FRONTIERS RIGHTS SEEKING NATIONALITY THE JUDICIAL ODYSSEY OF APPLICANTS • LEILA WAS HANDED OVER TO THE POLICE BY AN EGYPTIAN WOMAN IN 2014. B. Children Born in Lebanon to Parents with • SARI WAS BORN Unknown Nationalities IN LEBANON TO A The second part of Article 1 (3) FATHER WITHOUT A of Decision 15/1925 applies NATIONALITY AND to children born in Lebanon to parents of “unknown nationality”. AN UNREGISTERED The term “unknown nationality” MOTHER is not clearly defined. According (MAKTOUMAT to the doctrine and jurisprudence ALQAYD). are similar both children The mother had mental born to parents of unknown disorders and spent nationalities (parents who have years in a rehabilitation a nationality that is unknown) center where she and children born to parents with passed away. Sari no nationalities.35 Further, they was abandoned by his also consider to be similar both father when he was still the term “unknown nationality” a child. Sari is today and the term “unspecified married and have five nationality”, which is a term children who are all used for people registered in stateless. the 1932 census as having “no nationality” and were given “unspecified nationality” identity cards.36 This identity was replaced by the Lebanese General Security to Qaid adDars (nationality under-study) residency cards in early 1960s. Any persons holding this new residency card is considered “a person… who does not hold a specified nationality.”37 The change of status of persons holding “unspecified nationality” to “under-study” had negative impact on them. Paragraph 3 of Article 1 of Decision No. 15, gave the possibility for children of “unspecified nationality” card holders to be considered Lebanese if they are born in Lebanon to parents of unknown nationality. However, since “unspecified nationality” card holders became SEEKING NATIONALITY | PART 2 Jus Soli Lawsuits on Grounds of Article 1 (3) of Decision 15/1925 A third category of jus soli nationality lawsuits are filed invoking Article 1 (3) of Decision 15/1925 that stipulates that is considered to be Lebanese any person born on the territory of the State of Greater Lebanon from unknown parents (foundling) or parents of unknown nationality. A. Children Born in Lebanon to Unknown Parents (Foundlings) The legal text related to children born to unknown parents and whose filiation is not proven to anyone (foundlings) is related to newborn babies, usually found unattended in public places or in front of the orphanages’ doors. The delay for the registration of foundlings administratively is 39 days. This is regulated in Article 16 of the Law on the Registration of Civil Status Documents. It also places the responsibility of preparing birth certificates and registering the birth on the caring institution where the foundling is placed by order of Public Prosecution’s Office or upon the order of the Juvenile Court, or through the Union for the Protection of Juveniles in Lebanon. The foundling should not be estimated to be older than 30 days of age to be registered automatically. If the foundling was over 30 days of age it becomes necessary to resort to judicial authorities through the use of Paragraph 3 of Article 1 of Decision No. 15/1925.33 Unfortunately, there is no official monitoring and control of social care institutions to ensure compliance of the laws and procedures. Few caring institutions do not follow the birth registration procedures for the foundling placed with them neither when the child is 30 days of age nor if over the age through the judiciary. As a result, the foundlings remain stateless. FRH assigned attorneys-at-law for a few foundlings’ cases referred by social care institutions. Some of the files of the foundlings did not contain any reports from the judicial police issued when the foundling was found or any document related to the child especially in cases where a protection order was issued by the Juvenile Judge or the Public Prosecution’s Office. Almost the majority of the foundlings’ files did not contain notes of monitoring and follow up visits that ought to be conducted by the competent authorities to ensure full protection including any information related to the registration process of the child by the institution. Moreover, the files did not contain periodic reports submitted to the court on a regular basis, as required by the juvenile law.34 Some children who became adults stated that they did not receive any visit from a juvenile delegate during their full stay in the institution which exceeded 16 years. As a consequence of the lack of proper and complete case files at the institutions, FRH faced difficulties obtaining evidences and proves to build the cases files to be ready for submission to courts. The possibility to reach a positive outcome depends on the judge’s decision to request all necessary information and documentation from the different involved parties through judicial investigations to build a strong case. The child was estimated to be 2 years old then. In her statement to the police, the woman stated that a woman asked to attend the child for a moment in order to go to the car to get her some things. However, the woman did not return. Leila did not have any identity papers on her. The Egyptian woman confirmed that she did not know the other woman and did not know whether she was Leila’s mother or not. Leila was placed in a social care institution, following the order of the juvenile court in Mount Lebanon as a foundling, based on the report of the police. Two years later, the institution referred the case to FRH to assist them with her birth registration. However, the caring institution did possess the basic and necessary documentation such as the protection order issued by the juvenile court and the policy report when Leila was found. Further, Leila’s file at the institution did not contain any details that might make it easier to convince the court that Leila was born in Lebanon and her parents were unknown. 48