statelessness determination procedures, as it enables stateless individuals to live with dignity and security. In a small number of cases, however, it may not be appropriate to grant leave to enter or remain. For example, where a stateless person enjoys the right of residence in another State and is able to return and live there with full respect for their human rights. As discussed above, an effective statelessness determination procedure could help identify such cases. 4 The UK should ensure that its law, policy and practice relating to stateless persons and those who cannot as a matter of fact return to their country of nationality complies with its international human rights law obligations, particularly in relation to access to employment, social assistance and healthcare. The absence of an efficient procedure to effectively identify stateless persons, or the possibility for stateless persons without leave to remain to regularise their immigration status, results in many individuals facing a number of human rights challenges. These are particularly pressing where individuals are at risk of destitution. At present there is no clear and immediate route out of destitution for these stateless persons, as nearly all are subject to immigration legislation and policy that prohibits both access to mainstream benefits and employment. To counter this, provisions relating to social assistance (including section 4 support) and access to employment should take into account the particular circumstances of stateless persons, and be applied in accordance with the UK government’s obligations under international human rights law. The UK Border Agency should amend its guidance on immigration detention to expressly identify an individual’s statelessness as a factor that will weigh against detention, on the basis that it is likely to indicate that there are no reasonable prospects of removal. 5 A third of participants interviewed for the research had been detained under immigration powers. As well as amending existing guidelines in order to better protect stateless persons who are at risk of arbitrary and prolonged detention, there is a need for improved training of UK Border Agency personnel on how statelessness affects the presumption against detention, and how statelessness can sometimes become apparent only through the process of documentation for removal. The UK should build on the protections in British nationality law that already prevent and reduce statelessness, specifically with reference to obligations under the 1954 and 1961 Conventions and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. 6 The statistical evidence showed that British nationality law, which includes specific provisions designed to meet obligations under the 1961 Convention, is generally effective at preventing statelessness at birth. There is, however, evidence of a small number of stateless children who were born on the territory and remained stateless for five years before being able to register as British citizens as of right. Furthermore, there is no accelerated or prioritised route through which stateless persons on UK territory can naturalise as British citizens. These are both areas that should be reviewed in the light of the UK’s international obligations. 10 Mapping statelessness