61 152. With regard to the exception concerning foreigners in transit, both the Commission and the representatives alleged that the State authorities had taken the position, and made it effective in the practice, that children of Haitian origin born in the Dominican Republic, such as the children Dilcia and Violeta, would not be Dominican nationals, because their fathers are Haitian migratory workers and are considered to be in transit. 153. Regarding the Dominican authorities’ interpretation of the condition of person in transit, in its 1999 Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Dominican Republic the Inter-American Commission observed that: […] Around 500,000 undocumented Haitian workers live in the Dominican Republic. In many cases, these are people who have lived there for 20 or 40 years and many of them have been born on Dominican territory. Most of them face a situation of permanent illegality, which they transmit to their children, who cannot obtain Dominican nationality because, according to the restrictive interpretation that Dominican Authorities give to article 11 of the Constitution, they are children of ‘foreigners in transit.’ It is not possible to consider that people are in transit when they have lived for many years in a country where they have developed innumerable connections of all kinds.96 154. Judgment No. 453 of the Civil Chamber of the Appeals Court of the National District, delivered on October 16, 2003, concerning the registration in the Civil Status Registry Office of two children whose fathers are Haitian and live in the Dominican Republic, established that: […] It is not possible to equate the situation of a foreigner’s illegality to the notion of transit, because they are different concepts; also, in neither the regulations for the application of the Migration Law nor the report issued by the [Inter-American] Commission on Human Rights [on the Situation of Human Rights in the Dominican Republic in 1999], is the condition of legality established as a requirement for having the right to the nationality of the place of birth; [...] that, in the instant case, there is no possibility that the parents of the children who are applying for their birth to be registered can be considered in transit because, from the documents in the case file, it is clear that they have lived in the country for several years [..., and] that, although it is true that the parents of the child live in the country illegally, it is no less true that this situation of illegality cannot in any way affect the children, who can benefit from Dominican nationality merely by proving that they were born on Dominican territory, and that their parents are not diplomats in the country and are not in transit in it […].97 155. The Court considers it should mention that the obligation to respect and ensure the principle of the right to equal protection and non-discrimination is irrespective of a person’s migratory status in a State. In other words, States have the obligation to ensure this fundamental principle to its citizens and to any foreigner who is on its territory, without any discrimination based on regular or irregular residence, nationality, race, gender or any other cause.98 96 Cf. Organization of American States, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Dominican Republic, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.104, doc.49, rev. 1, of October 7, 1999, para. 363. 97 Cf. judgment No. 453 of the Civil Chamber of the Court of Appeal of the National District issued on October 16, 2003 (file of preliminary objections and possible merits, reparations and costs, tome II, folios 586 to 612). 98 Cf. Juridical Status and Rights of Undocumented Migrants, supra note 95, para. 118.