14 - 19 Article 1(1) can be analysed by breaking the definition down into two constituent elements: “not considered as a national…under the operation of its law” and “by any State”. When determining whether an individual is stateless under Article 1(1), it is often most practical to look first at the matter of “by any State,” as this will not only narrow the scope of inquiry to States with which an individual has ties, but might also exclude from consideration at the outset entities that do not fulfil the concept of “State” under international law. Indeed, in some instances consideration of this element alone will be decisive, such as where the only entity to which an individual has a relevant link is not a State. PART ONE 17. C. INTERPRETION OF TERMS (1) “by any State” (a) Which States need to be examined? 18. Although the definition in Article 1(1) is formulated in the negative (“not considered to be a national by any State”), an enquiry into whether someone is stateless is limited to the States with which a person enjoys a relevant link, in particular by birth on the territory, descent, marriage, adoption or habitual residence. In some cases this may limit the scope of investigation to only one State (or indeed to an entity which is not a State).12 (b) What is a “State”? 19. The definition of “State” in Article 1(1) is informed by how the term has generally evolved in international law. The criteria in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States remain pertinent in this regard. According to that Convention, a State is constituted when an entity has a permanent population, defined territory, government and capacity to enter into relations with other States. Other factors of statehood that have subsequently emerged in international legal discourse include the effectiveness of the entity in question, the right of self-determination, the prohibition on the use of force and the consent of the State which previously exercised control over the territory in question.13 12 The issue of what constitutes a relevant link is dealt with further in Part Two of this Handbook in the context of the standard of proof required to establish statelessness. 13 Where an entity claims to be a new State but the manner in which it emerged involved a breach of a jus cogens norm, this would raise questions about its eligibility for statehood. A jus cogens norm is a principle of customary international law considered to be peremptory in nature, that is it takes precedence over any other obligations (whether customary or treaty in nature), is binding on all States and can only be overridden by another peremptory norm. Examples of jus cogens norms include the prohibition on the use of force and the right to self-determination. 11