38.2 (7) TEMPROSA.DOCX38.2 (7) TEMPROSA.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 2020] 1/16/2021 12:59 PM STATELESSNESS AS RHETORIC 301 From State Discretionism to Greater Responsibilities for the International Community The 1954 Statelessness Convention was designed as a concrete expression of the international community's responsibility to protect the unprotected. Yet a lacuna in the present framework persists: the lack of an international institutional approach to follow through on this commitment at the level of the international community. Conceptually, the UN General Assembly assigned UNHCR with the global mandate of identifying stateless persons while providing "relevant technical and advisory services pertaining to the preparation and implementation of nationality legislation." 399 Article 34 of the 1954 Statelessness Convention also allows issues surrounding the definition of statelessness to be brought before the ICJ under certain circumstances. 400 The UN wants a system-wide approach to statelessness. 401 But, by and large, States engage in a horizontally dispersed practice of interpretation and application of the definition of statelessness, while UNHCR plays only a supportive role. A State has not yet brought another State to the ICJ on an explicit question of statelessness. This current arrangement is no longer tenable. a. International Institutional Statelessness Identification and Determination Assigning greater vertically-oriented responsibilities to a treaty body that has the power to review determinations of statelessness offers a way forward. Under the revision process, States could form and organize a treaty-body for the 1954 Statelessness Convention, composed of an odd number of experts on rights and citizenship law. This would shift the axis from the State to the international community. It would also complement the horizontal enforcement of the 1954 Statelessness Convention and better guide the interpretation of a functional definition of statelessness. UN treaty bodies have a record of success in human rights protection. 402 Most core human rights treaties have expert and independent treaty bodies with developed methods of considering reports. The treaty bodies have the ability to issue general comments or recommendations to improve compliance with international human rights obligations, coordinate with other similar bodies, and work with States, human rights institutions, and non-governmental 399. G.A. Res. 50/152, ¶ 14, U.N. Doc. A/RES/50/152 (Feb. 9, 1996). This is actually weird because the present definition seems to only allow determination to be done by States. To recall, part of the definition reads that a person is stateless when not considered a national "by a State". 400. 1954 Statelessness Convention, supra note 16, art. 34 (allowing disputes on interpretation or application to be brought before the International Court of Justice at the request of a party to dispute). 401. See generally United Nations, Guidance Note, supra note 88. 402. James Crawford, The UN Human Rights Treaty System: A System in Crisis, in THE FUTURE OF UN HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY MONITORING 1, 3 (Philip Alston & James Crawford eds., 2000).