health, education, housing, shelter, food and social security among other socio-economic rights. As noted above, stateless people often struggle to access education on an equal basis with others, including due to difficulties in showing identity documents for enrolment. Since stateless people are disproportionately represented among the poor, they are likely to be unable to access adequate healthcare in States where only rudimentary emergency care is available for those without an income or where citizenship is a pre-requisite for free healthcare. It is also common for States to limit any State support for housing and other social security to citizens. But in all of these instances, there may be a discrimination claim under the relevant equality framework. States often assume they are fully entitled to restrict the provision of socio-economic rights to their citizens. This is particularly common with respect to various forms of social security. However, there are limits to this discretion, depending in part on what treaties a State is party to. As the European Court of Human Rights’ decision in Andrejeva v. Latvia, discussed above indicates, under certain circumstances it will only be possible for Parties to the ECHR to differentiate on the basis of citizenship with respect to benefit entitlement if there are “very weighty reasons” for doing so. In fact, the Equal Rights Trust has identified a large number of cases in which the rights to equality and non-discrimination have been applied by courts to ensure the rights of the most marginalised to key socio-economic provisions.*! Courts are increasingly willing to consider equality arguments when adjudicating 60 61 Equal Rights Trust, Declaration of Principles on Equality, supra n4, Principle 8. Equal Rights Trust, Economic and Social Rights in the Courtroom, 2014. 120