Nationality of Foundlings: Avoiding Statelessness Among Children of Unknown Parents Under International Nationality Law

ISBN-13: 9789811630071 / Angielski / Miękka / 2022

Mai Kaneko-Iwase

Opis

This is the first book dedicated to clarifying the concept of “foundlings” and how to best prevent their statelessness in light of the object and purpose of Article 2 of the 1961 UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness and equivalent nationality law provisions. Among other features, the book defines the terms “foundling,” including the maximum age limit of the child to be considered a “foundling”; “unknown parents”; being “found” in a territory; and “proof to the contrary”; as well as the procedural issues such as the appropriate burden and standard of proof. In doing so, the book draws upon a comparative analysis of national legislation on “foundlings” covering 193 states, case law, and precedents in some states as well as international human rights law norms including the best interests of the child. As its conclusion, the book proposes an inclusive model “foundling provision” and a commentary to inform legislative efforts and interpretation of the existing provisions. Its findings are useful not only to state parties to the 1961 Convention but also to non-state parties, particularly in countries lacking systematic civil documentation or experiencing the effects of armed conflicts, migration, trafficking, and displacement.

Spis treści

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  16

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS           20

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION       22

1.1 Why foundlings?       23

1.2 Objective     26

1.3 Research questions 26

1.4 Working hypothesis to be verified in chapters 3 and 6: Foundling is a child of unknown parentage      28

1.5 Research methodology and limitation             29

1.5.1 Languages                29

1.5.2 Literature review and further research       30

1.5.2.1 Review of international and regional instruments and standards 30

1.5.2.2 Review of practical and academic materials           30

1.5.2.3 Systematic comparison of the ‘foundling provision’ including its definition and methodology (193 States - Annex 1)                32

1.5.2.4 Analysis of select nationality and birth registration related legal instruments, case law and administrative precedents                33

1.5.2.5 Inquiry with experts         34

1.5.2.6 Field visits and interviews              34

1.5.3 Consideration over the possibility of systematic comparative review and ideal focus countries         35

1.5.4 Adjusted approach and eventual countries with relative details included    36

1.5.5 Significance of practice by non-State parties             40

1.5.5.1 Customary international norm? Codification of the existing nationality legislation principle into the 1930 and 1961 Convention        41

1.5.5.2 Overview of Annex 1, a comparative table of 193 States - General practice accepted as law?         45

1.6 Qualitative rather than quantitative research               48

1.7 Structure      49

CHAPTER 2: NATIONALITY, STATELESSNESS, FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS, DOCUMENTAITON AND FOUNDLINGS        50

2.1 Statelessness around the world and efforts to address statelessness               50

2.2 Right to nationality under international law   53

2.3 Domestic rules for acquisition and loss of nationality                56

2.4 International legal framework to address statelessness          56

2.4.1 Developments towards adoption of the 1961 Convention  59

2.4.2 Relevance of UNHCR guidance        61

2.5 Stateless person definition and interpretation            62

2.6 The definition of being ‘considered a national’            64

2.7 Notes on other related concepts       66

2.7.1 De facto stateless persons                66

2.7.2 Persons of undetermined nationality           70

2.7.3 Persons at risk of statelessness      70

2.8 Causes of statelessness including foundlinghood       71

2.9 Documentation of birth, parentage and nationality   72

2.9.1 Lack of documentation is not equivalent to statelessness   72

2.9.2 When establishing nationality without documents becomes difficult             75

2.9.3 Late birth registration as a measure to prevent statelessness arising from lack of documentation    76

2.9.4 Lack of documentation of parentage and having unknown parents                77

2.9.5 Where foundling provisions are correct solutions   79

2.10 Family law and nationality   80

2.10.1 Distinction between ‘factual parent’ and ‘legal parent’      80

2.10.2 Legal descent under family law to be determined before nationality by jus sanguinis          81

2.10.3 Legal parentage’ under family law vis-à-vis under nationality law  82

2.10.4 Relevance of the law of parentage             84

2.10.5 Establishment of legal parentage in cases of natural reproduction                85

2.10.5.1 Maternal legal descent 85

2.10.5.2 Paternal legal descent   88

2.10.6 Establishment of legal parentage for surrogacy cases         90

2.10.7 Private international law on parentage and conflict of laws in surrogacy cases        92

CHAPTER 3: ‘FOUNDLING’ AND UNKNOWN PARENTAGE               96

3.1 ‘Found’ in the territory’: The condition for granting nationality – not part of who a foundling is            96

