Abstract

William E Conklin in his recent book titled “Statelessness: The Enigma of the International Community” does the same by constantly questioning the “enigma” of statelessness. The enigma arises from the claim of universal protections of all members of the international community, whereas millions remain unprotected because the membership can be secured only through intervention of a state. By exploring judgments of domestic, supra-national and international courts and tribunals, Conklin shows the discursive nature of the international community as an aggregate will of the states giving way to the international community as a whole, where harm to a natural person is seen not as harm against a state but against the international community claiming universal protection for all.