RAMADAN v. MALTA JUDGMENT – SEPARATE OPINION 27 force in 2008)8, and at a regional level, Article XIX of the 1948 American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, Article 20 of the American Convention on Human Rights (adopted in 1969 and entered into force in 1978)9, Article 6 (3) and (4) of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (adopted in 1990 and entered into force in 1999) 10, Article 24 of the Commonwealth of Independent States Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (adopted in 1995 and entered into force in 1998)11, Article 6 (g) and (h) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (adopted in 2003 and entered into force in 2005) 12, Article 7 of the Covenant on the Rights of the Child in Islam (adopted in 2005)13, Article 29 of the revised Arab Charter on Human Rights (adopted in 2005 and entered into force in 2008)14, and Article 18 of the 2012 Association of Southeast Asian Nations Human Rights Declaration. Other general provisions pertaining to the right to equal protection of the law, the right to the recognition of one’s own legal status, the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of the State and the 8. The Convention has 164 parties, including Malta. 9. The Convention has 22 parties. In its Advisory Opinion on Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provision of the Constitution of Costa Rica, OC-4/84, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, held, on 19 January 1984, that there were two aspects to this right which were reflected in Article 20 of the American Convention on Human Rights: “first, the right to a nationality established therein provides the individual with a minimal measure of legal protection in international relations through the link his nationality establishes between him and the state in question; and, second, the protection therein accorded the individual against the arbitrary deprivation of his nationality, without which he would be deprived for all practical purposes of all his political rights as well as those civil rights that are tied to the nationality of the individual”. See also the Inter-American Court of Human Rights judgments on Castillo Petruzzi et al. Case, 30 May 1999, § 101 and IvcherBronstein Case (Baruch Ivcher Bronstein vs. Peru), 6 February 2001, § 88, and particularly, Yean and Bosico Girls v. the Dominican Republic, 8 September 2005, §§ 140-142, 154-158, Expelled Dominicans and Haitians v. Dominican Republic, 28 August 2014, §§ 253-264, and Organisation of American States Resolution of the General Assembly, AG/RES. 2826 (XLIV -O/14), Prevention and reduction of statelessness and protection of stateless persons in the Americas, of 4 June 2014. 10. The Convention has 47 parties. See General Comment on Article 6 of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, ACERWC/GC/02 (2014), adopted by the Committee at its twenty-third Ordinary Session (7-16 April 2014), and IHRDA and OSJI (on behalf of children of Nubian descent in Kenya) v. Kenya, Communication No. 002/2009, 22 March 2011. As recalled by the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child in its general comment on Article 6 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, “being stateless as a child is generally an antithesis to the best interests of children”. 11. The Convention has 4 parties. 12. The Convention has 36 parties. 13. There is no official information regarding the ratification status of the Covenant. 14. The Convention has 13 parties.