deprivation of nationality, and not specifically on refugee status. 3.1 The Inter-American Court of Human Rights Of the three main regional instruments - the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR), the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), and the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) - the ACHR is alone in providing explicitly the right to a nationality (Article 20(1)). It also takes the leading step of seeking to combat statelessness by securing the right of children to acquire a nationality (Article 20(2)).108 Article 20 – Right to Nationality 1. Every person has the right to a nationality. 2. Every person has the right to the nationality of the state in whose territory he was born if he does not have the right to any other nationality. 3. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of this nationality or of the right to change it. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has not so far considered cases relating to nationality in the context of a claim for refugee status. 109 However, it has dealt with a number of cases relating to arbitrary deprivation of nationality, in which it held the right to nationality, as recognized by international law, to be a right of the individual: Nationality is a fundamental human right enshrined in the American Convention … and is non-derogable in accordance with Article 27 of the Convention.110 The Court also considers that: it allows the individual to acquire and exercise rights and obligations inherent in membership in a political community. As such, nationality is a requirement for the exercise of specific rights.111 It further acknowledges that nationality has ‘gradually evolved’ from a State’s attribute to ‘a It may be noted that, unlike Europe for instance, almost all countries in the Americas base their nationality legislation primarily on the jus soli principle. R. de Groot, ‘The Acquisition and Loss of Nationality and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: Lessons from the European Experience’, Africa Legal Aid, JulySeptember 1996, 16-20, at 18. 109 In the case Family Pacheco Tineo v Bolivia (judgment of 25 November 2013), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights considered for the first time due process in asylum and non-refoulement decisions, recognizing the right of asylum seekers to enjoy a fair asylum process and to be detained only following an individual case-by-case examination of their case. 110 Case of the Yean and Bosico Children v. The Dominican Republic, Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACrtHR), 8 September 2005, para.136 - available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/44e497d94.html [accessed 10 June 2013]. 111 Case of the Yean and Bosico Children v. The Dominican Republic, Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACrtHR), 8 September 2005, para.137 - available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/44e497d94.html [accessed 10 June 2013]. 108 18