95 - 101 error in assessing the facts, the reply must be taken on face value. It is the subjective position of the other State that is critical in determining whether an individual is its national for the purposes of the stateless person definition.59 Time permitting, statelessness determination authorities may be able to raise such concerns with the foreign authority in the hope of obtaining greater clarity about the individual’s nationality status. Indeed, in some cases this may result in the foreign authority belatedly acknowledging that the individual is its national or accepting that he or she is entitled to acquire nationality. (8) Interviews An interview with an applicant is an important opportunity for the decisionmaker to explore any questions regarding the evidence presented. Openended questioning, conducted in a non-adversarial atmosphere, can create a “climate of confidence”60 encouraging applicants to deliver as full an account as possible.61 Applicants must be reminded at the outset of the interview that they have a duty to cooperate with the proceedings. That being said, an applicant can only be expected to reply to the best of his or her abilities and in many cases even basic information may not be known, for example the place of birth or whether birth was registered. While one interview will normally be sufficient to elicit the applicant’s history, it may sometimes be necessary to conduct follow-up interviews. PART TWO 100. (9) Credibility issues 101. The credibility of an applicant’s statements will not be at issue during statelessness determination procedures where a determination can be reached on the basis of the available documentary evidence when assessed in light of relevant country-related information. Where, however, little or no documentary evidence is available, statelessness determination authorities will need to rely to a greater degree on an applicant’s testimony and issues relating to the credibility of the applicant’s account might arise. In assessing whether statements can be considered credible, the decisionmaker can consider objective credibility indicators, namely, the specificity and sufficiency of detail provided, consistency in the applicant’s account including his or her written and oral statements, consistency of the applicant’s statements with those of witnesses or family members, consistency with country of origin information and the plausibility of the statements. 59 Please see paragraphs 45 and 46 which note that an error as to the application of local law to an individual’s case is irrelevant in determining the State’s position. 60 Please see paragraph 200, Handbook and Guidelines on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, note 47 above. 61 Interviewing techniques are discussed more generally in UNHCR, Interviewing Applicants for Refugee Status, RLD 4, 1995, http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/3ccea3304.pdf. Please see also UNHCR, Beyond Proof, Credibility Assessment in EU Asylum Systems: Summary, 2013, http://www.refworld.org/docid/51a704244.html, page 24. 37