As extensively explained above, the 2013 UNHCR Note supports a broader scope of Article 1D, encompassing also those Palestinians who are eligible for such protection or assistance. Nonetheless, it should be noted that neither UNHCR nor the CJEU mention UNCCP when referring to protection offered by UN agencies other than UNHCR. This issue, of great importance to this Handbook, will be addressed in Chapter Five, The Interpretation and Application of Article 1D: a critical approach. In addition, it should be noted that, while the El Kott decision refers to reasons beyond one’s control and independent of one’s volition, it does not provide a practical framework for assessing such reasons. In contrast, the 2013 UNHCR Note offers two sets of objective reasons, concerning protection-related issues and practical barriers to return, as seen above. 2.1.5. Further screening Article 1D establishes that persons falling under its second paragraph – i.e., the inclusion clause – should be automatically granted refugee status, without further screening under Article 1A(2) criteria. While UNHCR does endorse this understanding,299 according to its 2013 Note, Palestinians should still be subject to some further screening, in order to assess the “objective reason” why they fled their countries of habitual residence. In some cases, such screening does amount to Article 1A(2) criteria; nonetheless, even when it does not, it still contradicts the ipso facto mechanism of the second paragraph of Article 1D, which was set to ensure the continuity of protection, since it assesses reasons for leaving rather than evaluating whether protection standards were met in the previous country of asylum. For a more detailed discussion of this issue and practical mechanisms that could serve the purpose of continuity of protection, refer to Chapter Five, Section 2. 2.1.6. Non-Refoulement and Returnabilities Palestinians recognized as refugees, as well as those seeking asylum, are minimally entitled to protection against refoulement, i.e., against being returned to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion (see section 1.1 Non-refoulement). The granting of residence status by the state that has recognized the individual as a refugee is not specifically addressed in the 1951 Refugee Convention. However, if state parties do not make provision for legal status to those whom they have recognized as refugees, their obligations under the Convention are seriously undermined. Nevertheless, under certain exceptional circumstances, national authorities might be permitted to return a Palestinian refugee to a country of previous residence where 58 299 UNHCR, “2013 Note,” 5; and, especially, UNHCR, “UNHCR’s Oral Intervention at the Court of Justice of the European Union, Hearing of the Case of El Kott and Others v. Hungary (C-364/11),” 13. Handbook on Protection of Palestinian Refugees