No longer invisible: Improving Australia’s identification and protection of stateless people

Kira Todd, Freya Phillips National Scholar, Y20 Fellow

Executive Summary

Gaps in Australia’s mechanisms to identify and protect stateless people risk entrenching their marginalisation and precarity. Members of Australia’s stateless population are not guaranteed refugee protections, as the current Refugee Status Determination procedure does not accommodate for the unique circumstances distinguishing them from other asylum seekers. Notably, there is no official record of the number of stateless people in Australia, no dedicated legal process to identify statelessness, and no guaranteed protections for those affected.  Despite being a party to international conventions committing to the protection of stateless people, Australia’s policies and institutional knowledge in this space remain inadequate. This institutional invisibility exacerbates the insecurity, poverty, and marginalisation faced by this population.

Building on Statelessness Determination Procedures already established overseas, this paper recommends Australia establish its own model within the existing asylum process. Further reforms to visa categories and citizenship rules would need to be introduced to guarantee permanent protection for people identified as stateless, ensuring that identification results in tangible protections. To accommodate this, the Department of Home Affairs would require additional training and staff to process these claims and avoid extending an already overburdened system.

Problem Identification

The Australian Government’s current asylum and refugee procedures do not guarantee protections for stateless people, leaving them in deep insecurity and vulnerability. Many are unable to access services including education, employment, healthcare, bank loans and government services, and are at risk of prolonged detention (Foster, McAdam & Wadley, 2016). 

When applying for refugee status in Australia, stateless people must prove they face persecution in their country of origin – a demand they face unique barriers in demonstrating by virtue of not having a nationality (Foster, McAdam & Wadley, 2016). Consequently, many stateless asylum seekers experience prolonged periods of ‘limbo’ on temporary or bridging visas which prohibit them from working, engaging in formal study or accessing government services like Medicare and Centrelink. Cyclical poverty, deteriorating health and mental illness are consequences of this exclusion (Bell, 2023). 

Critically, stateless asylum seekers risk being denied permanent protection, and must leave Australia if they do not satisfy criteria for refugee status or complementary protection. Further avenues to pursue residency are temporary or depend on Ministerial intervention, and once these are exhausted, stateless asylum seekers face prolonged detention, as there is no ‘home country’ to receive them (Refugee Council of Australia, 2015). Placing these individuals in detention exposes them to extreme physical and mental health risks, at the expense of Australian taxpayers (Estcourt, 2024; Refugee Council of Australia [RCOA], 2025).

Information scarcity entrenches stateless peoples’ vulnerability. There are no coordinated statistics on the number or location of stateless people living in Australia, and no formal mechanism to identify them (Foster, McAdam and Wadley, 2016). Without a clear record of statelessness accessible to policymakers, awareness remains poor and there is little incentive for policy action (Kingston, 2013). At the policymaking level, incorrect assumptions that stateless people will automatically gain refugee status perpetuate institutional mishandling

Context

Overview of statelessness International law defines a stateless person as ‘a person who is not considered a national by any State under the operation of its law’ (Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1960). Because of their lack of nationality, stateless people often face significant barriers accessing basic entitlements, including medical care, education, employment, property ownership and freedom of mobility. Many stateless people experience debilitating feelings of incompleteness and stagnation due to their inability to fully participate in society (Bell, 2023).  There are approximately 12 million stateless people worldwide, with the majority residing in the Asia-Pacific region (UNHCR, 2025).

Causes of statelessness are diverse and vary across different countries, but they include discriminatory and incomplete nationality laws, deprivation of nationality, border transformations and failure to register births. Within a given country, statelessness may be created by their own nationality laws, or arise from the arrival of stateless migrants (Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, 2023). The latter category describes Australia’s stateless population.

Statelessness in Australia

As a party to the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, Australia has legal obligations to protect stateless people, including by guaranteeing access to housing, employment, social services and administrative assistance. In 2011, Australia pledged to ‘better identify stateless persons and assess their claims’ and ensure ‘stateless persons are treated no less favourably than people with an identified nationality’ (UNHCR Pledges, 2011).  However, progress on these commitments has been sluggish, with legal experts highlighting that gaps in Australia’s identification mechanisms and protection regime leave it noncompliant with international legal obligations (Foster, McAdam and Wadley, 2016).

