This thesis interrogates the continued statelessness of more than 12 million stateless people around the world, in the face of Article 15 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which provides that everyone has a right to a nationality. Its principal argument is that the continued unresolved presence of stateless groups around the world exposes international law’s inadequate protection of the ‘right to a nationality’. It advocates the adoption of a robust approach to protect and enforce this right to nationality of stateless people. Article 15 of the UDHR has been complemented by a host of international and regional instruments relating to the right to nationality. In developing its argument, the thesis reviews the relevant instruments, as well as local and international judicial decisions relating to the right. The review is juxtaposed with local legislation and state practices on the issue of citizenship, for the purpose of determining the status of the right, and whether the right forms part of customary international law. This thesis also examines the emergence of nationality as a human right under international law and the interplay between states sovereignty and the right to nationality, for the purpose of showing the lacuna in international law that allows continued statelessness. It examines the relationship between the possession of nationality and the enjoyment of other human rights vis-à-vis the sufferings that arise from statelessness, as well as the extent to which denationalization is a step toward genocide, for the purpose of showing that protection of the right qualifies as erga omnes obligation. It also argues that suffering of stateless people must be taken seriously, as a step toward taking the right to nationality of stateless people seriously. While the thesis does not necessarily provide the final solution to all the problems arising out of statelessness, it is anticipated that it will make a worthy contribution to addressing the legal questions on statelessness and, more importantly, provide a sound basis for further discussions on the status, importance and the need to protect and enforce the right to nationality of stateless people.

Submitted by Morgana Silva (morgana_linhares@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-09-26T17:51:20Z No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 1610081 bytes, checksum: 11a5b3d3b84e3cd2325afb18b85e30c6 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-09-26T17:51:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 1610081 bytes, checksum: 11a5b3d3b84e3cd2325afb18b85e30c6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-07-20 / The focus of this dissertation is fixed on the forecasting and implementation of the right to nationality in normative documents and internal and international bodies as a responsible tool for eliminating the problem of not guarantee human rights to stateless persons. Under the inter-American system of human rights protection, both the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man as the American Convention on Human Rights guaranteeing the right to nationality to anyone, but on the continent there are still millions of individual who can’t enjoy a nationality for discriminatory reasons. From this fact, it discusses up the measures taken by Brazil to combat statelessness and if there is a transnational way to treat it from an interaction of the states around the Organization of American States. The investigation is justified by the fact that Brazil regularly sponsor global meetings aimed to resolving the issue of the right to nationality of such individuals, as well as the need to increase the studies in our country about the human rights norms of the Organization of American States. The methodology follows the deductive model subject to hermeneutic and comparative procedures. The exploratory and descriptive work’s bias is presented based on the analysis of international standards norms for protection of right to nationality, while comparing it under the light of Brazilian legal system will present proposals about the appropriateness or the need to improve the internal regulatory framework. The work is divided into four chapters. In the first, the concepts concerning the right of nationality and statelessness phenomenon will be