444 • Identifying the Stateless in the United Kingdom 19 20 21 22 23 Sarah Singer, ‘“Desert Island” Detention: Detainees’ Understandings of “Law” in the UK’s Immigration Detention System’ (2019) 38 Refugee Survey Quarterly 1. Joanna Pétin, ‘Exploring the Role of Vulnerability in Immigration Detention’ (2016) 35(1) Refugee Survey Quarterly 91, 98–102. UNHCR and Asylum Aid, ‘Mapping Statelessness in the UK’ (2012); UNHCR, ‘Good Practices Paper: Action 6. Establishing Statelessness Determination Procedures to Protect Stateless Persons’ (2016) 3–4. Stephanie J Silverman and Melanie Griffiths, ‘Immigration Detention in the UK’ (6th revision, Migration Observatory Briefing, University of Oxford 2019) 5. Between 2009 and 2018, 25,000– 32,000 people entered immigration detention each year, with 1,800–3,500 migrants detained at any given time. ibid; Home Office (HO), National Statistics, ‘Detention Data Tables Immigration Statistics Year Ending March 2019’ (24 May 2019) <https://assets.publishing.­service.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/803188/detention-mar-2019tables.ods> 20 March 2020. Asylum Aid, ‘Ending Detention of Stateless Persons in the UK’, Policy Briefing (November 2017) <https://d1r349398pb5ky.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Policy-briefingstatelessness-detention-Nov-2017.pdf> accessed 8 March 2020. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijrl/article/32/3/440/6065591 by guest on 04 July 2025 of the legislation and the disconnect between policy and practice are the main issues,19 aggravated by the uncertainty of whether immigration detention is being used in compliance with international and domestic law.20 In light of the above, this article analyses how the failure to give in-depth consideration to statelessness, and thereby also to identify stateless persons, places them at great risk of arbitrary detention. The article focuses on a case study of statelessness in the United Kingdom (UK), for three reasons. First, the UK is one of the few States worldwide with an SDP,21 which offers the possibility of identifying problems within specific identification mechanisms. Secondly, the UK has one of the largest immigration detention estates in Western Europe.22 Thirdly, among all Western European countries, the UK is the only one with no statutory time limit for immigration detention, making stateless persons there particularly vulnerable to long-term detention and cycles of detention.23 While the study focuses on the situation in the UK, the findings, arguments, and insights may be applicable to the situation of stateless persons in other countries. The article begins by introducing the methodology and framework of analysis (parts 2 and 3), before discussing the SDP, including its outcomes and flaws (part 4). The study uncovers problems of access to the SDP for stateless persons irrespective of whether they are detained or not, emphasizing additional complications for those in detention. The article then analyses the relevant legislation and Home Office (HO) policies and practices regarding immigration detention, as well as their interconnection with statelessness (part 5). This part argues that while stateless immigration detainees share issues that are common to all detainees, by virtue of their statelessness, they face a set of other challenges, such as being arbitrarily detained for excessive lengths of time. Finally, the article summarizes and compares the study’s findings with the scholarship on statelessness and immigration detention. The main conclusion is that in order to improve access to justice for stateless persons, it is important to address: (a) the issue of identification and status, (b) problems with the immigration detention provisions, and (c) modes of implementation, as opposed to an analysis limited to black letter law.