The Right to Nationality of Foundlings in

International Law
by attyralph
By Ralph A. Sarmiento[1]

Introduction
This article seeks to answer the question of whether International Law
sufficiently protects the right of foundlings to a nationality. In particular, it
focuses on the issue of whether International Law affords foundlings the right
to be considered nationals of the State in which they are found, and whether
States have a binding obligation to confer their nationality on foundlings
found in their territory.
As used in this article, a foundling is a child of unknown parentage found
abandoned on the territory of a State.[2] It must be an infant at the time it
was found abandoned. The Black's Law Dictionary defines a foundling as "a
deserted or abandoned infant; a child without a parent or guardian, its
relatives being unknown."[3] The Oxford English Dictionary also uses the
term infant in defining foundling, thus "an infant that has been abandoned
by its parents and is discovered and cared for by others."[4] The word infant,
on the other hand, is defined as "a very young child or baby."[5]
This article will argue that there are gaps in International Law that result in
inadequate protection and implementation of the right of foundlings to a
nationality. In particular, this article will show that the obligation of a State to
confer its nationality upon a foundling in its territory exists only as a matter
of treaty obligation in International Law.
This article is structured as follows: The first section will talk about
nationality and discuss the different principles of acquiring a nationality and
the corresponding obligations of States. The second section will talk about
statelessness and the measures taken States to reduce it. The third section
will examine the rules that confer nationality on foundlings in international
conventions and treaties, and determine the scope of their coverage and
their binding nature. The fourth section will determine if the existing
practices or rules that confer nationality on foundlings have attained the
status of customary international law and, therefore, binding upon all States.
For purposes of this article, the terms nationality and citizenship shall be
used interchangeably and without distinction. Most States

consider citizenship, which is the term that is commonly used in municipal or

national law, as synonymous with nationality, which is the term used in
International Law. The United States (U.S.) and Russia are two of the notable
exceptions. Under U.S. law, not all U.S. nationals are U.S. citizens. For
example, the inhabitants of American Samoa and Swain Island are
considered nationals for International Law purposes but are not
considered citizens for purposes of the U.S. Constitution and its laws.
[6] Under Russian law, the term nationality is associated with the ethnicity of
a person, while the term citizenship refers to the legal bond between an
individual and the State.[7]

Nationality
Nationality is generally understood as the legal bond that connects a person
to a particular State. It constitutes his membership in the particular State. It
makes him anational (or a citizen in the point of view of municipal law) of
that State.
Nationality creates reciprocal obligations between the citizen and the State.
It imposes upon the citizen the duty to render allegiance to the State and
subjects him to the obligations created by the laws of that State. Thus, it is
the basis of the State's exercise of jurisdiction over the person. On the part
of the State, nationality imposes the responsibility to protect the citizen. It
also gives the State the right to accord diplomatic protection to its nationals
and to make claims on their behalf.
Article 15(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights[8] provides that
everyone has a right to nationality and that no one shall be arbitrarily
deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
International Law, however, recognizes the right of each State to determine
who its citizens are, and to establish its own standards for conferring
nationality albeit only for domestic law purposes. In the Nottebohm case,
[9] the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Liechtenstein is the sole
judge of whether Nottebohm is a citizen of the State but such is for domestic
law purposes only as other nations are not obliged to recognize Nottebohm's
Liechtenstein citizenship especially absent a genuine link between
Nottebohm and that State.
The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of
Nationality Laws[10] (hereafter, the "1930 Hague Convention") provides the
following rules in determining a persons nationality:
"It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals.

This law shall be recognized by other States in so far as it is consistent with

international conventions, international custom, and the principles of law
generally recognized with regard to nationality." (Article 1)
"Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of a
particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of that
State." (Article 2)
A State may confer its nationality exclusively upon persons born within its
territory or jurisdiction by the application of the principle of jus soli (by place
of birth)[11] regardless of the nationality of their parents. A State may also
confer nationality only to persons whose parents are nationals of the State
by the application of the principle of jus sanguinis(by right of blood)
regardless of whether they are born within or outside its territory. A State
may also apply both principles of jus soli and jus sanguinis. A State may also
confer nationality upon persons through naturalization, which does not
require the naturalized citizen to be born within the territory of the State or
to be born of parents who are nationals of the State. A State may also
consider marriage and adoption as methods of acquiring a nationality.
The concurrent application of the principles of jus soli and jus sanguinis may
result in an individual having the nationalities of two States, i.e., dual
citizenship. If a child whose parents' State of nationality applies the principle
of jus sanguinis is born in the territory of another State that applies the
principle of jus soli, the child would be possessed of dual citizenship. The
child acquires both the nationality of his parents' State of nationality and the
nationality of the State where he was born.
Article 3 of the 1930 Hague Convention recognizes that a person having two
or more nationalities may be regarded as its national by each of the States
whose nationality he possesses. However, Article 5 of the said Convention
also adds that:
"Within a third State, a person having more than one nationality shall be
treated as if he had only one. Without prejudice to the application of its law
in matters of personal status and of any conventions in force, a third State
shall, of the nationalities which any such person possesses, recognise
exclusively in its territory either the nationality of the country in which he is
habitually and principally resident, or the nationality of the country with
which in the circumstances he appears to be in fact most closely connected."

Statelessness
While the concurrent application of the principles of jus soli and jus
sanguinis may result in a person having dual or multiple nationalities, their
conflicting application, on the other hand, may result in an anomaly whereby
an individual is not possessed of any nationality.
If a child whose parents' State of nationality exclusively applies the principle
of jus soli is born in the territory of another State that exclusively applies the
principle of jus sanguinis, the child would not be considered a citizen of
either State; hence, a stateless person.
Article 1 of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless
Persons[12] defines astateless person as a person who is not considered as a
national by any State under the operation of its laws. Since many rights and
privileges afforded by States may be exercised only by their nationals, a
stateless person, therefore, is at a big disadvantage.
While nationality is the basis of the reciprocal obligation of allegiance on the
part of the citizen and obligation of protection on the part of the State, a
stateless person is not without obligations to the State in which he finds
himself. Article 2 of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless
Persons[13] provides that:
"Every stateless person has duties to the country in which he finds himself,
which require in particular that he conform to its laws and regulations as well
as to measures taken for the maintenance of public order."
Reciprocally, although not a national of the State in which he finds himself, a
stateless person is not entirely without right and protection. Under the
same Convention,[14] a stateless person shall be accorded the same
treatment at least as favorable as that accorded to the nationals of the State
with respect to freedom to practice their religion and freedom as regards the
religious education of their children.[15] A stateless person shall also be
accorded the same treatment granted to a national of the country of his
habitual residence with respect to rights to artistic rights and industrial
property, free access to courts, rationing, elementary education, and public
relief and assistance.[16] A stateless person shall also be accorded the same
treatment which shall be as favorable as possible and, in any event, not less
favorable than that accorded to aliens generally in the same circumstances
with respect to rights to movable and immovable property, right of
association, wage-earning employment, liberal professions, housing, and

