followed. Examples included that deprivation often has immediate effect, an appeal doesn’t have any suspensive effect, the person concerned is no longer a national and often outside the country thereby significantly inhibiting their ability to effectively challenge the decision, including having access to the court/evidence, and proper support from a lawyer. 33. Experts underlined the need for guidance for competent authorities on adequate procedures and standards to determine whether a person would become stateless if deprived of nationality, including on applicable evidentiary requirements and due process safeguards. 34. Experts suggested that guidance from the Council of Europe would be desirable on the manner Article 7(1)(d) of the ECN, which permits deprivation of nationality due to behaviour seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the state, can be implemented by the state Parties, taking inter alia into account the principles of non-discrimination, ne bis in idem and proportionality. Connected issues which should be addressed included considerations of such modalities of loss of nationality as an anti-terrorism preventive measure, as well possible alternative actions (i.e., criminal law procedures, refusal of travel documents). II. Preventing childhood statelessness and ensuring child friendly procedures “Some children are born the country, speak nothing but the national language and lived all their life in their hometown, yet they still do not belong there on paper” (Lynn Al-Khatib) 35. The 1961 Convention and the Convention on nationality principle require that where a child born on the territory would otherwise be stateless, they should acquire the nationality of the state of birth. Most states in Europe have adopted at least some legal provisions in their nationality laws to prevent statelessness at birth, particularly in the case of foundlings and adopted children. Despite that, it appears that a large number of European states still did not have adequate safeguards in their nationality laws to prevent childhood statelessness. Safeguards are often partial, procedures and guidance to identify where a child is stateless or determine a child’s nationality are lacking, and there are still barriers to birth registration affecting specific groups of children. 36. It was stressed that the rights of the child should not be trumped by other considerations and that statelessness was not in the best interests of the child, which should be given paramount consideration. Examples were given where other considerations took precedence, such as parents’ behaviour or life choices, which can have significant implications for the child. It was reiterated that the child’s right to a nationality and best interests must come first and children’s applications should always be prioritised. Furthermore, immediate birth registration remained key to the prevention of statelessness. 37. It was also recommended that childhood statelessness could be an element to be brought into human rights education, as a way to help remove stigma and lack of awareness around the issue, foster dialogue with children and young people affected and broaden awareness. 14