68 SECTION I.B.1 nationality was arbitrary.101 In Robert John Penessis, the ACtHR once again affirmed its commitment to the protection of the right to nationality under Article 15 of the UDHR.102 It went a step further to hold that the arbitrary deprivation of an individual’s nationality is not only inconsistent with a state’s duty to avoid statelessness, but also with the individual’s right to human dignity.103 In Europe, although the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) does not refer to an explicit right to nationality, it finds mention in the case law and Conventions as promulgated by the Council of Europe. These Conventions104 deepen the existing legal framework aiming to avoid statelessness and facilitate the access to nationality by explicitly setting out the obligation of States to avoid statelessness. Further, they recall the right of every individual to have a nationality and emphasize upon the ruling that rules on nationality may not be discriminatory.105 However, these specific Conventions are less ratified than general ones among the 47 member States of the Council of Europe. The ECtHR has stepped in and played a decisive role by filling the legal gaps in the ECHR and imposing key obligations on the states. In several cases such as Genovese,106 Mennesson107 and Francis Labassee108, the ECtHR intervened to prevent State practice that led to statelessness. While the Court did not explicitly mention an obligation for States to prevent and reduce statelessness nor a right to nationality as such, it ruled that 101  Anudo Ochieng Anudo (n 21) [76] - [80], [102]. 102  Robert John Penessis (n 92) [103]. 103  Robert John Penessis (n 92) [87] - [88]. 104 See European Convention on Nationality, and Convention on the Avoidance of Statelessness in relation to State Succession. 105 European Convention on Nationality art 4(a), 4(b) and 5. Art 4(a): ‘everyone has the right to a nationality’, Art 4(b): ‘statelessness shall be avoided’, Art 5 – ‘The rules of a State Party on nationality shall not contain distinctions or include any practice which amount to discrimination on the grounds of sex, religion, race, colour or national or ethnic origin’. 106  Genovese v Malta App no 53124/09 (ECtHR, 11 October 2011). 107  Mennesson v France App No 65192/11 (ECtHR, 26 June 2014). 108  Labassee v France App No 65941/11 (ECtHR, 26 June 2014). SECURING CITIZENSHIP