detained (in particular in immigration detention), by asking the authorities for information regarding the grounds for detention of non- nationals. Peace processes, voter registration exercises and refugee repatriation efforts may be further avenues for identifying statelessness. Individual registration was also put forward as an identification method and the opportunities presented by and limitations inherent in this approach were discussed. Participants discussed a number of ideas for further identification efforts in the region. Those populations and situations about which relatively little is currently known – such as the position of children of (irregular) migrants and the situation of persons in detention – may be worthy research priorities that would bring a fresh understanding of the issue of statelessness as it manifests itself in MENA countries. A call was made for the examination of not only the concrete causes of statelessness for any individuals or groups identified, but also the underlying reasons (historic, political, societal, financial, etc) for the initial and ongoing exclusion of these persons. In addition, the importance of establishing a detailed profile of affected populations was acknowledged, including by identifying differences within these groups in terms of status, documentation, background, protection concerns and other elements, in order to tailor an appropriate response. Finally, participants recognised that greater effort must be made to share methodologies for the identification of statelessness, with identification techniques from within and outside the region brought together to generate a broad overview of potential methodologies, from which a selection can be made according to the dynamics of the particular country or situation under study. 3. Prevention and reduction of statelessness Good practices, bad practices In discussing the content and application of nationality laws in the region, participants raised examples of good practices that help to prevent statelessness as well as practices that can be a direct cause of statelessness. Since good practices can inform the content of – and advocacy strategy for – reform in those countries which are lagging behind in terms of safeguards against statelessness, experts also drew on their knowledge of situations outside the MENA region. They raised, for instance, two examples of policies that currently enjoy widespread recognition in Africa: the double jus soli rule (nationality granted to the second generation born on state territory) and the policy of attributing nationality jus soli to a child who was born on state soil and still resides there upon attaining the age of majority. Another interesting practice that was extracted from the African context – including Morocco and Algeria – is that of allowing individuals who have resided in the country for a certain period of time and have always been treated as a national to obtain official confirmation of their nationality without the need to furnish further evidence (possession d’état de national). This means that problems relating to proof of nationality can be avoided, even where individuals lack various forms of documentation. On the other hand, the downside to such a policy may be the exclusion of certain groups for political considerations, based on grounds such as colour, ethnicity or religion. Several participants also made reference to the reversed argument to the 14