252. To examine the arguments of the Commission and the parties, the Court finds it desirable to begin by indicating general standards relating to the arguments submitted on the relevant rights and obligations. It will then examine the alleged violations to the detriment of those whose personal documentation was ignored by the Dominican authorities and, after that, will analyze the alleged violations suffered by the presumed victims who lack this documentation. Lastly, it will consider the arguments on the obligation to adopt domestic legal provisions established in Article 2 of the American Convention. C.1. Rights to nationality and to equality before the law 253. Regarding the right to nationality recognized in Article 20 of the American Convention, the Court has indicated that nationality, “as a legal and political bond that links a person to a particular State, allows the individual to acquire and to exercise the rights and responsibilities inherent in membership in a political community. As such, nationality is a prerequisite for the exercise of certain rights,” 284 and it is also a nonderogable right according to Article 27 of the Convention. 285 In this regard, it is pertinent to mention that nationality is a fundamental right of the human person that is established in other international instruments. 286 254. Furthermore, it should be mentioned that the American Convention includes two aspects of the right to nationality: the right to a nationality from the perspective of endowing the individual with the basic legal protection for a series of relationships by establishing his connection to a specific State, and the protection of the individual against the arbitrary deprivation of his nationality because this would deprive him of all his political rights and of those civil rights that are based on a person’s nationality. 287 255. This Court has established that: Nationality, as it is mostly accepted, should be considered a natural condition of the human being. This condition is not only the very basis of his political status but also part of his civil status. Consequently, even though it has traditionally been accepted that the determination and regulation of nationality fall within the competence of each State, developments in this area reveal that international law has imposed certain limits on the State’s margin of discretion. 288 284 Cf. Case of the Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic, para. 137. 285 Cf. Case of the Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic, para. 136. On this issue, the Court has recognized the rights that cannot be suspended as a non-derogable nucleus of rights; in this respect, cf. Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, para. 119, and Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”), para. 244. The Court recalls that the right to nationality cannot be suspended according to Article 27 of the Convention. In this regard, cf. Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations (arts. 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of January 30, 1987. Series A No. 8, para. 23. 286 Cf. Among others, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, Article XIX; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 15; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 24(3) (rights of the child); the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 7; the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Article 5 (d) (iii); International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, Article 29; the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, Article 1(1); the European Convention on Nationality, Article 4; the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Article 6. 287 Cf. Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica. Advisory Opinion OC-4/84 of January 19, 1984, Series A No. 4, para. 34, and Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011 Series C No. 221, para. 128. 288 Cf. Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica. OC-4/84, para. 32. 83