deprivation of nationality need to be “provided in writing, and have to contain explicit reasons for the deprivation .216 125. Article of the Convention provides that States “shall not exercise a power of deprivation [...] except in accordance with law, which shall provide for the person concerned the right to a fair hearing by a court or other independent body . “Accordingly, loss and deprivation of nationality may only take place in accordance with law and accompanied by full procedural guarantees, including the right to a fair hearing by a court or other independent body. It is essential that the decisions of the body concerned be binding on the executive power. The person affected by deprivation of nationality has the right to have the decision issued in writing, including the reasons for the deprivation. Deprivation decisions are only to enter into effect at the moment all judicial remedies have been exhausted.”217 126. Such safeguards must apply in all cases of loss and deprivation, including in cases where authorities maintain that a given person never acquired a nationality in the first place.218 Indeed: “It must be possible to challenge the application of loss-provisions or acts of deprivation in court. Violations of the right to a nationality must be open to an effective remedy, before a court bound to observe minimum procedural standards. […] All decisions relating to the loss or deprivation of nationality should be open to judicial review, i.e. access to an independent judge leading to a reasoned decision […].”219 127. Similarly, Article 12 ECN provides that every State must ensure that decisions on loss of nationality are open to an administrative or judicial review in conformity with its internal law. 128. In order for the person facing denationalization to have a fair proceeding, they need access to all the relevant information and documents related to their denationalization. In McGinley and Egan v. The United Kingdom, the ECtHR found that where the State, without good cause, prevents appellants from gaining access to documents in its possession that would have assisted in the defence of their case, it would have the effect of denying them a fair hearing under Article 6(1) ECHR.220 129. Furthermore, the right to bring action or to lodge an appeal under international law must arise from the moment the parties effectively become aware of a legal decision imposing an obligation on them or potentially harming their legitimate rights and interests.221 Thus, a person who has been deprived of his nationality must be promptly informed of this and given the opportunity to 216 ILEC Guidelines (2015), section III.1. UNHCR, ’Tunis Conclusions‘ , para. . 218 ILEC Guidelines (2015), section III. 219 ILEC Guidelines (2015), sections I.9 and III.1. 220 ECtHR, Mcginley and Egan v United Kingdom (1998), Applications nos. 21825/93 and 23414/94, paras 86 and 90. 221 See e.g. ECtHR, Miragall Escolano and Others v Spain (2000), Application no. 38366/97 et al., para 37. 217 64