282 K. Henrard Commission highlighted that the ethnic group concerned has an undisputable valid claim to Ivorian nationality because they had become ‘integral and definitive part of the formation of the Ivorian ethno-cultural landscape’.90 Similarly, in the Yean and Bosico case91 the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACrtHR) did not accept the manipulation of the nationality law in the Dominican Republic which had the effect of impeding the acquisition of Dominican nationality by children of Haitian origin.92 Nationality is primarily acquired at birth, so as to optimize legal certainty, but can also be the result of naturalization, thus enabling migrants that come and settle in a state to obtain the nationality of that state. Birth right citizenship is bestowed on persons automatically, and is not a matter of choice. Interestingly, the criteria developed for this birth right citizenship are considered to be proxies for characteristics that reflect long term loyalty and affiliation with the polity.93 Put differently, the persons that acquire citizenship as a birth right are assumed to be committed and loyal to the state concerned. Naturalisation requirements may differ from state to state, typically these requirements include a certain period of residence, knowledge of the language and the country, and an oath of loyalty. Several of these explicit requirements can be seen to measure attachment to the country, and solidarity.94 In this respect naturalization requirements and procedures can be seen to aim at forging the connection between the newcomer and the polity, seeking explicit consent to be bound by rules of the community and proof of loyalty (what is assumed at birth).95 Authors that have advocated alternative criteria to acquire citizenship similarly focus on criteria that reflect social attachment, and social membership.96 As is further elaborated upon in the contribution of de Groot and Vonk in this special issue, traditionally two systems of birth right citizenship have been distinguished, ius soli (based on the place of birth) and ius sanguinis (based on descent). Ius soli systems see citizenry as a territorial community, which can be related to the feudal idea that those who were born on the territory where subject to the rule of that territory.97 The underlying idea of community is also more future oriented, in the sense that people born on a territory are intended to stay there and develop ties and commitment to the community living on that territory.98 This is exactly the 90 The discriminatory deprivation of nationality was held to constitute a violation of Art. 5 African Charter: OSI v. Cote D’ Ivoire (2016) Communication 318/06 ACHPR, para. 104. 91 IACrtHR Girls Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic (2005), Series C No. 130. 92 See also Kesby (2012), p. 55. 93 Rodriguez (2009). 94 Orgad (2017), p. 341. 95 Bauböck et al. (2006), pp. 449–450. See also Kostakopoulou (2003), p. 88, and Orgad (2017), p. 341: it is about proving that you are worthy. 96 See, inter alia, Shachar (2009) who advocates in her book Birthright Lottery for a ius nexi: citizenship by genuine connection to the country, which focuses on social membership as gate to political/legal membership; and Spiro (2011), p. 721 who calls for a presumption in favour of nationality on the basis of habitual residence. 97 Bauböck (2015), p. 6. 98 See also Brubaker (1992), p. 123. 123