Life is unmanageable when you are stateless

There is a growing number of ordinary people living in Malta who have one extraordinary thing in common—they do not hold any nationality at all.

Being a citizen is so normal that it’s challenging to comprehend what it means to be without citizenship. It is difficult to find the right words to describe the absence of something. More often than perhaps we should, those of us who seek to convey the urgency of this issue and the severity of its impact have fallen back on terms like ‘legal ghosts’ and ‘citizens of nowhere’ to try to portray what statelessness means.

Historically, statelessness has been regarded as a technical legal issue; however, it has devastating consequences for real individuals.

The existing legal loopholes that have contributed to the increasing number of stateless individuals in Malta were highlighted once more last June, when the NGO Moviment Graffitti made a passionate appeal to the government, urging it to address these troubling shortcomings.

Malta acceded to the 1954 convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons in 2019; however, it still offers very limited protection for stateless individuals and is not a signatory to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

Adding to the complexity, there’s no current way to determine statelessness, nor is there any recognised status offering protection to stateless people. Although some stateless people may be able to regularise their stay through alternative means, such as temporary humanitarian protection, these options remain limited.

Data on the stateless population is therefore limited, with figures available only for the very small number of asylum seekers, international protection beneficiaries, or refused asylum seekers recorded as ‘nationality unknown’ who cannot be returned and may or may not be stateless.

It is crucial to emphasise that while the pursuit of statistical information on statelessness is a valuable endeavour, it should not be undertaken in isolation or regarded as an end in itself. This effort must always complement and inform broader initiatives aimed at protecting stateless individuals, reducing the prevalence of statelessness, and ultimately eradicating it.

Although we have legislation providing some protections against arbitrary detention, there are limited procedural guarantees and safeguards. Any rights afforded to those detained for removal purposes are very limited, while restrictions on access to detention centres limit the possibility for NGOs and other actors to identify stateless individuals.

Implementing the few safeguards in our law to prevent statelessness remains problematic, with key gaps. We do have legislation preventing statelessness in cases of adopted children and newborns whose parents remain unidentified, together with a provision granting children born stateless in Malta a conditional right to acquire nationality following five years’ legal residence, but it’s next to nothing in properly addressing the growing social scourge of statelessness.

In the last decade, Malta received periodic international recommendations to accede to the 1961 convention, including appeals made by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and the Committee on the Rights of the Child. It also received international recommendations to establish a mechanism to identify stateless persons and guarantee their rights and protection, with an identification and referral mechanism for children who are undocumented and at risk of statelessness.

Legal loopholes that further worsen the statelessness dilemma arise from the Maltese Citizenship Act’s definition of a stateless person, which deviates from the 1954 convention’s definition by stating that statelessness means being “destitute of any nationality”. Yet, the convention definition is referenced in the immigration regulations. To ensure the adequate identification and protection of stateless people, Malta must adopt and apply a consistent definition of a stateless person in line with international law.

Despite being identified during refugee status determination procedures as part of an asylum claim, statelessness does not receive formal acknowledgement.

There is a definition of “vulnerable persons” in law, but statelessness is not included and is not considered a vulnerability factor. No vulnerability assessment is carried out before a decision to detain, except for those who are manifestly vulnerable, such as very young children and people presenting visible vulnerabilities.

Worse, statelessness is not considered to be a juridically relevant fact during the decision to detain, and stateless people are detained in practice prior to the authorities initiating removal procedures.

Individuals experiencing statelessness face distinctive difficulties. It can trap individuals in poverty and lead to stigma, isolation, and disenfranchisement. Feelings of being lost, rejected, unsettled, and insecure are common among stateless persons. However, they should not be defined or limited by their statelessness, just as you or I should not be defined by our nationality.

These individuals possess hopes, aspirations, abilities, character, a sense of self, and often a profound connection to their community and a homeland. The stateless are perhaps better described not as ‘citizens of nowhere’ but as ‘unrecognised citizens’. They have a place in this world, a country of their own, but this country does not recognise them as its nationals.

Statelessness impacts other issues, such as children’s rights and forced migration.

This situation must change, as every individual is entitled to a nationality. The loss of nationality is as grave as the loss of life or personal freedom.

Malta has the primary duty to identify stateless persons to implement its international obligations towards these persons under the two UN Conventions and in accordance with international human rights law.

Their statelessness sets them apart, but their humanity unites them and us.