Adopted children’s citizenship under Malaysian law requires biological parent status at birth; adoption does not retroactively confer citizenship rights.

Application

[1] The first and second plaintiffs are the joint litigation representatives and the adoptive parents of the child ("LSY"). They seek from this court judgment that LSY is a Malaysian citizen by operation of law. In this judgment, the plaintiffs and the child are referred to by their acronyms and details of the child's birth certificates are redacted pursuant to the discretion conferred on this court by s 15(2) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.

[2] The plaintiffs have prayed for the following declaratory orders in their amended originating summons (encl 49):

(i) that LSY is born of a mother who is a permanent resident in Malaysia pursuant to s 19B of Part III of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution (" FC ");

(ii) that LSY is a citizen of Malaysia by operation of law pursuant to art 14(1)(b) and s (1)(a) of Part II of the Second Schedule of the FC read with s 19B of Part III of the Second Schedule of the ;

(iii) in the alternative to paras 1 and 2 above, that LSY is a citizen of Malaysia by operation of law by virtue of her lawful adoption by the plaintiffs pursuant to the adoption order dated 17 June 2018 made by the Shah Alam Sessions court, read with ss 9 and 25A of the Adoption Act 1952 (" AA 1952") and art 14(1)(b) and s (1)(a) of Part II of the Second Schedule of the FC ;

(iv) that LSY is a citizen of Malaysia by operation of law pursuant to art 14(1)(b) and s (1)(e) and s 2(3) of Part II of the Second Schedule of the FC ; and

(v) that LSY's birth certificate (Register No.: 000XXXX, Serial No.: 00XXXXA) dated 6 August 2016 signed by the defendant which registers LSY as a non-citizen (bukan warganegara) instead of a citizen of Malaysia is an unlawful violation of LSY's rights as a citizen of Malaysia.

Salient Facts

[4] The plaintiffs are Malaysian citizens. They are husband and wife.

[5] The plaintiffs are not LSY's biological parents. LSY was born on 3 July 2003 at Puchong Maternity Centre. The first plaintiff had taken LSY from an Indian lady residing in Klang shortly after her birth.

[6] Nonetheless, the first plaintiffs had registered LSY at the National Registration Department ("JPN") as the plaintiffs' biological child. Based on the information provided by the first plaintiff, the defendant had issued a birth certificate registration No BEXXXXX under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 ("BDRA 1957"). The first and second plaintiffs were named as LSY's father and mother respectively on the said birth certificate.

[7] The fact that the plaintiffs are not LSY's biological parents was discovered by the defendant when LSY, at 12 years old, presented herself at JPN during her application for a national identity card. The plaintiffs are ethnically Chinese. LSY has been described as "dark skinned" in the documents filed in this application.

[8] Following the discovery that the plaintiffs are not LSY's biological parents, the defendant amended LSY's birth certificate where the details of LSY's biological parents were stated as 'maklumat tidak diperolehi' (no information obtained) and her nationality as 'bukan warganegara' (non-citizen).

[9] Subsequent to the amendment, the plaintiffs applied to the Shah Alam Sessions court to adopt LSY. The Sessions court granted the adoption order on 17 June 2016.

[10] Upon the grant of the adoption order, the defendant issued LSY with a new birth certificate (Register No.: 000XXXX, Serial No.: 00XXXXA) dated 6 August 2016 under the AA 1952, where the first and second plaintiffs were named as LSY's father and mother respectively and her citizenship status stated as 'bukan warganegara' (non-citizen).

[11] The plaintiff then applied to the Federal Government under art 15A of the FC for Mal