JUDGMENT

Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali JCA:

Introduction

[1] The principal question in these appeals pertained to the religion of the two respondents. This in turn necessitated examination of whether the definition of a Muslim in the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 - which under s 2(1)(b) provides that a person, at the time of his or her birth is a Muslim if either of his or her parents is a Muslim - is applicable if the person was born illegitimate.

[2] After having examined the appeal records and considered the submission by the parties, we arrived at the conclusion that the decision of the High Court , which had answered the above question in the negative - in that, the respondents are not Muslims, and that s 2(1)(b) was not applicable in this case - could not be sustained. We therefore set aside that decision and allowed the appeals by the two appellants.

[3] This Judgment contains the full reasons for our decision in these appeals.

Key Background Facts

[4] There were two appeals before us. These were heard together, and both of which were against a single decision of the High Court in Shah Alam which had ruled in favour of the two respondents, against the 1st Defendant, Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara Malaysia, now the appellant in Civil Appeal No: B-01(NCvC)(A)-72-01/2024 ("Appeal 72") ("the NRD") and Majlis Agama Islam Selangor who was the 2nd Defendant at the High Court , presently the appellant in Civil Appeal No: B-01(NCvC)(A)-100-02/2024 ("Appeal 100") ("MAIS").

[5] In essence it may be simply stated that the respondents had filed the action at the High Court as they disagreed with the NRD issuing them with an NRIC identifying them as Muslims. The High Court had in its decision granted the reliefs in the Originating Summons ("the OS") filed by the two respondents, namely Nivethah A/P Thamayandiran ("Nivethah") and Swetha A/P Thamayandiran ("Swetha") - who are sisters, as prayed therein, as follows:

(a) A declaration that the respondents' religion is, and has always been, Hindu;

(b) A declaration that, consequently, the respondents are entitled to be issued identity cards by the appellant (NRD) in recognition of the above fact;

(c) A declaration that all laws made by the Selangor State Legislative Assembly under the Ninth Schedule, List II, Item 1 of the Federal Constitution, including the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 do not apply to the respondents or affect the respondents;

(d) An order in the nature of mandamus directing the appellant (NRD) to issue identity cards to the respondents which reflect the said declarations; and

(e) costs of RM10,000.00 to be paid by each of the appellants.

The Issue For Determination

[6] The principal issue for determination in these appeals is whether the two respondents are Muslims by virtue of s 2(1)(b) of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 ("the ARIE 2003") which defines a Muslim as a person either or both of whose parents were at the time of the person's birth, a Muslim.

[7] The two respondents, however, it is not in dispute, were born out of wedlock. The application of this definition in s 2(1)(b) of the ARIE 2003 must therefore be examined by having regard to the provision in s 111 of the Islamic Family Law Enactment (State of Selangor) 2003 (Enakmen Undang-Undang Keluarga Islam (Negeri Selangor) 2003) ("the IFLE 2003") which denies the ascription of paternity to the father of a child who is born illegitimate.

The Applicable Law

[8] The entirety of s 2(1) of the ARIE 2003 on the definition of a Muslim reads as follows:

Interpretation

......

"Muslim" means-

(a) a person who professes the religion of Islam;

(b) a person either or both of whose parents were at the time of the person's birth, a Muslim;

(c) a person whose upbringing was conducted on the basis that he was a Muslim;

(d) a person who is commonly reputed to be a Muslim;

(e) a person who has converted to