widespread denial of citizenship for people of Palestinian origin in many host countries, such as Lebanon and Jordan, where they remain in legal limbo. Despite being recognized as refugees under international law, their inability to secure citizenship in these countries perpetuates their statelessness, making them highly vulnerable to exclusion from basic rights and services. This is a clear example of how political and security concerns often outweigh humanitarian obligations, with citizenship being used as a tool for demographic and political control, rather than as a mechanism for inclusion and protection. The broader regional trends highlight the importance of understanding the political and security concerns that underlie citizenship laws in MENA. The marginalization of certain groups, such as the Bidoon in Gulf countries, and the denial of nationality to Palestinians are not merely legal issues but are deeply embedded in the region’s geopolitical struggles. The refusal to grant citizenship to these groups is often justified on national security grounds, yet this perpetuates cycles of poverty, exclusion, and instability. The international community, through treaties such as the CRC, CEDAW, and CERD, has made commitments to protect the rights of stateless persons, but the gap between international norms and domestic practices remains vast. The ratification of these conventions does not always translate into effective domestic policies or legal protections for stateless individuals. The challenges faced by stateless persons in MENA countries are not merely legal but are also shaped by broader political dynamics, which often prioritize state sovereignty and national security over the rights of individuals. As such, while legal reforms and constitutional guarantees may provide a foundation for addressing statelessness, a more comprehensive and critical approach is required to address the political, social, and economic factors that perpetuate this issue in the region. In conclusion, while MENA countries have made strides toward addressing statelessness, particularly through constitutional guarantees of equality and the ratification of international treaties, the implementation of these policies remains inconsistent. The legal frameworks in the region often fail to account for the complex political dynamics that drive statelessness, such as the exclusion of Palestinians and the marginalization of minority groups like the Bidoon. To effectively mitigate statelessness, a more critical approach is needed one that not only focuses on legal reforms but also interrogates the political and security concerns that underpin citizenship laws in the region. Only by addressing these deeper issues can MENA countries create a more inclusive and equitable system for their populations, ensuring that all individuals are able to enjoy the right to a nationality and the full spectrum of human rights that it entails. CONCLUSION Based on the discussion, it can be concluded that the handling of citizenship issues in various regions shows significantly different approaches, influenced by international legal commitments, institutional capacity, and political considerations of each country. Indonesia, although not yet a party to the 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions, continues to demonstrate a normative and practical commitment to protecting the human rights of stateless persons through humanitarian diplomacy, cooperation with the UNHCR and the IOM, and active participation in regional and international forums, particularly regarding the Rohingya crisis. Conversely, the Philippines emerges as a progressive model in Asia with a comprehensive legal framework and a clear mechanism for determining statelessness, although it still faces implementation challenges due to limited resources and the gap between legal norms and the actual experiences of stateless persons. Meanwhile, countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) exhibit restrictive citizenship patterns, where political, security, and demographic interests often hinder the granting of citizenship rights, despite constitutional guarantees and commitments to international human rights instruments. These findings confirm that efforts to address statelessness are not sufficient through formal law alone, but also require political will, a consistent humanitarian approach, and integration between international norms and national practices so that the protection of the rights of stateless persons can be realized effectively and sustainably. ISSN 2776-1266 (print), 2776-1266 (online) Copyright © 2026, Journal of Public Representative and Society Provision Under the license CC BY-SA 4.0 | 194