8. European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Statelessness and legal identity have been the focus of several cases brought to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). However, there are few decided ECtHR cases relating to Palestinians.172 This report does not address this jurisprudence in any detail; but, as discussed above in relation to the cases of AB (France) (Case 427017) and HA v UK, there is potential for the ECHR to be used to increase the protection available to some Palestinians in Europe.173 Furthermore, in many countries, the ‘nationality’ and place of origin of Palestinians is recorded in divergent ways, which is problematic for accurate data collection and disrespectful of the rights of Palestinians in some cases. In the Netherlands, a Palestinian born in East Jerusalem brought a case to the ECtHR seeking to change the designation of his place of birth in the government’s Personal Records Database from “Israel” to “Palestine”. As a result of this litigation, the Dutch Government added Gaza and the occupied West Bank, but not Palestine, as birthplaces in its official records database.174 172 See eg Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, Application No: 50963/99, European Court of Human Rights (finding violations of ECHR Articles 5(4), 8, and 13 in the case of a Palestinian man born in Kuwait who had held a Bulgarian permanent residence permit and had Bulgarian citizen children, where his residence permit was revoked and he was detained and then deported to Syria); and Auad v Bulgaria, Application no. 46390/10, European Court of Human Rights (finding violations of Articles 5(1) and 13 and that Article 3 would be violated if the applicant was expelled). Summaries of both cases are available in ENS’s Statelessness Case Law Database. See also eg L.M. and others v. Russia, Applications Nos. 40081/14 et al (5 Oct 2015) (Stateless Palestinian from Syria and two Syrian nationals detained in Russia were kept in a detention centre before expulsion to Syria. The Court held that the Government’s actions breached the applicant’s rights provided under Articles 2 and 3, 5(4) and 5(1)(f), and Article 34 of the Convention); and A and Others v the United Kingdom, Application no. 3455/05 (19 Feb 2009 (deprivation of liberty violated Article 5(1) ECHR with regard to one of the applicants, who was a stateless person of Palestinian origin, because the government had failed to produce any evidence that another State was willing to accept the applicant. 173 See also eg Hélène Lambert, ‘Nationality and statelessness before the European Court of Human Rights: a landmark judgment but what about Article 3 ECHR?’ (Strasbourg Observers, 16 May 2018); and Caia Vlieks, An Obligation for Statelessness Determination under the European Convention on Human Rights? (Discussion Paper 09/14, European Network on Statelessness 2014) https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/582326c34.pdf [accessed 30 June 2022]. 174 See Lennard Swolfs, ‘Dutch Palestinians remain disappointed after birthplace ruling’ (Al Jazeera, 17 Feb 2019) https://www. aljazeera.com/news/2019/2/17/dutch-palestinians-remain-disappointed-after-birthplace-ruling; and see ‘ECtHR-complaint against the Netherlands for denial of Palestinian identity’ (Prakken d’Oliveira, 4 Dec 2018) https://www.prakkendoliveira.nl/ en/news/2018/ecthr-claim-against-the-netherlands-for-denial-of-palestinian-identity; ‘Intention of State Secretary does not amount to an acknowledgement of Palestinian identity’ (Prakken d’Oliveira, 13 Feb 2019) https://www.prakkendoliveira.nl/ en/news/2019/intention-of-state-secretary-does-not-amount-to-an-acknowledgement-of-palestinian-identity [accessed 30 June 2022]. 32