CChapter 3: Comparative analysis of nationality laws 3.5 Nationality law versus nationality practice Perhaps the greatest challenge when it comes to assessing a state’s performance in terms of its nationality policy, or indeed to establishing whether there is a problem with regard to a particular group or individual’s enjoyment of nationality,194 is that the letter of the law can be only half of the story. The competent authority of the state in question must interpret and apply the law, a process that can yield unpredictable results. For instance, the relevant authorities may have divergent views on the interpretation of particular terms or conditions. Where decision-making powers have been decentralised, the competent authorities may not be aware of recent amendments to the law, such that they continue to apply the old and familiar regulations in practice. The competent authorities may, alternatively, have very good knowledge of the law and interpret it appropriately, yet not be in a position to apply it in practice due to, for instance, 194 - To determine whether a person is stateless, i.e. not considered as a national by a state under the operation of its law, (article 1 of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons) requires a careful analysis of how a state applies its nationality laws in practice, in that individual’s case. In some cases, an objective analysis of the law would lead to the conclusion that the person is a national, but the state may not in practice follow the letter of the law, so the analysis must be based on how the competent authorities interpret the law. See UNHCR), Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, 30 June 2014, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/53b676aa4.html. 145