Part I. Introduction and Context These instruments of European organizations or institutions can of course include EU law 96, making European law a suitable term to refer to lawmaking by both the CoE and the EU. Under the definition of European law, and also of law as used in this research more generally, hard law – meaning legally binding legal instruments such as treaties – and soft law – or quasi-legal instruments – are included. This definition also includes custom, general legal principles, jurisprudence and doctrine. For a legal study like this, the importance of studying legally binding European law instruments is self-evident. However, soft law or non-legally binding instruments are also examined. Soft law can encompass a wide range of instruments, and it has been held that it can “influence the course or content of international law”.97 Importantly, they can also encompass more political instruments and/or commitment. Within the CoE, for instance, it has been acknowledged that soft law-instruments have gained importance and it is even noted that their capacity to modify state behavior is sometimes “not much inferior to that of hard law instruments”.98 As such, it is possible that soft law plays a relevant role in addressing statelessness in Europe, making it important to include this in this research. Several organizations have been founded in Europe to further cooperation between states. One cooperation mechanism not explored in depth in this study is the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). Its aims also include for instance the promotion of human rights, tolerance and non-discrimination. Even though this organization is concerned with Europe, it has 57 member states, which include states that really are beyond the scope of Europe as defined for the purpose of this research, such as states from Central Asia and North America. Furthermore, the decisions of this organization are taken by consensus and are politically, but not legally binding. As it is this research’s main objective to study legal instruments – and not political ones – the OSCE nor its instruments are studied further in this book.99 Pursuant to the usage of ‘European law’ in this research, please also note that whenever the term ‘Europe’ is used in this study, it refers in principle to the geographical area consisting of the 47 member states of the CoE – thus also including the EU member states. 96 97 98 99 26 Kluwer 1992) 213–222, 215. Ernst-Joachim Mestmäcker, ‘On the Legitimacy of European Law’ (1994) 58 Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 615. James Crawford & Martti Koskenniemi ‘Introduction’ in James Crawford & Martti Koskenniemi (eds), The Cambridge Companion to International Law (Cambridge University Press 2012) 11. Recommendations of the CoE Commitee of Ministers are mentioned as an example. See Jörg Polakiewicz, ‘Alternatives to Treaty-Making and Law-Making by Treaty and Expert Bodies in the Council of Europe’ in Rüdiger Wolfrum & Volker Röbin (eds), Developments of International Law in Treaty Making (Springer 2005) 245–290, 287. For a short overview of the OSCE see Philippe Sands & Pierre Klein, Bowett’s Law of International Institutions (6th ed, Sweet & Maxwell 2009) 202–204. See also <www.osce.org/> accessed 3 January 2022. Some of the work done within the OSCE does relate to nationality and statelessness matters, see for instance Arie Bloed, ‘Citizenship Issues and the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities’ in Síofra O’Leary & Teija Tiilikainen (eds), Citizenship and Nationality Status in the New Europe (Sweet & Maxwell 1998) 39–52. Intersentia