adopt certain measures to combat it, including adhering to the rule that a stateless child must receive the nationality of the state of birth.49 There is a remarkable degree of concordant practice resolving statelessness by granting nationality to children born in the state’s territory. Firstly in terms of treaty practice, although the 195450 and 196151 Statelessness Conventions do not attract widespread participation, there are a significant number of parties and the number continues to increase each year. The 1961 Convention specifically requires states to grant their nationality to children born stateless in their territory.52 In addition to the 1954 and 1961 Conventions, many major human rights treaties, with extensive participation, provide for a right to a nationality,53 and many of these focus attention on the case of child statelessness.54 Then we 49 See Brasilia Declaration on the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons in the Americas (Nov. 11, 2010) available at http://www.refworld.org/docid/4cdd44582.html The Governments of the participating countries from the Americas: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela … Underscoring the fundamental contribution made by States, with the support of UNHCR, the donor community, national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights and civil society organizations, among others, to care for, protect and seek durable solutions for refugees, stateless persons and internally displaced persons; … Resolves: … 7. To urge countries in the Americas to consider acceding to the international instruments on statelessness, reviewing their national legislation to prevent and reduce situations of statelessness, and strengthening national mechanisms for comprehensive birth registration. The Brasilia Declaration has, in turn, been operationalized as law in, inter alia, Brazil, see e.g. Lei No. 13,445 (May 24, 2017); Org. Amer. Sts., Press Rel., IACHR Welcomes Approval of New Migration Law in Brazil (June 16, 2017) available at http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2017/078.asp; Zagreb Declaration (Oct. 27, 2011) available at http://www.refworld.org/docid/4fa2193e2.html We, the participants of the Conference on the Provision of Civil Documentation and Registration in South Eastern Europe (Zagreb, 26-27 October 2011) taking into account fundamental human rights obligations and relevant international instruments on statelessness, as well as aspirations towards European integration, propose and recommend to consider the following principles: … 4. Carry out concrete efforts to identify and assist all persons at risk of statelessness, especially those who need to be registered and who lack documentation. … 6. Develop awareness campaigns to sensitize on the need to be registered at birth and explaining the procedures. 50 51 See 1954 Stateless Convention, at art. 1 See 1961 Statelessness Convention, supra note 95 at art. 8 [States] shall not deprive a person of his nationality if such deprivation would render him stateless” but adds “notwithstanding th[at] provision[ ] . . . a Contracting State may retain the right to deprive a person of his nationality, if . . . being grounds existing in its national law at that time . . . the person . . . (ii) Has conducted himself in a manner seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the State. 52 See id. at art. 1(1); HRC & UNSG, Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality (Dec. 19, 2012), supra note 43. However, the 1961 Statelessness Convention does permit a state to require an application in order to grant nationality in this scenario, rather than simply receiving nationality by operation of law, see 1961 Statelessness Convention, art. 1(1)(b). 53 See UDHR, supra note 41 at art. 15(1); Convention on the Nationality of Married Women, 1957, arts. 1-3; Protocol relating to a Certain Case of Statelessness, 12 April 1930, 179 LNTS 115; Convention on Conflict of Nationality Laws, supra note 37 at art. 1; ICCPR, supra note 41 at art. 24(3); CRC, supra note 42 at art. 7; 1954 Statelessness Convention, at art. 1; 1961 Statelessness Convention, supra note 95, at art. 1(1); International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (“CERD”), Dec. 21, 1965, art. 5(d)(iii), 660 UNTS 195; CEDAW, at art. 9; International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (“Migrant Workers Convention”), Dec. 18, 1990, art. 29, 2220 UNTS 3; CRPD, at art. 18(1)-(1); CSCE Helsinki Document (1992); Human Rights Council Decision 2/111 (27 November 2006); HRC Res. 13/2; HRC Res. 10/13; HRC Res. 7/10; Commission on Human Rights Resolutions 1998/48 (17 April 1998); HRComm’n Res. 1999/28; Hum. Rts. Comm’n Res. 2005/45 (19 April 2005); HRC Gen. Comm. 17, supra note 36 at paras. 7-8; Hum. Rts. Comm’n, Res. 2005/45; CEDAW Gen. Recomm. No. 21: Equality in Marriage and Family Relations, 1994, art. 9; Dep’t St., Cable No. 09ASHGABAT1607_a, para. 1 (Dec. 14, 2009) (“DOS 09ASHGABAT1607_a”) (“None of the Central Asian countries [Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan] are signatories to either of the UN Conventions on statelessness, but they are bound to protect stateless people under other UN treaty obligations [such as the] Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”); S Forlati, Nationality as a human right, in S F ORLATI & A A NNONI, EDS ., T HE C HANGING R OLE OF N ATIO NALITY IN I NTERNATIONAL L AW 22 (2013). 8 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3091912