1961 CONVENTION ANNIVERSARY SYMPOSIUM TAKING STOCK OF THE RELEVANCE AND IMPACT OF THE 1961 CONVENTION ON THE REDUCTION OF STATELESSNESS MELANIE KHANNA* AND MARCELLA ROUWELER** The 60th anniversary of the adoption of the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (‘1961 Convention’) calls for reflection on the influence of this important treaty over time, as well as the challenges that remain when it comes to realising the right of all persons to a nationality. 1 Sixty years is a relatively short period in human affairs; there are, after all, many people alive today who are much older than the 1961 Convention. Yet, the past 60 years seems to have been a significant period if we consider how much evolution there has been in the basic acceptance of the notion that nationality matters constitute an appropriate area for multilateral regulation and cooperation (this is consistent with the contemporaneous shift in the international consensus concerning the right balance between the rights of the individual and those of the state). At the same time, significant and somewhat telling gaps remain in the full acceptance and appropriate application of the 1961 Convention. To begin with, it bears note that during the period when the 1961 Convention was open for physical signature at the United Nations a paltry total of five states signed it.2 Moreover, of these five, a full three — France, Israel and the Dominican Republic — decided not to become party to it after all. In fact, in the entire decade of the 1960s, only two states became party to the 1961 Convention — the United Kingdom and Sweden. In the following two decades, the number of states parties increased only marginally: as of 1990, for example, there were some 15 parties to the treaty. Consequently, anyone taking the measure of the 1961 Convention in the early 1990s would likely have concluded that the international community simply failed to devise a treaty that would attract many ratifications yet be robust enough to make a real difference — the balance a British delegate to the conference that adopted the treaty astutely described as the goal of the negotiations.3 Halfway through its current lifespan, the treaty would have seemed virtually dead in the water as a result of it having been too far reaching and robust and, therefore, simply too controversial to attract more than a handful of states as adherents. * ** 1 2 3 Melanie J Khanna served as Chief of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’)’s Statelessness Section from 2015–21. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the UNHCR or the United Nations. Marcella Rouweler is a Legal Officer in the UNHCR’s Statelessness Section. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, opened for signature 30 August 1961, 989 UNTS 175 (entered into force 13 December 1975) (‘1961 Convention’). The Dominican Republic, France, Israel, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland. See ‘4. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness’, United Nations Treaty Collection (Web Page, 19 April 2022) <https://treaties.un.org/pages/ ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=V-4&chapter=5> (‘UNTC 1961 Convention Page’). United Nations Conference on the Elimination or Reduction of Future Statelessness, Summary Record of the Second Plenary Meeting, UN Doc A/CONF.9/SR.2 (24 April 1961) 2 (Mr Ross).