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

2024 MarsdenLR 3100

HIGH COURT MALAYA TAIPING
KAMALADEVI KANNIAPPAN & ORS – Appellant
Versus
PENDAFTAR KELAHIRAN DAN KEMATIAN & ORS – Respondent
[Originating Summons No: AB-24-2-05/2023]



Petitioner Advocates:New Sin Yew,Shugan Raman ,Respondent Advocate: Norazlinawati Mohd Arshad

Citizenship by operation of law is a fundamental right under the Federal Constitution, and the court must prevent generational statelessness by recognizing citizenship claims based on familial ties.

Headnote:(A) Federal Constitution - Article 5, Article 8(1), Article 14(1)(b) - National Registration Act 1959 - Section 4 - Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 - Sections 4, 27, 33 - Citizenship by operation of law - Plaintiffs, born in Malaysia, claimed citizenship based on familial ties to Malaysian citizens, asserting generational statelessness due to lack of documentation - Court recognized Plaintiffs' rights to citizenship under Article 14(1)(b) read with Section 1(a) of the Second Schedule, confirming citizenship by operation of law. (Paras 57, 59, 60)

(B) Burden of proof - The Defendants failed to disprove Plaintiffs' assertions regarding their familial ties and citizenship status, resulting in the court accepting the Plaintiffs' claims. (Paras 31, 34)

(C) Generational statelessness - The court emphasized the need to prevent generational statelessness and ensure access to citizenship rights for the Plaintiffs and their descendants. (Paras 55, 56)

JUDGMENT

Noor Ruwena Md Nurdin JC:

Introduction

[1] This application concerned the attempts of three generations from the same family seeking for the right to be recognised as Malaysian citizens and, needless to say, a better life for all of them. As the facts will show later in this Grounds of Judgment, they had encountered many "difficulties" in the process of trying to comply with the requirements of the law within their very limited resources, including a tragedy that befell two of the members of this unfortunate family. As fate would have it, they were trapped in a situation of "Generational Statelessness" , despite being born in Malaysia, because they did not possess the national identity cards and non-registration of marriages which occurred as a result of the previous generations' lack of awareness on the importance of such documents. It was a "vicious cycle", which could have been avoided had members of this family, as children, been accorded with at least basic education to enable them to be aware of their human rights and civil liberties.

Background

[2] The Originating Summons (Encl 1) was filed by the Plaintiffs on 24 May 2023. The Court delivered its decision on 20 May 2024 wherein the Court allowed the application in part with no order as to costs. Dissatisfied with the Court's decision, the Defendants have filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal (CoA) on 14 June 2024. The Court now gives its reasons in this Grounds of Judgment. The parties were referred to as they were in the High Court (HC).

[3] The reliefs sought from the Court in Encl 1 were as follows:

"1. Suatu deklarasi bahawa Plaintif-Plaintif merupakan warganegara Malaysia melalui perlaksanaan undang-undang selaras menurut Perkara 14(1)(b) yang dibaca bersama dengan s 1(a) Jadual Kedua, Bahagian II, Perlembagaan Persekutuan;

2. Secara alternatif, suatu deklarasi bahawa Plaintif-Plaintif merupakan warganegara Malaysia melalui perlaksanaan undang-undang selaras dengan Perkara 14(1)(b) yang dibaca bersama dengan s 1(e) Jadual Kedua, Bahagian II, Perlembagaan Persekutuan;

3. Suatu deklarasi bahawa Plaintif-Plaintif berhak untuk diisukan dengan surat kelahiran dengan status "WARGANEGARA";

4. Suatu deklarasi bahawa Plaintif-Plaintif berhak untuk diisukan kad pengenalan selaras dengan Peraturan-Peraturan Pendaftaran Negara 1990 dengan status "WARGANEGARA";

5. Suatu deklarasi bahawa Plaintif-Plaintif berhak untuk didaftarkan nama ke dalam daftar sepertimana di bawah s 4 Akta Pendaftaran Negara 1959, dan Peraturan-Peraturan 4, 11 dan 14 Peraturan-Peraturan Pendaftaran Negara 1990;

6. Suatu deklarasi bahawa Plaintif-Plaintif Pertama dan Ke-2 berhak untuk mendaftarkan perkahwinan masing-masing berdasarkan Akta Membaharui Undang-Undang (Perkahwinan dan Penceraian) 1976 di Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara;

7. Suatu deklarasi bahawa hak-hak Plaintif-Plaintif Pertama dan Ke-2 di bawah Perkara 8(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan telah dicabuli oleh Defendan-Defendan;

8. Sebarang arahan, perintah atau writ untuk penguatkuasaan hak yang diberikan oleh Bahagian II, Perlembagaan Persekutuan, atau mana- mana daripadanya, atau untuk memberikan keadilan penuh kepada subjek perkara tindakan ini;

9. Tiada perintah untuk kos; dan

10. Apa-apa relif atau perintah atau arahan lanjut yang dianggap suaimanfaat oleh Mahkamah yang Mulia ini.'.

[4] The Plaintiffs had produced this chart of their family tree, and which I have reproduced below for ease of reference:

Facts Of The Case

[5] Before I go further, the Plaintiffs will be referred to as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P6 where necessary. P1 is the biological mother of both P2 and P3 whereas P4, P5 and P6 are the biological children of P2. All 6 of them were born and raised in Malaysia. They do not hold the citizenship of any other country, and neither have they been out of this country as they do not hold any national identity card (IC) and Malaysian passport. The only legal documents that they possess are the birth certificates issued by the Jabatan Pendaftaran


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