15 | PROTECTING STATELESS PERSONS FROM ARBITRARY DETENTION IN MALTA 3. KEY ISSUES OF CONCERN 3.1 IDENTIFICATION & DETERMINATION PROCEDURES Malta is not a party to the 1954 and 1961 Conventions, and there is no formal procedure of identification and determination of statelessness. However, UNHCR have highlighted that “a number of non-contracting States have introduced some form of statelessness determination procedure to address the situation of such persons in their territories, given their commitment under international human rights law. With respect to the latter, statelessness is a juridically relevant fact, for example in relation to protection against arbitrary detention.” 63 Therefore, if Malta were to introduce an early identification procedure, this could result in protection of stateless people from arbitrary decision, in line with European and international standards. In case of irregular arrivals of migrants, following disembarkation all persons are brought before the Immigration Police, which operates an identification process based on declaration. It is at this stage that the mainstreaming of stateless persons, or persons at risk thereof, commences. In fact, largely due to a lack of awareness of statelessness issues and related risks, stateless persons or persons at risk of statelessness are grouped with all other migrants and channelled to the detention and eventual asylum routes. During this first registration of identity conducted by the Police, there is no real option for individuals to declare themselves as stateless. The Immigration Police declares that there have been no such claims in the past, although this is likely to be due to a general lack of awareness and training. In one incident, the Police faced a migrant (originally from Western-Sahara) claiming he had no country and it was problematic to register this person without recording a recognised state of origin. If such a claim arises during an interview under an application for international protection, RefCom will assess the claim in the same manner it assesses claims for protection. The assessment is done in relation to the risk of persecution, in accordance with the 1951 refugee definition and relevant norms under the Common European Asylum System. RefCom states that such claims