BLOG

• Agencies lack sufficient staffing, and humanitarian access has become a growing issue.
• A coordinated response to gender-based violence has yet to be developed.
• A systematic plan to protect minority communities and returnees has not been finalized.

It is the last point on this list that raises red flags for me. Sudan has an enormous opportunity (and obligation) to prevent the emergence of statelessness. In December 2010, RI visited Latvia and met some of the people who have been stateless for twenty years! Stateless people are individuals who are not citizens of any country, and this problem continues to plague the Baltic States, especially Latvia, two decades after they re-asserted independence.  This year marks the 20th anniversary of the breakup of the USSR, and in Latvia, 340,000 people still have ineffective nationality and the second-class status of “non-citizen."

Origins: The EUDO Citizenship Observatory Country Report on Latvia says that in 1990 decision-makers in states of the soon-to-be Former Soviet Union were faced with two options for reconstituting statehood. The first presupposed the disintegration or disappearance of one state and the subsequent emergence of a new state. The newly founded state would then determine its nationals on the basis of its territory – a ‘zero option.’ Latvia would discount what ethnic Latvians call the illegal occupation of its territory by the Soviet Union and define its citizenry anew by adopting a new citizenship law based simply on residency at the time that independence was acquired. The second option, based on the principle of ex injuria just non oritur, argued Soviet presence was nothing other than illegal occupation and, thus, never technically led to Latvia’s de jure loss of independence. This concept of state continuity—the option adopted in Latvia in 1990—implies continuity of the citizenship of the state and introduced stratifications of citizenship. In 1991 when the Republic of Latvia regained its independence, strict citizenship policies resulted in 673,398 people, or 28.2 percent of the total population, being left in legal limbo which has in turn lead to a number of social problems, administrative and financial strain on the government and the potential of violent disassociation and action.

Lessons for Sudan: The current situation in Sudan bears a striking resemblance to Latvia in terms of risk for creating mass statelessness. RI traveled to Sudan in June 2010 to meet with displaced southerners in Khartoum and to assess the level of threat they face in the run-up to the referendum on southern independence. A consensus tally places 1.5 – 2 million southerners in the north, including internally displaced people, migrants and other residents. With only about 20 percent of Sudanese in possession of birth certificates--a vital proof of citizenship-- this is a recipe for discrimination, recrimination and possible dismantling from within. As RI colleagues pointed out at the time, the parties themselves must decide the criteria for citizenship of their respective countries. But international actors involved in stewarding the peace process cannot watch passively from the sidelines waiting to provide “technical support” as they did in the case of Latvia and its sister states.

An international framework of principles and good practices, including the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness and the UN International Law Commission draft articles on nationality in relation to the succession of states, exists for such situations. Key principles that must be pushed by the U.S. and others are:

• Choice. To the extent possible people should be able to choose their nationality and not have their current nationality stripped from them against their will.
• Sufficient time to make a free and informed decision. Neither side should engage in or permit forced expulsion.
• Non-discrimination. People with significant ties to either the north or south should not be excluded from accessing citizenship on ethnic, religious or political grounds.
• Commitment to protecting people from statelessness. While citizenship negotiations over are in process, both parties should offer reassurance and express commitment to avoid statelessness.

In November, the UNHCR and the UN Mission in the Sudan organized a citizenship symposium. UNHCR’s Assistant High Commissioner Feller urged accession to the UN conventions pertaining to statelessness. She mentioned the possibility of dual citizenship and the importance of protecting the residency rights of people who are unable to acquire citizenship, including employment, education and health care. Protecting basic rights of non-citizens is a step in the right direction, a step Latvia has long ago taken. However, if severe disaffection of nearly a third of the population of a Baltic country suggests anything to Sudan as it faces similar challenges, it is that such protections are meager consolation for the rights and privileges of true citizenship.

Dear leaders of Sudan please consider and learn from the past to prevent future suffering. And if you are still not sure, call Latvia.