The Universal Periodic Review of Colombia under the First and Second Cycles (2008 and 2013) 5. Colombia was subject to the UPR in 2008 during the Third Session of the First Cycle and again in 2013 during the Sixteenth Session of the Second Cycle. Colombia was subject to a recommendation that was relevant to the right to nationality and statelessness in each of these Cycles. In the First Cycle, the Czech Republic recommended that Colombia ‘Adopt measures ensuring effective national birth registration, including through programmes of mobile registration units and registration of those without documentation’.5 Although Colombia accepted the recommendation, as this joint submission makes clear, Colombia needs to engage in further work to fulfil this recommendation. During the Second Cycle, the Republic of Ecuador recommended that Colombia ‘Become a party of the international instruments of protection and promotion of human rights still pending ratification, as appropriate, such as the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.’6 Colombia also accepted this recommendation,7 and must be commended for acceding to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness in 2014.8 It must be pointed out, however, that Colombia has only signed, but not yet ratified the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.9 6. Other recommendations, which are pertinent to populations at risk of statelessness in Colombia, were also put forth during previous UPR sessions. These include adopting all necessary measures to: protect children and their human rights; protect against human trafficking; establish a stronger government presence in rural areas; and improve the quality of life of vulnerable groups, such as Indigenous Peoples and Afro-Colombians. As described further below, individuals at heightened risk of statelessness in Colombia include children born of undocumented parents, indigenous persons and individuals of African descent, as well as those born in rural areas where access to government resources is lacking. All such groups may face challenges in confirming or accessing their Colombian nationality. Moreover, and as various reports point out, those who are (at risk of being) stateless are vulnerable to human trafficking.10 Minorities, including indigenous persons and those of African descent, can be at heightened risk of trafficking in the Colombian case.11 Colombia’s International Obligations 7. Colombia is a signatory to, but has not yet ratified, the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons. Despite its non-ratification of the 1954 Convention, Colombia considers the 1954 Convention applicable to issues of statelessness within its own national legal framework.12 On 15 August 2014 Colombia ratified the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, commendably following through with a pledge that it had made to do so. Of note, it placed a reservation on Article 14 5 UNGA, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Colombia, A/HRC/10/82, 9 Jan. 2009, para. 62. UNGA, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Colombia, A/HRC/24/6, 4 July 2013, para. 116.1. 7 UNGA, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Colombia, A/HRC/24/6/Add.1, 19 July 2013, p. 2. 8 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 1961, http://www.unhcr.org/enus/protection/statelessness/3bbb286d8/convention-reduction-statelessness.html. 9 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1954, http://www.unhcr.org/enus/protection/statelessness/3bbb25729/convention-relating-status-stateless-persons.html. 10 See, for example, Anne T. Gallagher (2010), The International Law of Human Trafficking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.158-9; and Conny Rijken, Laura van Waas, Martin Gramatikov and Deirdre Brennan (2015), ‘The Nexus between Statelessness and Human Trafficking in Thailand.’ The Netherlands: Wolf Legal Publishers. 11 For instance, in its most recent evaluation of Colombia, the Human Rights Committee reported, ‘human trafficking, including internal trafficking, persists, particularly to the detriment of vulnerable persons such as children, Afro-Colombians and indigenous peoples.’ Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Colombia, CCPR/C/COL/CO/7, 17 November 2016, para. 26. 12 Open Society Justice Initiative (2017), Born in the Americas: The Promise and Practice of Nationality Laws in Brazil, Chile, and Colombia, p. 66. 6 2