Illegitimate children cannot acquire Malaysian citizenship by operation of law unless their legitimacy is established at birth. Principles from overruled case law must be followed.

JUDGMENT

Rozi Bainon JC:

Introduction

[1] This is the Plaintiff's application in encl 1 dated 18 April 2022, made pursuant to Articles in the Federal Constitution and Regulations made under and in relation for citizenship of Malaysia for the following orders:

(a) deklarasi bahawa Plaintif ialah seorang warganegara Malaysia melalui operasi undang-undang menurut Artikel-Artikel 14(1)(b) dan/atau 16, Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia.

(b) deklarasi bahawa Plaintif ialah seorang warganegara Malaysia menurut Artikel 19 Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia.

(c) perintah mengarahkan Defendan-Defendan untuk mengeluarkan Sijil Kelahiran yang mencatatkan bahawa Plaintif merupakan warganegara Malaysia kepada Plaintif dalam tempoh 21 hari dari tarikh Mahkamah memerintahkan sedemikian.

(d) perintah mengarahkan Defendan-Defendan untuk mengeluarkan Kad Pengenalan MyKad dengan catatan bahawa Plaintif adalah seorang warganegara Malaysia dalam tempoh 21 hari dari tarikh Mahkamah memerintahkan sedemikian.

(e) perintah bahawa Defendan Pertama mendaftarkan ("register") dan mengemaskinikan ("update") nama Plaintif ke dalam pendaftar sepertimana di bawah s 4 Akta Pendaftaran Negara 1959 dan peraturan 11 dan 14 Peraturan-Peraturan Pendaftaran Negara 1960.

(f) perintah dan/atau arahan lanjut yang Mahkamah ini fikir adil dan saksama.

[2] The affidavits are filed accordingly and the full written submissions also had been filed by the parties

[3] On 2 November 2022 the application is dismissed with no order to costs.

The Facts

[4] The Plaintiff is a young boy age 21 years old. He is born on 21 July 2001 at Pusat Pakar Arunamari Klang to his Malaysian father, Lee Chee Mong and his Indonesian mother XXXXX.

[5] His birth mother had left him and went untraced.

[6] On 26 January 2016, the Plaintiff first came to realize that he is not a Malaysian citizen when his father tried to apply a My Kad for him.

[7] He conducted a search with the First Defendant (Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara Malaysia/JPN) and based on the extracted birth certificate dated 13 January 2016 it was stated that the Plaintiff is "Bukan Warganegara".

[8] After 13 days realizing that the Plaintiff is "Bukan Warganegara", his father had applied for a citizenship for him under art 15A of the Federal Constitution .

[9] Article 15A of the Federal Constitution provides "special power" to the Federal Government to register under "special circumstances" a noncitizen child who is under the age of 21 as a citizen. The said application is still pending decision of the Federal Government.

[10] The fact derived that the Plaintiff is not born as an illegitimate child can be referred from his birth parents Lee Chee Mong and XXXXX who were legally married on 21 April 2001 as per the marriage certificate.

[11] The Plaintiff's parents subsequently divorced on 23 May 2013 pursuant to a dekre nisi absolute issued by Shah Alam High Court which was registered with the First Defendant (JPN) on 21 April 2014.

[12] The Plaintiff had not applied and had not obtained any foreign citizenship, foreign passport or foreign identification card specifically to his birth mother country, Indonesia. He is stateless.

[13] Based on the documents, JPN claimed that there is an identity fraud committed by his birth mother in procuring their marriage certificate. His birth father denied and disclaimed it.

Solemnization Of The Plaintiff's Parent's Marriage

[14] The learned counsel for the Plaintiff submit that the Plaintiff's parents had a lawful marriage before the Plaintiff was even born and also a valid decree nisi absolute which would render the marriage and the divorce as prima facie valid and hence this would mean that the Plaintiff is a legitimate child and there are no issues and/or doubt regarding the legitimacy of the Plaintiff. In other words, the marriage between the Plaintiff's biological mother and father have been registered for 21 years prior to the filing of this action.

[15] The learned Senior Federal Counsel representing the Defendant's