2016] The Protection of Stateless Persons in Australian Law 425 above, the Act does not currently protect stateless persons who do not also fall into one of these categories. PAM3 does not respond to the broader question of how to identify, and resolve the status of, stateless persons covered by the statelessness Conventions, which was the intention behind the UNHCR’s request for state pledges in 2011.120 However, given that the guidelines are relevant to assessing claims by stateless persons pursuant to the Refugee Convention and complementary protection provisions, they warrant examination in those contexts. 1 Statelessness Per Se as a Basis for Refugee Status? It is now widely accepted that ‘mere statelessness or inability to return to one’s country of former habitual residence [is] insufficient of itself to confer refugee status under the Convention’.121 This has been the conclusion in all jurisdictions that have examined the question.122 This issue was discussed at length in several decisions of the Federal Court of Australia in the late 1990s.123 In Savvin v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Dowsett J concluded that although persons with a nationality were required to establish a well-founded fear of being persecuted, stateless persons only had to show that they were unable or unwilling to return to their country of former habitual residence.124 This was based on a 120 Jane McAdam, Response to Department of Immigration and Citizenship (Cth), PAM3 — Assessing Claims of Statelessness (October 2012). 121 Revenko v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] QB 601, 601. 122 Refugee Status, UN Doc PPLA/2014/01, 36. See, eg, Thabet v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration [1998] 4 FC 21 (Canada); Refugee Appeal No 72635/01 (Unreported, Refugee Status Appeals Authority, Chairperson Haines and Member Plunkett, 6 September 2002) (New Zealand); AAAAD v Refugee Appeals Tribunal [2009] IEHC 326 (17 July 2009) (Ireland); Maksimova v Holder, 361 Fed Appx 690, 693 (6th Cir, 2010) (United States); Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27, s 2(1) (definition of ‘refugee convention’); Directive 2011/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on Standards for the Qualification of Third-Country Nationals or Stateless Persons as Beneficiaries of International Protection, for a Uniform Status for Refugees or for Persons Eligible for Subsidiary Protection, and for the Content of the Protection Granted [2011] OJ L 337/9, art 2(c). However, note that under human rights law, ‘the issue of whether there would be serious obstacles to re-admission must remain central to the question of whether there is a real risk of serious harm’: YL (Nationality-Statelessness-Eritrea-Ethiopia) Eritrea CG v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] UKIAT 00016 (30 June 2003) [64] (Vice President Storey) (‘YL Eritrea’), quoted in Refugee Status, UN Doc PPLA/2014/01, 39, which also analyses this approach. 123 See, eg, Rishmawi v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1997) 77 FCR 421, 427–8 (Cooper J) (‘Rishmawi’). 124 (1999) 166 ALR 348.