30  S. MANTU of nationality, the creation of statelessness and respect for private life, and, for France and the UK, obligations stemming from EU membership. These obligations are relevant for legislators, authorities taking nationality decisions, and courts or bodies reviewing such decisions. The central point of the legal framework protecting the right to nationality is Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) stating that everyone has the right to a nationality, and prohibiting arbitrary deprivation of nationality. The term ‘arbitrary’ is understood to mean more than illegal since ‘deprivation can be arbitrary when it is discriminatory, it results in statelessness or it is carried out in order to avoid conferral of rights which according to international human rights law are enjoyed only by citizens’ (Batchelor 2006, 10; Blitz 2009; Zilbershats 2002, 20). UN bodies state that a measure of citizenship deprivation needs to meet standards of necessity, proportionality, and reasonableness in order to not be seen as arbitrary (UN Human Rights Council 2013, 2011). Thus, it must be provided by law, serve a legitimate purpose, be proportionate, be the least intrusive measure possible to achieve their legitimate aim, and respect procedural standards of justice that allow for it to be challenged. While there is no specialized UN convention addressing the right to nationality, the main UN human rights instruments contain provisions concerning the nationality of specific groups (e.g. children, women). Moreover, Article 13 UDHR and Article 12(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) proclaim the right to enter and leave one’s own country and prohibit arbitrary deprivation thereof. The UN Human Rights Committee defines the concept of ‘own country’ broadly and going beyond nationality in a formal sense. Persons deprived of nationality in violation of international law are seen as covered by the scope of Article 12(4) ICCPR (General Comment 27:para 20). The Committee views state actions as arbitrary where they strip a person of nationality or expel him/her to another country with a view to prevent that person from entering his/her own country (General Comment 27:para 21; International Law Commission 2014, 32). These findings should be binding for both France and the UK as part of their human rights obligations. The 1961 UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness prohibits the creation of statelessness and constitutes another legal source affecting state power in the field of nationality law. Its standards are relevant for the UK and France and its aims are to reduce statelessness by creating positive obligations for states to eliminate and prevent statelessness in their nationality legislations. Citizenship deprivation leading to statelessness is not per se arbitrary and contrary to international law and jus cogens norms (see Eritrea v. Ethiopia). Exceptionally, Article 8 of the 1961 UN Convention allows for loss of citizenship followed by statelessness, among others, in situations where the citizen has shown allegiance toward another state or cases where he conducted himself in a manner seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the state. UNHCR guidelines on the interpretation of the 1961 Convention define behavior that is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the state as threatening ‘the foundations and organization of the state’ in question (UNHCR 2014: para 67). While crimes of a general nature are not seen as covered by this ground of loss, acts of treason, espionage, or terrorism may be covered, as what is sanctioned is behavior inconsistent with the duty of loyalty. Thus, ‘terrorist’ citizens can be deprived of nationality and made stateless, but only if the legislation of their state of nationality contained such a ground of loss upon becoming a state party to the 1961 UN Convention, as is the case with the UK. Besides the UN standards discussed above, regional human rights treaties, such as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Convention on Nationality (1997) also impose obligations concerning nationality. While both France and the UK are