2.3 Qualitative analysis of stateless persons 2.3.1 Specifics of the information used The current mapping project did regrettably not include room for participatory assessments with stateless persons in Finland, in which their voices could have been duly heard. More detailed statistical information on the background of stateless persons who reside in Finland would have enabled a closer look into the situations of different groups of stateless persons in Finland. Moreover, the general lack of information and awareness about stateless persons and limited understanding of their specific situation among the authorities and other actors also limit the possibilities of drawing conclusions on the human face of statelessness in Finland. Based on discussions with NGOs and other actors who generally deal with asylum-seekers, refugees and human rights issues, these actors very rarely come across stateless persons and do not generally have an idea of who the stateless persons in Finland are, and whether they face particular challenges. The only qualitative aspect was provided for by the review of 125 asylum cases concerning persons who were considered as stateless or of unknown / not known nationality from 2009 to 2011, which are referred to in various parts of this report. In light of this review, most stateless persons who arrive to Finland as asylumseekers originate from the Middle East. In most of these cases, the applicants had claimed a fear of harm on the basis of, or related to, their lack of a nationality. These cases will be discussed in more detail in section 3.4.2.1 below. 2.4 Conclusions and recommendations There are several measures, both legislative and practical, in place in order to ensure consistent recording of information regarding foreigners, including stateless persons, in the different public registers. The cooperation between Migri and the Local Register Offices in this regard is on an advanced level. In principle, this should ensure to a large extent that the different authorities share the same view regarding the personal information of the individual, including her or his nationality, the lack of a nationality or the lack of clarity of the person’s nationality. Room for improvement remains though, in terms of harmonisation of recording of statelessness and unknown nationality, within and among the authorities. In particular within the asylum procedure, there are two very similar sounding categories used: “unknown nationality” and “nationality not known”. Even though some explanations by Migri were provided, it remains largely unclear why these two separate categories are used. It is recommended that this is further assessed and clarified, and that the possibility of merging these two categories in a consistent manner by Migri is looked into. It appears that both “unknown nationality” and “nationality not known” are registered as “unknown nationality” in PIS. The statistics on stateless persons in Finland provide very little information concerning the background and profile of this population. Stateless persons in Finland are generally of foreign origin but further information on their backgrounds and profile is unavailable both from PIS as well as from RA. Data regarding a person’s country and place of birth and other relevant biodata is registered in both of these systems. However, the challenge is obtaining this data in a report format. Currently the only way of obtaining information regarding the profiles of stateless persons in Finland is to manually go through individual case records. Moreover, in cases of residence permits granted outside the asylum procedure, even basic information on numbers of stateless persons is unreliable as the RA contains incorrect information with regard to nationality (or the lack of it). UNHCR STOCKHOLM, NOVEMBER 2014 23