According to the Department of Home Affairs (DHA), stateless people comprised 1% of humanitarian visa applicants in 2023-24 (2025), although it must be noted these figures are based on self-identification, rather than a systematic legal process to confirm statelessness (Foster, McAdam & Wadley, 2016). The UNHCR reported 7,067 stateless people in Australia in 2024, however, in the absence of a formal identification mechanism, it notes this figure is likely inaccurate (UNHCR, 2024).

Treatment of statelessness in the asylum process

Most stateless people in Australia are asylum seekers who apply for a permanent protection visa through the Refugee and Humanitarian Entry Program (RCOA, 2015). Their application is assessed under the Refugee Status Determination Procedure, which does not recognise statelessness as an independent ground for receiving refugee status. Applicants must prove experience of persecution in their home country - a requirement which stateless people, who face heightened difficulty accessing documentation - encounter unique challenges in demonstrating.

A stateless person who is determined ineligible for refugee status or complementary protection is denied permanent protection and expected to leave Australia, as there is no dedicated visa pathway for them (see Figure 1 and Appendix). Although there are other avenues to pursue Australian residency, they are temporary or rely on the Minister for Immigration’s intervention. Stateless people remaining in Australia after exhausting all options to secure residency face prolonged detention, a policy with severe economic and human costs (Refugee Council of Australia, 2015). The annual cost to hold one person in immigration detention is $550,040, with costs increasing substantially each year (RCOA, 2025). Recent statistics indicate there are 16 stateless people currently held in detention, with an average detention period of 992 days. Keeping stateless detainees in this environment creates high risk of mental and physical trauma requiring ongoing treatment upon release. Rates of self-harm in detention are very high, with 1.5 incidents recorded daily between 2019-2024 (Estcourt, 2024).

Identification of statelessness

Following its 2011 UNHCR pledge, the (former) Department of Immigration introduced Procedures Advice Manual 3 (PAM3) guidelines into existing complementary protection and refugee law guidelines to help identify stateless applicants. However, it has been criticised for requiring a high threshold for proving statelessness, and for considering whether applicants may be entitled to citizenship in countries which they may have no tangible connection to. These requirements do not account for the challenges faced by stateless people in obtaining legitimate documentation, and could generate additional, unreasonable difficulties for stateless people in achieving security (Foster, McAdam and Wadley, 2016). 

Figure 1. Permanent protection pathways for stateless asylum seekers in Australia

The absence of a formal statelessness determination procedure in the humanitarian entry system entrenches information paucity.  While the Department of Home Affairs records the number of protection visa applicants identifying as stateless, this information is not fed into a dedicated database to keep track of this population. Moreover, these figures only capture stateless humanitarian visa applicants, excluding an unknown number of people who have not interacted with this process, such as children born in Australia to stateless parents who have not initiated an application for Australian citizenship (UNHCR, 2024; Robertson, 2024). 

International case studies

The UNHCR’s Global Action Plan to End Statelessness 2.0 (2023) recommends states establish Stateless Determination Procedures (SDPs) to grant protection to stateless migrants. An SDP is a statutory mechanism which identifies stateless people within a country’s migrant population, ensuring they can access rights while they wait to acquire citizenship. Around 20 countries have established SDPs through various legal structures which complement their asylum regimes (UNHCR, 2020). 

The UNHCR’s Good Practices Paper (2020) outlines seven key characteristics of effective SDPs: 

• an appropriate institutional location with well-trained examiners 

• an accessible procedure

• coordination with refugee claims

• a shared burden of proof between applicant and examiners

• procedural guarantees

• rights for recognised stateless persons 

• facilitated naturalisation

Moldova’s SDP, established in 2011, fulfils most of these criteria and is recognised as a model for other states to emulate (UNHCR, 2020). Individuals can apply in person at a government office, either orally or in writing. Authorities may initiate an application on behalf of an individual they believe may be stateless. A dedicated Statelessness Unit examines applications within six months, with a mandatory interview with interpreter access included in the evaluation process. People recognised as stateless are then given permanent residence and equal rights to nationals, excepting political rights (Statelessness Index, 2021).

Between 2011 and 2019, 355 out of a total of 1144 applicants received statelessness status. This entitled them to permanent residence, identity and travel documents and free access to dedicated social integration activities run by the Moldovan government (UNHCR, 2020). The European Network on Statelessness commended Moldova’s SDP as a best practice example, with Hungary, Latvia and France also receiving commendation (ENS, 2021). These countries demonstrate that governments can make significant progress in protecting their stateless populations by implementing an SDP. Australia could refer to these examples to fill domestic policy gaps in this area.

