Rising Statelessness Due to Disappearing Island States that is initiated by state authorities’. 144 As emphasised above, disappearing island states do not revoke citizenships of their populations voluntarily. The prohibition against arbitrary deprivation of nationality does also not apply to the case of disappearing states due to the aforementioned grounds. 145 Therefore, the 1961 Convention will hardly provide redress to the problems created by virtue of the disappearance of island states. 146 Moreover, unlike other international human rights treaties, the Conventions on Statelessness do not provide for any enforcement mechanisms, as elaborated above. However, the UN General Assembly awarded the UNHCR the mandate to work on four different issues concerning statelessness. 147 This includes inter alia the task to advocate for the ratification of the Conventions on Statelessness as well the prevention of statelessness. 148 In light of this, it is also important to highlight that some authors speak of an emerging trend towards the duty of states to prevent, or rather not to create, statelessness. 149 The Explanatory Report of the European Convention on Nationality even states that the obligation to avoid statelessness has become part of customary international law. 150 In essence, the scholarly debate on the duty to prevent is similar to that on the right to nationality. However, while various international and regional (human rights) treaties already include provisions with regard to a right to nationality, they do not explicitly refer to a duty to prevent statelessness. 151 The content of such a duty in international law is not strictly defined yet. For instance, the Introductory Note of the UNHCR to the 1961 Convention itself states that in order to prevent statelessness ‘[s]tates may either grant nationality to children automatically at birth or subsequently upon application’. Apart from the conferral of nationality, which is inherent in the right to nationality, the duty to prevent also includes a prohibition on the withdrawal of nationality if such deprivation would render 144 Brücken and Groot (n 56) 40. 145 For further details on arbitrary deprivation of nationality, see Foster and Lambert (n 22) 578. 146 ibid 581. However, it should also be noted that the general effectiveness of art 8(1) is limited 147 148 149 150 151 due to the possibility of states to retain the right to deprive citizens of their nationality by means of a declaration under art 8(3) at the time of ratification of the 1961 Convention (n 3); See generally, Brücken and Groot (n 56). Seet (n 9) 8. ibid 8, 20. Such a duty to prevent statelessness upon states would be of customary nature. As such, it is relevant to determine uniform state practice as well as opinio juris. European Convention on Nationality (n 61) [33]. Please also note the European Convention on Nationality explicitly provides in art 4(b) that statelessness shall be avoided. See generally Foster and Lambert (n 22) 578. See 1930 Hague Convention (n 18) arts 14, 15; ICCPR (n 41) art 24; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, opened for signature 18 December 1971, 1249 UNTS 1 (entered into force 3 September 1981) (‘CEDAW’) art 9; Convention on the Rights of the Child, opened for signature 20 November 1989, 1577 UNTS 3 (entered into force 2 September 1990) (‘CRC’) art 7–8; International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, opened for signature 18 December 1990, 2220 UNTS 3, (entered into force 1 July 2003) (‘ICRMW’) art 29; ACHR (n 60) art 20. See also Yean and Bosico v The Dominican Republic (n 60) [140]– [143], where the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights speaks of the ‘obligation to prevent, avoid and reduce statelessness’ by citing: 1961 Convention (n 3) art 1(1); ICRMW at art 29; CRC at art 7(1); ICCPR at art 24(3). With regard to the gradual development of the ‘duty to prevent’, see Tang Lay Lee, ‘Denationalization and Statelessness in the Modern World’ (2006) 6 ISIL Year Book of International Humanitarian & Refugee Law 19, 34–37. It must be noted that Tang Lay Lee explicitly refers to the ‘duty to prevent statelessness’ and not the right to nationality when citing the provisions above. 61