A/HRC/28/28 reasonable.29 Measures such as travel bans, the revocation of passports and the denial of citizenship also raise important due process concerns, where decisions are taken following secretive proceedings, in absentia or on the basis of vaguely defined criteria without adequate safeguards to prevent statelessness. 51. International human rights law includes the right of everyone to a nationality, although there is no right to a specific nationality. Given the significant impact that any interference with the enjoyment of nationality has on the enjoyment of rights, the loss or deprivation of nationality must meet certain conditions in order to comply with international law, in particular the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of nationality. 30 These conditions also include serving a legitimate purpose, being the least intrusive instrument to achieve the desired result and being proportional to the interest to be protected. Where the loss or deprivation of nationality leads to statelessness, the impact on the individual is particularly severe. International law therefore strictly limits the circumstances in which the loss or deprivation of nationality leading to statelessness can be recognized as serving a legitimate purpose. 52. States should ensure that adequate procedural standards are in place to guarantee that nationality regulations are not applied arbitrarily and relevant safeguards against statelessness are implemented effectively. In particular, decisions relating to nationality should be “issued in writing and open to effective administrative or judicial review”. 31 International law thus obliges States to provide for the meaningful review of nationality decisions, including on substantive issues.32 53. In its resolution 2178 (2014), the Security Council also called upon States to require airlines to provide advance passenger information to the appropriate national authorities in order to detect the departure from their territories by, or attempted entry into or transit through their territories, of individuals identified as falling within the scope of the resolution. Such measures raise important considerations for the right of individuals to be protected by law against unlawful or arbitrary interference in their privacy, as well as against discrimination. States must ensure that any measure that interferes with the right to privacy is both necessary and proportionate to the specific risk being addressed, that procedural safeguards and effective, independent oversight is in place to ensure to prevent against discriminatory measures and/or the abusive use of personal data, and that redress is provided for in cases of abuse. IV. Conclusions and recommendations 54. While States have a duty to take measures to protect populations from violence and insecurity and to deliver justice, such measures must be anchored in respect for international human rights law. Experience at the national level has demonstrated that protecting human rights and ensuring respect for the rule of law contribute to countering terrorism, in particular by creating a climate of trust between the State and those under its jurisdiction, and by supporting the resilience of communities to threats of violent radicalism. Conversely, compromising on human rights has proven corrosive to the rule of law and conducive to a climate of impunity, and may 29 30 31 32 16 Ibid., para. 21. See A/HRC/13/34, A/HRC/19/43 and A/HRC/25/28. A/HRC/13/34, para. 43. Ibid., para. 44.