Oleksandra Zmiyenko Saggi – DPCE online, 2020/4 ISSN: 2037-6677 5265 European Migration Network into a platform to exchange best practices between the Member States related to i.a. statelessness determination procedures, followed by two comprehensive publications on the matter. A study commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizen's Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee34 outlined the major possible legal basis for EU action in the field of statelessness. Within three different (joint) provisions of TFEU35, two of them may be applicable in the context of forced migration. The study pointed to art. 78 TFEU, which determines the procedure for adopting legislation in the field of common policy on asylum, subsidiary and temporary protection, and art. 79 TFEU, which allows the EU to legislate on the EU immigration policy. Legal basis to legislate on identification and protection of stateless persons was found in art. 67(2) TFEU, and art. 352 TFEU could be relied on as an additional legal basis. Recommendations to initiate a European Union directive on statelessness determination procedures, however, did not result in any visible action as of mid2020. Furthermore, according to art. 205 TFEU, EU external action should be guided by the principles laid down in art. 21 TEU that include ‘the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter of 1945 and international law’, thus, statelessness matters, as a considerable human rights concern, might be included in the EU’s external agenda. The focus of the paper is, however, on the domestic scene, which requires a closer look to the situation in the Member States. 3. Comparative observations in selected Member States. In order to assess the (in)coherence between the EU Member States and to identify policy gaps in addressing statelessness, it is indispensable to understand three layers of the subject: firstly, the international legal framework, i.e. adherence to relevant international and regional instruments, secondly, whether the relevant provisions were incorporated into national legislation, and thirdly, whether the allegedly implemented mechanisms work in practice. Studying each state of the EU to give a detailed picture of the general situation would be excessive for the purposes of this paper. Moreover, limitations related to data availability create a significant obstacle. Nevertheless, a comparison of more than two countries may already give an indication whether statelessness34 European Parliament, DG for Internal Policies, Policy Department Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Practices and Approaches in the EU States to Prevent and End Statelessness, G-R. De Groot, K. Swider, O. Vonk, study for LIBE Committee, 2015, available at www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/536476/IPOL_STU(2015)536476 _EN.pdf, accessed 7-7-2020. 35 Ibidem, 54.