administrative assistance in the process of obtaining relevant information, as well as it is bound by the obligation of fully establishing the facts and circumstances of the case ex officio under general rules on administrative procedures.76 C) Factors to consider when designing a national system  Has the country’s legislation or jurisprudence established formal rules concerning the burden of proof applicable in relevant procedures (asylum, immigration matters, etc.)?  If yes, are there specific rules referring to a shared burden of proof/duty to substantiate in asylum procedures that could be copied to statelessness determination?  If the country’s legislation and jurisprudence do not normally establish formal rules concerning the burden of proof, are there any specific rules that aim to ease the burden of proof on persons claiming protection in relevant situations (for example asylum-seekers, applicants for a humanitarian residence permit, victims of discrimination or domestic violence seeking redress with authorities, etc.)?  If yes, can these provisions be effectively applied in case of statelessness determination?  Does the law regulating administrative procedures put a duty on decision-making authorities to fully establish facts and circumstances before taking decisions?  If yes, is this duty normally understood as sharing the burden of proof between applicants and the decision-making authority in relevant (in particular asylum) procedures?  When establishing national rules on the burden of proof and the duties of the applicant and the determining authority, states should consider that authorities are usually better equipped to elicit responses from other states than an individual. Vulnerable or destitute applicants may in particular struggle to obtain evidence (for example they often cannot afford to travel to an embassy for an interview). These factors call for a protection-oriented approach and a duty on determining authorities to proactively obtain evidence. V.2 Appropriate standard of proof A) Summary of international standards The standard of proof or threshold of evidence necessary to determine statelessness must take into consideration the difficulties inherent in proving statelessness, particularly in light of the consequences of incorrectly rejecting an application. Requiring a high standard of proof of statelessness would undermine the object and purpose of the 1954 Convention. States are therefore advised to adopt the same standard of proof as that required in refugee status determination, namely, a finding of statelessness would be warranted where it is established to a “reasonable degree” that an individual is not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law.77 76 Act II of 2007 on the Admission and Right of Residence of Third-Country Nationals, 1 July 2007, Section 79 (2); Act CXL of 2004 on the General Rules of Administrative Procedures and Services, Section 3 (2) (b) 77 See UNHCR Statelessness Guidelines 2, Para 39 27