the consequences of deprivation is all the greater. Moreover, reliance on a purported putative entitlement to an alternative citizenship, which is not effective in practice, cannot absolve the State of its international law obligations, including under the Convention. States are obliged to consider positive obligations under Article 4 prior to deprivation 29. The Contracting Parties’ Article 4 obligations do not cease once trafficking has occurred. Rather, they remain and include duties of protection, recovery and integration following trafficking. In this context, citizenship deprivation would materially impede the Contracting Parties’ ability to fulfil their Article 4 obligations, rendering the practical and effective protection guaranteed under Article 4 illusory. 30. Under Article 4, prior to deciding whether to deprive an individual of their citizenship, the Contracting Party must: (i) assess whether the individual concerned has been a victim of trafficking,18 in particular as a child; (ii) determine what duties of protection, assistance, and non-punishment flow from that status, and (iii) take those duties into account in the decision-making process. The Contracting Party’s failure to undertake such an assessment would render those protection obligations ineffective in practice. 31. Duty to Identify and Assess Trafficking Indicators: Article 4 imposes positive obligations on Contracting Parties to take operational measures to protect victims. These include a duty to identify victims where there are credible grounds to suspect exploitation.19 These obligations arise when authorities “knew or ought to have known” of circumstances giving rise to credible suspicion of trafficking.20 32. Obligation to Discharge Protective and Investigative Duties: Article 4 further requires States to take appropriate protective and investigative measures once a credible risk of trafficking arises. This includes obligations to investigate potential exploitation and secure the victim’s safety and recovery.21 The UN Special Rapporteur on Trafficking in Persons, especially women and children has noted that, “Article 4 ECHR, also entails a procedural obligation to investigate situations of potential trafficking” and “the need for a full and effective investigation covering all aspects of trafficking allegations from recruitment to exploitation is indisputable.”22 Any State’s failures in this respect would likely constitute a violation of the procedural limb of Article 4. The State cannot lawfully impose detrimental measures, such as citizenship deprivation, while leaving this obligation unfulfilled. Citizenship deprivation, particularly while the individual remains acutely vulnerable while outside their country, cannot serve to absolve or significantly limit the State’s duty and capacity to fulfil these obligations in practice. In this context, rather than facilitating identification, protection, and recovery, citizenship deprivation would entrench the concerned individual’s exposure to harm and effectively hinder the State’s ability to fulfil its Convention obligations. 33. Duty of Protection and Assistance: Article 4 requires States to ensure practical and effective protection for trafficking victims and those at risk, including access to assistance, support, and recovery. According to UN Security Council Resolution 2331, States must “provide access to protection and assistance for identified victims without delay” and ensure that victims are “not penalised or stigmatised for their involvement in any unlawful activities in which they have been compelled to engage.”23 In this context, citizenship deprivation would enhance the risks human rights violations for the individual concerned, including by resulting in a denial of assistance and protection, excluding the person from the State’s protective framework. Such an outcome is incompatible with the Convention’s object and purpose. 34. Duty to Integrate Article 4 into Decision-Making: Article 4 obligations apply across all areas of State action, including citizenship and national security decision-making. According to the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2388, States must “assess the individual situation” so as to enable “prompt identification of victims of trafficking” and ensure their treatment as victims.24 This requires assessing whether citizenship deprivation 18 “States have an international obligation to identify, assist, and protect victims of trafficking” and “a failure to identify a trafficked person will likely result in a further denial of that person’s human rights.” Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (n 5) Arts. 10 and 12; OHCHR, Recommended Principles and Guidelines on Human Rights and Human Trafficking (2002) Guideline 2. 19 ECtHR , Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, §§ 282-289; Chowdury and Others v. Greece, no. 21884/15, paras 103-104. 20 ECtHR , Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, para. 286. 21 ECtHR , Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, paras 288-289. 22 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Submission on Shamima Begum (United Kindgom) (30 June 2022) para. 28. 23 United Nations Security Council, Resolution 2331 (2016) on trafficking in persons in situations of armed conflict, S/RES/2331 (20 December 2016). 24 United Nations Security Council, Resolution 2388 (2017) on trafficking in persons in armed conflict, S/RES/2388 (21 November 2017). 5