2019 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 1(1) lawfully staying in the territory of the host state. 137 Essentially, stateless persons unlawfully staying in the host state are only able to enjoy a limited number of rights under the 1954 Convention. As the legality of residence is subject to domestic legislation, states will in general enjoy wide discretion in determining the legal status of former islanders fleeing from disappearing island states. 138 Thus, the requirement of lawful stay might be a pivotal barrier for stateless persons to enjoy the human rights stipulated therein; in particular as states will arguably not consider them refugees under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (‘1951 Refugee Convention’). 139 Even if falling under the legal definition of a stateless person, the enjoyment of the rights stipulated in the 1954 Convention is not as simple as it may sound. Naturally, in order to benefit from the statelessness regime, a stateless person has to reside in a state party to the Conventions on Statelessness. As already mentioned above, ratification is poor, as is exemplified by the large number of neighbouring countries of endangered island states (which would most likely serve as refuge to former islanders) that have not ratified the Conventions on Statelessness. More precisely, of all those states that likely might serve as host states due to their geographical proximity to low-lying island states — eg India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, the United States or Australia — only Australia and the Philippines have ratified the 1954 Convention. 140 While the 1954 Convention could provide human rights protection, which goes even beyond basic human rights standards, most future host states in the case of disappearing island states have not yet ratified the Convention. Hence, stateless persons will not enjoy protection under the 1954 Convention unless the aforementioned states ratify it. Additionally, the protection regime of the 1961 Convention should also be briefly mentioned here. In contrast to the 1954 Convention, its main focus is to prevent cases of statelessness from arising rather than the protection of basic human rights standards. 141 As illustrated above, art 1(1) of the 1961 Convention does not confer a right to nationality to everyone but only to persons born on the territory of a state if they otherwise would be stateless. 142 This means that the 1961 Convention only applies to children of displaced islanders born on the territory of the host state. 143 Consequently, the original generation does not enjoy such a right under art 1(1). Another core obligation in the 1961 Convention is art 8(1), which stipulates that states ‘shall not deprive a person of its nationality if such deprivation would render him stateless’. While the 1961 Convention does not have a legal definition on the term deprivation, it is however regarded as the ‘withdrawal of citizenship 137 The following articles in the 1954 Convention (n 3) require lawful stay: art 15 (right of 138 139 140 141 142 143 association), art 17 (wage-earning employment), art 18 (self-employment), art 19 (liberal professions), art 21 (housing), art 23 (public relief), art 24 (labour legislation and social security), art 26 (freedom of movement), art 28 (travel documents) and art 31 (expulsion). For a detailed discussion on the importance of a legal status in the host state for the enjoyment of social rights: see Dobric and Janig (n 136). Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, opened for signature 28 July 2951, 189 UNTS 37 (entered into force 22 April 1954) (‘1951 Refugee Convention’). See more on this issue further below. ‘Refugees and Stateless Persons Page’ (n 4). See Stoutenburg (n 11) 409. Edwards (n 16) 28. See Part IV for more details. Stoutenburg (n 11) 428. 60