The applicants tried to register their births with the civil status office in Albania. The Albanian authorities refused to proceed with the registration of births of the applicants because they failed to provide Greek birth certificate in the form required by Albanian law: a legalised act (apostille stamp) translated into Albanian and notarised. The applicants could not have their Greek birth certificate legalised because they were incomplete; in particular, their names were missing from the certificate. The reason given by the Greek authorities for not including the names on the birth certificates was the parents’ undocumented status in Greece at the time the children were born there. This prevented the applicants from being registered immediately after birth and from having a name. The applicants filed a complaint with the Human Rights Committee in 2019, which found a violation of Articles 16, 24 (1-3) and 26 of the ICCPR.
- Article 24(2) ICCPR
- Article 24(3) ICCPR
- Article 24(1) ICCPR
- Article 16 ICCPR
- Article 17 ICCPR
- Article 25 ICCPR
- Article 26 ICCPR
- Albanian Law no. 8389, dated 05.08.1998, “On Citizenship”, as amended
- Albania Law no. 10129, dated 11.05.2009 “On Civil Status”, as amended
The applicants belong to the Romani community. At the time of their birth, their Albanian parents were living in Greece without legal residence status. For children born outside the State party territory to parents who are Albanian citizens, there were two ways of registering the birth of a child: (a) It was possible to register the birth with the Albanian consular authorities in the country where the child was born by submitting a birth certificate from the hospital the child was born in containing information on the date of birth, place of birth, gender, and the mother’s name; and (b) If the child was born outside the State party and had been registered in a civil status office in the foreign country, the parents could also register the birth of the child directly in their civil status office in the State party, once they were on Albanian territory. In such a case the birth certificate must be in the form prescribed by law, i.e., a legalised certificate translated into Albanian and notarised. In December 2016, a new law amending the Law on Civil Status was adopted. According to the amendments, as from 2017, all children’s births must be registered in Albania, meaning that Albanian consular services thus no longer have the power to register births.
Children who are born in Greece to parents who are foreign nationals will generally have their birth registered in Greece based on a “maternity certificate” issued by the hospital. However, parents who are staying in Greece without residence permits, such as those of the applicants, are only provided with a document attesting the birth as a matter of fact. This document is incomplete as it does not indicate the name of the child and would refer to the child as “ako” (“nameless”). Parents without legal residence status would not be allowed to give their child a name on the certificate as they have no legal right to reside in Greece.
Albanian consular services would refuse to proceed with the birth registration based on the incomplete birth certificate and would request parents to submit the incomplete document to the Greek Ministries of Interior, Foreign Affairs and of Health to secure the necessary stamps to legalise the document.
The Greek authorities would in turn refuse to legalise the “ako” birth certificates as they are incomplete. Although there were of instances where Greek authorities would exceptionally legalise such incomplete birth certificate, Albanian authorities would still refuse to register the birth because the document still does not indicate the name of the child.
The first applicant was born in February 2014 in Greece, where his Albanian parents were living without legal residence status. His birth was registered with the Greek Civil Office, but the authorities refused to indicate his name on the certificate as his parents did not have legal residence status in Greece. In addition, the registration certificate did not have the proper legislation stamp, nor did it have an apostille stamp. These facts prevented his parents from registering the birth at the Albanian registry offices. The first applicant moved back to Albania in 2014, but because his birth was not registered at the Albanian registry offices, he was not able to attend kindergarten or school or be accepted by health institutions.
The second and third applicants, who are twins, were born in 2002 in Athens, where their Albanian parents were living without legal residence status. Because they did not have money to pay the hospital fees of 1,000 EUR, the parents left the hospital before obtaining a medical certificate of birth. On an undetermined date, the second and third applicants’ parents went to the Greek Civil Status Office in Athens and requested a birth certificate for their children. The births were then registered, and the office issued certificates without indicating the names of the applicants, only registering them as “first twin” and “second twin” respectively. The parents were told that since they did not have legal residence status in Greece, they could not register the names of their children and could only be provided with these incomplete certificates, which did not allow them to register the birth of the applicants in Albania as the documents do not conform to the requirements under domestic law. At the time of the submission of the complaint to the Human Rights Committee, the second and third applicants were 15 years of age and lived in Albania, but could not attend school or access social and health services as they had not been and could not be registered with the Albanian authorities.