freedom of movement.[17]
Aiming to reduce statelessness by international agreement, the 1961
Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness[18] has adopted the following
measures to prevent statelessness:
"A Contracting State shall grant its nationality to a person born in its territory
who would otherwise be stateless." (Article 1)
"A Contracting State shall grant its nationality to a person, not born in the
territory of a Contracting State, who would otherwise be stateless, if the
nationality of one of his parents at the time of the persons birth was that of
that State." (Article 4)

The Right to Nationality in International

Law
Since nationality is the legal bond between a State and an individual, such
bond is not possible without the consent of the State. Such consent may be
manifested by a State in several ways:
1.

Expressly, through a municipal law that confers nationality upon a

foundling;

2.

Expressly, through an international convention or treaty where a

State assumes the obligation to confer its nationality upon foundlings in
its territory; or

3.

Impliedly, through a rule of customary international law that imposes

an obligation on the State to confer its nationality upon foundlings in its
territory.

This article focuses only on conferment of nationality on foundlings either by

way of an obligation assumed under an international convention or imposed
by an international custom or norm. However, the examination of municipal
laws that confer nationality upon foundlings is still relevant as evidence of a
general practice accepted as law, i.e., an international custom.[19]
Hence, under International Law, the right of a foundling to nationality can be
based on international conventions or on international customs, both of
which are considered to be sources of International Law pursuant to Article
38, paragraph 1 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice ("ICJ
Statute").[20]

The Right to Nationality in Resolutions of

the United Nations General Assembly
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,[21] which was adopted by the
General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1948, has codified
"nationality" as a human right.[22] Article 15 of the Declaration reads:
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right
to change his nationality.
As to the binding nature of resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly,
Professor Ian Brownlie expresses the view that these resolutions, in general,
are not binding on member States. He adds, however, that when the
resolutions are concerned with general norms of international law, then
acceptance by a majority vote constitutes evidence of the opinions of
governments in the widest forum for the expression of such opinions.[23]
As a mere resolution of the General Assembly, the Universal Declaration of
Human Rightsis not per se legally binding. There is, however, a view that
since 1948 the Declaration has become binding as a new rule of Customary
International Law.[24] Paragraph 2 of theProclamation of Teheran,[25] which
was adopted by the International Conference on Human Rights held in Iran in
1968 declares: "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states a common
understanding of the peoples of the world concerning the inalienable and
inviolable rights of all members of the human family and constitutes an
obligation for the members of the international community."
In 1959, the Declaration on the Rights of the Child[26] was proclaimed by the
U.N. General Assembly through its Resolution 1386(XIV) of 20 November
1959. It contains a more emphatic provision on the right to nationality as
applied to children as it makes it an entitlement of a child from birth.
Principle 3 of the Declaration reads:
"The child shall be entitled from his birth to a name and a nationality."
Another resolution of the U.N. General Assembly, the Declaration on Social
and Legal Principles relating to the Protection and Welfare of Children,
[27]

adopted on 3 December 1986, and published on 6 February 1987, also

affirms the right to nationality as applied to children. Article 8 of the said

Declaration reads:
The child shall at all times have a name, a nationality and a legal
representative. The child should not, as a result of foster placement,

adoption or any alternative regime, be deprived of his or her name,

nationality or legal representative unless the child thereby acquires a new
name, nationality or legal representative.

The Right to Nationality in International

Conventions
International conventions or treaties are agreements that establish rules that
are expressly recognized by the parties to them.[28] The Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties[29]defines a treaty as an international agreement
concluded between States in written form and governed by international law,
whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related
instruments and whatever its particular designation.[30]
Since express consent is required for a State to be bound by the rules that
international conventions or treaties establish, States that do not become a
party to a particular convention or treaty cannot be bound by its terms. This
principle was explained by the ICJ in the North Sea Continental Shelf
cases[31] where it stated that:
"In principle, when a number of States, including the one whose conduct is
invoked, and those invoking it, have drawn up a convention specifically
providing for a particular method by which the intention to become bound by
the rgime of the convention is to be manifested-namely by the carrying out
of certain prescribed formalities (ratification, accession), it is not lightly to be
presumed that a State which has not carried out these formalities, though at
all times fully able and entitled to do so, has nevertheless somehow become
bound in another way. Indeed if it were a question not of obligation but of
rights,if, that is to say, a State which, though entitled to do so, had not
ratified or acceded, attempted to claim rights under the convention, on the
basis of a declared willingness to be bound by it, or of conduct evincing
acceptance of the conventional rgime, it would simply be told that, not
having become a party to the convention it could not claim any rights under
it until the professed willingness and acceptance had been manifested in the
prescribed form."[32]
The principle is also echoed in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
It states: "A treaty does not create either obligations or rights for a third
State without its consent."[33] It adds further: "An obligation arises for a
third State from a provision of a treaty if the parties to the treaty intend the
provision to be the means of establishing the obligation and the third State
expressly accepts that obligation in writing."[34]

Therefore, a rule conferring nationality upon foundlings, if established

pursuant to an international convention or treaty, is only binding on States
that are parties to the said convention or treaty. Consequently, foundlings
found in States that are not parties to such an international convention may
not compel the State to confer them with its nationality.
Thus, the following international conventions that affirm the right of
everyone to a nationality must be understood as binding only on State which
are parties to them, either by ratification, accession, or any other means
allowed by the particular convention in question.
The Council of Europe affirms the right of everyone to a nationality through
the European Convention on Nationality,[35] which it adopted on 6
November 1997 at Strasbourg. It provides:
Article 4 Principles
The rules on nationality of each State Party shall be based on the following
principles:
1.

everyone has the right to a nationality;

2.

statelessness shall be avoided;

3.

no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her nationality;

The Arab States also recognize the right to a nationality. Article 29 of

the Arab Charter on Human Rights,[36] which was adopted by the Council of
the League of Arab States on 22 May 2004, states:
1.

