4.4 Conclusions and recommendations Although Article 3 of the Norwegian Nationality Act incorporates international law and thus Norway’s commitments under the 1954 and 1961 Conventions, these international obligations have largely not been expressly incorporated into domestic law. The Nationality Act does not contain any express provisions under which persons born in Norway who would otherwise be stateless can obtain Norwegian nationality. For such persons, Norwegian law provides neither for the acquisition of Norwegian nationality at birth by operation of law nor by application. Norwegian law is thus not in accordance with the international standards set forth by Article 1 of the 1961 Convention. Stateless persons in Norway are not barred from acquiring Norwegian nationality, but they cannot do so on the basis of their statelessness and birth in Norway. Even where stateless persons are exempted from certain conditions generally applicable to persons seeking naturalization (a lowered residence period and exemption from the requirement to prove release from nationality), Norwegian naturalization law imposes conditions upon applicants that, when applied to stateless persons born in Norway, are impermissible under Article 1(2). In light of these findings, a review of the Nationality Act is therefore recommended. Specifically, it is recommended that the domestic law be amended to provide for the grant of Norwegian nationality to persons born in Norway who would otherwise be stateless, preferably automatically, by operation of law (ex lege), at birth, as provided by Article 1(1)(a) of the 1961 Convention, or by application pursuant to its Article 1(1)(b). By applying Article 1 of the 1961 Convention in conjunction with Articles 3 and 7 of the CRC, UNHCR recommends that states grant children born on their territory who would otherwise be stateless nationality automatically at birth. If Norway, on the other hand, chooses to grant its nationality by application pursuant to Article 1(1)(b), it then needs to be done in line with the enumerated conditions set out in Article 1(2) of the 1961 Convention. With regard to facilitation of naturalization of stateless persons under the 1954 Convention, it is noted here that Norway provides for a reduced residence period for stateless persons from seven to three years. This is a considerable reduction in the residence period and is to be commended. Norway is encouraged to consider the possibility of reducing some of the other criteria for naturalization for stateless persons, in order to further facilitate their ability to acquire a nationality. Current Norwegian law has strong jus sanguinis provisions for children born abroad to Norwegian nationals. Norway is overcompliant with the relevant 1961 Convention provisions and is thus to be commended. It is recommended, however, that further research be conducted with regard to children born abroad to Norwegians prior to the change in the law of 1 September 2006 to assess whether these children might be at risk of statelessness. Norwegian law contains strong protections for foundlings that are compliant with the 1961 Convention and Norway is thus to be commended. Norwegian law contains a general jurisdiction provision providing that Norwegian law applies aboard Norwegian-flagged sailing vessels. It is understood that Norwegian law will be interpreted such that a birth aboard a Norwegian-flagged ship shall constitute a birth on Norwegian territory for purposes of the 1961 Convention. However, some ambiguity remains as to the law governing Norwegian-registered aircraft. It is therefore recommended that Norway reviews if it may be necessary to amend its laws to expressly provide that births aboard a Norwegian aircraft be deemed to have taken place in Norwegian territory for purposes of the 1961 Convention. UNHCR STOCKHOLM, OCTOBER 2015 51