2020 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2(2) island. Thus, it is important to highlight thus the role of the IACtHR in the struggle for equality and the right to a nationality in the Dominican Republic. The role of MUDHA, a women’s rights association, in the Yean y Bosico advocacy effort helps to highlight the gender aspects of Dominican citizenship law and policy. As in Myanmar, nativism understood mixed marriages between foreigners (or those considered otherwise ‘others’) and nationals as a threat to the nation. This has resulted in gender discrimination in both law and practice. For instance, the law delineates a birth registration process for foreign mothers who give birth in the Dominican Republic, which is different from that of Dominican nationals. 110 According to the norm established by the Central Electoral Board to register births, when a foreign mother does not possess identification documents (even if the father is Dominican and possesses an identification card) the process cannot be initiated without the passport of the mother. This is the main obstacle in registering children from mixed couples, mainly when the foreign mother does not possess the document. 111 Thus, it is crucial to establish an alternative accreditation mechanism for the foreign mother’s identity where the mother does not have a passport or equivalent identity card for a foreign resident. The passport requirement, in practical terms, prevents birth registration for children of mixed couples, even if the Dominican father owns his identification document and is willing to recognise the child. 112 The measure has a disproportionate impact on both Haitian women and women of Haitian descent, as they are often unable to provide the documentation and follow the administrative hurdles set by the procedure. As a result of these historical developments, the present legal framework of the Dominican Republic shifted from jus soli towards jus sanguinis, and its implementation has made it more difficult for persons of Haitian descent to acquire or retain citizenship. Indeed, compliance with the Yean y Bosico sentence was incomplete, and the authorities changed their strategy towards codifying what had been administrative violence into positive law. They did so by re-interpreting ‘in transit’ to apply to all irregular migrants and, later, through the 2010 Constitution of the Dominican Republic’s restrictions on jus soli: art 18(3) established that individuals born in the Dominican Republic of parents residing illegally in the Dominican Republic were not entitled to nationality by birth. 113 Later on in 2013, a Constitutional Tribunal sentence attempted mass citizenship deprivation of all persons born in the country with irregular status since 1929. 114 In 2013, the Constitutional Tribunal for the Dominican Republic delivered Judgement 168-13 retroactively changing the interpretation of the Constitutions in effect from 1929 to 2010, by stating that children born in Dominican territory of 110 Migration Law No 285-04 (n 106) art 28, arts 36–41. See also Allison J Petrozziello, 111 112 113 114 ‘(Re)producing Statelessness via Indirect Gender Discrimination: Descendants of Haitian Migrants in the Dominican Republic’ (2019) 57(1) International Migration 213. Facilitando el Acceso al Registro Civil Dominicano a Descendientes de Parejas Mixtas: Protocolo para su Acompañamiento Legal (Report, Centro Para la Observación Migratoria y el Desarrollo Social en el Caribe 2018) 27. ibid 57. Constitution of the Dominican Republic (2010) art 18(3). ibid 216. 210