Everyone has the right to nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily or

unlawfully deprived of his nationality.

2.

States parties shall take such measures as they deem appropriate, in

accordance with their domestic laws on nationality, to allow a child to
acquire the mother's nationality, having due regard, in all cases, to the
best interests of the child.

3.

No one shall be denied the right to acquire another nationality,

having due regard for the domestic legal procedures in his country.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) also echoes a similar

declaration which affirms the right to nationality. Article 18 of the ASEAN
Human Rights Declaration,[37] which was adopted on 18 November 2012 at
Phnom Penh, Cambodia, states:
"Every person has the right to a nationality as prescribed by law. No person
shall be arbitrarily deprived of such nationality nor denied the right to
change that nationality."
The Latin American States also uphold the right to nationality of every
person. TheAmerican Convention on Human Rights, "Pact of San Jose, Costa
Rica,"[38] which was adopted by the Organization of American States (OAS) on
22 November 1969, states:
Article 20. Right to Nationality
1.

Every person has the right to a nationality.

2.

Every person has the right to the nationality of the state in whose
territory he was born if he does not have the right to any other
nationality.

3.

No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality or of the right to

change it.

The 1995 Commonwealth of Independent States Convention on Human

Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,[39] which was adopted on 26 May 1995
at Minsk, Belarus, also provides that:
Article 24
1.

Everyone shall have the right to citizenship.

2.

No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his citizenship or of the right

to change it.

In other international conventions, this right to a nationality is guaranteed in

a clearer language, i.e., as the right to acquire a nationality, especially in the
case of children.
Article 24(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
[40] which was adopted on 16 December 1966 in New York, affirms that:
"Every child has the right to acquire a nationality."

Article 7(1) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child,[41] which was
adopted on 20 November 1989 in New York, reads:
"The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right
from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and as far as possible,
the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents."
Article 7(2) of the same Convention[42] imposes the further obligation upon
States Parties to "ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance
with their national law and their obligations under the relevant international
instruments in this field, in particular where the child would otherwise be
stateless."
The African States also assert the right of every child to acquire a nationality.
The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child,[43] which was
adopted by the Organization of African Unity on 11 July 1990 at Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia, states:
Article 6: Name and Nationality
1.

Every child shall have the right from his birth to a name.

2.

Every child shall be registered immediately after birth.

3.

Every child has the right to acquire a nationality.

4.

States Parties to the present Charter shall undertake to ensure that

their Constitutional legislation recognize the principles according to
which a child shall acquire the nationality of the State in the territory of
which he has been born if, at the time of the child's birth, he is not
granted nationality by any other State in accordance with its laws.

The Scope and Meaning of the Right to

Nationality
While there is no question about the binding nature of the provisions of
international conventions protecting the right of everyone to a nationality
and to acquire a nationality, the question, however, is the scope of the said
provisions and the nature of the obligation they impose upon the states
which are parties to them. Are the said general rights to a nationality and to
acquire a nationality sufficient to impose a binding obligation upon a state
party to confer its nationality upon a foundling in its territory?

In General Comments No. 17: Article 24 (Rights of the Child),[44] the Human
Rights Committee has made the following observations:
"Special attention should also be paid, in the context of the protection to be
granted to children, to the right of every child to acquire a nationality, as
provided for in article 24, paragraph 3. While the purpose of this provision is
to prevent a child from being afforded less protection by society and the
State because he is stateless, it does not necessarily make it an obligation
for States to give their nationality to every child born in their territory."
In his Guide to the "Travaux Prparatoires" of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights,[45] Marc Bossuyt made the following observations
with respect to the adoption of the wording of Article 24, paragraph 3 of the
ICCPR.
"During the ensuing debate, the word 'acquire' was inserted in draft Article
24(3), and the words 'from his birth' were deleted. Accordingly, the word
'acquire' would infer that naturalization was not to be considered as a right
of the individual but was accorded by the State at its discretion.[46]
Hence, the general rights of everyone to nationality and of every child to
acquire a nationality do not impose an unqualified obligation on the part of a
State party to give its nationality on every child born on its territory.
The same interpretation would apply to all the other international
conventions that protect the right of everyone to nationality and the more
specific right of a child to acquire a nationality, including the Convention on
the Rights of the Child which was adopted after the ICCPR. In fact, Article
7(2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child provides: "States parties
shall ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance with their
national law and their obligations under the relevant international
instruments in this field, in particular where the child would otherwise be
stateless."
Article 7(2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child underscores the
equal importance of a State's "national law" and its "obligations under the
relevant international instruments" in ensuring its implementation of the
right of a child to acquire a nationality, in particular where the child would
otherwise be stateless. This obligation is explained by the Human Rights
Committee in paragraph 8 of General Comments No. 17,[47] which reads:
"States are required to adopt every appropriate measure, both internally and
in cooperation with other States, to ensure that every child has a nationality

when he is born. In this connection, no discrimination with regard to the

acquisition of nationality should be admissible under internal law as between
legitimate children and children born out of wedlock or of stateless parents
or based on the nationality status of one or both of the parents. The
measures adopted to ensure that children have a nationality should always
be referred to in reports by States parties.

International Conventions that Specifically

Apply to Foundlings
While the international conventions cited above deal with the right to
nationality as applied to anyone or any person, or to children in general,
there are several international conventions that contain specific provisions
that apply to foundlings and their right to a nationality.
The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the
Conflict of Nationality Laws[48] provides:
Article 14. A child whose parents are both unknown shall have the
nationality of the country of birth. If the childs parentage is established, its
nationality shall be determined by the rules applicable in cases where the
parentage is known.
A foundling is, until the contrary is proved, presumed to have been born on
the territory of the State in which it was found.
Article 15. Where the nationality of a State is not acquired automatically by
reason of birth on its territory, a child born on the territory of that State of
parents having no nationality, or of unknown nationality, may obtain the
nationality of the said State. The law of that State shall determine the
conditions governing the acquisition of its nationality in such cases.
The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness,[49] on the
other hand, contains the following provisions:
Article 1
1.

