Nationality in relation to the succession of States appropriate connection with that State if those persons would otherwise become stateless as a result of the succession of States. 3. When persons entitled to the right of option have exercised such right, the State whose nationality they have opted for shall attribute its nationality to such persons. 4. When persons entitled to the right of option have exercised such right, the State whose nationality they have renounced shall withdraw its nationality from such persons, unless they would thereby become stateless. 5. States concerned should provide a reasonable time limit for the exercise of the right of option. Commentary (1) Numerous treaties regulating questions of nationality in connection with the succession of States as well as relevant national laws have provided for the right of option or for a similar procedure enabling individuals concerned to establish their nationality by choosing either between the nationality of the predecessor and that of the successor States or between the nationalities of two or more successor States. (2) This was, for example, the case of the 1848 Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits and Settlement between Mexico and the United States of America,60 or the 1882 Treaty between Mexico and Guatemala for fixing the Boundaries between the respective States.61 The peace treaties adopted after the end of the First World War provided for a right of option mainly as a means to correct the effects of their other provisions on the automatic acquisition of the nationality of the successor State and loss of the nationality of the predecessor State by persons habitually resident in the territories involved in the succession of States.62 A right of option was also granted in article 19 of the Treaty of Peace with Italy, of 1947. 60 Treaties and Conventions concluded between the United States of America and Other Powers, revised edition (Washington, D.C., United States Government Printing Office, 1873), p. 562. See also Consolidated Treaty Series (Dobbs Ferry, New York, Oceana Publications, 1969), vol. 102, p. 29. 61 British and Foreign State Papers, 1881-1882, vol. LXXIII, p. 273. See also paragraphs (5) and (8) of the commentary to draft article 17 proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his third report (footnote 10 above). 62 See articles 37, 85, 91, 106 and 113 of the Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Germany (Treaty of Versailles); articles 78 to 82 of the Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Austria (Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye); respective articles 3 and 4 of the Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Poland, the Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Czechoslovakia and the Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and the SerbCroat-Slovene State, as well as the Treaty of Paris between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Roumania; articles 40 and 45 of the Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Bulgaria; article 64 of the Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Hungary (Peace Treaty of Trianon); article 9 of the Treaty of Peace between Finland and the Soviet Government of Russia (Treaty of Tartu) concerning the cession by Russia to Finland of the territory of Petsamo (Petschenga) (see paragraph (20) of the commentary to draft articles 7 and 8 proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his third report (footnote 10 above)); and articles 21 and 31 to 36 of the Treaty of Peace (Treaty of Lausanne), of 1923. 33 (3) Among the documents concerning nationality issues in relation to decolonization, while some contained provisions on the right of option, several did not. Thus, the Burma Independence Act, 1947,63 after stipulating that the categories of persons specified in the First Schedule to that Act automatically lost British nationality, also provided, in section 2, subsection (2), that any such person who was immediately before independence domiciled or ordinarily resident in any place outside Burma in which the British Monarch had jurisdiction over British subjects could, by a declaration made before the expiration of two years after independence, elect to remain a British subject.64 The free choice of nationality was also envisaged under article 4 of the Agreement between India and France for the Settlement of the Question of the Future of the French Establishments in India, signed at New Delhi on 21 October 1954.65 The Treaty of Cession of the French Establishments of Pondicherry, Karikal, Mahe and Yanam, between India and France, signed at New Delhi on 28 May 1956, contained provisions on the right of option as well.66 (4) In recent cases of succession of States in Eastern and Central Europe, where questions of nationality were not resolved by treaty but solely through the national legislation of the States concerned, the possibility of choice was in fact established simultaneously in the legal orders of at least two States. Thus, the Law on State Citizenship in the Slovak Republic, of 19 January 199367 contained liberal provisions on the optional acquisition of nationality. According to article 3, paragraph 1, every individual who was on 31 December 1992 a citizen of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and did not acquire the citizenship of Slovakia ipso facto, had the right to opt for the citizenship of Slovakia.68 No other requirement, such as permanent residence in the territory of Slovakia, was imposed for the optional acquisition of the citizenship of Slovakia by former Czechoslovak citizens. (5) The function which international law attributes to the will of individuals in matters of acquisition and loss of nationality in cases of succession of States is, however, among the issues on which doctrinal views considerably diverge.69 Several commentators have stressed the importance of the right of option in this respect.70 While most 63 See footnote 37 above. See also section 2, subsection (3). For the remaining provisions of section 2 on the right of option and its consequences, see also subsections (4) and (6) (Materials on Succession of States . . . (footnote 36 above)), p. 146. 65 Materials on Succession of States . . . (ibid.), p. 80. 66 Ibid., p.86. 67 Sbierka zákonov Slovenskej republiky (Collection of laws of the Slovak Republic), law No. 40/1993. For a translation in English, see Central and Eastern European Legal Materials (Huntington, New York, Juris Publishing, 1997), Binder 2A. 68 See paragraph (30) of the commentary to draft articles 7 and 8 proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his third report (footnote 10 above). 69 There is a substantial body of doctrinal opinion according to which the successor State is entitled to extend its nationality to those individuals susceptible of acquiring such nationality by virtue of the change of sovereignty, irrespective of the wishes of those individuals. See O’Connell, The Law of State . . . (footnote 24 above), p. 250. 70 See, for example, C. Rousseau, Droit international public, 11th ed. (Paris, Dalloz, 1987), pp. 174-175. 64