Policy Options

To address the marginalisation and exclusion of stateless people in Australia, the federal government needs to improve its identification of the affected population, and ensure they can access rights and protections they are entitled to under international law. 

Policy Option 1: The Department of Home Affairs establishes a statutory Statelessness Determination Procedure (SDP) which leads to legal protections.

The UNHCR and subject experts recommend that Australia establish an SDP to understand the size and profile of Australia’s stateless population. A positive determination should grant stateless people to legal rights and protections (Foster, McAdam and Wadley, 2016; RCOA, 2015). This option would align Australia with other states which have taken meaningful action to identify and protect their stateless migrant populations.

Implementing an SDP within the asylum claim procedure would increase the burden on the DHA’s Refugee and Humanitarian Program by lengthening the claim assessment process. Statelessness would become a third status to check eligibility for, in addition to existing checks for refugee status and complementary protection eligibility. This would require additional training and staffing to effectively process statelessness claims, creating a permanent cost increase for the Department. 

Policy Option 2: The Department of Home Affairs establishes a dedicated visa category for stateless people to provide them with permanent protection and rights to participate in work and study.

Obtaining official stateless status means little for affected people if it does not guarantee them protections. There is currently no clear visa pathway for people who have been determined as stateless on the basis of government guidelines, but who do not qualify for refugee status or complementary protection. A dedicated visa category for stateless people would provide them clear protections and ensure they can access basic rights - including the ability to seek employment and education before they are eligible to apply for Australian citizenship. Implementing a new visa category would require additional costs for the Department: a temporary cost associated with the creation of a new visa, and a permanent cost for claim processing.

Policy Option 3: The Department of Home Affairs revises the PAM3 guidelines to better identify and process stateless people applying for humanitarian protection, and record the number of people receiving a positive determination.

The DHA could revise its internal guidelines to accurately identify stateless humanitarian protection applicants. The burden of proof required to prove statelessness should be lowered, aligning with principles outlined in the UNHCR’s Good Practices Paper, to acknowledge the unique barriers faced by stateless people in accessing identity documentation. With a record of the number of stateless people applying for protection visas, the Commonwealth Government would have an improved quantification of Australia’s stateless population, and could use this to develop further strategies to ensure their protection. 

While this would improve government knowledge on statelessness and improve recognition of stateless peoples’ unique status, a positive assessment would not result in legal protections. This should be accompanied by changes to visa eligibility to allow people identified as stateless to access permanent protection visas.

Policy Recommendation

Option 1 is the most comprehensive step Australia can take towards improving knowledge of and protecting stateless people.

The Department of Home Affairs (DHA)’s Refugee and Humanitarian Program is the responsible authority for this reform. Emulating best-practice examples in countries with effective SDPs, an Australian SDP could efficiently be integrated into the existing Refugee Status Determination procedure. Applicants would be assessed for refugee status, complementary protection and statelessness through a single procedure (Foster, McAdam and Wadley, 2016).

The procedure should be highly accessible. Applicants should have access to interpreters and legal assistance, given that language barriers and unfamiliarity with bureaucratic systems are major obstacles for stateless people. Authorities should additionally be able to launch applications on behalf of stateless people. Crucially, the procedure should account for difficulties faced by stateless people in acquiring valid identity documents, and ensure the inability to produce documents is not grounds for refusing statelessness status. The standard of proof should therefore be slightly lower than for proving refugee status (ENS, 2021). Strong protections, including the right to not be detained and to access public services, should be granted to applicants while they await processing (UNHCR, 2020).

Costs

The DHA would incur costs associated with the administrative setup of an SDP, and ongoing operational costs to support additional staffing to process statelessness claims. Given that stateless applicants comprised only 1% of humanitarian visa applicants in 2023-2024, the volume of additional staff and budget needed to process statelessness claims would be low (Department of Home Affairs, 2025). 

The most recent Federal Budget allocated $862 million to Refugee, Humanitarian Settlement and Migrant Services for 2025-26. This figure includes the direct provision of visas under the Humanitarian Program (Budget Papers, 2025). 850 stateless people applied for humanitarian visas via the offshore humanitarian program in 2023-24, out of a total of 84,913 applicants (1%). Utilising a comparative cost assessment of 1% of the $862 million budget, the estimated cost of processing 850 stateless applicants is $8.62 million per annum.

Risks

Implementing an SDP without creating a protection pathway will not produce tangible benefits for stateless people. In this case, the SDP would represent the first step in solving this policy problem by enabling decision makers access to better data on Australia’s stateless populations. 