A Contracting State shall grant its nationality to a person born in its

territory who would otherwise be stateless. Such nationality shall be
granted:

(a) at birth, by operation of law, or

(b) upon an application being lodged with the appropriate authority, by or on

behalf of the person concerned, in the manner prescribed by the national
law. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 of this article, no such
application may be rejected.
A Contracting State which provides for the grant of its nationality in
accordance with subparagraph (b) of this paragraph may also provide for the
grant of its nationality by operation of law at such age and subject to such
conditions as may be prescribed by the national law.
Article 2
A foundling found in the territory of a Contracting State shall, in the absence
of proof to the contrary, be considered to have been born within that
territory of parents possessing the nationality of that State.
Article 12
1.

In relation to a Contracting State which does not, in accordance with

the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 1 or of article 4 of this
Convention, grant its nationality at birth by operation of law, the
provisions of paragraph 1 of article 1 or of article 4, as the case may be,
shall apply to persons born before as well as to persons born after the
entry into force of this Convention.

2.

The provisions of paragraph 4 of article 1 of this Convention shall

apply to persons born before as well as to persons born after its entry
into force.

3.

The provisions of article 2 of this Convention shall apply only to

foundlings found in the territory of a Contracting State after the entry
into force of the Convention for that State.

The European Convention on Nationality[50] also provides:

Article 6 Acquisition of Nationality
1 Each State Party shall provide in its internal law for its nationality to be
acquired ex legeby the following persons:
1.

children one of whose parents possesses, at the time of the birth of

these children, the nationality of that State Party, subject to any

exceptions which may be provided for by its internal law as regards
children born abroad. With respect to children whose parenthood is
established by recognition, court order or similar procedures, each
State Party may provide that the child acquires its nationality following
the procedure determined by its internal law;
2.

foundlings found in its territory who would otherwise be stateless.

The Covenant on the Rights of the Child in Islam,[51] which was adopted by
the 32nd Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers in Sana'a, Republic of
Yemen in June 2005, states:
Article Seven - Identity
1.

A child shall, from birth, have right to a good name, to be registered

with authorities concerned, to have his nationality determined and to
know his/her parents, all his/her relatives and foster mother.

2.

States Parties to the Covenant shall safeguard the elements of the

child's identity, including his/her name, nationality, and family relations
in accordance with their domestic laws and shall make every effort to
resolve the issue of statelessness for any child born on their territories
or to any of their citizens outside their territory.

3.

The child of unknown descent or who is legally assimilated to this

status shall have the right to guardianship and care but without
adoption. He shall have a right to a name, title and nationality.

The Right to Nationality in Customary

International Law
The Charter of the United Nations[52] acknowledges the existence of
customary international law through Article 38(1)(b) of the ICJ Statute, which
is incorporated into the Charter by Article 92 thereof. It states:
"The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with International Law
such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply... international custom, as
evidence of a general practice accepted as law."[53]
Being a general practice accepted as law, a rule of customary international
Law requires the presence of a State practice (usus) and the belief that such

practice is obligatory as a matter of law or juridical necessity (opinio juris

sive necesitatis). Opinio juris was described by Professor Brownlie as a
"sense of legal obligation, as opposed to motives of courtesy, fairness, or
morality."
We will now turn to examine if there is evidence of practice that States
adhere to, out of a sense of legal obligation (opinio juris), that is sufficient to
maintain that the obligation of a State to give its nationality upon a foundling
born or found on its territory has crystallized into a rule of customary
international law.
State practice in the form of having municipal laws granting nationality on
foundlings in their territories has been found in the following States:
1.

United States of America - Section 301(f) of its Immigration and

Nationality Act,[54]also known as the Foundling Statute, provides:

SEC. 301. The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at
birth:
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under
the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twentyone years, not to have been born in the United States;
1.

Canada - The Citizenship Act[55] provides:

Section 3, Par. 4. (1) For the purposes of paragraph 3(1) (a), every person
who, before apparently attaining the age of seven years, was found as a
deserted child in Canada shall be deemed to have been born in Canada,
unless the contrary is proved within seven years from the date the person
was found.
1.

Austria - The Nationality Act of 1985[56] provides that:

Article 8. (1) Until proof to the contrary, a person under the age of six
months found on the territory of the Republic is regarded as national by
descent.
1.

Bulgaria - The Law for the Bulgarian Citizenship[57] provides:

Art. 11. Considered born on the territory of the Republic of Bulgaria is a child
found on this territory, whose parents are unknown.
1.

Croatia - The Law on Croatian Citizenship[58] provides:

Article 7. A child who was born or found on the territory of the Republic of
Croatia shall acquire Croatian citizenship if both of his or her parents are
unknown or are persons whose citizenship is unknown or are stateless
persons. The child shall lose Croatian citizenship if by time he or she is
fourteen it shall be determined that both of his or her parents are foreign
citizens.
1.

Denmark - The Danish Nationality Act[59] provides:

Article 1(2) A child found abandoned in Denmark will, in the absence of

evidence to the contrary, be considered a Danish national.
1.

Finland - Section 12 of its Nationality Act of 2003[60] provides:

Section 12. Foundlings and children of parents with unknown citizenship

A foundling who is found in Finland is considered to be a Finnish citizen as
long as he or she has not been established as a citizen of a foreign State. If
the child has been established as a citizen of a foreign State only after he or
she has reached the age of five, the child retains Finnish citizenship,
however.
1.

Greece - The Greek Nationality Code[61] states:

Article 1(2). A person born on Greek territory shall acquire the Greek
nationality by birth, provided that such person does not acquire any foreign
nationality by birth or is of unknown nationality.
1.

Hungary - The ACT LV of 1993 on Hungarian Citizenship[62] states:

Section 3(3) Until proven to the contrary, the following persons shall be
recognized as Hungarian citizens:
1.

b) children born of unknown parents and found in Hungary.

2.

Italy - The Law No. 91 of 1992[63] provides:

Article 1(2). The child of unknown parents who is found abandoned in the
territory of the Republic shall, unless possession of another citizenship is
proved, be deemed citizen by birth.
1.

Spain - The Spanish Civil Code[64] provides that:

Article 17. The following persons are Spaniards by birth:

1.

d) Those born in Spain of uncertain filiation. For these purposes,

minors whose first known place of existence is in Spanish territory shall
be presumed born within Spanish territory.

2.

Sweden - The Act on Swedish Citizenship[65] provides:

Section 2 Any foundling discovered in Sweden shall be considered to be a

Swedish citizen until any indication to the contrary is discovered.
1.

