2021] NATIONALITY LAWS 109 citizens and non-citizens from the ambit of the definition.108 Initially, the Sub-Commission’s draft convention proposed the “interpretive” Article 8 to serve as a counterbalance to the broad protection offered by Article 1(1) and the contested invocation of “national origin.”109 Draft Article 8 reads as follows: Nothing in the present Convention may be interpreted as implicitly recognizing or denying political or other rights to non-nationals nor to groups of persons of a common race, colour, ethnic or national origin which exist or may exist as distinct groups within a State Party.110 There was general agreement that the article was intended by the Sub-Commission to provide a qualification to Article 1. It was “aimed at precluding certain interpretations of the provisions of the Convention.” 111 There was considerable discussion, however, about the scope and intention of some of the wording used in the Sub-Commission’s text. A joint amendment to Article 8 proposed by representatives of France, India, and the Philippines read as follows: Nothing in this present Convention may be interpreted as affecting in any way the distinction between national and non-nationals of a State, as recognized by international law, in the enjoyment of political or other rights, or as amending provisions governing the exercise of political or other rights by naturalized persons . . . .112 After lengthy discussions that revolved largely around the inclusion of the words “national origin” in Article 1(1), Article 108 Boyle & Baldaccini, supra note 88, at 152 n.79. 109 U.N. ESCOR, 37th Sess., Supp. 8, at ¶¶ 248, 253, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/874 (Feb. 17–Mar. 18, 1964). 110 Id. ¶ 242. 111 Id. ¶ 248. 112 Id. ¶ 247. See also Comm’n on Hum. Rts. Sub-commission on Prevention of Discrimination & Protection of Minorities, Rep. of the Sixteenth Sess., 41, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/873 (Feb. 11, 1964). The phrase “as recognized by international law” was later deleted. Earlier drafts focused largely on noncitizens. The first version, submitted by Calvoressi and Capotorti, included the provision that nothing in the Convention “shall be interpreted as implying a grant of equal political rights to nationals of a contracting State or a grant of political rights to a distinct racial ethnic or national group as such.” THORNBERRY, supra note 2, at 142.