Finland out of wedlock would decrease if it were known that avoiding establishment of paternity enabled acquiring Finnish citizenship for a child. In this case, the mother knew who the father was and that he was a national of Somalia and information about the reluctance of the father to establish the paternity was only based on the mother’s statements. The Supreme Administrative Court rejected the appeal of Migri and endorsed the decision of the Administrative Court. The Supreme Administrative Court stated that the provision of Section 39 of the Nationality Act on the obligation of the applicant to provide information could not be interpreted in a way that determining and establishing paternity was required of the applicant. The court further stated that the Nationality Act does not contain specific provisions on determining paternity with regard to the determination of citizenship or with regard to application of jus soli, and held that under the circumstances of the case it could not be considered that the mother had not fulfilled her obligations under Section 39 of the Nationality Act. The court further held that the provision of Section 9 of the Nationality Act with regard to the secondary right of a child to acquire another nationality, could not in this case be interpreted in a way that the child would have had a secondary right to the nationality of Somalia. The aim to prevent statelessness, which is indicated in international treaties and in the Finnish Constitution and Nationality Act, was taken into consideration. Therefore, the child should be determined as a Finnish national according to the judgment. This case illustrates that even though the Nationality Act leaves room for a child born in Finland to become stateless, this provision and possibility needs to be interpreted narrowly in order to prevent children born in Finland from becoming stateless. Another case dealt with non-Finnish parents who had a nationality and a child who was born in Finland. The citizenship of the child was determined through the determination of citizenship status procedure. The parents were not granted international protection or any other type of residence permit in Finland. For acquisition of the parents’ nationality at birth, registration of the child was required with the authorities of the country of origin of the parents. The parents refused to contact the embassy or consulate of their country of origin. As Migri did not consider the parents having a well-founded fear with regard to the authorities of their country of origin, it was expected of them to register the child with the authorities and the child was not considered to have right to Finnish nationality. Migri did however not consider the child as stateless but as “nationality not known”. 170 The UNHCR Guidelines on Statelessness No. 4 stipulate that the responsibility to grant nationality to children who would otherwise be stateless is not engaged where a child is stateless but could acquire a nationality by registration with the State of nationality of a parent, or a similar procedure, immediately after the child is born and when the State of nationality has no discretion to refuse the grant of nationality.171 Of relevance is also paragraph 39 in the UNHCR Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, which states the following: “The role of consular authorities merits particular consideration. A consulate may be the competent authority responsible for conducting the necessary step in a non-automatic mechanism. This occurs, for example, where a country’s laws require children born to their nationals overseas to register with a consulate as a prerequisite for acquiring the nationality of the parents. As such, the consulate in the country of such a child’s birth will be the competent authority and its position on his or her nationality will be decisive, assuming no subsequent mechanism has also to be considered. If an individual is refused such registration or is prevented from applying for it, he or she is not considered as a national for the purposes of Article 1(1).” In light of the above, as long as the authorities of the country of nationality of the parents do not prevent or refuse the child to be registered, Finland does not have a responsibility to grant Finnish nationality to a child. 48 170 E-mail from Migri, August 2012. 171 UNHCR, Guidelines on Statelessness No. 4: Ensuring Every Child’s Right to Acquire a Nationality through Articles 1-4 of the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 21 December 2012, para. 24-26. MAPPING STATELESSNESS IN FINL AND