Introduction to Digital ID Introduction to Digital ID Understanding these procedural dimensions is essential for evaluating both the legitimacy of such systems and their potential social consequences. Laws This section examines the Legal safeguards that govern digital Identification (digital ID) systems, beginning with an assessment of the laws that apply to such systems in each country. This is a critical starting point, as many governments in the region have moved forward with implementing digital ID systems in the absence of a robust Legal framework. Without Legal safeguards, individuals’ most sensitive personal data is at risk. Digital ID systems typically collect highly private information, including biometric identifiers such as fingerprints and iris scans, as well as demographic details such as address, age, and gender. The absence of strong regulatory protections exposes this data to potential misuse, surveillance, and security breaches, as has been widely reported. Accordingly, this section not only reviews laws and policies directly governing digital IDs but also assesses the presence and the use of related legislation on data protection, privacy, surveillance, cybersecurity, and access to Legal remedies in cases of rights violations. The analysis further considers whether a country has drawn on another nation’s model in designing its own framework. It also examines how the country defines “digital ID” in its Legal and policy documents. This is significant because no universally agreed definition of digital ID exists, and countries interpret and apply the concept differently. Moreover, States in the Asia Pacific are at varying stages of development and implementation of their systems. The scope of application is another critical point, wherein most cases, the Legal definition specifies that digital IDs are accessible to citizens only, as observed in Afghanistan, Nepal, Fiji. Such a scope automatically excludes stateless persons and other non-citizens from obtaining a digital ID, creating structural barriers to their access to essential services. In addition to domestic law, the section explores a country’s international obligations. While there are no binding international treaties specifically addressing digital ID systems, States in the region are party to a range of core human rights instruments. The analysis considers whether the design and implementation of digital ID systems are consistent with obligations under treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and the two Statelessness Conventions. The section evaluates whether digital ID and Legal identity systems risk enabling discrimination in providing Legal identity documents or access to digital ID, infringing the right to privacy, or denying individuals access to essential services, among others, which could amount to violations of these international commitments. Designed to Include? Impact of Digital ID and Legal Identity on Citizenship and Nationality Rights The final component of each country’s factsheet is an analytical section that synthesizes the findings from the preceding three sections to assess the implications of digital ID and Legal identity systems for stateless individuals, drawing together evidence on Legal frameworks, system design, and procedural safeguards. This section aims to identify patterns of exclusion that emerge directly or indirectly from the structure and requirements of digital ID systems. It examines how these systems may create or exacerbate barriers for stateless individuals in accessing essential services, exercising their rights, or participating fully in public life. Beyond identifying exclusionary outcomes, it also explores whether a digital ID system of a country reflects principles of inclusion, transparency, accountability, and human rights–based approaches. Where available, the section incorporates relevant judicial precedents that address digital ID systems in each country, providing insight into how National courts have interpreted and applied laws relating to identity, privacy, and access to services. These cases can reveal whether the judiciary has acted as a check on government overreach, upheld individual rights, or reinforced exclusionary policies. The section also evaluates whether governments have introduced targeted measures to facilitate access to digital IDs for vulnerable and marginalised groups, including stateless persons, persons with disabilities, minorities, and older persons. Examples of such measures might include deploying mobile registration units to remote areas, waiving documentation requirements in certain cases, offering free Legal aid, or conducting outreach campaigns in multiple languages. This concluding analytical section aims to provide a holistic understanding of how digital ID systems intersect with the lived realities of stateless individuals and other at-risk populations. to greater insight into the real on-the-ground impacts of digital ID systems, particularly on stateless individuals. The availability and quality of information varied considerably across countries. In some contexts, official statistics were outdated or inaccessible. Accessing laws and policies was particularly challenging in politically sensitive environments or where official documents were not available in English. In these cases, our reliance on official translations sometimes meant working with sources that reflected bias or omitted key details. Furthermore, many countries, particularly in the Pacific, were in the developmental stages of their digital ID systems, which provided very limited room to understand its impact on stateless individuals. There were a few countries in the region which we could not find reviewers or collaborators for, resulting in not all countryspecific data being verified directly by in-country stakeholders. The project also experienced temporary delays due to uncertainty arising from potential foreign aid cuts, which impacted timelines and workflow. The findings presented in this report should be interpreted with these limitations in mind. The aim of this report is knowledge production. It is not intended to serve as legal advice. Future iterations of this research would benefit from incorporating primary field studies, strengthening collaborations with regional partners, and expanding the thematic scope to include other areas where stateless individuals may be affected by the introduction of digital ID systems. Limitations While our methodology maintained a high degree of consistency and credibility, it also faced certain constraints that shaped the scope and depth of our findings. We relied primarily on secondary data, which may not fully capture recent developments, unreported cases, or nuanced local realities. Future research on the subject should aim to incorporate primary fieldwork such that it leads 10 11 STATELESSNESS ENCYCLOPEDIA ASIA PACIFIC THIRD EDITION - REGIONAL OVERVIEW REPORT 2026