27 | PROTECTING STATELESS PERSONS FROM ARBITRARY DETENTION IN BULGARIA his interview. Mr. A. was homeless. He tried to approach the authorities for help, but had no success. He lived in the streets of Sofia until 2015, at which point he left Bulgaria irregularly to another EU member state where he is currently seeking asylum. When he was released due to the judgment of the CJEU, Mr. Kadzoev was not granted any legal status. In fact, he was told that he could be detained again since he lacked identification documents. At the time of his release, he was only provided with a copy of the decision of the Court, his mobile telephone and one set of clothes. Since Mr. Kadzoev was not granted asylum, he could not access material assistance. For months he moved from one place to another, being hosted by friends in the cities of Sofia and Varna. Without access to the labour market, he could not find a job and, apart from having difficulties to find accommodation, he also had trouble finding enough food to survive. Mr. Kadzoev was violently attacked and seriously injured, but he could not access formal medical treatment. He survived, once again, relying on his friends. He never approached the authorities because he was afraid he would be detained again for lacking identification papers. This situation in which Mr. Kadzoev could not ensure his survival led him to suffer not only physically, but also psychologically. The only paper given to Mr. H. upon his release from detention was an order that obliged him to report weekly at the local police station. Asked about his plans for the future, Mr. H. replies that he is going to search for a job. He admits that without identity documents he is being exploited: “If I had papers, I would not have worked for 510 leva,127 but for normal payment. However, when you do not have documents, you are being used”. Mr. H. sees it as a vicious circle as he believes that if he had a good job and money, he would have been able to arrange his papers. According to Recital 12 of the Preamble to the EU Return Directive: The situation of third-country nationals who are staying illegally but who cannot yet be removed should be addressed. Their basic conditions of subsistence should be defined according to national legislation. In order to be able to demonstrate their specific situation in the event of administrative controls or checks, such persons should be provided with written confirmation of their situation. Member States should enjoy wide discretion concerning the form and format of the written confirmation and should also be able to include it in decisions related to return adopted under this Directive.” In the Mahdi case C 146/14 PPU, the SCAC asked the CJEU whether: in the event of the release of a third-country national on account of the absence of a reasonable prospect of implementation of a removal decision where that third-country national has no identity documents, has crossed the state border illegally and states that he does not wish to return to his country of origin, it is to be assumed that the Member State is under an obligation to issue a temporary document on the status of the person in question if the embassy of the country of origin does not in these circumstances issue the document required for the person in question to travel to his country of origin even though it has confirmed that person’s identity”. Unfortunately, the CJEU replied that Directive 2008/115 must be interpreted as meaning that a member state cannot be obliged to issue an autonomous residence permit, or other authorisation conferring a right to stay in such cases. However, that member state must provide the third-country national with written confirmation of his situation. When persons are released from detention without any identity documents, there is a high risk of re-detention. For example, during the interview at the National Commission on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings (NCTHB) the expert recalled the case of a stateless lady who was repeatedly detained in the Bousmantsi detention centre.128 She was a victim of trafficking and had suffered physical abuse. As a result, she suffered from dissociative psychosis. In September 2013 she was transferred from the Bousmantsi detention centre to a shelter of the NCTHB. In the meantime, the Migration Directorate continued to investigate her citizenship. She was not provided with identity documents. In 2014 the shelters of the NCTHB were temporarily closed and the stateless lady was again detained in the Bousmantsi detention centre. For release from detention to be sustainable, it must come with a legal status and related rights. To this extent, identification of statelessness is also relevant at point of release.