17. In the case of non-automatic modes of acquisition, a person should not be treated as a “national” where the mechanism of acquisition has not been completed. 18. The ordinary meaning of Article 1(1) requires that a “stateless person” is a person who is not considered a national by a State regardless of the background to this situation. Thus, where a deprivation of nationality may be contrary to rules of international law, this illegality is not relevant in determining whether the person is a national for the purposes of Article 1(1) – rather, it is the position under domestic law that is relevant. The alternative approach would lead to outcomes contrary to the ordinary meaning of the terms of Article 1(1) interpreted in light of the Convention’s object and purpose. This does not, however, prejudice any obligation that States may have not to recognize such situations as legal where the illegality relates to a violation of jus cogens norms. 3 19. There is no requirement for an individual to exhaust domestic remedies in relation to a refusal to grant nationality or a deprivation of his/her nationality before he or she can be considered as falling within Article 1(1). 20. The definition in Article 1(1) refers to a factual situation, not to the manner in which a person became stateless. Voluntary renunciation of nationality does not preclude an individual from satisfying the requirements of Article 1(1) as there is no basis for reading in such an implied condition to the definition of “stateless person”. Nonetheless, participants noted that diverging approaches have been adopted by States. It was also noted that the manner in which an individual became stateless may be relevant to his or her treatment following recognition and for determining the most appropriate solution. 21. The consequences of a finding of statelessness for a person who could acquire nationality through a mere formality are different from those for a person who cannot do so and a distinction should be drawn in the treatment such persons receive postrecognition. On the one hand, there are simple, accessible and purely formal procedures where the authorities do not have any discretion to refuse to take a given action, such as consular registration of a child born abroad. On the other hand, there are procedures in which the administration exercises discretion with regard to acquisition of nationality or where documentation and other requirements cannot reasonably be satisfied by the person concerned. C) Meaning of “by any State” 22. Given that Article 1(1) is a negative definition, “by any State” could be read as requiring the possibility of nationality to be ruled out for every State in the world before Article 1(1) can be satisfied. However, the adoption of an appropriate standard of proof would limit the States that need to be considered to those with which the 3 A jus cogens norm (or a peremptory norm of general international law) is a rule of customary international law which cannot be set aside by treaty or acquiescence but only by the formation of a subsequent customary rule of contrary effect. Examples of such norms are the prohibition on the use of force by states and the prohibition on racial discrimination. 4