Transfer of citizenship requires clear legal criteria to be satisfied, notably the necessity of accurate biological parentage and correct procedural adherence, as per established constitutional provisions.

Introduction

[1] On 13 December 2022, I dismissed the plaintiffs' judicial review application for the following reliefs for which leave was granted on 7 February 2022 by this Court:

(a) an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the Registrar-General of Births and Deaths ("Registrar- General") issuing the birth certificate extracted on 19 August 2021;

(b) an order in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondents to issue a birth certificate stating the child as "warganegara" or citizen;

(c) a declaration that the child is a citizen by operation of law pursuant to art 14(1)(b) read with s 1(a) and/or s 1(e) of Part II of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution; and

(d) a declaration that the respondents had violated the fundamental right provided under the Federal Constitution and other relevant laws.

[2] I have redacted all names to maintain anonymity and LHY, the 2nd applicant is hereinafter referred to as "the child". Also, for the sake of brevity, unless otherwise stated, all references in this judgment to "Articles" and "Second Schedule" are to that of the Federal Constitution. Similarly, and unless otherwise stated, any references to Part II or Part III are to that of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution.

The Applicants' Case

[3] The salient facts of the applicants' case are gleaned from the affidavit verifying facts affirmed by the 1st applicant on 15 November 2021. The 1st applicant averred that he is married to FSL and both are citizens of Malaysia. Their marriage did not produce any children. The 1st applicant averred that sometime in 2006 he was informed by OTS, a former colleague of his, that a child bom and abandoned by her biological parents at Taj Hospital. The 1st applicant averred that on 14 October 2006, he, FSL and OTS attended the said hospital and without more it was stated that he and FSL decided to raise the child as their own. It is averred that since that day, he and the FSL have been taking care of the child. It is to be noted here that the child has not been adopted by the 1st applicant and FSL.

[4] On 17 October 2006, the 1st applicant made an application to register the birth of the child using Form JPN LM01, the form prescribed for the purpose of registering the birth of a newborn under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 ("BDRA") . In the said form, the 1st applicant stated that he and FSL were the parents of the child. On 18 October 2006, the Registrar-General registered the birth and issued a birth certificate, No BT33748 in respect of the child ("the first birth certificate"). In this birth certificate, the status of citizenship of the child was stated as "citizen". This is only natural in view of the fact that the 1st applicant and FSL who are alleged to be the parents of the child are citizens of Malaysia. A MyKid card was also issued in respect of the child based on the first birth certificate.

[5] On 22 October 2018, when the child had reached the age of 12 years, the 1st applicant applied for an identity card (MyKad) for the child. One month later, on 28 November 2018, the 1st applicant and FSL were called for an interview in an inquiry carried out by the Registrar- General in respect of the information given by the 1st applicant when registering the child. Subsequently, in a letter dated 14 May 2019 the 1st applicant was informed that the application for the MyKad was rejected. The reasons for the rejection were stated as follows in the said letter (paragraph 2):

2. Berikut adalah masalah yang dikenalpasti:

Masalah: Status pemohon tidak sah untuk urusniaga ini

Catatan: Permohonan tidak di sokong kerana pengeluaran sijil kelahiran tidak terat