2021 B Statelessness & Citizenship Review 3(1) The Meaning of the Obligation Not to Render Persons Stateless under International Law As explained above, the right to nationality is the right to have rights and assures persons of membership in a society so that they have access to the full range of human rights and also enjoy human dignity. This means that the obligation not to render persons stateless under international law prevents states from taking away a core right to a human being’s existence as a member within society and the right to access and enjoy other rights. Furthermore, art 15(2) of the UDHR on the prohibition of the arbitrary deprivation of nationality can provide guidance as to the meaning of the obligation not to render persons stateless. 41 Some argue that any deprivation of nationality that results in statelessness is arbitrary. 42 While this is contentious, what is clear is that the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality obliges states to prevent statelessness unless the circumstance is one that falls under certain exceptions. 43 Even these exceptions ought to be read restrictively keeping in mind the principle of proportionality. 44 International law recognises that a state can deprive persons of their nationality on limited grounds including if the nationality has been acquired by fraud or if persons have acted in a manner prejudicial to the vital interests of the state. 45 Furthermore, all deprivations of nationality that result in statelessness will be arbitrary unless such deprivations serve a legitimate purpose under international law and are in conformity with the principle of proportionality, 46 which necessitates that the proposed state action of rendering a person stateless is to be proportionate to the state interest to be protected. 47 States cannot, even by legislation, render persons stateless if such legislation arbitrarily deprives persons of their nationality. 48 Given these limitations, it is difficult to actually justify a loss or deprivation of nationality resulting in statelessness. 49 Accordingly, mass denationalisation measures that result in statelessness have to be considered as arbitrary deprivation of nationality. 50 Therefore, the international law obligation 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 ‘Right to a Nationality and Statelessness’, UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/Nationality.aspx>. See Mirna Adjami and Julia Harrington, ‘The Scope and Content of Art 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ (2008) 27(3) Refugee Survey Quarterly 93, 103. See Jorunn Brandvoll, ‘Deprivation of Nationality: Limitations on Rendering Persons Stateless under International Law’, in Alice Edwards and Laura van Waas (eds), Nationality and Statelessness under International Law (Cambridge University Press 2014) 194, 215. See Foster and Lambert (n 19) 75; Human Rights and Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality — Report of the Secretary-General, UN Doc A/HRC/25/28 (19 December 2013) [39] (‘UN Doc A/HRC/25/28’). 1961 Convention (n 16). See also Brandvoll (n 43) 194–216. United Nations Human Rights Council, Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality: Report of the Secretary-General, UN Doc A/HRC/10/34 (26 January 2009). See Expert Meeting — Interpreting the 1961 Statelessness Convention and Avoiding Statelessness Resulting from Loss and Deprivation of Nationality Summary Conclusions (Report, UNHCR March 2014) <https://www.refworld.org/docid/533a754b4.html>. See also Michelle Foster and Hélène Lambert, ‘Statelessness as a Human Rights Issue: A Concept Whose Time Has Come’ (2016) 28(4) International Journal of Refugee Law 564, 579. See Brandvoll (n 43) 195. UN Doc A/HRC/25/28 (n 44) [4]. See Laura van Waas, ‘Nationality Matters: Statelessness under International Law’, Institute Statelessness and Inclusion (Web Page, 2008) <https://files.institutesi.org/Nationality_Matters.pdf>. 192