YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. 2017] The Risk of Statelessness VOL. XIX 83 significance of the risk assessment suggested by the Inter-American Court in making that determination. B. Returning to the Statelessness Determination A statelessness determination is a complex matter that may involve scrutinizing evidence from multiple jurisdictions and assessing that evidence under different legal frameworks.243 While a statelessness determination should be necessary to extend the protection of the international law of statelessness to Dominicans of Haitian descent, there are substantial challenges. First, determining whether a person is “not considered as a national of any state under the operation of its laws” requires 1) identification of the appropriate legal framework of each jurisdiction;244 and 2) a determination of how state authorities apply that law in practice. Inasmuch as one of the central critiques of this Article is that the Inter-American Court extended statelessness protection in Expelled Dominicans and Haitians without completing such a determination, 245 the following discussion will explore some of the challenges that may have deterred the Court. With regard to the inquiry into the relevant law of each jurisdiction, UNHCR guidance provides that “laws” include not just legislation, but also “ministerial decrees, regulations, [and] orders,” as well as case law and customary practice where appropriate.246 Of particular importance in this regard is that some laws operate automatically, while others do not. In essence, automatic nationality acquisition is triggered by the mere presence of a circumstance or event, “such as birth on a territory or birth to nationals of a state,” whereas non-automatic modes of acquisition require an additional act of an individual or the state.247 While the analysis of both the Inter-American Court and Dominican courts into Dominican law has been quite detailed, the analysis of Haitian law by these courts has been superficial. However, a detailed review of Haitian nationality law is absolutely necessary if there is to be any clarity 243. UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, ¶¶ 18, 23 (June 30, 2014), http://www.unhcr.org/dach/wp-content/uploads/sites/27/2017/04/CHUNHCR_Handbook-on-Protection-of-Stateless-Persons.pdf [https://perma.cc/6S5L-W2FK] [hereinafter UNHCR Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons]. 244. A preliminary step, not addressed here in detail, is to identify all those States with which an individual has a “relevant link, in particular by birth on the territory, descent, marriage, adoption or habitual residence.” Id. ¶ 18. Guidance by the UNHCR does not elaborate on what constitutes a “relevant link,” but the clear implication is that “relevant” is a fairly low standard, such that a country should be considered if there is some articulable connection between that jurisdiction and the individual seeking a determination of statelessness. 245. See Expelled Dominicans and Haitians ¶ 297 (noting that the Court was not, “in this context, examining the laws of Haiti”); id. ¶ 279 (finding it unnecessary “to verify factual aspects relating to the alleged obstacles to obtain documents, or the alleged ‘refusal’ of the authorities to grant these”). 246. UNHCR Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, supra note 243, ¶ 22. 247. Id. ¶ 26. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3111529