THEMATIC BRIEFING | JULY 2021 Deprivation of nationality and the prevention of statelessness in Europe 13 a deprivation order. This should include ensuring that the person possesses another nationality at the time of deprivation of nationality (not whether they could acquire one in the future). Statelessness must be assessed based on the law of the State or States with which the person enjoys a relevant link and how the competent authorities in that State or those States apply the law in practice in the specific case. Nationality status must therefore be confirmed in writing by the competent authority of the State in question, and not be based on another State’s interpretation of its nationality laws.43 States must have regard to the internationally accepted definition of statelessness, established in Article 1 of the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (1954 Convention), and consider guidance on the interpretation of this definition. According to UNHCR guidance, determination of statelessness is a ‘mixed question of fact and law’, requiring an analysis of how the relevant competent authorities apply the law in practice in a specific case.44 It is unclear how Index countries determine statelessness for the purpose of deprivation of nationality on national security grounds. For example, in at least two cases, the UK authorities have conducted their own interpretation of another State’s nationality laws, which has resulted in individuals being deprived of their British citizenship when the other State did not recognise them as their nationals, rendering them stateless.45 8. DISCRIMINATION International framework International and regional human rights norms prohibit discrimination. Article 9 of the 1961 Convention precludes deprivation of nationality on racial, ethnic, religious, or political grounds, irrespective of whether the deprivation would lead to statelessness or not. UNHCR Guidelines clearly establish that the list of discriminatory grounds protected under Article 9 is continuously non-exhaustive.46 The ECN also specifies in Article 5 that States should not discriminate between different categories of nationals: ‘[e]ach State Party shall be guided by the principle of non-discrimination between its nationals, whether they are nationals by birth or have acquired its nationality subsequently’. States must also ensure that deprivation of nationality does not discriminate against family members. Articles 2 and 8 of the CRC (read jointly) and Article 9 CEDAW prohibit derivative loss of nationality. States should therefore ensure that individuals are autonomous, and that nationality is not dependent on another person. All Index countries that have provisions on deprivation of nationality distinguish between different kinds of nationals in how they exercise these powers. Therefore, there are no examples of good practice to highlight whereby States adhere to the norm not to distinguish between their nationals. Some States have explicit safeguards to ensure family members or dependents are not impacted by deprivation of nationality or renunciation of nationality. This is the case in Latvia and Greece, for example, where the law precludes derivative deprivation of nationality. In France, a French spouse who marries a foreigner may renounce French nationality only if they have acquired the foreign nationality of their spouse.