United Kingdom - The British Nationality Act of 1981[66] states:

(2) A new-born infant who, after commencement, is found abandoned in the

United Kingdom shall, unless the contrary is shown, be deemed for the
purposes of subsection (1)(a) to have been born in the United Kingdom after commencement; and
(b) to have been born to a parent who at the time of the birth was a British
citizen or settled in the United Kingdom.
1.

India - Section 3(1) of its Citizenship Act of 1955[67] states:

2.

Citizenship by birth

(1) Except as provided in sub-section (2), every person born in India, (a) on or after the 26th day of January, 1950.
Mere birth in India, even if both the parents are unknown, is sufficient.[68]

1.

Sri Lanka - Its Citizenship Act of 1948[69] provides:

2.

Foundlings

Every person first found in Ceylon as a newly born deserted infant of

unknown and unascertainable parentage shall, until the contrary is proved,
be deemed to have the status of a citizen of Ceylon by descent.
1.

South Korea - Article 2, paragraph 2 of its Nationality Law[70] reads:

Article 2. Attainment of Nationality by Birth

(1) A person falling under any of the following subparagraphs shall be a
national of the Republic of Korea at birth:
3.

A person who was born in the Republic of Korea, if both of the

person's parents are unknown or have no identity.

(2) An abandoned child found in the Republic of Korea shall be recognized as

born in the Republic of Korea.
1.

Egypt - Its Law No. 26 of 1975 Concerning Egyptian

Nationality[71] provides:

Article 2: Shall be considered Egyptians:

4.

Those who were born in Egypt of unknown parents. A foundling in

Egypt shall be considered as born in it, unless otherwise proved.

5.

Iraq - Its Law No. (46) of 1963[72] provides:

Article 4: Shall hereby deemed to be an Iraqi National:

3.

Every person in Iraq of unknown parents. The foundling who is found

in Iraq, shall be deemed to be born there unless there shall be an
evidence against it.

4.

Kuwait - Its Nationality Law of 1959[73] provides:

Article 3. Kuwaiti nationality is acquired by any person born in Kuwait whose

parents are unknown. A foundling is deemed to have been born in Kuwait

unless the contrary is proved.
1.

Mozambique - Its Nationality Act of 1975[74] states:

Article 1
1.

The following shall be Mozambican nationals, provided they are born

in Mozambique:

(b) Persons born of stateless parents or parents of unknown nationality or of

unknown parents;
1.

Algeria - The Nationality Law of 1970[75] states that:

Article 7. The following are of Algerian nationality by birth in Algeria:

(1) the child born in Algeria of unknown parents;
However, the child born in Algeria of unknown parents shall not be
considered to have ever been Algerian if, before he comes of age, it is
established that he is also of foreign descent and if he possesses the
nationality of his foreign parent in accordance with the law of that country.
Any foundling found in Algeria is considered to be born in Algeria until the
contrary has been proved.
1.

Belize - The Nationality Act of 1981[76] provides:

2.

Foundlings.

Every person first found in Belize as a newly born deserted infant of unknown
and unascertainable parentage shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed
to have the status of a citizen of Belize by descent.
1.

The following post-Communist States in Europe also grant

exceptional jus solicitizenship for children of unknown parents, found in
the territory, particularly: Albania, Bosnia H., Czech Republic, Estonia,
FRY/Serbia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, Romania,
Slovakia, and Slovenia.[77]

The above shows that there is a big corpus of domestic statutes granting
citizenship on foundlings. However, whether it satisfies the state practice
requirement of customary international law is an entirely different question.
The State practice, to establish a rule of customary international law, must
be extensive, virtually uniform, and show a general recognition that a rule of
law or legal obligation is involved. As stated by the International Court of
Justice in the North Sea Continental Shelfcases:
"Although the passage of only a short period of time is not necessarily, or of
itself, a bar to the formation of a new rule of customary international law on
the basis of what was originally a purely conventional rule, an indispensable
requirement would be that within the period in question, short though it
might be, State practice, including that of States whose interests are
specially affected, should have been both extensive and virtually uniform in
the sense of the provision invoked; and should moreover have occurred in
such a way as to show a general recognition that a rule of law or legal
obligation is involved."[78]
However, perfect uniformity in the application of the practice is not really
necessary. In theCase Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and
against Nicaragua[79] when it examined the customary nature of the
principles of non-use of force and non-intervention, the ICJ stated that:
"It is not to be expected that in the practice of States the application of the
rules in question should have been perfect, in the sense that States should
have refrained, with complete consistency, from the use of force or from
intervention in each other's internal affairs. The Court does not consider that,
for a rule to be established as customary, the corresponding practice must
be in absolutely rigorous conformity with the rule. In order to deduce the
existence of customary rules, the Court deems it sufficient that the conduct
of States should, in general, be consistent with such rules, and that instances
of State conduct inconsistent with a given rule should generally have been
treated as breaches of that rule, not as indications of the recognition of a
new rule. If a State acts in a way prima facie incompatible with a recognized
rule, but defends its conduct by appealing to exceptions or justifications
contained within the rule itself, then whether or not the State's conduct is in
fact justifiable on that basis, the significance of that attitude is to confirm
rather than to weaken the rule."[80]
The ICJ also emphasized the necessity of opinio juris in several decisions. In

the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, it observed:

"Not only must the acts concerned amount to a settled practice, but they
must also be such, or be carried out in such a way, as to be evidence of a
belief that this practice is rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule of
law requiring it. The need for such a belief, i.e., the existence of a subjective
element, is implicit in the very notion of the opinio juris sive necessitatis. The
States concerned must therefore feel that they are conforming to what
amounts to a legal obligation. The frequency, or even habitua1 character of
the acts is not in itself enough. There are many international acts, e.g., in the
field of ceremonial and protocol, which are performed almost invariably, but
which are motivated only by considerations of courtesy, convenience or
tradition, and not by any sense of legal duty."[81]
While the State practice of conferring nationality on foundlings is sufficiently
dense and extensive, it does not appear to be virtually uniform.
A number of States give their citizenship on foundlings found in their
territory without requiring that the foundling must have been born in their
territory. Some States, on the other hand, require that a foundling be born in
their territory in strict application of the principle of jus soli. But some States
implement a presumption that foundlings are deemed to have been born in
their territory unless the contrary is proved.
Other States implementing such presumption impose a period within which
such presumption can be rebutted, and that after such period and there is no
evidence against it, then the presumption becomes conclusive. An example
of this is Finland, where a foundling retains Finnish citizenship if established
as a citizen of another State only after he or she has reached the age of five.
[82] Another example is Canada that considers a deserted child to have been
born in Canada, unless the contrary is proved within seven years from the
date the person was found.[83]
Some States also implement an age requirement on foundlings as a
condition for giving its citizenship. For example, the United States requires
that foundlings were under the age of five years at the time they were found.
[84] Canada requires that the foundling be found before apparently reaching
the age of seven years.[85] Austria requires that a foundling be found under
the age of six months.[86] The United Kingdom, on the other hand, requires
that the foundling was a new-born infant at the time it was found.[87] This
reflects the understanding of some States that a foundling must be an infant

or a very young child.

