The Transnational Human Rights Review, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2021], Art. 1 hence considered a “privilege”. 29 This view was reiterated under the 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws, and in the famous Nottebohm judgement of the International Court of Justice. 30 Although both, the Convention and the judgement acknowledged that a state’s municipal law on nationality should be consistent with international conventions, customs and general principles of international law, a state that acts in contravention of such international developments does not bear any repercussions, except that other states need not give recognition to such consequences. 31 Moreover, the right to nationality under the UDHR has been criticized for not putting the onus on a specific state to confer such nationality.32 This conception of nationality being a privilege has also seeped into other Conventions subsequently enacted, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,33 the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,34 the Convention on the Rights of Child etc.,35 which only make a passing reference to nationality, and more specifically to nationality of children. Thus, former Secretary of State of the United Kingdom, David Owen, noted that Hannah Arendt’s description of nationality as the “right to have rights” is still valid today in spite of a robust human rights framework. In his words, its loss is both “wrongful and harmful”, since it deprives an individual of exercising his political rights, and exposes him to insecurity, because he is unable to access resources.36 But more importantly, without nationality, an individual Flavia Zorzi Giustiniani, “Deprivation of Nationality: In Defence of a Principled Approach” (2016) 31 Questions of Int’t L 5 at 19. 30 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws, 12 April 1930, 179 LNTS 89 (entered 1 July 1937); Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v Guatemala)(second phase), [1955] ICJ Rep 4 at 23. 31 Ibid. 32 David Owen, “On the Right to Have Nationality Rights: Statelessness, Citizenship and Human Rights” (2018) 65 Netherlands Int’l L Rev 299. Current provisions as they exist discuss how individuals are entitled to a nationality (for instance, Article 15 of the UDHR states, the right to “a” nationality). However, the debate must shift to an examination of the right to hold a particular state’s nationality. 33 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 19 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 arts 9—14 (entered into force 23 March 1976) [ICCPR]. 34 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 21 December 1965, 660 UNTS 195 (entered into force 4 January 1969) at art. 5(iii). 35 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20 November 1989, 1577 UNTS 3 (entered into force 2 September 1990) at art 5. 36 Owen, supra note 32 at 300-301. 29 https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/thr/vol8/iss1/1 DOI: 10.60082/2563-4631.1096 6