8. In terms of the arbitrary deprivation of nationality, the report of the Secretary-General on Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality comments on the regulation of loss and deprivation of nationality, particularly emphasising that ‘Any interference with the enjoyment of nationality has a significant impact on the enjoyment of rights. Therefore, loss or deprivation of nationality must meet certain conditions in order to comply with international law, in particular the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality.’5 Furthermore, article 8 of the CRC sets out a clear obligation of states to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her nationality; thereby prohibiting the arbitrary deprivation of nationality of all children. 9. Bahrain is neither a party to the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, nor to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. 10. In Bahrain’s third-cycle UPR review in 2017, Uruguay, Algeria, Botswana, the Philippines, Argentina, Slovenia, Sierra Leone, Uganda and Belgium all made recommendations that urged Bahrain to reform its nationality law and to allow women to transfer their nationality to their children on an equal basis to men.6 Additionally, the United States of America submitted an Advance Question asking: ‘Will the government take steps to reform Bahrain’s nationality laws to eliminate discrimination against women with respect to citizenship conferral and transmission of citizenship to their children and spouses?’7 With the exception of the two recommendations issued by Uganda and Belgium, which did not solely pertain to the issue of gender-based discrimination in the nationality law, Bahrain accepted all of these recommendations. Additionally, in 2013, the CEDAW committee requested Bahrain for an update on the status of the amendment of the law.8 However, Bahrain has not acted on these recommendations and continues to report that the amendment is under consideration. 11. Denmark, Germany, the Czech Republic, Mexico, and Belgium also issued UPR recommendations calling on Bahrain to end the practice of arbitrarily revoking citizenship, including when it results in statelessness or forced exile and when it is the conducted under the 2006 anti-terror law. The United States of America also raised concern over ‘arbitrary revocation of citizenship’ during the interactive dialogue and submitted a further Advance Question, asking: ‘Will the government review decisions which arbitrarily revoke citizenship and consider changes to the law permitting such decisions in order to prevent and reduce statelessness?’ Bahrain only accepted Denmark’s recommendation, and it has not taken these actions. In response, the government stated: ‘The nationality code was aligned to international standards. Nationality could be withdrawn or lost, in accordance with the law. To protect society against acts of terrorism, the commission of acts of terrorism resulted in the loss of nationality; such decisions could be appealed up to the highest level of the judiciary.’ The authorities did not address extrajudicial revocation orders that can be made by the Ministry of Interior, which violate due process standards. 5 See A/HRC/25/28 Human Rights and Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality Report of the Security General, December 2013 Find information of recommendations and Bahrain’s response https://www.uprinfo.org/sites/default/files/document/bahrain/session_27_-_may_2017/response_to_recommendations_bahrain_2017.pdf 7 The list of Advance Questions can be downloaded from the Office of the High Commissioner’s web page here: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/BHindex.aspx 8 See CEDAW/C/BHR/Q/3 at http://www.refworld.org/publisher,CEDAW,,BHR,525be1c84,0.html 6