Code of 1961. By way of major amendments, the said laws respectively introduced the acquisition of nationality for foreigners who marry Ivorians and the introduction of a special temporary nationalization procedure for persons who could not apply for nationality between 1961, the year the Code was adopted, and 1972, when the provisions authorizing the acquisition through a simple declaration were repealed. The ineffectiveness of these reforms, unanimously recognized by the Parties, led to the implementation of the programme for the identification of Ivorians and foreigners living in Côte d’Ivoire under the aegis of the Ouagadougou Peace Accords concluded in 2007 between the Government of the time and the armed rebellion, following the 2002 failed coup d’état. The Parties also agree that the mobile court hearings following the said accords and the distribution of supplementary judgments have not resolved the issues of nationality and statelessness, particularly concerning the Dioulas. The subsequent reforms are those which were undertaken in 2013 by the administration of President Alassane Ouattara and which the Commission will concentrate on in order to consider compliance with the standards mentioned above. 124. It is relevant to concentrate on the 2013 reforms because they are the most recent, on the one hand, and because they, according to the allegations of the Respondent State, resolve the issues which previous reforms have not been able to resolve, on the other hand. Before considering this claim, the Commission reiterates that in this case in point, a distinction must be made between at least two sets of victims: the Dioulas and others. As a reminder, the Dioulas are one of the ethnic groups which formed the original population of Côte d’Ivoire through successive waves of immigration and uninterrupted residence from the 13th Century up to the date of the legal birth of Côte d’Ivoire. As the Commission has concluded above, the historical and legal claim of the Dioulas is consubstantial with the birth of Côte d’Ivoire and the first and original Ivorian nationality. Besides, and consequently, any applicant for Ivorian nationality who has blood relations with these Dioulas of the first generation migrants logically inherits a similar claim. 125. However, the Commission considers that there is another category of Dioulas. These are Dioulas who have emigrated to Côte d’Ivoire for the first time after independence and who, on account of this fact, cannot claim legal Ivorian nationality established before their first contact with the independent State of Côte d’Ivoire. These second generation migrants are particularly made up of persons with about the same ethnic origins and culture as the first Dioulas and whose arrival in Côte d’Ivoire was particularly spurred on by the ‘pro-immigration’ policies of President Houphouët-Boigny. Generally, they emigrated between 1960 and 1993, the year marking not only the demise of the first president of Côte d’Ivoire, but also the end of ‘amended’ enforcement 37