SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 MarsdenLR 4462

HIGH COURT MALAYA JOHOR BAHRU
IRHAZMI ALI KASIM – Appellant
Versus
REGISTRAR GENERAL OF BIRTH AND DEATHS & ORS – Respondent
[Originating Summons No: JA-24NCVC-969-08/2023]



Petitioner Advocates:Shaik Salem@Shaik Adam Shaik Mohd Daud ,Respondent Advocate: Zahilah Mohammad Yusoff

Citizenship by operation of law requires proof of both jus soli and jus sanguinis; the applicant bears the burden of proof regarding their citizenship status.

Headnote:(A) Federal Constitution - Articles 14(1)(b), 14(1)(e), and 19 - Citizenship application - Plaintiff sought declaration of citizenship by operation of law and naturalization - Court found that Plaintiff did not meet jus sanguinis requirements as neither parent was a citizen or permanent resident at birth - Dismissed the application. (Paras 19, 20, 21, 28, 45)

(B) Burden of Proof - The applicant bears the burden to prove their claim for citizenship, including proving statelessness - Court emphasized the necessity of evidence regarding the citizenship status of the Plaintiff's biological parents. (Paras 41, 49, 53)

Facts of the case:
Plaintiff was born in Malaysia to parents of Indonesian descent, claimed statelessness and sought citizenship. Defendants opposed the application, asserting insufficient evidence of the Plaintiff's citizenship status. (Paras 7-17)

Findings of Court:
The Plaintiff failed to establish citizenship by operation of law due to lack of evidence regarding the citizenship of his parents at the time of his birth. (Paras 46, 54)

Issues: Whether the Plaintiff qualifies for citizenship by operation of law or naturalization, and the burden of proof regarding his statelessness. (Paras 19, 41)

Ratio Decidendi: Citizenship by operation of law requires both jus soli and jus sanguinis; the Plaintiff did not meet the jus sanguinis requirement. The burden of proof lies with the Plaintiff to establish his claim. (Paras 20, 45)

Result: Application dismissed with no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT

Noor Hisham Ismail J:

Introduction

[1] This was an application by the Plaintiff ("P") by way of Originating Summons (Enclosure 1) to move this Court for the following reliefs:

(a) declaration that P is a Malaysian citizen by operation of law under Article 14 (1)(b) read together with 14(1)(e) of the Federal Constitution (" FC ") or in the alternative by naturalization under art 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and 2(a), (b), (c) under Part III of the ;

(b) an order for the defendants to issue a new Certificate of Birth to P that endorses P's citizenship as Malaysian;

(c) an order for the defendants to issue a National Registration Identity Card to P as a Malaysian citizen; and

(d) an order for the defendants to update P's particulars as a citizen of Malaysia in the registers kept under s 4 of the National Registration Act 1959 and regs 4, 11 and 14 National Registration Regulations 1990.

[2] The Defendants opposed P's application.

[3] The following are the cause papers filed by the parties:

(a) Originating Summons dated 30 August 2023 ("OS");

(b) Plaintiff's Affidavit in-Support affirmed on 14 August 2023 ("AIS");

(c) Defendant's Affidavit in-Reply affirmed on 21 November 2023 ("DAIR");

(d) Plaintiff's Affidavit in-Reply affirmed on 12 December 2023 ("PAIR")

[4] Both parties had also put in their respective written submissions before this Court.

[5] Having perused the cause papers, the written submissions, and after having heard arguments from both parties' learned counsel, this Court dismissed the OS with no order as to costs.

[6] Below is the Grounds of Judgment of this Court.

Salient Facts

[7] P was born on 27 January 1989 at 10.31am at the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital.

[8] P was then issued with a Certificate of Birth bearing registration No. l026266 (exhibit IA-1 in AIR). The said ertificate and the particulars as stated therein are not disputed by the Defendants (see: paragraph 5, para 11.3 and exhibit 'ZM-3' in DAIR).

[9] A perusal of the said certificate reveals that P's biological parents are Nurmi Bt Mukhtar as the mother and Ali Kasim Bin Sarin as the father. Both of them (hereinafter to be referred to as "parents" or "biological parents") are recorded as of Indonesian descent.

[10] From another document produced by the Defendants titled as 'Daftar Kelahiran (Borang A)' (exhibit ZM-4 in DAIR), it is further revealed that P's father was recorded as having no identity documents while P's mother was categorized as an illegal immigrant.

[11] P claimed that he had attempted on numerous times to apply for Malaysia citizenship but were rejected at the counter even before P could filed the relevant documents. The Defendants however refuted this claim.

[12] Plaintiff further averred that he made his first application to obtain a temporary resident card or what is commonly known as MyKAS on 30 December 2008 and this was approved on 23 October 2012 as evident from exhibit ZM-1 DAIR. The validity of the said MyKas was for a period of 5 years.

[13] Subsequent to the above, the MyKAS Application Committee Panel on 12 December 2017 approved P's application for a replacement of his MyKAS as could be seen in exhibit ZM-2 DAIR. It is also stated therein that P's parents are not Malaysian citizens, are of Indonesian descent and there are no identification documents concerning them.

[14] The new MyKAS issued as replacement by the National Registration Department (NRD) is also valid for five (5) years and expired on 12 December 2022.

[15] P averred that he did try to apply for an extension of his MyKAS after the said expiry date but was rejected by the National Registration Department. This assertion was strictly denied by the Defendants by deposing that there were no records whatsoever within their possession to show that P had indeed made such application.

[16] Finally, P also admitted that he did not make any application to become a permanent resident of Malaysia because he felt that such application would cause prejudice to him since he has spent his entire 34 y

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top