3.2 Lack of an established definition of a ‘foundling’ – available ‘definitions’         97

3.3 Language analysis     100

3.3.1 The term ‘foundling’ – is it used in domestic nationality legislation in English?           100

3.3.2 ‘Foundling’ in five other UN official language versions of the 1961 Convention and domestic nationality laws             102

3.3.3 Observations based on the text of the 1961 Convention and legislation in different languages          105

3.4 Evolution of the foundling provision within international and regional instruments    106

3.4.1 Codification of nationality legislation principle into the 1930 and 1961 Convention: ‘Foundling provision’ more common ‘otherwise stateless’ persons provision 106

3.4.2 The 1930 Hague Convention             106

3.4.2.1 Two-fold structure of article 14: A i) child of unknown parents vs. ii) foundling      106

3.4.2.2 Who can be a child of unknown parents born in the territory?      107

3.4.2.3 The ‘supremacy’ of the obligation for children of unknown parents and foundlings (article 14) over that for children of stateless parents (article 15)  112

3.4.3 1949 UN Study of Statelessness      113

3.4.4 ILC study on Nationality including Statelessness and Draft Conventions       114

3.4.5 ILC Draft Conventions on Reduction and Elimination of Future Statelessness             115

3.4.5.1 Original dependency of article 2 on article 1           115

3.4.5.2 Subsequent separation for intended strengthening of the States’ obligation for foundlings over that for persons otherwise stateless        116

3.4.6 The 1961 Convention           119

3.4.7 A child of unknown parents born in the territory: Left between article 1 and article 2? - ‘Marger’ with ‘a foundling found in the territory’-  119

3.4.8 ECN and its explanatory report       121

3.5 The overall difference between persons of unknown parentage and other persons otherwise stateless         123

3.6 Does a ‘foundling’ need to have been intentionally ‘abandoned’ and passively ‘found’ on the territory?         123

3.7 The distinction between ‘children of unknown parents’, ‘foundlings’ and ‘otherwise stateless persons’ within domestic nationality laws 125

3.8 Persons who fall through the crack of the 1961 Convention and ECN: Persons of known parentage of unknown birthplace, otherwise stateless  130

3.9 Summary and conclusions: A foundling is of ‘unknown parentage’     131

CHAPTER 4: DEFINING ‘UNKNOWN-NESS’ OF PARENTAGE           134

4.1 Note on the statistical information    134

4.2 One parent or both parents unknown?          135

4.3 Categories of persons considered to be of ‘unknown parents’ under national foundling provision      136

4.3.1 Babies abandoned on streets and other places       136

4.3.2 Baby boxes or baby hatches             138

4.3.3 Babies (anonymously) entrusted to a third person                143

4.3.4 Persons who suffer memory loss or are mentally disabled whose parents thus cannot be identified              147

4.3.5 Children informally adopted and raised by unrelated adults              149

4.3.6 New-born babies left behind at a hospital by biological mothers (of foreign appearance)    157

4.3.7 Orphans    164

4.3.8 Runaway child        165

4.3.9 A person of undocumented parentage       167

4.3.10 Children born through anonymous birth scheme 168

4.3.11 Persons whose mothers go missing after registering their birth with invalid or incomplete identity information      175

4.4 Legally unknown vs. factually unknown parents – the former includes the latter         178

4.5 Persons without legal parents as a result of surrogacy arrangements: Applicability of the foundling (unknown parentage) provision?   183

