A/HRC/19/43 first seek redress at the national level. Where they encounter obstacles in that respect, the pathway to an international remedy could present serious legal challenges. E. Right to family life 21. Article 23 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognizes the obligation of States to protect the family. Furthermore, article 17 of the Covenant establishes a prohibition on arbitrary or unlawful interference with the family. Persons who have been arbitrarily deprived of their nationality may experience difficulties in exercising their right to family life due to limitations to the right to enter or reside in the territory of a State.29 22. The Human Rights Committee has stated that while the Covenant does not recognize the right of non-citizens to enter or reside in the territory of a State, in certain circumstances a non-citizen’s right to entry or residence may be protected under the Covenant when considerations of non-discrimination, prohibition of inhuman treatment and respect for the right to family life arise.30 For instance, while the Committee has indicated that the mere fact that certain members of the family are entitled to remain on the territory of a State does not necessarily mean that requiring other members of the family to leave involves an unlawful interference to the right to family life, it has also stated that there may be cases in which a State’s refusal to allow one member of a family to remain in its territory would involve interference in that person’s family life. 31 In that regard, the Committee has ruled that a deportation order issued against two stateless parents of a child violated rights relating to the protection of the family and of the child.32 The Committee also found that the deportation of a non-citizen violated his right to family life because, notwithstanding the fact that he had been convicted of a serious crime and was in the country in an irregular situation, all his family resided in that State and he had no family ties with his home country.33 The European Court of Human Rights has also ruled that the prolonged refusal to grant a permanent residence permit violated the right to private life. 34 F. Right to work 23. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognizes the right of everyone to work, including the right to earn one’s living by work which the individual freely chooses or accepts. This right is not, in principle, subject to citizenship or statelessness.35 The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has held that 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Report of the independent expert on minority issues (A/HRC/7/23), para. 62. General comment No. 15, para. 5. See, for example, communications No. 930/2000, Winata and Li v. Australia, Views adopted on 26 July 2001, para. 7.1; No. 1011/2001, Madafferi v. Australia, Views adopted on 26 July 2004, para. 9.7; and No. 1222/2003, Byahuranga v. Denmark, Views adopted on 1 November 2004, para. 11.5. Human Rights Committee, Winata and Li v. Australia. Human Rights Committee, communication No. 1792/2008, Dauphin v. Canada, Views adopted on 28 July 2009, para. 8.3. European Court of Human Rights, Family K. and W. v. The Netherlands, Application No. 11278/84, 1 July 1985; Slivenko v. Latvia, Application No. 48321/99, 9 October 2003; Sisojeva and others v. Latvia, Application No. 60654/00, 16 June 2005; Kaftailova v. Latvia, Application No. 59643/00, 22 June 2006. See the report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of non-citizens (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/23, para. 7). 9