For an SDP to result in protection, there must be a clear visa outcome attached to a positive finding of statelessness. Continued political commitment to delivering these reforms will be necessary.

Limited Reach

An identification and protection mechanism within the RSD procedure may not reach all stateless people. Stateless people who were previously refused refugee protection and are either in detention or living on temporary visas may not be able to access the procedure, as applicants can only apply for a protection visa once (Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, 2021). To resolve this, the Commonwealth Government would need to expand its effort to grant permanent visas to temporary visa holders. Currently, people who held or applied for a temporary visa until 14 February 2023 are eligible to apply for a Resolution of Status visa - this should be expanded to include all temporary visa holders, including those who have previously had their claims rejected.

Increasing the backlog of asylum claims

Without adequate funding and staffing expansion to the DHA’s Refugee and Humanitarian Program, adding an SDP to the Refugee Status Determination procedure could harm all applicants by increasing processing times. This is a serious consideration considering there were 28,691 protection visa applications awaiting a decision as of April 2025 (Ghezelbash, Dorostkar & Bridle, 2025). The DHA therefore needs to hire and train more staff to process protection claims to avoid prolonging the time applicants spend on restrictive temporary visas.

SDPs creating a 'pull factor' for migration

A criticism of SDPs is that they could incentivise more people to enter the country, including through illegal channels, to apply for statelessness status. This has not materialised in countries which have established SDPs in recent years, with data revealing that the number of people initiating SDP applications remains relatively low. 

References

Asylum Seeker Resource Centre. (2021.) Overview of the legal process for seeking asylum in Australia.

Bell, Z. (2023). Experiences of Statelessness and Refugee Protection: Exploring the “Rohingya Life” in Sydney, Australia [Doctoral dissertation, University of News South Wales]. https://doi.org/10.26190/unsworks/25307  

Department of Homes Affairs. (2025). Portfolio Budget Statements 2025–26 Budget Related Paper No. 1.10 Home Affairs Portfolio. https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/reports-and-pubs/Budgets/2025-26-home-affairs-pbs-full-version.pdf

Department of Home Affairs. (2025). Australia’s Offshore Humanitarian Program. https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research-and-stats/files/aus-offshore-humanitarian-program-2023-24.pdf 

Estcourt, D. (2024, September 24). ‘Epidemic levels’ of self-harm continue in immigration detention, sparking calls for reform. ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-24/immigration-detentions-epidemic-levels-of-self-harm-continues/104385820

European Network on Statelessness. (2021). Statelessness determination and the protection status of stateless persons in Europe: good practices, challenges and risks. https://www.statelessness.eu/sites/default/files/2021-09/ENS-Statelessness_determination_and_protection_in_Europe-Sep_2021.pdf

Foster, M., McAdam, J. & Wadley, D. (2016). Part One: the protection of stateless persons in Australian Law: the rationale for a Statelessness Determination Procedure. Melbourne University Law Review, vol. 40. 401-455. doi/10.3316/informit.877443693279832 

Humans Like Us. (accessed September 2025). Common Visas. https://www.humanslikeus.org/visas. 

Kingston, L. N. (2013). “A forgotten human rights crisis”: Statelessness and issue (non)emergence. Human Rights Review, 14. 73–87. doi:10.1007/s12142-013-0264-4  

Statelessness Index. (2021). Country briefing: Moldova.

https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/2067872/Country+Briefing+Moldova+2021+EN.pdf 

Ghezelbash, D., Dorostkar, K. & Bridle, M. (2025, April 24). 5 ways to tackle Australia’s backlog of asylum cases. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/5-ways-to-tackle-australias-backlog-of-asylum-cases-254071 

Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness. (2023). An Overview of Statelessness. https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/4460454/Statelessness_overview_factsheet_Nov_2024.pdf 

Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness. (2024). Statelessness in Australia. https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/4488281/Statelessness-in-Australia-_-Feb-2024.pdf 

Refugee Council of Australia. (2015). Statelessness in Australia. https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/1508-Statelessness.pdf 

Refugee Council of Australia. (2025). Statistics on people in detention in Australia. https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/detention-australia-statistics/10/

Robertson, K. & Dale, S. (2021).  A place to call home: Shining a light on unmet legal need for stateless refugee children in Australia. Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness & Refugee Advice and Casework Service. https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/3645547/StatelessChildrenReport.pdf 

