728 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW [Vol. 105:694 non-Jews,225 as has CERD about a Qatari naturalization measure favoring nationals of Arab states.226 Since affinity preferences are discriminatory in the sense that they favor nationals of some states over others, they may be headed for a collision with nondiscrimination norms. Administrative discretion, processing issues, and application fees. States are being challenged for procedural irregularities in their naturalization regimes, especially when they raise issues of potential discrimination. CERD has taken Switzerland to task for its naturalization policies as being “too protracted and selective,”227 and Croatia for “excessive delays” in processing the citizenship applications of non-Croat ethnics.228 The Human Rights Committee condemned the Latvia naturalization regime as “calculated to delay the naturalization process for many years.”229 The Dominican Republic has been condemned for a birth registration scheme that, in practice, deprives residents of Haitian origin from securing citizenship due them under Dominican law.230 Other countries cited for administrative barriers to citizenship have included Macedonia231 and the United States.232 Among African states, naturalization, while available in principle, may “in practice . . . be almost impossible to obtain.”233 As two leading legal scholars on citizenship recommend, human rights standards should guarantee procedural minimum standards, which include reasonably low fees that do not create financial deterrents for applicants, clearly stated requirements that do not allow for 225 Committee on Economic, Social & Cultural Rights, Report on the Thirtieth and Thirty-first Sessions, May 5–23, Nov. 10 –28, 2003, Concluding Observations: Israel, para. 261, UN Doc. E/2004/22 (Mar. 8, 2004). 226 CERD, Concluding Observations: Qatar, para. 11, UN Doc. CERD/C/60/CO/11 (May 21, 2002). 227 CERD, Annual Report: Czech Republic, para. 124, UN Doc. A/53/18, (Sept. 10, 1998); see also CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 316, UN Doc. A/53/18 (Sept. 10, 1998) (highlighting “delays in processing of applications for citizenship”). 228 CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 497, UN Doc. A/48/18 (Sept. 15, 1993); CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 316, UN Doc. A/53/18 (Sept. 10, 1998); see also CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 17, UN Doc. CERD/C/HRV/CO/8 (Mar. 24, 2009) (calling for Croatia to “remove any administrative and other obstacles and assist persons whose access to obligatory documentation is limited, such as persons of Roma, Serb and Bosniak origin”). 229 Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Latvia, para. 350, UN Doc. A/50/40, vol. I (Oct. 3, 1995). CERD likewise called on Latvia to “streamline the process of naturalization.” CERD, Concluding Observations: Latvia, para. 404, UN Doc. A/54/18 (Sept. 29, 1999). 230 See Girls Yean v. Dominican Republic, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R., para. 171 (Sept. 8, 2005). The practice was found discriminatory, inconsistent with Article 20 of the American Convention of Human Rights, Nov. 22, 1969, 1144 UNTS 123, which provides that individuals should not be arbitrarily deprived of nationality. See Girls Yean, para. 174; see also Gerald L. Neuman, The Resilience of Nationality, 101 ASIL PROC. 97, 98 (2007) (“a remarkable example of international constraint on a state’s power to determine who its nationals are”); Committee on the Rights of the Child, Concluding Observations: Nepal, paras. 42– 44, UN Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.261 (Sept. 21, 2005) (criticizing birth registration system having the effect of discriminating against individuals born to single mothers). 231 Committee on Economic, Social & Cultural Rights, Concluding Observations: Macedonia, para. 32, UN Doc. E/C.12/MKD/CO/1 ( Jan. 15, 2008) (calling for removal of “administrative obstacles” to securing of citizenship by Roma). 232 Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Addendum: Mission to the United States of America, para. 70, UN Doc. A/HRC/11/36/Add.3 (Apr. 28, 2009) (expressing “serious concern” regarding “long delay in the processing of citizenship applications” following the September 11 attacks). 233 MANDBY, STRUGGLES FOR CITIZENSHIP IN AFRICA, supra note 5, at 141. This content downloaded from 82.196.111.31 on Thu, 07 Oct 2021 15:20:30 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms