namely to implement the principle of non-discrimination.140 For the Committee, ‘the practice of making children wait until they turn 18 years of age to apply to acquire a nationality cannot be seen as an effort on the part of the State Party to comply with its children’s rights obligations’. 141 It considers ‘being stateless as a child is generally antithesis to the best interests of children’ in that it prevents children from developing through realizing their essential socio-economic rights (e.g., access to health and education).142 In relation to Article 3, the African Committee held this provision to be no exception to the general rule that ‘racial and ethnic discrimination are prohibited as binding jus cogens norm of international law’.143 Recalling the findings of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Yean and Bosico v Dominican Republic, 144 and the conclusions of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights,145 it found the practice that led children to be stateless for such a long period of time, and the resulting discriminatory treatment of Kenya in relation to children of Nubian descent, to be disproportionate and unnecessary to the protection of the State interest.146 Having found a violation of both Articles 6 and 3 of the African Children Charter, the African Committee went on to consider the consequential violations; just like at the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, this is a welcome application of the principle of indivisibility of rights by the Committee. For the Committee, ‘All Charter rights generate obligations to respect, protect, promote and fulfill. This is no less so in respect of the rights implicated when nationality and identity rights are violated’. 147 The discriminatory treatment of the children affected by Kenya’s practice ‘has had long standing and far reaching effects on the enjoyment of other Charter rights’.148 As ‘the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ rights has confirmed, in the African context, collective rights and economic and social rights are essential elements of human rights in Africa’.149 In the case Nubian Children v Kenya, these were found to be the right to health 150 and the right to Nubian Children v Kenya, para.40. Nubian Children v Kenya, para.42. 142 Nubian Children v Kenya, para.46. 143 Nubian Children v Kenya, para.56. 144 ‘the refusal and placing of unfair obstacles by local officials to deny birth certificate and recognition of the nationality of Dominicans of Haitian descent as part of a deliberate policy which effectively made the children stateless constituted racial discrimination’. Nubian Children v Kenya, para.56 - referring to Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic, I-ACtHR Judgment of 8 September 2005. 145 ‘the process of vetting... Nubians... is discriminatory and violates the principle of equal treatment. Such a practice has no place in a democratic and pluralistic society’. Nubian Children v Kenya, para.56 - referring to KNCHR, ‘An Identity Crisis? Study on the issuance of national identity cards in Kenya’ (2007), iv. 146 Nubian Children v Kenya, para.57. 147 Nubian Children v Kenya, para.58. 148 Nubian Children v Kenya, para.58. 149 Nubian Children v Kenya, para.58 - referring to SERAC v Federal Republic of Nigeria, Communication No.155/96, para.68. 150 Guaranteed under Article 14, African Children Charter, which is equivalent to Article 16, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and interpreted widely to include the right to health care and the right to the underlying conditions of health (e.g., electricity, drinking water and medicines), para.59 of Nubians judgment, 140 141 25