Therefore, the practice of States of giving nationality to foundlings found in
their territory is not sufficiently uniform and consistent enough to constitute
a rule of customary international law. There is also no clear evidence
of opinio juris that States feel a sense of legal obligation to confer their
nationality on foundlings found in their territory.

The Right to Nationality as a Customary

Rule of International Law Derived from
Treaties
Some treaties known as law-making treaties ("trait-loi") may also establish
norms which, when coupled with opinio juris, result to rules of customary
international law that become binding not only on the parties to the treaty,
but also on non-parties. Article 38 of the Vienna Convention provides:
"Nothing in articles 34 to 37 precludes a rule set forth in a treaty from
becoming binding upon a third State as a customary rule of international
law, recognized as such."
In the ILA Report (London Principles),[88] the International Law Association
summarized the case law on the role of treaties in the formation of
customary international law:
1.

A treaty may provide evidence of existing (lex lata) customary law;

[89]

2.

Multilateral treaties can provide the impulse or model for the

formation of new customary rules through State practice.[90]

3.

Multilateral treaties can assist in the crystallization of emerging

rules of customary international law.[91]

4.

A multilateral treaty may give rise to new customary rules (or to

assist in their creation) of its own impact if it is widely adopted by
States and it is the clear intention of the parties to create new
customary law.[92]

Treaties can, therefore, play an important role in the crystallization of

emerging norms as binding international customs or at least to affirm their
existence. In the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, the ICJ also recognized

the norm-creating nature of treaties, as one of the recognized methods of

establishing international customs, holding that:
"There is no doubt that this process is a perfectly possible one and does from
time to time occur: it constitutes indeed one of the recognized methods by
which new rules of customary international law may be formed."[93]
The ICJ, however, also declared that in order to become an international
custom, the provision of a treaty in question must be:
"a norm-creating provision which has constituted the foundation of, or has
generated a rule which, while only conventional or contractual in its origin,
has since passed into the general corpus of international law, and is now
accepted as such by the opinio juris, so as to have become binding even for
countries which have never, and do not, become parties to the
Convention."[94]
The relevant treaty provisions that specifically give foundlings the right to
the nationality of the State where they are found state provide the following:
1.

A child whose parents are both unknown shall have the nationality of
the country of birth. (Art. 14, 1930 Hague Convention)[95];

2.

A foundling is, until the contrary is proved, presumed to have been

born on the territory of the State in which it was found. (Art. 14, 1930
Hague Convention)[96];

3.

A foundling found in the territory of a Contracting State shall, in the

absence of proof to the contrary, be considered to have been born
within that territory of parents possessing the nationality of that State.
(Art. 2, 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness)[97];

4.

Each State Party shall provide in its internal law for its nationality to
be acquired ex lege by foundlings found in its territory who would
otherwise be stateless. ( 6,European Convention on Nationality)[98]

For the said treaty provisions to be binding on States, which are not parties
to said conventions as norms of customary international law, said provisions
must fulfill the said standards set by the ICJ.
The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of
Nationality Laws entered into force on 1 July 1937 by virtue of the ratification

or accessions of ten States.[99] As of this writing, only twenty-two States are

parties to the Convention, namely Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Burma
(Myanmar), China, Cyprus, Fiji, Great Britain, India, Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia,
Malta, Mauritius, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Swaziland,
Sweden, and Zimbabwe.[100] Canada previously ratified the Convention in
1934 but subsequently denounced it 15 May 1996.[101]
The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness entered into force on
13 December 1975 and has sixty-four States parties as of this writing.
[102] However, while it has more parties, its provision on foundlings (Article
2) cannot be said to reflect existing rules of customary law. Article 12(3) of
the Convention states that the provisions of Article 2 shall apply only to
foundlings found in the territory of a Contracting State after the entry into
force of the Convention for that State. That being the case, the provision on
foundlings contained in Article 2 of the Convention neither provides evidence
of existing customary law nor assists in the crystallization of rules of
customary international law. The said provision creates a purely conventional
or treaty obligation that is referable only to the Convention.
Moreover, not having been widely adopted by States, the said provision
cannot give rise to a new rule (lex ferenda) of customary international law or
assist in its creation "of its own impact."
The same things can be said of the provision on the nationality of foundlings
in Article 6 of the European Convention on Nationality, which entered into
force on 1 March 2000. While the Convention is also open to non-members of
the Council of Europe, the Convention, as of this writing, has been signed by
twenty-nine States, but has been ratified by only twenty of those States.
[103] From the very wordings of Article 6, the obligation of a State Party to
give its nationality to foundlings found in its territory who would otherwise be
stateless shall be provided in its internal law. Evidently, it is an obligation
that a State assumes within the context of the Convention, and not arising
from a belief that it is rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule of
customary international law requiring it.

Conclusion
While the right to nationality is declared as a fundamental human
right by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and some international
conventions, its specific application on foundlings is still a matter of State
prerogative and discretion. A State has the exclusive prerogative to
determine who its citizens are, which may be limited only by international

obligations that the State itself has assumed in International Law.

