38.2 (7) TEMPROSA.DOCX38.2 (7) TEMPROSA.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 2020] STATELESSNESS AS RHETORIC 1/16/2021 12:59 PM 271 Zealand tribunals have also disregarded how law operates in some of their cases. 188 Most States, in theory, deny or grant stateless status based exclusively on reading another State's citizenship law, rather than by analyzing how that law (and other related laws) operates with respect to a particular person. Adjudicators either fail to interpret the definition "properly,” are confused with de facto and de jure statelessness, or are dissuaded by the complexities, time, and effort required to make a "proper" analysis of statelessness. 189 But the problem is that State practice can contradict or alter the reading of citizenship laws, 190 and States grant (or withdraw) citizenship at their discretion, even when they are not so authorized under their own laws. 191 Secondly, other States add or subtract other elements to international law's definition of statelessness. In the United Kingdom, immigration rules add that one cannot be stateless if they are not in the United Kingdom. 192 Canada's approach, another Commonwealth common-law jurisdiction, is to include a stateless person in its definition of "foreign national," as if to say that stateless persons are nationals of another State. 193 Finally, there could be more eclectic approaches to interpreting the definition that work around and within indeterminacy. Despite the customary nature of the definition, the US Department of State, for instance, refers to a stateless person as "someone who, under national laws, does not enjoy citizenship." 194 The emphasis is on the "enjoyment" of citizenship. 195 In the Czech Republic, a person who is not a Czech citizen is stateless. 196 Hence, although statelessness has a definition in international law, it operates in vagueness. 197 any State, according to its legislation, is considered a stateless person." The Republic of Panama's Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores' Decreto Ejecutivo Numero 10 (de 16 de Enero 2019), ch. 11, art. 5. 188. Fisher, supra note 104, at 271. 189. Id. at 274–78. 190. Id. at 278. 191. See UNHCR, HANDBOOK, supra note 79, ¶ 22. 192. Immigration Rules Part 14 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigrationrules-part-14-stateless-persons. 193. See Immigration and Refugee Protection Act - S.C. 2001, c. 27 (Section 2) https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-2.5/. 194. U.S. DEP'T OF STATE, Statelessness, https://www.state.gov/other-policy-issues/statelessness/. 195. Note, however, that US practice is not consistent. US adjudicators rule on a person's status as "somewhat ambiguous" despite a statement from the State concerned that a person is not its citizen. Fisher, supra note 104, at 270. 196. Helena Hofmannová, Legal Status of Stateless Persons in the Czech Republic, 3 L. Q. 55, 67 (2013). 197. Two State practices are most noteworthy. Hungary's definition looks into the applicant's "national law" without explaining how to determine what a person's national law is. This allows Hungarian agents to pick and choose which laws and instruments to apply. See Hungary's Act II of 2007 on the Admission and Right of Residence of Third-Country Nationals, RRTN Section 2 (b),