494 Melbourne University Law Review [Vol 40:456 investigation into the applicant’s citizenship status.229 This is in contrast to other comparable regimes where compliance with the 1961 Convention is understood to require specific consideration of the issue of statelessness. For example, in Canada, the relevant legislation explicitly provides that revocation provisions ‘do not operate so as to authorize any decision, action or declaration that conflicts with any international human rights instrument regarding statelessness to which Canada is signatory’,230 and requires that the Minister must have ‘reasonable grounds to believe the person is a citizen’ of another country before pursuing revocation.231 By contrast, the Australian amendments neither reference international law obligations pertaining to statelessness,232 nor contain a comparable factual assessment as a condition precedent to revocation in every case. In light of Australia’s obligation not to ‘deprive a person of its nationality if such deprivation would render him stateless’,233 the onus is on the Australian government to ensure that a person is indeed a dual national prior to any revocation of Australian citizenship. This requires the government to investigate with the ‘competent authority’ of the person’s presumed other state of nationality as to whether the person is, in fact, a citizen.234 This assessment involves an analysis not only of the legislation of the other state, ‘but also ministerial decrees, regulations, orders, judicial case law (in countries with a tradition of precedent) and, where appropriate, customary practice.’235 As this suggests: Establishing whether an individual is … a national under the operation of [the] law [of a foreign state] requires a careful analysis of how a State applies its na- 229 Explanatory Memorandum, Australian Citizenship Amendment (Allegiance to Australia) Bill 2015 (Cth), 7 [20]. 230 Citizenship Act, RSC 1985, c C-29, s 10.4(1). 231 Ibid s 10.4(2). 232 We are grateful to Anna Saunders, Juris Doctor student, Melbourne Law School, for this observation. 233 1961 Convention art 8(1). 234 UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, above n 10, 13 [27] (citations omitted): Competence in this context relates to the authority responsible for conferring or withdrawing nationality from individuals, or for clarifying nationality status where nationality is acquired or withdrawn automatically. The competent authority or authorities will differ from State to State and in many cases there will be more than one competent authority involved. 235 Ibid 12 [22] (citations omitted).