Some States already give their nationality to foundlings found in their
territory ex lege. However, there is no indication that such practice is done
out of a sense of legal obligation, or in recognition of what States believe to
be a rule of customary international law.
The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness has implemented
provisions to secure the right of foundlings to a nationality, and impose an
obligation on States to ensure its observance by giving their nationality on
foundlings found on their territory. However, being a mere treaty or
conventional obligation, the same is binding only upon States which are
parties to the Convention. Furthermore, not having been generally accepted
by States, it cannot be lightly assumed that its provisions on foundlings have
crystallized into the establishment of an obligation that exists outside of the
Convention as a matter of general practice accepted as law.
Absent a national law or an international convention where a State has
agreed to assume an obligation to confer its nationality on a foundling found
in its territory, the right of a foundling to nationality cannot be enforced by
an action against the State. It is not a right that enforces itself by its own
inherent value.
The right of foundlings to a nationality will just be an empty rhetoric unless
States accord it due respect and take measures, internally and
internationally, to implement the right. Foundlings in States which have no
national laws, and which are not parties to international conventions, that
give foundlings their nationality may find themselves stateless, and
International Law affords no remedy.

Endnotes:
[1] Dean, University of St. La Salle College of Law; Author: Public
International Law Bar Reviewer; MCLE Lecturer & Bar Reviewer on Public
International Law
[2] European Union Democracy Observatory on Citizenship, The EUDO
Glossary on Citizenship and Nationality, available at http://eudocitizenship.eu/databases/citizenship-glossary/glossary [accessed on
September 7, 2015]
[3] H.C. Black, Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed. 1979)

[4] Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1989

[5] Ibid.
[6] Boleslaw A. Boczek, International Law: A Dictionary, Scarecrow Press Inc.,
2005, p. 188
[7] See the European Union Democracy Observatory on Citizenship's
Glossary "Citizenship or Nationality?" available at http://eudocitizenship.eu/databases/citizenship-glossary/terminology [accessed on
September 7, 2015], which makes the following discussion about Russia:
"While modern international law uses the term 'nationality' to refer to the
legal bond between an individual and a sovereign state, Russian domestic
law uses the term 'citizenship' (grazdanstvo - ). According to
Russian legislation there is striking difference between citizenship
(grazdanstvo - ) and nationality (nationalnost ). In consequence, in the Russian context the term
citizenship cannot be used as a synonym for nationality.
"The Constitution of the Russian Federation distinguishes between these two
legal definitions. Thus, under Article 6 of the Russian Constitution citizenship
(grazdanstvo - ) of the Russian Federation shall be acquired
and terminated according to federal law; it shall be one and equal,
irrespective of the grounds of acquisition (Article 6 (1); a citizen of the
Russian Federation may not be deprived of his or her citizenship
(grazdanstvo - ) or of the right to change it (Article 6 (3). At the
same time, with regard to Article 26 (1) of the Russian Constitution the term
nationality (nationalnost - ) is associated with the
ethnicity of the person: Everyone shall have the right to determine and
indicate his nationality (nationalnost - ). No one may be
forced to determine and indicate his or her nationality (nationalnost ). As a result, in the Russian language, the term nationality
(nationalnost - ) refers to individual membership in a
nation () as a cultural, linguistic and historic community."
[8] UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10
December 1948, 217 A (III)
[9] Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala); Second Phase,
International Court of Justice (ICJ), 6 April 1955
[10] League of Nations, Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the
Conflict of Nationality Law, 13 April 1930, League of Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 179, p. 89, No. 4137

[11] Jus soli literally means "right of the soil."

[12] UN General Assembly, Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless
Persons, 28 September 1954, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 360, p. 117
[13] Supra.
[14] Supra.
[15] Ibid., Art. 4
[16] Ibid., Articles 14, 15, 16, 20, 22, 23
[17] Ibid., Articles 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 26
[18] UN General Assembly, Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 30
August 1961, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 989, p. 175
[19] Article 38, paragraph 1(b), Statute of the International Court of Justice,
18 April 1946
[20] See Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, at p. 3 (Fifth Ed.
1998)
[21] UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10
December 1948, 217 A (III)
[22] Ren de Groot, Survey on Rules on Loss of Nationality in International
Treaties and Case Law, CEPS Papers in Liberty and Security in Europe, No.
57/August 2013, available
at:http://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/16514111.pdf [Accessed on August 20,
2015]
[23] Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, at p. 14 (Fifth Ed.
1998)
[24] L. Malone, International Law, Emanuel Publishing Corporation, 1998, at
p. 118
[25] Proclamation of Teheran, Final Act of the International Conference on
Human Rights, Teheran, 22 April to 13 May 1968, U.N. Doc. A/CONF. 32/41 at
3 (1968)
[26] UN General Assembly, Declaration of the Rights of the Child, 20
November 1959, A/RES/1386(XIV)
[27] UN General Assembly, Declaration on Social and Legal Principles
relating to the Protection and Welfare of Children, with special reference to
Foster Placement and Adoption Nationally and Internationally : resolution /
adopted by the General Assembly, 6 February 1987, A/RES/41/85
[28] ICJ Statute, Art. 38(1)(a)
[29] Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1155, p. 331
[30] Vienna Convention, Article 2(1)(a)

[31] ICJ, North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic of Germany v.
Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany v. Netherlands), I.C.J. Reports 1969,
p.3, International Court of Justice (ICJ), 20 February 1969
[32] Id. at par. 28
[33] Vienna Convention, supra., Art. 34
[34] Id., Art. 35
[35] Council of Europe, European Convention on Nationality, 6 November
1997, CETS 166
[36] League of Arab States, Arab Charter on Human Rights, 12 Int'l Hum. Rts.
Rep. 893, May 22, 2004
[37] Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), ASEAN Human Rights
Declaration, 18 November 2012
[38] Organization of American States (OAS), American Convention on Human
Rights, "Pact of San Jose", Costa Rica, 22 November 1969
[39] Regional Treaties, Agreements, Declarations and
Related, Commonwealth of Independent States Convention on Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms, 26 May 1995
[40] UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171
[41] UN General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20
November 1989, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, p. 3
[42] Supra
[43] Organization of African Unity (OAU), African Charter on the Rights and
Welfare of the Child, 11 July 1990, CAB/LEG/24.9/49 (1990)
[44] UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), CCPR General Comment No. 17:
Article 24 (Rights of the Child), 7 April 1989
[45] M.J. Bossuyt, Guide to the "Travaux Prparatoires" of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1987
[46] Id. at pp. 466-467
[47] General Comments No. 17, supra., par. 8
[48] League of Nations, Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the
Conflict of Nationality Law, 13 April 1930, League of Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 179, p. 89, No. 4137
[49] UN General Assembly, Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 30
August 1961, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 989, p. 175
[50] Supra
[51] Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Covenant on the Rights of
the Child in Islam, June 2005, OIC/9-IGGE/HRI/2004/Rep.Final

