This means that, by way of example, a stateless Rohingya applicant cannot enter ‘stateless’ for his or her nationality and must select a listed nationality, such as ‘Burmese.’ Selecting the nationality of ‘Burmese’ is likely to create problems for the applicant once reviewed by the Department, which may seek to use the selection of the nationality of ‘Burmese’ as evidence that the applicant is not actually stateless and has previously lied about their identity. This is despite the fact the Department may have previously found the applicant to be stateless. The Department may use the selection of Burmese to both reject the application for citizenship on a credibility basis and potentially cancel the visa of the applicant, on the grounds that, through providing information that is inconsistent with data they have previously given the government, they are not credible. “So this paperwork, it’s very tiring, it gives a lot of stress to the individual. There’s no way to go there because …. it’s not available for the stateless person…every time when we fill those forms, that’s the hardest part to do it.” — Social Worker Healthcare and social service providers Research indicated a gap in policies and procedures for stateless people within the Australian settlement services. Without acknowledgement or visibility in health and social service policy or procedural frameworks, stateless people lack tailored support, which may compound existing health problems. “(Lack of recognition) makes it very challenging and very difficult for people to access health services. And they’re already traumatised and stressed…(E)very time a door is closed or every time access is denied, it’s like a wound that keeps constantly being opened up and it compounds their stress, the distress for the person, trying to access care. And then what does that lead to in terms of their long-term mental health or physical health?” — Refugee Health Worker 4.2 Stateless people experience multiple, complex and interrelated legal issues This section explores the legal complexity and precarity experienced by stateless people in Australia. Stateless people often face multiple, overlapping legal challenges that compound their exclusion and vulnerability. Systemic gaps in Australia’s legal frameworks exacerbate these challenges as does the lack of a stand-alone mechanism for identifying statelessness. “The settlement service providers don’t acknowledge statelessness at all. So they don’t factor that in as anything that may be impacting people who are stateless differently to those who have citizenship. Which I think is quite an oversight. Key findings indicate that: 1.1 Stateless people’s legal journeys through Australian courts and tribunals is complex (4.2.1); In the resettlement context, working for a big organisation that is supposed to be aware of issues relating to refugees and people seeking asylum, statelessness was never discussed. It was never even sort of acknowledged. So that just shows the oversight in that general day to day sort of case management.” 1.2 Proving statelessness in the absence of a statutory framework is challenging (4.2.2); 1.3 Stateless people experience a ‘relentless’ reassessment of their identity which has a real and detrimental impact on them (4.2.3); 1.4 A finding that a person is stateless carries distinct consequences across Australian administrative decision making (4.2.4); 1.5 Stateless people experience significant access to justice issues and barriers to legal assistance (4.2.5); 1.6 The Migration Act functions as a ‘further tool of family violence’ placing stateless victims at increased risk of harm (4.2.6); and 1.7 Lengthy delays in processing applications for visas and citizenship with no mandated timeframes or updates provided to applicants is detrimental to stateless people (4.2.7). — Social Worker Understandings of, and awareness of the unique needs of statelessness were also reported to be lacking in the Australian health sectors. “I don’t think, from a refugee and asylum seeker health and broader multicultural health policy perspective, that we think about statelessness as part of the portfolio of work.… statelessness is typically not the way in which we’re conceptualising the issues. It’s probably more so about people’s eligibility for health services, or social services, at a state level and at a commonwealth level across different visa categories, and that’s how we’d be seeing it.” — State Government Healthcare Provider Understanding Statelessness in Australia | Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness 37