2022 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 4(2) of the mother or the state of birth ‘under the operation’ of their respective legislation.19 B Broad Interpretation of Spanish Law on the Recognition of Spanish Nationality On the one hand, there are two main public international law rules that constitute the hermeneutical principles for a broad interpretation of Spanish law. Firstly, the principle of the best interests of the child. According to Spanish law and public international law — art 3(1) of the CRC — this principle must be the primary consideration in and govern any decision issued by an authority (administrative or judicial) that affects a child.20 Secondly, art 7 of the CRC declares the right of every child to be registered at birth and to acquire a nationality. It also states that state parties (such as Spain) have an obligation to ensure those rights ‘in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless’.21 On the other hand, even though Spanish nationality has traditionally been acquired jus sanguinis, the Civil Code of Spain (‘Civil Code’) was amended — through Law No 51/1982 — to allow cases of jus soli nationality acquisition in order to avoid situations of statelessness for children born in Spain.22 In particular, art 17(1)(c) of the Civil Code establishes a safeguard that grants nationality to children born in Spain to stateless parents or parents unable to pass on their nationality.23 This provision is inspired by the principle of favor nationalitis and it ‘was introduced … in response to Spain’s obligations under international treaties in order to avoid as far as possible the existence of situations of statelessness’.24 In addition, Spanish authorities have developed case law that recognises children as Spanish nationals when they are born in Spain and do not automatically acquire their parents’ nationality or nationalities because certain bureaucratic procedures have to be followed after their birth. Considering all of the previous discussion, the Court of Appeal found that art 17(1)(c) of the Civil Code could be applied in a broad way in this case. The specific circumstances of the case underpin these conclusions. In particular, the Court appreciated that ‘a genuine effort has been made by the [mother] to remove 19 20 21 22 23 24 See Audienca Provincial de Guipúzcoa Judgment (n 1) 5. CRC (n 10) art 3(1). ibid art 7(2). See Ley No 51/1982 de modificación de los artículos 17 al 26 del Código Civil (Spain). ibid art 17(1)(c). See Audienca Provincial de Guipúzcoa Judgment (n 1) 5, where the Court stated: In our legal system, jus sanguinis has traditionally been the criteria for attribution of Spanish nationality. However, the reform of the Spanish Civil Code operated by Law 51/1982 of 13 July, introduced a modification regarding cases of statelessness, and expanded the cases of attribution of Spanish nationality to include those born in Spain to foreign parents ‘if both lack nationality or if the legislation of none of them attributes a nationality to the child’ (current 17.1 c CC). This modification responded to the obligations assumed by Spain through international treaties in order to avoid, as far as possible, the existence of situations of statelessness. Therefore, we find ourselves with a norm prior to the adoption of the Convention on Rights of the Child of 1989 and its subsequent integration into the Spanish legal system inspired by the principle of favor nationalitatis in order to avoid situations of statelessness. 320