Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2020 2(1) The burden of proof is discharged by the applicant rendering a truthful account of facts relevant to the claim so that, based on the facts, a proper decision may be reached. 64 A proper procedure should not leave the responsibility of establishing a case solely on the applicant who more often than not is unable to solely prove their statelessness status or absence of a link to any nation. 2 Standard of proof ‘It is well known that the standard of proof in a civil case is proof on the balance of probabilities, and that this means that the party bearing the burden of proof must prove that his case is more probable than not’. 65 However, as regards statelessness claims, it may suffice for a finding of statelessness, that it is established to a ‘reasonable degree’ that an individual is not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law. 66 ‘The standard of proof may be understood, first, as referring to the caution that must be exercised in making positive findings’. 67 The adjudicator needs to decide if, based on the evidence provided , it is likely that the claim of that applicant is credible. 68 Lord Kitchin, reiterating the points on standard of proof proffered in the UNHCR Statelessness Handbook, 69 held in the United Kingdom case of AS (Guinea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department as follows: [A]s with the burden of proof, the standard of proof or threshold of evidence necessary to determine statelessness must take into consideration the difficulties inherent in proving statelessness, particularly in light of the consequences of incorrectly rejecting an application. Requiring a high standard of proof of statelessness would undermine the object and purpose of the 1954 Convention. States are therefore advised to adopt the same standard of proof as that required in refugee status determinations, namely, a finding of statelessness would be warranted where it is established to a ‘reasonable degree’ that an individual is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law. 70 What then is a reasonable degree desired of an applicant? An applicant could be said to have proven his case to a reasonable degree even when the determination authority is unable to find sufficient evidence of a lack of a nationality link to a particular state. A number of considerations are relevant in this context. Has the applicant made sufficient efforts to present documents supporting his or her case? Where s/he does not have sufficient documents, has the applicant demonstrated sufficiency in approach, behaviour and cooperation with the determination authorities in finding solutions for his predicament? Considering the requirement of a shared burden, where caseworkers are unable to find any information to suggest that the applicant is legally linked to any other state, it may be established to a reasonable degree that he is stateless. 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Note on Burden and Standard of Proof in Refugee Claims (Note, UNHCR 16 December 1998) 2. Mike Redmayne, ‘Standards of Proof in Civil Litigation’ (2003) 62 Modern Law Review 167, 167. See Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons (n 11) 35 [91]. Hock Lai Ho, A Philosophy of Evidence Law: Justice in the Search for Truth (Oxford University Press 2008) 173. Note on Burden and Standard of Proof in Refugee Claims (n 64) 2. See Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons (n 11) 34–35. ibid 34–35 [91], quoted in AS (Guinea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 2234, [8] (Lord Kitchin). 97