YESTERDAY’S (Aug 5) appellate court ruling that Malaysian moms cannot pass citizenship to their overseas-born kids was “ultimately the correct decision”, according to a constitutional lawyer.
New Sin Yew said “the problem” lies with the Federal Constitution – which “discriminates against women” – and can only be “fixed” by lawmakers in Parliament.
“The courts can only do so much; too strained a reading of a clear provision will only result in absurdity,” Sin Yew said in a Twitter thread last night.
He said past and present lawmakers must take blame for their “failure” to amend the constitution and disallow discrimination against women, referring to a contentious citizenship clause that says an overseas-born child must have a Malaysian father in order to have Malaysian citizenship.
It was because of their “inaction” that a group of six Malaysian mothers and family rights group Family Frontiers had no choice but to seek remedy through the courts, Sin Yew pointed out.
Yesterday, the Court of Appeal ruled that the word “father” in the Second Schedule of Part 11 of the constitution meant the biological father and cannot be extended to include the mother or parents.
In a two-one majority, the three-person bench also overturned the landmark decision by the Kuala Lumpur High Court in 2021 that children born overseas to Malaysian mothers and foreign fathers are automatically entitled to Malaysian citizenship.
Judge Datuk S. Nantha Balan, who dissented, argued that the present legal status of the mother’s bloodline was made to look inferior to the father.
He said that Article 14 of the constitution, which allows children outside the federation to obtain citizenship, was discriminatory as it violated the equality provision, adding that the denial of citizenship also went against international law.
“No time like the present”
Sin Yew, who is also a human rights advocate, said there is no need to wait for the courts to “fix the mess created by Parliament” as MPs can act now to amend the constitution.
“Everyone who is dissatisfied with the outcome should now focus on our MPs and demand that they start doing something about it,” he said.
He added that the matter is not a controversial one, which can and should receive bipartisan support.
“All that is needed is just to replace the word ‘father’ with ‘parents, one at least’,” he said.
“At the same time, delete Section 17, Part III, 2nd Schedule to the Federal Constitution.”
Meanwhile, Family Frontiers president Suriani Kempe took to Twitter to respond to the appellate court ruling, which she and the other respondents are appealing at the Federal Court.
In an emotional thread yesterday, she likened the inability of Malaysian women to automatically confer citizenship to children to an invisible wall with a door that only opens for men.
“With the High Court decision, it felt like that door had opened a crack and all of the possibilities that the other side had to offer became just a little bit brighter, more tangible and more available to Malaysian women and their children.
“But the Court of Appeal decision slammed that door shut again, and it feels like the hope that we held in the palm of our hands was ripped from us,” she said.
“Today is painful, but tomorrow will be another day that we turn these tears and bruises into armour, and continue to claim our rights as citizens of equal worth, value and dignity.” – Aug 6, 2022
Main photo credit: Suriani Kempe
