UNHCR, Statistical Reporting, and the Representation of Stateless People 83 Moreover, in many countries, stateless persons live precariously on the margins of society because they lack identity documents, are illegally in the territory, or are subject to discrimination. They therefore may be reluctant to come forward to be counted, or to reveal their personal circumstances, because of concerns that such information may be used against them. Indeed, history shows that population data has even been misused in certain countries in the past to render certain groups stateless through denationalization.64 Unfortunately, contrary to UNHCR’s assumptions, testimonies of stateless people record that states have repeatedly dismissed these criticisms. Here are two cases from the United Kingdom, a country that, both before and after the introduction of statelessness determination procedures, has proven reluctant to allow some long-standing citizenship claims deriving originally from the colonial period. There are six different classes of British nationality, offering more or fewer civil and political rights. In 1948, the United Kingdom introduced a new law to address its evolution from an imperial system to a commonwealth of independent states. The Commonwealth Heads of Government agreed that each member would adopt their own national citizenship, while the status of “British subject” would continue, as a supranational category.65 On January 1, 1949, the United Kingdom established the status of Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (CUKC). Until the early 1960s, there was little difference in UK law between the rights of CUKCs and other British subjects, all of whom enjoyed the right to enter and remain in the United Kingdom for work or family life. However, in many parts of the Commonwealth, newly independent colonies introduced nationality provisions that withdrew CUKC status, unless the person had a connection to the United Kingdom or a remaining colony (e.g., through birth in the United Kingdom). There were some important exceptions. For example, CUKC status was not withdrawn from the Crown colonies of Penang and Malacca that were integrated into the Federation of Malaysia in 1957. Hence, hundreds of thousands continued to enjoy the dual status of CUKC and citizen of Malaysia. Over the following fifty years, the UK government legislation reduced the rights of former imperial subjects and established a multitiered approach to UK citizenship, which over time disadvantaged those born outside the British Isles and gradually restricted the rights to enter, work, and settle in the United Kingdom to a minority of former subjects. Specifically, the 1971 Immigration Act introduced the concept of patriality, by which only British subjects with sufficiently strong links to the British Isles (e.g., being born in the islands or having a parent or a grandparent who was 64 65 Ibid. The meaning of “British subject” changed radically in 1948. All those who were British subjects became CUKCs (Citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies) in 1948; and the classification of British subject was then demoted to become an umbrella term used for everyone who had some sort of UK connection. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108914994 Published online by Cambridge University Press