The determination of statelessness 117 Even in the context of what van Waas calls the ‘progressive denationalisation of human rights’, or in other words the gradual transformation of the ‘rights of citizens’ to the ‘rights of all human beings’, the international community deemed it necessary to create a specific instrument to protect stateless persons’ rights, confirming their position as a vulnerable group.3 The 1954 Convention outlines states’ protection obligations vis-à-vis stateless persons, as well as the set of rights states parties shall guarantee to this group.4 However, this crucial instrument remains silent about the manner in which beneficiaries of such protection shall be established, or how such protection shall be provided in practice.5 Together with examination of guidelines issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and using insights gained from years of closely following state practice in a number of countries, this chapter will put forward a number of definitions and concepts in order to increase the clarity and consistency of the nascent international framework for the protection of stateless persons. 5.1. The content and the limits of protection Protection, in its broadest sense, means that a stateless person has access to and can enjoy the rights embedded in the 1954 Convention and in other relevant international human rights instruments. Protection also means, in a narrower sense, official recognition as a stateless person and being granted a legal status that ensures the proper enjoyment of the abovementioned rights. In either event, protection differs from reduction or elimination of statelessness, as it stops short of offering a nationality to the person concerned (who remains stateless).6 It is important to recall that statelessness can surface in a wide range of situations, from purely individual cases where gaps in legislation or administrative practice render a person stateless, through to massive populations who have been deprived of their nationality on discriminatory 3 4 5 6 L. van Waas, ‘Nationality and Rights’ in B. Blitz and M. Lynch (eds.), Statelessness and the Benefits of Citizenship: A Comparative Study (Oxford Brookes University, 2009), 26. See also Chapter 3 by van Waas in this volume. Molná r states that part of the problem is the non-self-executing nature of convention obligations: T. Molná r, ‘Stateless Persons under International Law and EU Law: A Comparative Analysis Concerning their Legal Status, with Particular Attention to the Added Value of the EU Legal Order’, Acta Juridica Hungarica, 51 (2010), 293–304, at 296. Note that reduction does have a role in the protection machinery, see details later in this chapter. On the content of protection more generally, see Chapter 3 by van Waas in this volume on the statelessness conventions. 9781107032446c05_p116-143.indd 117 6/16/2014 3:12:01 PM