arbitrary and disproportionately lengthy immigration detention can ensue when the particular vulnerabilities of stateless people are not addressed.29 25. There are several gaps in immigration detention law, policy, and practice in Moldova. There are some protections against the arbitrary detention of undocumented stateless people, including provisions establishing that detention should be a measure of last resort and a country of removal must be identified prior to detaining.30 However, in practice, it is unclear how these principles are implemented. 26. No alternatives for immigration detention exist in law or in practice, and such alternatives are not considered during decisions to detain. Vulnerability assessments are carried out prior to the decision to detain, but statelessness is not considered during the assessment.31 Referral to the SDP is possible from detention, though someone who applies from detention may remain detained until the proposed country of removal confirms they are not a national. Between 2012-2020, 49 people were released from detention into the SDP following confirmation they were not a national by the proposed country of removal. 27. Moldova also has shortcomings in its procedural safeguards for immigration detainees. The maximum time limit differs for different types of detention,32 but there is no time limit for detention pending expulsion following a criminal conviction. The provision of information to detainees on their rights is not set out in law and is provided by UNHCR’s NGO partners at the discretion of the Government. Until December 2016, monthly judicial reviews of the necessity of immigration detention were carried out but, following changes to legislation, the provision for regular periodic review of detention no longer exists in law. However, a 2018 Advisory Opinion of the Supreme Court of Justice requires this to be reinstated. 33 This judicial oversight has not yet been reinstated in law, but in practice courts apply detention for not more than 30 days and renewal of the detention period requires a new court decision. Recommendations 28. Based on the above information, the co-submitting organisations urge reviewing States to make the following recommendations to Moldova: I. Fully promote, respect, protect and fulfil its obligations towards stateless persons and the right to a nationality under international human rights law. II. Amend the law to reinstate the full safeguard to ensure that all children born on the territory who would otherwise be stateless acquire Moldovan nationality automatically at birth, regardless of the residence status of their parents. 29 European Network on Statelessness, Protecting Stateless Persons from Arbitrary Detention: A regional toolkit for practitioners, 2017 https://www.statelessness.eu/sites/www.statelessness.eu/files/ENS_Detention_Toolkit.pdf . 30 Law 200/2010 on foreigners in the Republic of Moldova, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4f520.html. 31 Government Decision 492/2011, available at: http://lex.justice.md/index.php?action=view&view=doc&lang=1&id=339318. 32 12 months for 'undesirable persons' (person whose resident permit has been cancelled with no right of return for five to 15 years); six months for people subject to removal procedures; no time limit for people subject to a deportation order following a criminal conviction. 33 Supreme Court of Justice, Advisory Opinion nr. 102: http://jurisprudenta.csj.md/search_rec_csj.php?%20id=158 (Romanian). 7