Centre for Child Law v Minister of Home Affairs CCT 101/20 [2021] ZACC 31 29. This matter deals with two important issues related to access to birth registration. It was initiated in the High Court after DHA had refused to register the birth of child born in South Africa to a South African citizen father and DRC citizen mother. The refusal was due to the fact that the mother’s visa had expired, and she could thus not comply with the regulations to the BDRA that require parents to submit valid identity documentation for the birth registration process. The DHA also refused to allow the father to register the child because the parents were unmarried. The High Court declared the requirement for valid identity documentation in terms of the regulations unconstitutional and ruled that such documentation should only be provided “where it is available”.45 The court further ruled that the law preventing unmarried fathers from registering their children’s birth was unconstitutional and invalid and all children, regardless of their parent’s marital status should have equal access to birth registration. This order was confirmed by the Constitutional Court. 30. However, despite the judgement, parents seeking to register the birth of their child(ren) are still compelled to produce valid identity documents in practice. This affects parents with blocked IDs, expired permits or visas, or who are undocumented themselves. The DHA has also made it compulsory for unmarried fathers to provide ‘proof of paternity’ in the form of DNA tests to register their children. Not only is this requirement ultra vires the law, but the exorbitant costs of DNA tests make it impossible for poor or indigent families to meet this requirement. These practices are not in the best interests of the child and fail to uphold the child’s right to a name and nationality from birth. DGLR v the Minister of Home Affairs (GPJHC) (unreported) case number 38429/13 of 3 July 2014 31. In terms of Section 2(2) of the South African Citizenship Act (“SACA”) - a child who is born in South Africa, and who would otherwise be stateless, is a South African citizen by birth. However, since the DHA has not promulgated regulations prescribing the administrative process for such applications nor establishing a Statelessness Determination Mechanism to determine eligibility, it is practically impossible to access this provision. 32. This matter concerned a child who was born in South Africa to Cuban citizen parents. The parents soon discovered that their Cuban citizenship had been revoked and they were deemed “permanent emigrants” through the embassy. This meant their child was stateless and they attempted to obtain South African citizenship on her behalf based on Section 2(2) SACA. The DHA refused to grant her South African citizenship and this decision was later reversed by the High Court. The court ruled that it was not in the best interest of the child to remain stateless and that she was entitled to South African citizenship under Section 2(2) SACA. The court further ordered DHA to promulgate regulations that give effect to section 2(2) of SACA by March 2018. To date, DHA has not complied with the order in terms of promulgating the necessary regulations. Minister of Home Affairs v Miriam Ali (2018) ZASCA 169 SCA 45 Menzile Naki and another v Director General: Department of Home Affairs and Another (4996/2016) [2018] ZAECGHC 90 11