7.2.1.3. Exporting the function and responsibility of administering justice to another State. 7.2.2. Regardless of the stated purpose, any punitive impact incurred by deprivation of nationality is likely to render this measure incompatible with international law. UNSC Res. 2178 (2014), para. 4: “Calls upon all Member States, in accordance with their obligations under international law, to cooperate in efforts to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, … and developing and implementing prosecution, rehabilitation and reintegration strategies for returning foreign terrorist fighters . UNSC Res. 2178 (2014), para. 6: “ … decides that all States shall ensure that their domestic laws and regulations establish serious criminal offenses sufficient to provide the ability to prosecute and to penalize in a manner duly reflecting the seriousness of the offense: (a) their nationals who travel or attempt to travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality, and other individuals who travel or attempt to travel from their territories to a State other than their States of residence or nationality, for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts, or the providing or receiving of terrorist training … . UNSC Res. 1373 (2001), para. 2: “Decides also that all States shall: … e Ensure that any person who participates in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in supporting terrorist acts is brought to justice and ensure that, in addition to any other measures against them, such terrorist acts are established as serious criminal offences in domestic laws and regulations and that the punishment duly reflects the seriousness of such terrorist acts; 71. In order to override the presumption that the deprivation of nationality of a citizen on national security grounds is arbitrary, the deprivation must first be carried out in pursuance of a legitimate purpose “that is consistent with international law and, in particular, the objectives of international human rights law .125 Deprivation of nationality that does not serve a legitimate aim is arbitrary under international law, and therefore prohibited.126 In order to assess whether the purpose is legitimate, it has been held that the purpose must be clearly defined.127 72. According to Article 8(1) of the 1961 Convention, a “Contracting State shall not deprive a person of its nationality if such deprivation would render him stateless . However, in the paragraphs that follow, some exceptions are made in which deprivation of nationality could serve a legitimate purpose. The 1961 Convention allows for deprivation of nationality, resulting in statelessness, in the following cases: When nationality is acquired by misrepresentation or fraud (Art. 8(2)(b) 1961 Convention); When a citizen acts inconsistently with his duty of loyalty to the Contracting State (Art 8(3)(a) 1961 Convention), which includes rendering services or receiving emoluments from another 125 UN Human Rights Council, ’Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality: Report of the Secretary-General’, A HRC para. 25. 126 UN Human Rights Council, ’Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality: Report of the Secretary-General’, A HRC para. 40. 127 Glion Recommendation (2019), p. 9. 46 , ,