« I said at the Foreign Police that I had no nationality. None. They replied: ‘How come? You were born there and there, so you had to have some nationality.’ I said: ‘No, I have none.’ And they replied: ‘Really none? You have to have some nationality. You are Russian, so for example Russian nationality?’ ‘I have none.’ (…) I cannot talk about it anymore. It is terrible, all the explaining. Nobody understands it, it is crazy. “ « Interviewer: When you received the decision [note: on administrative expulsion] from the Foreign Police, were you identified as a stateless person? Participant: No, I was not identified as stateless. It stated that I am Palestinian. Interviewer: And have you told them that you are stateless…? Participant: So many times! But in the asylum application that I have filed, they refused to indicate me as a stateless person, they told me that I have to state there what is written in my passport. But my passport is Palestinian, so I am a Palestinian for them. They told me that they cannot write there that I am stateless. Interviewer: So they consider you to be a Palestinian national? Participant: I explained it to them many times and from the very beginning I told them that the passport I have is a temporary passport, that I don’t have the Palestinian national identification number there, that it does not prove my nationality in any way. But I don’t know, maybe they need some kind of proof, and maybe they are not interested at all. I really don’t know how they work. But I am sure that the Ministry of the Interior is aware that I am stateless. I am really sure they know it and that they know about my entire situation. The above demonstrates the negative implications that arise from not having an effective statelessness determination procedure establishing that a person is stateless for the purpose of his or her further communication with the authorities. Stateless persons were repeatedly required to explain to the authorities that they were not nationals of any State. These efforts were described by the interviewees as frustrating, while the outcome was often uncertain because the authorities responded differently to the claims, even if the absence of nationality was well documented. « « (…) Sometimes they gave me an exit visa so I could leave the country. But how can I leave? And so I told them I don’t have any nationality, I have no place to go and I cannot even leave the country. And they are just not interested, they say ‘that’s your problem’.” It’s terribly complicated, I don´t even try to explain it. I tried to explain it to the police but they were not interested. Because they are only interested in what they have in their system.” The reviewed administrative decisions provided by the interviewed persons showed that nine persons have consistently been referred to as stateless by the administrative authorities. In respect of the other six participants, the authorities have used the nationality of the country of former habitual residence before arriving to the Czech Republic. The authorities used these nationalities despite the fact that the relevant persons were not nationals of these countries, which was well documented in some cases. However, the relevant decisions, as demonstrated below, often lacked adequate reasoning reflecting considerations of the administrative authority in relation to this matter. 36 Faces of Statelessness in the Czech Republic