The applicants claim that by failing to register their births the State party has violated their rights under Articles 16, 17, 24 (1-3), 25 and 26 of the Covenant. The applicants claim a violation of their rights under Article 24 (2) of the Covenant as the State party authorities have failed to proceed with the registration of their birth because they were unable to provide Greek birth certificates in the form required under State party legislation, i.e., a legalised certificate translated into Albanian and notarised. The applicants submit that the term “immediately” in Article 24 (2) places a particular requirement on the authorities, which the State party failed to fulfil in their case. The State party authorities are aware that the applicants cannot provide a Greek birth certificate conforming to the requirements under State party legislation. Insisting on such a document in the case such as of the applicants leads to arbitrary delays in registration, and puts the applicants at risk of statelessness, while depriving them of fundamental basic rights such as the right to education and health. The requirement under domestic legislation for children of Albanian parents born abroad to provide a legalised birth certificate, and the lack of exceptions for those, such as the applicants, who are not in position to obtain such a document, renders the registration inaccessible for an undetermined period, which is manifestly contrary to the requirement of immediacy under Article 24 (2) of the Covenant. The applicants note that at the time of the submission of their complaint, they were four and 15 years old respectively and still unregistered, which is clearly incompatible with the provisions of the Covenant.
The applicants claim that by failing to register their births, the State party has also violated their right to acquire a nationality under Article 24 (3) of the Covenant. They note that under Article 7 of the Law on Citizenship any individual born to one or two parents of Albanian nationality automatically acquires Albanian nationality.
The applicants further claim a violation of their rights under Article 24 (1) of the Covenant. They note that the failure to register their births immediately is a facially neutral measure, but that it has a disproportionate impact on Romani communities.
The applicants also claim that their rights under Articles 16, 17, 25 and 26 of the Covenant have been violated. They argue that owing to their status as legally invisible persons in the State party they are unable to enjoy the right to recognition as a person before the law, their right as citizens to take part in public life, and their right to be treated equally under the law. Regarding their claim under Article 26 of the Covenant, they argue that said right as been violated for the same reasons as set out regarding their claims under Article 24 (1).
The State party notes that in December 2018, amendments to the Law on Civil Status entered into force. The State party notes that with the amendments to its domestic legislation the civil status offices are under the obligation to ensure that assistance in registering births is provided to citizens who are in possession of incomplete birth certificates.
The Committee observes that birth registration is the continuous, permanent and universal recording within the civil registry of the occurrence and characteristics of birth, in accordance with the national legal requirements, which establishes the existence of a person under law, and lays the foundation for safeguarding civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. As such, it is a fundamental means of protecting the human rights of the individual. The Committee further observes that while birth registration does not in itself confer citizenship on a child, it is essential to ensure the right of every child to acquire a nationality, as it constitutes an important form of proof of the link between an individual and the State. Arbitrarily delaying the registration of their births, puts them at risk of statelessness and deprives them of fundamental basic rights, such as the right to education and health.
The Committee observed that the State party did not exercise due diligence in discharging its positive obligation to assist the authors in registering their birth with the civil registry and thus establishing their nationality, in violation of the applicants’ rights under Articles 24 (2-3) of the Covenant.
The Committee finds that the facts described amounts to a violation of the applicants’ rights under Articles 24 (1) and 26 of the Covenant.
Furthermore, the Committee considers that by failing to register the birth of the applicants and thus recognising their legal personality, the State party also violated their rights under Article 16 of the Covenant.
The Committee, acting under Article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the facts before it discloses a violation by the State party of the applicants’ rights under Articles 16, 24 (1-3) and 26 of the Covenant.
Pursuant to Article 2(3)(a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the applicants with an effective remedy. The State party is also under an obligation to take all steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future, including by ensuring that its legislation on the registration of births, as well as its implementation, comply with the State party’s obligations under Articles 16, 24 (1-3) and 26 of the Covenant.
The Committee notes that the State party’s observations regarding the 2018 amendments to the Law on Civil Status (para. 4) do not provide any persuasive argumentation refuting the applicants’ claims in this regard.
The State party is obligated to ensure that the applicants’ birth is immediately registered in the civil status registry and to provide them with adequate compensation. The State party is also under an obligation to take all steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future.
UNHCR report ‘Mapping the Population at Risk of Statelessness in Albania' https://www.refworld.org/reference/countryrep/unhcr/2018/en/121478
- Kouidis v. Greece (CCPR/C/86/D/1070/2002),
- Quliyev v Azerbaijan (CCPR/C/112/D/1972/2010);
- Mónaco de Gallicchio v. Argentina (CCPR/C/53/D/400/1990);
- Bakhtiyari and Bakhtiyari v. Australia (CCPR/C/79/D/1069/2002);
- Zhao v. the Netherlands (CCPR/C/130/D/2918/2016);
- Purna v. Nepal (CCPR/C/119/D/2245/2013);
- V.M. v. Sri Lanka (CCPR/C/137/D/2406/2014);
- Althammer et al. v. Austria (CCPR/C/78/D/998/2001);
- O’Neill and Quinn v. Ireland (CCPR/C/87/D/1314/2004);
- Yaker v. France (CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016);
- Hebbadj v. France (CCPR/C/123/D/2807/2016);
- Genero v. Italy (CCPR/C/128/D/2979/2017);
- Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic