be rendered in writing “within a reasonable time”, and be subject to administrative or
judicial review. Meanwhile, Article 5(2) develops the norm of non-discrimination in the
context of citizenship, stipulating that “[e]ach State Party shall be guided by the principle
of non-discrimination between its nationals, whether they are nationals by birth or have
acquired its nationality subsequently”.
Complementary international standards
Prohibition against arbitrary deprivation of nationality
A number of international instruments – e.g. the Convention on the Rights of the Child
(Article 8(1)) and the Draft articles on nationality of natural persons in relation to the
succession of States 75 (Article 16) – as well as various regional treaties,76 explicitly
prohibit the arbitrary deprivation of nationality. These provisions echo Article 15 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that “no one shall be arbitrarily
deprived of his nationality”.
It is generally accepted that an action is not arbitrary if it: (1) serves a legitimate purpose;
(2) is the least intrusive instrument to achieve the desired result; and (3) is proportional
to the interest to be protected.77 In addition, lack of arbitrariness is generally understood
to entail compliance with minimum due process standards and procedural safeguards.
These include ensuring that decisions on nationality be issued in writing, that there
be an opportunity for the meaningful review of such decisions, and that judgements
on deprivation (and expulsion) be suspended pending the result of a final appeal.78
Deprivation of nationality that results in statelessness may be particularly difficult to justify
as proportional, “[g]iven the severity of the consequences where statelessness results”.79
Extension of deprivation to spouses and children
Other international treaties recognize the independent nationality rights of women80
and protect the rights of children to preserve their identity, including nationality.81 The
1961 Convention (Article 6) and the ECN (Article 7(2)) explicitly prohibit the extension of
deprivation of nationality to spouses and children where it would result in statelessness.
Also relevant is Article 3 of the CRC, which sets forth the principle that “the best interests
of the child shall be a primary consideration” in all State actions concerning children. It is
never in the best interests of the child to be rendered stateless.82
75 Text adopted by the UN International Law Commission at its fifty-first session, in 1999.
76 E.g. the European convention of nationality (Art. 4 (c)), the American convention on human rights (Art. 20 (3)), the Revised Arab charter on
human rights (Art. 29), and the ASEAN human rights declaration (Art. 18).
77 UN Human Rights Council, Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality: Report of the Secretary-General, 19 December 2013,
A/HRC/25/28, available at: www.refworld.org/docid/52f8d19a4.html
78 Ibid., para. 31 – 33. See also, European convention on nationality, Art. 11 and Art. 12., which set similar standards.
79 Ibid., para. 4.
80 1957 UN Convention on the Nationality of Married Women, Art. 1; UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women, Art. 9; European convention on nationality, Art 4(d).
81 See, e.g., Convention on the Rights of the Child, Art. 8; Covenant on the rights of the child in Islam, Art. 7(2)
82 See, e.g., Tunis Conclusions, supra para. 62.
30