A rights-based approach to statelessness

This thesis argues that current policies on statelessness fail to prioritize the empowerment of affected persons. It suggests adopting a rights-based approach to statelessness policies to remedy that problem. Part I focuses on the meanings of the concepts of nationality and statelessness. Deeply rooted yet unfounded assumptions that nationality is by definition good for everyone, and that statelessness is by definition problematic are at the core of the failure of current policies. Part II discusses the current legal and policy discourse on statelessness, identifies the way in which it fails to empower affected persons, and suggests an alternative. A rights-based approach to statelessness requires rethinking the language used in policy and law making generally, as well as amending specific rules that do not prioritize the empowerment of affected persons, such as for example the prohibition on voluntary statelessness. Four case studies of policy responses to statelessness illustrate the practical implications of the current approach and of the proposed alternative. The thesis concludes that by adopting a rights-based approach, statelessness policies no longer need to draw their justifications from an unfounded idealization of nationality, and an equally unfounded demonization of statelessness. Instead of focusing on turning stateless persons into nationals, a rights-based statelessness policy empowers affected persons to choose whether, when, and how to invoke the relevant rights. This puts the power to define the problem as well as its solution in the hands of those affected by the policies.