4.6 Alternative avenues of nationality grant via adoption, institutional care, facilitated naturalisation or late birth registration                193

4.7 Summary and conclusions: ‘unknown parents’ mean they do not legally exist or their existence is not proven              197

CHAPTER 5: BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF IN DETERMINING UNKNOWN-NESS OF PARENTAGE     200

5.1 Lack of international standards on the burden and standard of proof in establishing the applicability of the foundling provision             201

5.2 Applicability of the UNHCR evidentiary standards for ‘otherwise- statelessness assessment’ to the foundling related assessment        203

5.3 Burden and standard of proof - irrelevant in administrative procedures?        207

5.4 The applicant’s duty to cooperate and the non-adversarial nature of the procedure 207

5.5 Need for clarification of evidentiary terms and concepts        208

5.5.1 Burden of proof     209

5.5.1.1 Two kinds of ‘burden of proof’: burden of production versus burden of persuasion           209

5.5.1.2 ‘Shared’ burden of proof: Impossible?    211

5.5.1.3 Reversal of burden of persuasion              212

5.5.2 Standard of proof 212

5.5.2.1 Standard of proof in different jurisdictions and fields of law          213

5.5.2.2 Standard of proof relating to statelessness in general: International standards, State practice and the challenges in adopting a low standard               214

5.6 State practice on the burden and the standard of proof in determining unknown parentage 217

5.6.1 USA             217

5.6.2 The Philippines       226

5.6.3 Japan          229

5.6.3.1 High standard of proof in Japanese civil/administrative litigations and procedures               229

5.6.3.2 Baby Andrew Case (1995) – caselaw on de facto reversed burden of persuasion and broad interpretation (lowered extent) of ‘unknown-ness’ of parentage              230

5.6.3.2.1 Summary of facts           230

5.6.3.2.2 The distribution of burden of persuasion affecting the three courts’ decisions  231

5.6.3.2.3 Broad interpretation or ‘lowered extent’ of the ‘unknown parentage’ requirement      232

5.6.3.2.4 De facto reversed burden of persuasion             234

5.6.3.2.5 Was the standard of proof ‘lowered?’  238

5.6.3.2.6 Low standard of proof (and reversed burden of persuasion) can be substituted by a broad interpretation of the ‘unknown-parents’ definition    238

5.6.3.3 Subsequent family court adjudications: Even broader interpretation of ‘parents are unknown’?  239

5.6.3.3.1 Yokohama Family Court’s adjudication in 2003  241

5.6.3.3.2 Other family court adjudications after Baby Andrew      244

5.7 Undetermined nationality: Cannot be an outcome of State’s assessment      244

5.8 What is the reasonable time for the classification ‘undetermined nationality’ ie for the assessment of the foundling provision applicability?  245

5.8.1 Isn’t ‘five years’ standard for ‘otherwise-statelessness’ period too long?   246

5.8.2 Applicability of the ‘five years’ standard to assessment under article 2, the foundling provision?     248

5.9 Summary and conclusions     252

CHAPTER 6: AGE OF A FOUNDLING, AND BEING ‘FOUND’ IN THE TERRITORY        255

6.1 Ordinary meaning     255

6.2 UNHCR and other international standards     258

6.3 Overview of the comparative review of the 139 States in terms of the age    260

6.4 The actual implementation of the legislation limiting foundlings’ age                266

6.5 What is the definition of being ‘found’ and who can ‘find’ the person?            275

6.6 What is the age above which one should be able to secure evidence of stay in the country? 276

6.7 Are the rationale for low age limitation justified?       277

6.7.1 Rationales presented by States      277

6.7.2 On rationale 1: Are older children necessarily able to communicate accurately the parents’ identity or birthplace?  280

6.7.3 On rationale 2: Is it justifiable to include ‘presumption of birth’ in the definition of being ‘found’?  280

6.7.4 A foundling is any child under the age of majority  282

6.8 ‘Not having been born outside the territory’ – is it part of the ‘found’ definition?       283

