BARRIER High standard of proof in Switzerland By default, the standard of proof applied to the determination of statelessness in Switzerland is ‘full proof’. Unlike in the asylum procedure, where a lower standard of proof is applied, there is no provision in law to acknowledge the challenges faced by applicants to evidence their statelessness. The Swiss courts have endorsed this higher standard of proof in recent judgments. Lack of child rights-based statelessness determination procedures SDPs are also essential to identify stateless children among migrant populations and ensure that the rights they are entitled to are upheld until they acquire a nationality. However, procedures are usually applied to children without adaptation from the general SDP, and the burden of proof remains with the child. It is often unclear whether unaccompanied children are provided with a guardian or granted legal aid in any of the countries that have a dedicated SDP (except France, Hungary, and Moldova).57 3.2.3. Procedural safeguards There are several minimum procedural safeguards that must be provided for in an SDP. Applicants should be offered free legal aid, interpreting, and translation services on the same basis as asylum applicants. They should have the right to an individual interview and necessary assistance to ensure they can present their situation and clarify any questions material to their application.58 In particular, for child applicants, there should be child-rights-based adaptations and procedural safeguards in place, including ex officio initiation of the SDP, prioritisation in the processing of claims and provision of adequately trained legal representatives, interviewers, guardians and interpreters (where appropriate).59 The determination should be carried out expeditiously and decisions issued in writing within an established, reasonable time limit of no longer than six months (or twelve months in exceptional circumstances).60 There should be a mechanism for cross-referral between the SDP and asylum procedures (giving primacy to the asylum claim), and procedures to recognise or grant nationality, should an entitlement to nationality become apparent during the procedure. The SDP should be subject to regular quality-assurance audits and UNHCR should be guaranteed access to the procedure as an additional safeguard. Good practice In Hungary and Ukraine, free legal aid is available to all applicants at all stages of the procedure. In Hungary, interviews are mandatory, interpreters are provided if required, and legal aid representatives are permitted to attend and comment. Interviews are also mandatory in Ukraine, Moldova, and Bulgaria, and interpretation is available in most countries during the interview (except in Bulgaria, Italy, and Switzerland). In Ukraine and Moldova, the authorities must examine an application within six months, although this can be extended with reasoning. In Latvia, there is a time limit of three months, but it is unclear whether this is adhered to in practice. In Hungary, the limit is 45 days, but this can be extended where there is a delay on the part of a foreign authority, which can result in lengthy delays.