Regional Overview Regional Overview system expected within three years; Kiribati and the Marshall Islands are advancing digital ID through broader digital government initiatives with external support; Papua New Guinea has begun rolling out SevisPass;20 Samoa has enacted enabling legislation but has not yet implemented its system; Tonga and Nauru are progressing through development strategies and international support; and smaller states like Tuvalu have articulated digital ambitions but face uncertain implementation timelines. East Asian digital ID systems, across Hong Kong, China, Mongolia, South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, generally function as voluntary, governmentdeveloped platforms (via apps or websites) that enable access to public and private e-services while remaining distinct from foundational legal identity documents such as national or resident ID cards.21 Japan is a notable exception, as its My Number Card integrates both foundational and functional roles through embedded electronic certificates for authentication and digital signatures. Although enrollment is formally voluntary, digital IDs are becoming increasingly necessary in practice as governments link them to essential services, as seen in Mongolia’s E-Mongolia platform and Japan’s My Number system. These systems are typically accessible to citizens and legal residents and are tied to existing identity or residency registries, meaning they do not inherently establish citizenship status; however, stateless individuals are often excluded due to documentation requirements. Implementation has largely been state-led with limited public participation, and there is little evidence of systematic engagement with inclusion or anti-discrimination experts in system design. Central Asian countries are progressively implementing digital identity systems as part of broader digital governance strategies. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan operate fully integrated foundational systems linked to national identity registers, while Tajikistan and Uzbekistan use more functional platforms focused on authentication and service access (IMZO and OneID/eID respectively), and Turkmenistan remains in the planning stage.22 Across the region, digital ID systems typically build on existing national ID frameworks rather than replacing them, making legal identity documents a prerequisite for access. These systems are increasingly central to accessing public services such as social benefits, healthcare, taxation, and banking, and while not always legally mandatory, they are becoming effectively unavoidable in practice. Access is generally limited to citizens and legally documented residents, excluding undocumented stateless persons, though some initiatives (such as Kazakhstan’s QazETA) aim to expand access for foreign nationals. Overall, digital ID development has been largely statedriven with support from international actors, with limited evidence of public participation or inclusion of perspectives related to discrimination, statelessness, or minority rights. and implementation. There is little publicly documented evidence of systematic engagement with experts on discrimination, statelessness or minority rights. Notable partial exceptions include Malaysia, which conducted public consultation before launching its National Digital ID Framework. Australia and New Zealand also have multi-stakeholder governance frameworks under their respective Digital ID statutes. Eight of eleven Southeast Asian countries have operational or near-operational digital ID systems. Among them, Cambodia, Laos, and Timor-Leste are still developing digital ID systems as part of their broader digital government initiatives.23 These systems generally build on existing civil registration frameworks and function either as foundational identity systems linked to population registries (e.g., Indonesia, Philippines, Viet Nam) or as functional authentication platforms dependent on existing IDs (e.g., Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Laos). Digital IDs are increasingly integrated into service delivery across sectors such as healthcare, banking, and social protection, and in some countries are becoming effectively mandatory for accessing key services. Access is typically limited to citizens and documented residents, excluding many stateless persons due to documentation requirements. In South Asia, five countries (Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Afghanistan) have domestic legal or policy frameworks defining digital identity, and these vary widely in scope and substance.24 Governments generally follow two approaches: either enacting dedicated digital ID laws (as in Pakistan’s 2025 Digital Nation Act) or adapting existing civil registration laws to include digital or biometric elements (as seen in Sri Lanka). Where defined, digital identity is typically understood as a state-issued identifier linking demographic and often biometric data for authentication and service access, though some countries provide clear statutory definitions while others rely on operational or technical descriptions within ID systems like Aadhaar. These differences influence accountability mechanisms, with dedicated laws more likely to include formal grievance redress systems, whereas amended civil registration frameworks offer more limited recourse. Digital ID systems across the region are predominantly government-led, with limited structured public consultation during design See Table 2 - Status of digital ID systems across Asia-Pacific ( page 27 ) Laws Domestics Laws and Policy Across the five sub-regions, most countries regulate digital identity through broader digital governance, civil-registration, electronicdocument or electronic-signature laws rather than through a single standalone digital ID statute. Across the region, digital ID systems are closely tied to citizenship: in some countries they directly function as proof of nationality, while in others like India, they do not confer citizenship but still depend on citizenship documentation and effectively act as markers for accessing rights and services. Across Southeast Asia, ten of eleven countries have legal or policy frameworks governing digital identity, though these vary in scope and structure.25 Only the Philippines and Viet Nam have adopted dedicated digital ID laws while others rely on broader legal regimes such as civil registration, digital government, or cybersecurity; Laos lacks specific digital ID legislation altogether. Digital identity is generally defined as electronic credentials or authentication systems used to verify individuals and enable secure access to services, and in most countries, it is built on existing civil registration or population databases rather than functioning independently. Unlike South Asia, digital identity is not explicitly defined as proof of citizenship in any country, instead it serves as a marker of legal identity or residency linked to national ID systems. While most countries provide avenues for complaints through general administrative systems or data protection authorities, none has established a dedicated grievance mechanism specifically for digital identity systems. In East Asia, all six countries examined have legal or policy frameworks governing digital identity, though their approaches differ.26 China, Japan, and South Korea have recently introduced dedicated digital ID laws or amendments (between 2023 and 2025), reflecting the relatively nascent nature of these regulatory frameworks, while Hong Kong, Mongolia, and Taiwan rely on existing laws (particularly those on electronic signatures, data protection, and cybersecurity) to provide the legal basis for digital ID systems. In countries with dedicated legislation, digital identity is explicitly defined as an electronic authentication system using identifiers or certificates to verify 16 17 STATELESSNESS ENCYCLOPEDIA ASIA PACIFIC THIRD EDITION - REGIONAL OVERVIEW REPORT 2026