The Hungarian regulation only allows the person concerned to initiate the procedure, but obliges the immigration authorities to provide information about the possibility of applying for stateless status and the rights that can be acquired in this way to any person whose potential statelessness arises in any migration-related procedure.53 C) Factors to consider when designing a national system  Is it presumed that an important proportion of the envisaged stateless population is extremely vulnerable and/or for certain reasons is unable to effectively access statelessness determination procedures (for example unaccompanied minors, persons who are illiterate or have never enrolled in formal education, persons living in extreme poverty or destitution especially in remote rural areas, etc.)?  If yes, this circumstance may indicate a specific necessity to allow the competent state authority to initiate statelessness determination ex officio.  In case of ex officio initiation of statelessness determination, proper safeguards should be in place to ensure that no such measure is taken against the will or without the consent of the person concerned. III.4 Applicant’s status during the procedure A) Summary of international standards The applicant for stateless status, at a minimum, should be entitled to all rights based on jurisdiction or presence in the territory as well as “lawfully in” rights as defined by the 1954 Convention. States should refrain from expelling or removing an individual from their territory pending the outcome of the determination process. The applicant’s status must guarantee, inter alia, identity papers, the right to self-employment and freedom of movement. In addition, the applicant’s status must also reflect applicable human rights such as protection against arbitrary detention and assistance to meet basic needs. As the aforementioned Convention rights are formulated almost identically to those in the 1951 Refugee Convention, it is recommended that applicants for stateless status receive the same standards of treatment as asylum-seekers whose claims are being considered in the same state.54 B) Existing good practices Unfortunately, no clear good practice exists at the time of writing, and improving the regulation with regard to the temporary status of the applicant for stateless status in line with UNHCR guidance is an important challenge for all the national statelessness determination mechanisms examined in this publication. However, some states have recently made noteworthy steps in this direction. The Moldovan regulation was the first one to clearly and explicitly confer the right to stay on the national territory while statelessness determination is being conducted, as well as a documentary proof about this fact: 53 Act II of 2007 on the Admission and Right of Residence of Third-Country Nationals, 1 July 2007, Section 22 (2) 54 For detailed guidance see UNHCR Statelessness Guidelines 2, Para 20 and UNHCR Statelessness Guidelines 3, Para 25-27 17