Robertson, K. (2024). Best Practice Models for Providing Legal Education and Aid to Stateless Children. Winston Churchill Trust.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2020). Good practices paper: Action 6 – Establishing statelessness determination procedures for the protection of stateless persons. 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2023). Global Action Plan to End Statelessness 2.0. 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2024). Refugee data finder: Stateless persons by region (2019–2024) [Data set]. https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download?data_finder%5BdataGroup%5D=displacement&data_finder%5Bdataset%5D=population&data_finder%5BdisplayType%5D=totals&data_finder%5BpopulationType%5D%5B%5D=STA&data_finder%5Byear__filterType%5D=range&data_finder%5Byear__rangeFrom%5D=2019&data_finder%5Byear__rangeTo%5D=2024&data_finder%5Bcoo__displayType%5D=doNotDisplay&data-finder=on&data_finder%5Bcoa__displayType%5D=region&data_finder%5Bcoa__region%5D=5&data_finder%5Byear__%5D=&data_finder%5Bcoo__%5D=&data_finder%5Bcoa__%5D=&data_finder%5Badvanced__%5D=&data_finder%5Bsubmit%5D=  

Appendix - Humanitarian protection visas in Australia

Permanent protection visas
Type	Eligibility	Stateless applicant eligibility
Refugee visa (subclass 200)	For people subject to persecution in their home country and are in need of resettlement. Applicants typically identified by the UNHCR, and then referred to the Australian Government for resettlement consideration.	Yes – although it is unknown if stateless people are disadvantaged in the UNHCR’s process of allocating refugees to Australia, and in Australia’s prioritisation process.
In-Country special humanitarian programme visa (subclass 201)	For people who have suffered persecution in their home country, and who have been unable able to seek refuge elsewhere.	Yes – although it is unknown if stateless people are disadvantaged in the prioritisation process.
Global Special Humanitarian Programme visa (subclass 202)	For people subjected to substantial discrimination and human rights abuses in their home country, but who are not considered refugees. These visas are proposed and funded by Australian citizen or permanent resident over the age of 18, an eligible New Zealand citizen or an organisation operating in Australia.	Yes – but significant eligibility barriers make this very exclusionary. Requires an individual or organisation in Australia to fully fund the visa.
Emergency rescue visa (subclass 203)	For people who satisfy refugee criteria, and whose lives or freedom depend on urgent resettlement. Offers accelerated processing.	Yes if refugee status criteria is fulfilled – however, incomplete or unclear documentation may prevent successful processing.
Woman at risk visa (subclass 204)	For women and their dependents who are subject to persecution, living outside their home country without the protection of a male relative, and are in danger of victimisation, harassment or serious abuse because of their gender. Most applicants under this category are identified and referred to the Australian Government by the UNHCR.	Yes – although it is unknown if stateless people are discriminated against in the prioritisation process.
Protection visa (subclass 866)	This visa allows a person who arrived in Australia on a valid visa, and engaged Australia’s protection obligations, to live in Australia permanently.	Dependent on satisfying criteria for refugee status or complementary protection.
Resolution of Status Visa	Provided in 2023 to most temporary visa holders, largely affecting asylum seekers who arrived by boat after 2012. Only applies to those who received a positive decision in the ‘fast track’ process.	Stateless asylum seekers have received RoS visas, but some have been excluded. Applicants who were rejected in the ‘fast track process’ (which required quick submission of legal documents to lodge a valid refugee status claim, which stateless people are less likely to successfully achieve) were ineligible.
Temporary protection visas
Temporary Protection Visa (TPV) (subclass 785)	This visa allows a person who arrived in Australia without a valid visa and engaged Australia’s protection obligations to stay in Australia up to three years. Holders have the right to work, and can access Medicare and Centrelink benefits. Can be extended for an additional three years. Most of these visa holders were transferred to Resolution of Status Visas in February 2023.	Dependent on satisfying criteria for refugee status or complementary protection.
Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV) (subclass 790)	For people who arrived in Australia without a valid visa, and engaged Australia’s protection obligations. Allows them to stay in Australia up to five years if they or a family member intend to work and/or study in regional Australia.	Dependent on satisfying criteria for refugee status or complementary protection.
Bridging visas
BVA (subclass 010) BVB (subclass 020) BVC (subclass 030) BVE (subclass 050and subclass 051)	Allows holders to remain in Australia while their visa application under process, or in preparation for leaving Australia. Limited work and study rights, with limited access to Medicare and Centrelink.	Dependent on satisfying criteria for refugee status or complementary protection.

The views and opinions expressed by Global Voices Fellows do not necessarily reflect those of the organisation or its staff.