Exploring the Interface Between Birth Registration and Citizenship Determination: A Scoping Study in Seven Countries in Southern Africa The country-level research focuses on the following questions: • Laws and processes: Among the seven countries, which have a law that places responsibility on the civil registrar to determine the citizenship of a person whose birth is registered? Which countries do this in practice (not based on law)? How is such determination conducted in practice? • Safeguards against statelessness and due process: Are safeguards in place to prevent statelessness? Are there clear procedures for challenging a determination of a child’s citizenship in this context? Are there referral mechanisms in place to ensure citizenship of the child in undetermined cases? • Impact: What is the impact of the intertwining of birth registration and citizenship determination on vulnerable populations, including refugees, asylum seekers, migrants, stateless people, children of unknown citizenship, and abandoned and orphaned children? Does uncertainty regarding the citizenship of the child or the parents result in the birth of the children not being registered? • Rationale for the intertwining: What are the underlying reasons for countries making a citizenship determination as part of the birth registration process? The questionnaire used for the interviews with the countries can be found in Annex 1. Feedback and input on the findings of the research were received at a regional UNHCR workshop on statelessness in November 2024, hosting statelessness focal points from the Southern Africa Development Community Member States. This analysis intended to document and describe emerging practices related to the intertwining of birth registration and citizenship determination, rather than to provide a comprehensive or empirically exhaustive assessment of their prevalence or impact. As such, the analysis does not aim to generate statistically representative findings, nor does it assess outcomes or impacts through systematic field research or quantitative analysis. The following limitations should be noted. First, the country sample is limited to seven countries in Southern Africa and findings should accordingly not be extrapolated to the region as a whole or beyond. Second, primary data collection relied mainly on interviews with civil registration authorities, complemented by publicly available information, and did not include field-based research. As a result, the consequences of identified practices for individuals and communities are described largely on the basis of existing knowledge and reported experiences, rather than systematic empirical evidence. Finally, this report should be understood as descriptive rather than prescriptive in nature. Its purpose is to shed light on current laws and practices, and to identify areas of legal ambiguity and potential risk, and surface questions that warrant closer examination. While the findings are intended to inform further policy dialogue, including the development of more targeted and actionable recommendations, this report itself does not seek to advance definitive policy or legal solutions. Rather, it provides an analytical foundation to support subsequent, more in depth analysis and consultative processes with a broader range of stakeholders. 8