Oleksandra Zmiyenko Saggi – DPCE online, 2020/4 ISSN: 2037-6677 related to administrative measures (identity papers) and social welfare. Italy and Hungary, in turn, did not have any significant reservations to the main UN instruments. However as to the regional instruments, the former has signed, but not ratified the ECN, whereas the latter had major reservations concerning the acquisition of Hungarian nationality. Germany, being a State Party to the ECN, kept significant reservations allowing for de-nationalisation. Further analysis should be done through the prism of the adherence or lack of ratification of the relevant international and regional instruments, as the selected countries perform differently depending on their international commitments. b. Prevention. 5267 In the chosen Member States, across the elements possible to compare as to prevention of the new cases of statelessness to occur, the context of forced migration implies the following categories out of the wider selection available in the SI: stateless born on territory, foundlings, access to birth registration, late birth registration and reduction of the risk of statelessness. A comparison between those categories in these four counties may suggest that the efforts to prevent statelessness and to reduce the risk of statelessness are mixed. The least ambiguous cases relate to the foundlings – in all four domestic legal systems foundlings acquire citizenship (with a minor reservation in Italy, which does not create an obstacle in practice of the application of law). The situation is different for stateless persons born on the territory of the respective countries, as only Italian law contains a possibility for a child of stateless parents or parents who cannot confer their nationality, to acquire citizenship at birth, and even that provision is not implemented automatically. Thus, legislation of all the four countries contains gaps that might allow for childhood statelessness. The situation is even more aggravated concerning access to birth registration and late birth registration, where only Poland does not have legal obstacles or practical barriers in both cases. Access to sound birth registration procedures are crucial in preventing and eradicating statelessness. For instance in Germany, which is perceived as a destination country, in spite of procedural possibilities to obtain late birth registration, there are practical obstacles to accomplish it. As regards to the reduction of the risk of statelessness, in all for countries there is no evidence of any government campaigns to promote civil birth registration. The common feature between the selected countries is not only an absence of exhaustive legal mechanisms that would allow for full prevention of the statelessness cases and reduction of the risk of statelessness, but also in case of the existence of such procedural safeguards, their application might encounter obstacles.