95. Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, IACHR OEA/Ser/L/V/II.40. 96. See, e.g., Court of Justice of the European Union, Janko Rottmann v. Freistaat Bayern, Judgment, Case C-135/08, Mar. 2, 2010. 97. UN Human Rights Council, Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality: Report of the Secretary-General, 19 December 2013, A/HRC/25/28, at paras. 10-11, https://www.refworld.org/docid/52f8d19a4.html. 98. See Audrey Macklin, Citizenship Revocation, the Privilege to Have Rights and the Production of the Alien, 40 Queen’s L. J. 1, 15 (2014) (“Indicia of arbitrariness may include (but are not exhausted by) disproportionality, unreasonableness, denial of procedural fairness, lack of independent judicial engagement, discrimination and a desire to effectuate exile.”). 99. UN General Assembly, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 21 December 1965, United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 660, p. 195. 100. CCPR, Art. 2(1). 101. Laura van Waas and Sangita Jaghai, All Citizens are Created Equal, but Some are More Equal Than Others, 65 Netherlands Int’l L. Rev. 413 (2018). 102. UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, A/ HRC/38/52, Apr. 25, 2018, at paras. 12-13, https://undocs. org/A/HRC/38/52. 103. Id. at para. 14. 104. Id. at para. 19. 105. Id. at para. 30. 106. In the Modise decision, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights concluded that living as a stateless person was “degrading treatment.” Modise v. Botswana, Comm. 97/93, para. 92. In Open Society Justice Initiative v. Cote d’Ivoire, the commission identified a “supreme and dependent relationship” between the right to dignity and the right to legal status, stating that “the failure to grant nationality as a legal recognition is an injurious infringement of human dignity.” According to the commission, “the very existence of the victim . . . is vitally compromised” when his or her legal status is extinguished. Open Society Justice Initiative v. Cote d’Ivoire, Comm. 318/06, Decision of Feb. 25, 2015, para. 146. The African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the child found in the Kenyan Nubian Children decision that the Kenyan government’s discriminatory treatment of children of Nubian descent was “a violation of the recognition of the children’s juridical personality, and is an affront to their dignity and best interests.” Institute for Endnotes Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and Open Society Justice Initiative (on Behalf of Children of Nubian Descent in Kenya) v. Government of Kenya, African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Decision No 002/Com/002/2009, para. 80. These principles were emphasized in the committee’s General Comment on Article 6 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, adopted in 2014. General Comment on Article 6 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, ACERWC/GC/02 (2014). The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has recognized that arbitrary denial of nationality can interfere with the close link between nationality and identity. Genovese v. Malta, ECtHR, Judgment of October 11, 2011, at para. 33; Mennesson v. France, ECtHR, Judgment of June 26, 2014, at para. 97; Kurić and others v. Slovenia, ECtHR [GC], Grand Chamber Judgment of June 26, 2012, at para. 337. The Council of Europe has also recognized that “certain provisions [of the European Convention on Human Rights] may apply also to matters related to nationality questions. Amongst the most important ones are: Article 3,” which prohibits torture, and inhuman and degrading treatment, on the basis that “actions that lower a national or alien in rank, position or reputation and are designed to debase or humiliate can be a violation of Article 3.” Council of Europe, European Convention on Nationality Explanatory Report, (1997) ETS No. 166, paras. 16, 18. 107. See, e.g., Eric Fripp, ed., The Law and Practice of Expulsion and Exclusion from the United Kingdom: Deportation, Removal, Exclusion and Deprivation of Citizenship 62 (2015) (citing cases covering “discriminatory practices impeding birth registration of children of undocumented refugees in Ecuador (which would support their identification as citizens by birth on the territory), the failure by Colombia to confer its nationality on children born stateless on its territory and Zimbabwean laws denying its citizenship to the children of Zimbabwean parents born abroad.”). 108. Id. at 61. 109. Sarah Bantu, Contingent Citizenship: The Law and Practice of Citizenship Deprivation in International European and National Perspectives 36 (2015). 110. Patti Tamara Lenard, Democracies and the Power to Revoke Citizenship, 30 Ethics & International Affairs 73, 75 (2016). 111. See UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons (2014), at para. 23. 112. See Audrey Macklin, Citizenship Revocation, the Privilege to Have Rights and the Production of the Alien, 40 Queen’s L. J. 1, 15 (2014). 113. Bronwen Manby, Citizenship and Statelessness in Africa: The law and politics of belonging 46 (2016). 114. Tunis Conclusions, at para. 59. 167