The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has reiterated the Human Rights Committee’s views and noted that non-citizens have no effective remedy against their continued administrative detention, resulting in arbitrary detention.87 The Human Rights Committee has stated that Australia is under obligation to take steps to prevent similar violations in future.88 ISSUE 3: Australia’s Existing, and Proposed Citizenship Deprivation Powers Risk Rendering Persons Stateless 52 There are a number of ways that a person may cease to be a citizen, under Australian law, including renunciation by application,89 revocation due to offences or fraud,90 revocation due to a failure to comply with special residence requirements,91 cessation through engaging in terrorist related conduct,92 cessation through service in the armed forces of an enemy country or declared terrorist organisation,93 or cessation due to conviction for terrorism offences.94 53 Under international law, states have traditionally been granted broad discretion in the regulation of nationality matters. This is not, however, an absolute discretion. States' prerogative in nationality matters has been gradually limited by the evolution of human rights law.95 54 The Principles on Deprivation of Nationality as a National Security Measure,96 and the UNHCR Guidelines on Statelessness No 5: Loss and Deprivation of Nationality97 provide important Committee, Views: Communication No 2229/2012, 116th sess, UN Doc CCPR/C/116/D/2229/2012 (17 November 2016); and Human Rights Committee, Views: Communication No 2233/2013, 116th sess, UN Doc CCPR/C/116/D/2233/2013 (2 May 2016); Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its eightieth session, 20 – 24 November 2017, UN Doc A/HRC/WGAD/2017/71 (21 December 2017). 87 Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its eightieth session, 20 – 24 November 2017, 80th sess, UN Doc A/HRC/WGAD/2017/71 (21 December 2017) [53]-[55]. 88 Human Rights Committee, Views: Communication No 2233/2013, 116th sess, UN Doc CCPR/C/116/D/2233/2013 (2 May 2016) [12]. 89 Australian Citizenship Act (n 34) s 33; see also Foster, McAdam and Wadley, ‘The Prevention and Reduction of Statelessness in Australia: An Ongoing Challenge’ (n 5) 487. 90 Australian Citizenship Act (n 34) s 34; see also Foster, McAdam and Wadley, ‘The Prevention and Reduction of Statelessness in Australia: An Ongoing Challenge’ (n 5) 487. 91 Australian Citizenship Act (n 34) s 34A; see also Foster, McAdam and Wadley, ‘The Prevention and Reduction of Statelessness in Australia: An Ongoing Challenge’ (n 5) 487. 92 Australian Citizenship Act (n 34) s 33AA; see also Foster, McAdam and Wadley, ‘The Prevention and Reduction of Statelessness in Australia: An Ongoing Challenge’ (n 5) 487. 93 Australian Citizenship Act (n 34) s 35; see also Foster, McAdam and Wadley, ‘The Prevention and Reduction of Statelessness in Australia: An Ongoing Challenge’ (n 5) 487. 94 Australian Citizenship Act (n 34) s 35A; see also Foster, McAdam and Wadley, ‘The Prevention and Reduction of Statelessness in Australia: An Ongoing Challenge’ (n 5) 487. 95 Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Submission No 15 to Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, Parliament of Australia, Advisory Report on the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Strengthening the Citizenship Loss Provisions) Bill 2018 (18 January 2019) 2 < https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3025850/PMCS-Joint-Committee-Submission-Jan-2019.pdf >. 96 Principles on Deprivation of Nationality as a National Security Measure, March 2020. Available at: https://files.institutesi.org/PRINCIPLES.pdf. The Principles were drafted by ISI in collaboration with the Open Society Justice Initiative and with support from the Asser Institute and Ashurst LLP. They were developed over a 30-month research and consultation period, with input from more than 60 leading experts in the fields of human rights, nationality and statelessness, counter-terrorism, refugee protection, child rights, migration and other related areas. At the time of submission, they have been endorsed by over 100 individual experts and organisations, including leading academics, UN Special Rapporteurs and Treaty Body members, litigators, judges, parliamentarians and diplomats. The Principles restate or reflect international law and legal standards under the UN Charter, treaty law, customary international law, general principles of law, judicial decisions and legal scholarship, regional and national law and practice. They articulate the international law obligations of States and apply to all situations in which States take or consider taking steps to deprive a person of nationality as a national security measure. More information is available here: https://www.institutesi.org/year-of-actionresources/principles-on-deprivation-of-nationality. 97 UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Guidelines on Statelessness No. 5: Loss and Deprivation of Nationality under Articles 5-9 of the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, May 2020, HCR/GS/20/05, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/5ec5640c4.html. The Guidelines provide authoritative guidance on the interpretation of Articles 5 – 9 of the1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. They draw on the Summary Conclusions of the Expert Meeting on Interpreting the 1961 Statelessness Convention and Avoiding Statelessness Resulting from Loss and Deprivation held in Tunis, Tunisia on 31 October-1 11