From Dr Amar-Singh HSS, Hartini Zainudin and 28 othersEvery child deserves the security of knowing where they belong. Nationality is more than a legal status as it is also the foundation of identity, protection and equal participation in society.Yet for some children born and raised in Malaysia, this fundamental sense of belonging remains uncertain, not because of anything they have done, but because of their parents’ marital status at the time of birth.The Court of Appeal recently dismissed the citizenship claims of two Malaysia-born adults raised their entire lives in Malaysia by Malaysian fathers. In both instances, their parents were unmarried, and their mothers left when they were very young.However, both have official letters confirming they are not registered citizens of their mothers’ countries and have DNA evidence proving their paternity.Sadly, both have just been told that none of that matters under the Federal Constitution, as it presently stands.
In both cases, it was argued they should qualify under Section 1(e), Part II, Second Schedule, which grants automatic citizenship to a Malaysia-born child who is “not born a citizen of any country” – the constitutional safeguard against statelessness.The court rejected this, holding that both were presumed capable of taking on their mothers’ nationalities, regardless of the fact that both mothers had disappeared from their children's lives decades ago. The judgment relied heavily on other Federal Court decisions and Court of Appeal rulings.By applying Section 17 strictly to deny citizenship, solely because the unmarried parent is the father, the law effectively perpetuates gender discrimination against Malaysian men and penalises children based on legitimacy.Just as recent constitutional amendments recognised the equal right of Malaysian mothers to confer citizenship, Section 17 must be given a purposive, harmonious interpretation alongside Article 8(2) of the Federal Constitution – which explicitly prohibits gender discrimination – so that “parent” includes a Malaysian father.The deeper question is whether this framework still deserves to stand in 2026. The constitutional provisions being applied here were drafted in 1957 in a world where legitimacy carried heavy legal weight, DNA testing did not exist, international mobility was rare and preventing dual nationality was a central policy concern.Patern…
Summary from source