which states are obliged to readmit their own nationals, in light of the corresponding hosting burden they would otherwise impose on other states.65 The second follows as a natural corollary of the first, and is based upon the prohibition of denationalization, where states cannot avoid the rule of readmission simply by denationalizing their own nationals (the prohibition becomes even stronger in cases of mass denationalization).66 4. The right of return is also considered under refugee law (a subset of IHRL, which also incorporates principles of IHL) as a central remedy within the framework of durable solutions designed by the international community in order to address refugee flows. There are two other solutions considered - voluntary host country integration and voluntary ‎resettlement - but repatriation is the only one that constitutes a right accorded to individuals, which generates a corresponding binding obligation upon the state of origin of the refugee population, following directly from the rule of readmission based in the Law of Nationality (above).67 Refugee law points also to the modality under which voluntary return should take place, underlining that it should occur “in safety and dignity without any fear of harassment, discrimination, arbitrary detention, physical threat or prosecution”.68 The role of the UN resolutions in restating and strengthening Palestinians’ right of return The right of return of displaced Palestinians has been expressly recognized by UN bodies on several occasions. General Assembly Resolution 181 of 1947, which provided for the establishment of an Arab state and a Jewish state in 65 This rule is universally recognized and has acquired customary status. See, e.g. Lex Takkenberg, The Status of Palestinian Refugees in International Law (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1998) 238; and Guy Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law (Oxford : Oxford University Press 1996) 269. 66 That second rule has also reached customary nature. Paul Weis, Nationality and Statelessness in International Law (Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 1979) 54-57. 67 The customary nature of the duty of the country of origin to readmit refugees on its territory is corroborated by various examples, as the 1994 Bosnia Agreement; the 1995 Dayton Agreement, Annex 7; the 1997 Croatia Agreement; the 1994 Guatemala Agreement; the final peace agreement for Cambodia. 68 Handbook on Voluntary Repatriation, supra note 40, Chapter 2.6. See also Jeff Crisp, Katy Long, “Safe and Voluntary Refugee Repatriation: from Principle to Practice”, Journal on Migration and Human Security 4, No.3 ( 2016): 141-147. Under IHRL, IDPs are entitled to similar rights, where the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement affirm the primary duty of the competent authorities of “establish] conditions, as well as provide the means, which allow internally displaced persons to return voluntarily, in safety and with dignity, to their homes or places of habitual residence, or to resettle voluntarily in another part of the country.”(See UNHCR, Guiding Principles, supra note 5, principle 28). 25