408 Melbourne University Law Review [Vol 40:401 arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country’,30 it does not impose positive obligations per se to confer nationality on any particular individual. Hence, while the traditional position that nationality is within the reserved domain of states has undoubtedly been tempered by international human rights norms, considered below, states nonetheless retain significant discretion to design their citizenship laws in line with their own internal sociopolitical interests. In other words, the principle set out in art 1 of the 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws that ‘[i]t is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals’,31 remains the default position in international law today. Nationality is important because it ‘serves as the basis for legal recognition and for exercise of other rights.’32 Yet, the UNHCR estimates that at least 10 million people worldwide are stateless,33 with the highest known concentration in the Asia-Pacific region.34 It is difficult to provide a precise number of stateless persons globally on account of the difficulties inherent in counting stateless populations,35 inaccurate reporting and inconsistent definitions of statelessness.36 What is known, however, is that some families have been stateless for generations, and that despite renewed attention to this issue and positive actions by many states to prevent or reduce statelessness, new cases continue to arise.37 The causes of statelessness are multifaceted and varied. Statelessness can occur as a result of discriminatory or conflicting nationality laws,38 arbitrary 30 To not be arbitrary, such deprivation must conform with domestic law and comply with both ‘procedural and substantive standards of international human rights law’: Refugee Status, UN Doc PPLA/2014/01, 9. 31 Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws, opened for signature 12 April 1930, 179 LNTS 89 (entered into force 1 July 1937). 32 Batchelor, ‘Statelessness and the Problem of Resolving Nationality Status’, above n 1, 168. 33 UNHCR, Ending Statelessness (2017) <http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c155.html>; UNHCR, Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2015 (2016) 2. 34 ‘Annex’ (2014) 14 UNHCR Statistical Yearbook 79, 83. This shows that the Asia-Pacific accounts for about 1.5 million of the 3.5 million stateless persons accounted for in government data submitted to the UNHCR. The 10 million figure is a broad overall estimate, whereas the 3.5 million figure reflects what has been reported in data submitted to the UNHCR. 35 UNHCR, Global Action Plan to End Statelessness 2014–24 (2014) 24. 36 UNHCR, ‘UNHCR Launches Campaign to Combat Statelessness’ (Press Release, 25 August 2011) <http://www.unhcr.org/4e54e8e06.html>. 37 UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, above n 20, 1. 38 UNHCR, ‘Gender Equality, Nationality Laws and Statelessness 2014’ (Background Note, UNHCR, 7 March 2014) <http://www.unhcr.org/4f5886306.html>.