on human rights, without subjecting such decisions to the same tests and standards set out in these Principles. Such measures may include the withdrawal or refusal to renew passports or other travel documents and the imposition of travel or entry bans. ICCPR, Art. 12(4): “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country. 10.3. The measures referred to in section 10.2 may in some circumstances, be considered to constitute deprivation of nationality, particularly when imposed on persons when they are abroad. HRC General Comment No. 27, para. 21: “A state party must not, by stripping a person of nationality or by expelling an individual to a third country, arbitrarily prevent this person from returning to his or her own country. HRC General Comment No. 27, para. 9: “[T]he right to leave a country must include the right to obtain the necessary travel documents. 184. Deprivation of nationality for ulterior motives or as the means to an end without the necessary due process and not related to intentional fraudulent acts to the acquisition of that nationality do not meet the high standards set out by international law on due process requirements and arbitrariness more broadly and do not fall within the limited set of circumstances permitting the deprivation of nationality. 185. Besides issues related to national security, the grounds that remain most relevant regarding the deprivation of nationality today are those relating to fraud or misrepresentation in the acquisition of nationality.314 The HRC has stated that “loss or deprivation of nationality can only be justified where the fraud or misrepresentation was perpetrated for the purpose of acquiring nationality and was material to its acquisition. 315 186. Measures that cause the de facto deprivation of nationality, such as restricting a person’s ability to leave or enter their country of nationality or limiting access to travel documents necessary to that end, can constitute arbitrary deprivation of nationality (see also supra Principle 7). Such a restriction also risks leaving a person de facto stateless, whereby they may have the right to a nationality on paper but are unable to make use of that right or any of the associated fundamental rights. 187. In line with the prohibition on de facto deprivation of nationality, the HRC has stated that any restrictions of the right to leave one’s country must be narrowly interpreted and must not impair the essence of the right.316 In particular: “In no case may a person be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his or her own 314 See ‘Tunis Conclusions’ para stating that provisions relating to loyalty and allegiance to the state have “been largely superseded by later developments in domestic nationality laws . 315 UN Human Rights Council, ‘Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality: Report of the Secretary General’, A HRC , para 10. 316 Human Rights Committee, ‘General Comment No. : Freedom of movement article ’ CCPR C Rev. Add. , para . 88