nationality of the adult will also be recognised; and also because children may have their other rights restricted if they are not regarded as nationals, in particular in relation to their access to education, health care and other social services. 86. It is thus not a coincidence that the first case in which the Committee has ruled on interpretation of the African Children’s Charter related to the statelessness of children. In the Kenyan Nubian Children’s case), the Committee stated that it : [...] cannot overemphasise the overall negative impact of statelessness on children. While it is always no fault of their own, stateless children often inherit an uncertain future. For instance, they might fail to benefit from protections and constitutional rights granted by the State. These include difficulty to travel freely, difficulty in accessing justice procedures when necessary, as well as the challenge of finding oneself in a legal limbo vulnerable to expulsion from their home country. Statelessness is particularly devastating to children in the realisation of their socio-economic rights such as access to health care, and access to education. In sum, being stateless as a child is generally an antithesis to the best interests of children. 87. The Committee thus reminds African States that States do not enjoy unfettered discretion in establishing rules for the conferral of their nationality, but must do so in a manner consistent with their international legal obligations. These include those set out in Article 6, paragraphs (3) and (4) of the African Children’s Charter, as well as Article 4, which provides that “In all actions concerning the child undertaken by any person or authority the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration”. The Committee also draws States’ attention to Article 5(2) of the African Children’s Charter, which provides that “States Parties to the present Charter shall ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the survival, protection and development of the child”, and notes that the possession of a nationality is critical to the ability of a child to access such State protection. 88. Articles 6(3) and (4) of the African Children’s Charter reaffirm the established international principle set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 15(1) that “Everyone has the right to a nationality”. However, the combination of sub-articles (3) and (4) of Article 6 provide a more specific obligation than Article 15(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is because these subarticles require States “to adopt every appropriate measure, both internally and in cooperation with other States, to ensure that every child has a nationality when he is born”. Article 6(4) of the African Children’s Charter strengthens the overarching provision on nationality, and harmonises the Charter with the principle established by the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness: that a child who would otherwise be stateless – that is, who does not obtain any other nationality at birth – shall have the nationality of the State in which he or she is born. The African Children’s Charter thus reaffirms the specific responsibility of the State where the child is born to confer its nationality upon the child, if that child has no other nationality. 89. Above all, the inclusion of Article 6(4) within the African Children’s Charter represents a recognition by African States that the lack of the right to a nationality, and the lack of recognition as a full participant in the political and social life of the country where a person has been born and lived all his or her life, has been at the heart of many of Africa’s most intractable political crises and civil conflicts. Ensuring that all children have a nationality from birth is not only in the best interests of the child and future adult, but also of States Parties to the Charter. 90. In considering the significance of the wording of Article 6(3), the Committee of Experts held in the Kenyan Nubian Children’s case that: The African Committee notes that Article 6(3) does not explicitly read, unlike the right to a name in Article 6(1), that “every child has the right from his birth to acquire a nationality”. It only says that “every child has the right to acquire a nationality”. Nonetheless, a purposive reading and interpretation of the relevant provision [Article 6(3)] strongly suggests that, as much as possible, children should have a nationality beginning from birth. This interpretation 101