displayed, their most common causes and the breaking point identified by Hannah Arendt in relation to the failure of the standard of human dignity to guarantee rights to those who do not enjoy a nationality. The second presents the development of international human rights law with regard to nationality. The next section reviews the milestones of the Brazilian law regarding the treatment of stateless persons, with an emphasis on its shortcomings and promoting a comparison – at legal level – with other Latin American countries. The last chapter discusses the Habermas’s proposal to form transnational states and how could such architecture contribute to the protection of stateless persons. The research shows that Brazil, despite having ratified the universal conventions on statelessness and be a signatory of the San José Pact, has an insufficient legal frame for the protection of these people which entails helplessness on the part of official institutions and violation of their basic rights of citizenship; at the same time, the formation of a transnational state based on the Organization of American States set up the possibility of ensuring the protection of stateless in the continent through the construction of a discursive and normative public sphere common to people and governments. / O ponto central investigado nesta dissertação fixa-se na previsão e aplicação do direito à nacionalidade em documentos normativos e órgãos internos e internacionais como ferramenta responsável por eliminar o problema da não garantia de direitos humanos aos apátridas. No âmbito do sistema interamericano de proteção dos direitos humanos, tanto a Declaração Americana de Direitos e Deveres do Homem quanto a Convenção Americana de Direitos Humanos garantem o direito à nacionalidade a qualquer pessoa, mas no continente ainda existem milhões de indivíduos que não podem gozar de uma nacionalidade por razões discriminatórias. A partir deste fato, problematiza-se quais as medidas tomadas pelo Brasil para combater a apatridia e se existe uma maneira transnacional de tratá-la a partir de uma interação dos Estados em torno da Organização dos Estados Americanos. A investigação justifica-se pelo fato de o Brasil periodicamente patrocinar encontros mundiais visando solucionar violações ao direito à nacionalidade, bem como pela necessidade de se aprimorarem no país estudos sobre a normatização de direitos humanos da Organização dos Estados Americanos. A metodologia adotada segue o modelo dedutivo sujeito aos procedimentos hermenêutico e comparativo. O viés exploratório e descritivo do trabalho se apresenta a partir da análise das normas internacionais de proteção do direito à nacionalidade, enquanto a comparação à luz do ordenamento jurídico brasileiro apresentará proposições sobre a adequação ou a necessidade de aperfeiçoamento do marco normativo interno. O trabalho divide-se em quatro capítulos. No primeiro, serão apresentados os conceitos relativos ao direito à nacionalidade e do fenômeno da apatridia, suas causas mais comuns e o ponto de ruptura identificado por Hannah Arendt com relação à insuficiência do padrão da dignidade humana para a garantia de direitos aos que não gozam de vínculo patrial. O segundo apresentará o desenvolvimento do Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos no tocante à nacionalidade. A seção seguinte analisa os marcos da legislação brasileira com respeito ao tratamento dado aos apátridas, com ênfase em suas insuficiências e promovendo uma comparação – em nível legislativo – com outros países da América Latina. O último capítulo discute a proposta de Habermas de formação de Estados transnacionais e como poderia tal arquitetura contribuir com a proteção dos apátridas. A pesquisa demonstra que o Brasil, apesar de ter ratificado as convenções universais sobre apatridia e ser signatário do Pacto San José, possui um ordenamento lacunoso e insuficiente quanto à proteção destas pessoas, o que enseja o desamparo por parte de instituições oficiais e a violação dos seus direitos básicos de cidadania; ao mesmo tempo, a formação de um Estado transnacional com base na Organização dos Estados Americanos configura a possibilidade de garantir a proteção dos sem nacionalidade no continente a partir da construção de um espaço público discursivo e normativo comum para as pessoas e os governos.

