SAHNI ARTICLE 3.3.21 (WORD) (DO NOT DELETE) Spring 2021 Loss of Nationality Rights 5/6/2021 7:21 PM 125 and redress to stateless applicants. A forum that places lesser weight on Article 15(1)(2) is less likely to condemn and negate a State’s arbitrary voidance of an individual’s nationality rights. Alternatively, a forum that acknowledges the validity of Article 15(1)(2) generally awards or restores nationality rights and reverses the stateless status of the applicant. To illustrate, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR) has expressly emphasised the significance of Article 15 by observing that the UDHR forms part of customary international law.118 Such acknowledgement is relevant, particularly in countries where constitutional and regional instruments do not provide for a right to nationality.119 The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights lacks an express clause that recognizes nationality rights.120 In Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania, the court criticised the unrestrained acts of local and federal authorities to denationalize a Tanzanian citizen. As in the Girls Yean and Bosico case, the applicant’s deprivation of documentation led to his immediate statelessness status. Both situations are inconsistent with human rights and public policy aims. The mass denationalization and deportation in the Dominican Republic ensued from authorized state policies and legislation, whereas municipal authorities singled out Anudo on random and unsubstantiated grounds. Ironically, Anudo was attempting to fulfil bureaucratic requirements by complying with a routine police verification of his passport.121 He lost access to his citizenship rights instead and was deported.122 Anudo was born in Tanzania and possessed a birth certificate, passport, and voter’s identity card.123 A senior employee of a German NGO, he was detained after approaching the local police station in 2012 to submit his marriage application.124 The police alleged that his passport had been issued in 2006 on the basis of forged documents that, among other things, contained discrepancies about the birth details of Anudos’ father.125 It confiscated the passport.126 The State did not conduct any court or immigration hearings.127 118. Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania, No. 012/2015, Judgment, ¶ 76 (Afr. Ct. on Hum. and Peoples’ Rts. Mar. 22, 2018) (citing U.S. Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (Iran v. U.S.), Judgment, 1980 I.C.J. 3 (May 24); South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa) Preliminary Objections, Judgment, 1962 I.C.J. 319 (Dec. 21); Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977, § 9(f)). 119. Id. ¶¶ 74, 76-77 (with ¶ 77 citing Liech. v. Guat., 1955 I.C.J.) 120. African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, June 27, 1981, 1520 U.N.T.S. 217 (entered into force Oct. 21, 1986). 121. Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania, No. 012/2015, Judgment, ¶¶ 4, 132 (Afr. Ct. on Hum. and Peoples’ Rts. Mar. 22, 2018) 122. Id. ¶ 4 123. Id. ¶ 63. 124. Id. ¶ 4. 125. Id. ¶¶ 69-70. 126. Id. ¶ 67. 127. Id. ¶ 107.