24 10.1163/22131035-14020001 | enigbokan In determining the status of a child applicant, this study raises concerns about how ai will function in such a way that it protects the best interest of the child – a principle already fraught with human discretion.137 A stateless applicant may find it difficult proving that he or she is not a national of any country particularly in situations where there are no available documents. Therefore, the question arises as to how applications will be responded to in a child sensitive way because children may have challenges with providing basic information about their nationality. An algorithm assessing a child’s application may not exercise the care and empathy required by a human when dealing with a child and can thus neglect the fact that the State has a greater share of the burden of proof when it comes to children. Stateless persons may lack the resources necessary to conduct thorough investigations into their nationality. Even when they approach authorities with inquiries, they are often ignored. This situation is particularly challenging for stateless children, who face even greater obstacles – especially those who are orphaned or abandoned and have no family members to support them in navigating these processes. In such cases, the State has a higher duty of care and responsibility to assist the child.138 The above circumstance will make it impossible to completely replace human decision-makers with ai because an ai algorithm’s decision might not take into account the communication challenges of the child – which in most cases will require an interview(s) with the child for gathering information and for clarification.139 Therefore, the replacement of human decision-makers with ai, risks violating the state’s responsibility as a duty bearer to respond to the rights and needs of children.140 Moreover, this also risks violating the obligation to ensure that the child’s views are heard – either directly or through a representative – and to uphold the best interests of the child in decisions that affect their rights.141 States have to ensure that the child receives all 137 138 139 140 141 European Network on Statelessness, ‘Statelessness Determination and Protection in Europe: Good Practice, Challenges, and Risks’ Statelessness Index,Thematic Briefing, September 2021 at 15. Handbook on statelessness, (n 13) para. 119; Thandeka Chauke, ‘Pioneering legal victory for childhood statelessness fight’ 9 November 2023 <https://africanlii.org /articles/2023-11-09/ThandekaChauke/pioneering-legal-victory-for-childhood -statelessness-fight> accessed 18 June 2025. Handbook on Statelessness, (n 13) para. 119. Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment 5- General Measures of Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, crc/gc/2003/5, Thirtyfourth session 19 September-3 October 2003 paras. 6 & 11. Arts. 3 & 12 crc; UN Committee on the Rights of the Child adopted a general comment on the rights of children in relation to the digital environment, crc/c/gc/25, 2 March 2021 para. 13. International Human Rights Law Review (2025) 1–31