À travers cette recherche, nous avons étudié la violation des droits des travailleurs migrants haïtiens en République dominicaine à la lumière du principe de l’effectivité du droit international. L’étude analyse en profondeur deux aspects de cette violation : la question d’expulsion collective et la violation du droit à la nationalité. En réaction à celle-ci, nous analysons le problème de l’exécution des décisions de justice de la Cour régionale condamnant l’État dominicain. En premier lieu, l’histoire relate que dès l’époque coloniale, des différends survirent entre les deux puissances colonisatrices de l’île - la France (à l’ouest/Haïti) et l’Espagne (à l’est/la République dominicaine) - en vue du partage de cet espace géographique. Ces différends sont transmis comme héritage aux deux États (Haïti et la République dominicaine) issus de la colonisation. Avec le développement de la migration haïtienne sur le territoire voisin, les différends persistent en raison des traitements infligés aux travailleurs migrants haïtiens. Ils sont considérés comme étant des invités indésirables au point d’être qualifiés de problème. Dans l’espace public dominicain, il a été institué l’expression «el problema haitiano». Si Trujillo a tenté de résoudre ledit problème via le génocide, à partir des années 1990, les autorités préfèrent procéder par des vagues de déportations massives réalisées de façon sommaire contrairement au droit international. Par exemple, les garanties judiciaires ne sont pas respectées. En vue de mieux faciliter la déportation, l’État dominicain met en œuvre tout un processus de déchéance de nationalité. Ainsi, au cours des années 2000, les fonctionnaires de l’administration publique dominicaine refusaient d’enregistrer les enfants qui, selon la constitution, ont droit à la nationalité dominicaine. D’autre part, ils ont saisi les documents d’identité des individus qui font partie de cette catégorie de personnes. En réaction à ces exactions, la Cour interaméricaine des droits de l’homme a condamné à deux reprises l’État dominicain. Par contre, dans les faits, ces décisions peinent à être exécutées. Dans l’arrêt rendu dans le cadre de l’affaire des enfants Yean et Boscico, les mesures les plus significatives ne sont pas exécutées. Dans l’affaire des personnes dominicaines et haïtiennes expulsées, en guise d’exécution, la réaction de l’État constitue, de préférence, des résistances nationales à l’exécution de ladite décision. Tant sur le plan politique que sur les plans judiciaire et administratif, le comportement de l’État va dans le sens contraire à l’exécution de la décision de la Cour de San José. Dans les faits, les règles de droit garantissant les droits en question restent lettres mortes vis-à-vis de l’État dominicain. Voilà ce qui permet de confirmer l’hypothèse principale de la recherche selon laquelle la violation du droit à la nationalité des personnes d’ascendance haïtienne en République dominicaine s’explique en raison de l’ineffectivité des règles de droit codifiées par le droit international public. Afin que les personnes d’ascendance haïtienne puissent jouir de leurs droits, nous faisons, entre autres, des recommandations à l’État dominicain, à la République d’Haïti et à la communauté internationale. / This research focuses on the problem of the violation of the rights of Haitian migrant workers in the Dominican Republic. We highlight two key points. The first one is the mass deportation; the second one refers to the violation of the right of nationality. In reaction to this one, we analyze the problem of execution of the decisions of the international jurisdictions precisely, the Court of San José that condemned the Dominican Republic. First, the history shows that since the colonial time, there were disputes between the two-colonizing superpower of the island - France (west, Haiti) and Spain (east, Dominican Republic) - about their part of the territory. Those misunderstandings are transmitted as a heritage to the two countries that share the geographic territory of the island at the end of the colonization. With the development of the Haitian migration on the territory of the Dominican Republic, the dispute increased between the two countries because of the treatment that Haitian cane cutters received. They considered them as unwanted guest and as a problem. So, in the Dominican society, people use the expression « el problema haitianno ». Via his genocide, Trujillo tried to solve that problem, but nowadays, since the beginning of the 1990s, the authorities preferred to organize the mass deportation of Haitian workers and their descents. It is a violation not only of the principles of public international law, but also of human rights. For example, the Dominican Republic violates the juridical guarantees codified by the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights. In order to facilitate the mass deportation, the State creates a process of denationalization. Therefore, during the 2000s, the officials of the Dominican public administration refused to deliver a birth certificate to children who have this right according to the constitution. On the other hand, the official use to seize and/or destroy documents of identity of this category of people. In reaction, the Inter-American Court of Human Right condemned twice the Dominican Republic because of those violations. But the state refuses to execute those decisions. In the case of the girls Yean and Boscico, the key points of the decision are not executed. In the case of the Dominican and Haitian expelled, the State reacted against the decision and refuse to execute it. Here are, among others, the arguments that confirm the principal hypothesis of the research that assimilates the violation of the right of nationality of Haitian migrants’ workers' descents in the Dominican Republic to the effectiveness of the rule of law of international public law. In order to repair the damages caused to the Haitian cane cutters and their descents, we make recommendations first, to Dominican State; secondly, to Haitian State and lastly to the members of the international society.