A/HRC/19/43 D. Right to an effective remedy 17. Non-citizens also face obstacles in exercising their right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial provided in articles 2, paragraph 3(a), 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.24 18. Numerous factors are of concern in relation to the enjoyment of the right of access to courts, the right to an effective remedy and the principle of fair trial. Non-citizens in general and persons who have been arbitrarily deprived of their nationality in particular are often exposed to the threat of detention or expulsion and may, therefore, decide not assert their rights. As a result, they are often left without the effective means to challenge and obtain remedies for violations of their human rights. For instance, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has expressed concern in relation to the small numbers of complaints of acts of racial discrimination lodged with courts and other relevant authorities in spite of persistent reports of de facto discrimination against non-citizens, including migrants and refugees.25 19. Persons who have been arbitrarily deprived of their nationality may also face legal constraints in relation to their access to an effective remedy, in particular in relation to the right to challenge administrative or judicial decisions affecting them. For example, the Committee against Torture has expressed concerns with regard to the difficulties affecting documented and undocumented non-citizens detained under immigration laws and awaiting deportation, who are unable to contest the validity of their detention or claim asylum or refugee status without access to legal aid.26 Similarly, the Human Rights Committee has recommended that constitutional provisions relating to the right of the executive branch to expel any non-citizen whose stay is deemed inappropriate, with immediate effect and without the possibility of appeal, should be amended in order to comply with the right to an effective remedy.27 The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has also expressed concern about the impossibility to appeal, before a judicial body, presidential decrees declaring a non-citizen as a prohibited migrant.28 Another difficulty is that persons who have been arbitrarily deprived of their nationality often lack documents to establish their identity, which leaves them in a situation where they may not effectively pursue any kind of legal claim. 20. Therefore, a range of procedural safeguards should be adopted to guarantee access to justice in decisions relating to the rights of non-nationals and stateless people, as well as in any decision on the deprivation of nationality itself. Where the initial decision has failed to take all factors into account, the ability to challenge this decision will present a chance to review the decision, taking into account the principles of proportionality and nondiscrimination. Without effective access to justice, persons who have been arbitrarily deprived of their nationality are hindered from seeking a remedy and redress for any subsequent human rights violations suffered. Moreover, in order to gain access to most regional or international individual complaints procedures against human rights violations, applicants are required to first exhaust all domestic remedies, thereby compelling them to 24 25 26 27 28 8 See the report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of non-citizens on examples of practices in regard to non-citizens (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/23/Add.3). Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, concluding observations: Republic of Moldova (CERD/C/MDA/CO/8-9), para. 10. Committee against Torture, concluding observations: South Africa (CAT/C/ZAF/CO/1), para. 16. Human Rights Committee, concluding observations: Mexico (CCPR/C/MEX/CO/5), para. 17. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, concluding observations: Botswana (CERD/C/BWA/CO/16), para. 17.