Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2020 2(1) an SDP. 121 Regarding the timeframe within which a decision must be made, it is recommended that Nigeria set a (reasonable) time frame from the date of application to the time for statelessness status decisions. A best practice in this regard is Moldova, where decisions are normally made within 6 months, and exceptionally within 12 months. 122 It is also important for Nigeria to transpose the practice of non-penalisation of applicants on grounds of illegal entry and residence in its asylum procedure to the proposed SDP (See Part III(E) above). This ensures that applicants are not detained pending the determination of status. E Proposed Method for Assessment of Evidence and Establishment of Fact In the current asylum procedure, in keeping with the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status and Guidelines on International Protection, 123 the burden of proof is shared between the applicant and the case officer, even if the NCFRMI Act and the refugee procedure SOPs do not explicitly provide for a shared burden. This burden sharing system should be retained in the proposed SDP framework, as we have argued in Part III(E). Nigeria could draw inspiration in this respect from the SDP systems in France, Moldova, and Paraguay, where case officers can collect information from the applicant’s place of birth, place of residence, including from state authorities in the last place of habitual residence of the applicant. 124 The standard of proof that is used in RSD in Nigeria is the balance of probabilities. For SDP, we would propose a somewhat lower standard ie proof to a reasonable degree, as recommended by UNHCR, 125 and in this article in Part III(E). F Management of Combined Refugee and Statelessness Claims As noted earlier, UNHCR advises that when an applicant raises both a refugee and a statelessness claim, it is important that each claim is assessed and that both types of status are explicitly recognised. 126 UNHCR acknowledges that sometimes there could be overlaps between refugee and statelessness claims, and on that ground advises states to consider establishing a combined procedure for both refugee and statelessness determination. Although we would recommend separate determination procedures as well as different agencies for SDP and asylum procedures (see Part III(F)), if procedures were to be combined in Nigeria, it is imperative that Nigeria examine how to manage confidentiality concerns, especially in situations of mixed statelessness and refugee claims, considering the 121 Although no administrative fee is charged in RSD practice in Nigeria, the NCFRMI Act and its SOPs are silent on it. 122 See Handbook on the Protection of Stateless Persons (n 11) 30 [75]. See also Moldova Foreigners Regime (n 110) art 872(1). 123 Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status and Guidelines on International Protection Under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (UNHCR February 2019) 43 [196]. 124 See OFPRA Guide (n 118) 55 [9.2]; Moldova Foreigners Regime (n 110) art 872(2);. Paraguay Statelessness Law (n 105) art 44. 125 See Handbook on the Protection of Stateless Persons (n 11) 34 [91]. 126 ibid 31 [78]. 107