[52] United Nations, Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS
XVI
[53] ICJ Statute, Article 38(1)(b)
[54] Title III, Chapter 1, 301, 8 U.S.C. 1401, available
athttps://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401 [accessed 7 September
2015]
[55] Canada: Citizenship Act [Canada], R.S., 1985, c. C-29, 10 July 1985,
available at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/48106cf72.html %5Baccessed 12
September 2015]
[56] Austria: Federal Law Concerning the Austrian Nationality (Nationality
Act 1985) (last amended 2006) [Austria], 30 July 1985, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b52114.html %5Baccessed 22
September 2015]
[57] Law for the Bulgarian Citizenship (last amended February
2013) [Bulgaria], 5 November 1998, available
at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/49622ef32.html %5Baccessed 10
September 2015]
[58] Law on Croatian Citizenship (last amended 1993), 26 June 1991,
available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4dc14.html %5Baccessed 10
September 2015]
[59] Act on the Acquisition of Danish Nationality (amended to
2004) [Denmark], Consolidated Act No. 113 of 20 February 2003, with the
amendments following from Act No. 311 of 5 May 2004, 7 June 2004,
available at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/4e5cf36d2.html %5Baccessed 10
September 2015]
[60] Nationality Act (359/2003) [Finland], 359/2003, 1 June 2003, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b51614.html %5Baccessed 7
September 2015]
[61] Greek Nationality Code [Greece], Law 3284/2004, 10 November 2004,
available at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/4c90edcf2.html %5Baccessed 12
September 2015]
[62] Act LV of 1993 on Hungarian Citizenship [Hungary], 1 October 1993,
available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4e630.html %5Baccessed 12
September 2015]
[63]Italian Parliament, Law No. 91 or 1992, 15 August 1992, available
athttp://www.culture.gouv.fr/entreelibre/Laurette/country/italytxt.html [acces

sed 12 September 2015]

[64] Civil Code of Spain (as approved by Royal Decree of 24 July 1889),
available athttp://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=221319 [accessed
12 September 2015]
[65] Swedish Citizenship Act (with amendments up to and including SFS
2006:222) [Sweden], 30 April 2006, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/4e6628972.html %5Baccessed 12
September 2015]
[66] British Nationality Act 1981, 1981 Chapter 61, 30 October 1981,
available at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b5b08.html %5Baccessed 12
September 2015]
[67] India: Act No. 57 of 1955, Citizenship Act, 1955, 30 December 1955,
available at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b57b8.html %5Baccessed 7
September 2015]
[68] Ko Swan Sik, Nationality and International Law in Asian Perspective,
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1990, at p. 77
[69] Citizenship Act [], 15 November 1948, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b50414.html %5Baccessed 21
September 2015]
[70] Republic of Korea: Law No. 16 of 1948, Nationality Act (last amended
2010) [Republic of Korea], 20 December 1948, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3fc1d8ca2.html %5Baccessed 7 September
2015]
[71] Law No. 26 of 1975 Concerning Egyptian Nationality [], Official Journal
No. 22, 29 May 1975, 29 May 1975, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4e218.html %5Baccessed 7
September 2015]
[72] Law No. (46) of 1963 - Iraqi Nationality,1963, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4ec38.html %5Baccessed 7
September 2015]
[73] Nationality Law, 1959, 1959, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4ef1c.html %5Baccessed 7
September 2015]
[74] Nationality Act, 25 June 1975, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b5238.html %5Baccessed 7 September
2015]
[75] Law No. 1970-86, 15 December 1970, Nationality Law, 18 December
1970, available

at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4d714.html %5Baccessed 7
September 2015]
[76] Belizean Nationality Act 1981, 28 November 1981, available
at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b50ac.html %5Baccessed 7 September
2015]
[77] Costica Dumbrava, Citizenship Policies in Eastern Europe: Acquisition
and Loss of Citizenship in Sixteen Post Communist Countries (2007), at p. 31,
available athttp://www.etd.ceu.hu/2007/dumbrava_costica.pdf [accessed on
7 September 2015]
[78] ICJ, North Sea Continental Shelf cases, supra., at par. 74
[79] Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against
Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America); Merits, International
Court of Justice (ICJ), 27 June 1986
[80] Id., par. 186
[81] ICJ, North Sea Continental Shelf cases, supra., at par. 77
[82] Nationality Act (359/2003) [Finland], 359/2003, supra.
[83] Canada: Citizenship Act [Canada], R.S., 1985, c. C-29, 10 July
1985, supra.
[84] Title III, Chapter 1, 301, 8 U.S.C. 1401
[85] Canada: Citizenship Act [Canada], R.S., 1985, c. C-29, 10 July
1985, supra.
[86] Austria: Federal Law Concerning the Austrian Nationality (Nationality
Act 1985), supra.
[87] British Nationality Act 1981, 1981 Chapter 61, 30 October 1981,
available at:http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b5b08.html %5Baccessed 12
September 2015]
[88] International Law Association, Final Report of the Committee on
Formation of Customary (General) International Law, Statement of Principle
Applicable to the Formation of General Customary International Law,
International Law Association London Conference 2000, available
at http://www.ila-hq.org/download.cfm/docid/A709CDEB-92D6-4CFAA61C4CA30217F376 [accessed on September 7, 2015]
[89] Id. Section 21
[90] Id. Section 24
[91] Id. Section 26
[92] Id. Section 26
[93] ICJ, North Sea Continental Shelf cases, supra., at par. 71
[94] Id.

[95] League of Nations, Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the

Conflict of Nationality Laws, supra.
[96] Id.
[97] UN General Assembly, Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness, supra.
[98] Supra
[99] See Articles 25 & 26, Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the
Conflict of Nationality Laws, supra.
[100] United Nations Treaty Collection, Convention on Certain Questions
relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws, Ratifications or definitive
accessions, available athttps://treaties.un.org/pages/LONViewDetails.aspx?
src=LON&id=512&chapter=30&lang=en [accessed 9 September 2015]
[101] Id.
[102] United Nations Treaty Collection, 1961 Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness, available at https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?
src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=V-4&chapter=5&lang=en [accessed 9 September
2015]
[103] Council of Europe Treaty Office, European Convention on Nationality,
Status of Ratifications, avaialable
at http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/ChercheSig.asp?
NT=166&CM=&DF=&CL=ENG [accessed 9 September 2015]