6.9 Burden and standard of proof in establishing having been found (under the applicable age limitation)             284

6.10 Summary and conclusions: A foundling can be found by any third party while a minor            285

CHAPTER 7: ‘IN THE ABSENCE OF PROOF TO THE CONTRARY’       288

7.1 Temporal scope of ‘in the absence of proof to the contrary’: Pre-facto and post-facto assessment    288

7.2 Structure of article 2 and what ‘to the contrary’ qualifies (prerequisite or presumed facts?)  290

7.3 Travaux discussions on what constitutes proof to the contrary            292

7.3.1 Discovery of birth abroad pre-facto (and post-facto)            292

7.3.1.1 Travaux discussions on granting nationality to foundlings born abroad      292

7.3.1.2 ECN’s article 6(1)(b) and the possibility to grant nationality to foundlings born abroad       298

7.3.1.3 The contemporary relevance of the drafters’ intention allowing foundlings born abroad to acquire nationality      299

7.3.1.3.1 Hypothetical case study: A trafficked girl found in State A born in State B             300

7.3.1.3.2 Link with unaccompanied children         302

7.3.1.4 Discovery or establishment of foreign parentage                305

7.4 The formulation of current domestic foundling provisions and the proof to ‘the contrary’ (pre-facto and post-facto)                306

7.5 Selected national legislation and practice (on pre-facto assessment)                310

7.6 Post-facto withdrawal of nationality, and what constitutes proof to ‘the contrary’?   326

7.6.1 Overall analysis of annex 1: Legislation on post-facto withdrawal based on birth abroad or foreign parentage, or possession of another nationality             329

7.6.2 Limitation of nationality withdrawal not resulting in statelessness – deadline, assessment of proportionality and best interests of the child      332

7.6.2.1 International standards and national legislation on the deadline for post-facto withdrawal of nationality  337

7.6.2.2 Legislation restricting nationality withdrawal regardless of timing even if it results in multiple nationality  340

7.7 Burden and standard of proof in proving the ‘contrary’           342

7.7.1 States’ responsibility to prove the contrary               342

7.8 Summary and conclusions: Possession of another nationality to constitute ‘the contrary’       343

CHAPTER 8: RECOMMENDATIONS – MODEL FOUNDLING PROVISION     349

8.1. Short summary of chapters 1-7         349

8.2 Previous discussions on a model founding provision 350

8.3. Model foundling provision  351

8.3.1      351

‘whose legal parentage (cannot be proven)’:  351

8.3.2 ‘(whose legal parentage) cannot be proven’:           352

8.3.3 ‘found’ (in the territory)    355

8.3.4 ‘child’         355

8.3.5 ‘shall acquire nationality’ (of the State where found)           356

8.3.6 ‘unless her or his possession of a foreign nationality is proven’:       358

8.3.7 ‘reasonable time’ to determine the applicability of paragraph 1       358

8.3.8 Regulating the withdrawal of nationality post-facto               360

8.4 Alternative avenues of nationality grant via adoption or other means              362

8.5 Final remarks              362

ANNEX 1: COMPARATIVE TABLE OF LEGISLATION ON THE NATIONALITY OF FOUNDLINGS OF 193 UN MEMBER STATES   364

ANNEX 2:  FOUNDLING PROVISIONS AS OF 1953 (NON-EXHAUSTIVE)      364

VALORISATION ADDENDUM       364

BIBLIOGRAPHY  367

International Case Law  374

Regional Case Law           374

National Case Law           375

Australia              376

Japan    376

Philippines          377

Spain     378

UK          378

O autorze

Dr Mai Kaneko-Iwase, a researcher at Maastricht University, the Netherlands, studied international human rights law at the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University in New York where she obtained her master’s degree in 2004. She was awarded a PhD (Law) from the Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, Maastricht University in January 2020. Starting in 2004, Dr Kaneko-Iwase has worked for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) primarily in Japan, but also in Pakistan, Lebanon and Malaysia. This book was written by the author purely in her personal capacity. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the UN or UNHCR.