DESPITE attempts by some quarters to defend and justify the conversion of the three underaged children of single mother Loh Siew Hong, the law is clear.
The conversion of the three children with the consent of only the father, Nagahswaran Muniandy, is unconstitutional. This was made clear by the Federal Court in the case of the underaged child of Indira Gandhi.
It is not just a Federal Court decision but a constitutional interpretation. Such an interpretation renders all state enactments and laws that provide for conversion only with the consent of one parent unconstitutional or illegal.
The Federal Court’s decision in 2018 has made it very clear that “parent” means “parents”, in plural.
Whether the Malay translation of the Federal Constitution or the Article pertaining to parent is singular does not arise in the first place. The decision by the apex court is clear on this matter.
Given this, it is strange that there are still some quarters arguing about the relevance of their outdated state enactments, that require only the consent of one parent. The fact that these outdated state laws exist do not make them relevant or constitutional in nature.
In fact, these outdated enactments pertaining to conversion of minors should have been removed as they are unconstitutional.
Why such a process is taking so long to be completed reflects the lack of political will on the part of the federal and some state governments.
It is not that the constitutional provision on the conversion of minors is not known to those who are advocating state enactments for the conversion of minors.
The conversion of minors with the consent of both parents is the one that is recognised by the Federal Constitution. Turning and twisting facts for the sheer purpose of justifying conversion of minors is nothing but a political act.
An act that has been turned into a racial or religious issue to deny the obvious.
Justice will prevail over “artificial forces”
Those who are daily giving speeches on religious harmony are not prepared to respect the court order that gave sole custody of the children to Loh.
By unilaterally or illegally converting minors by giving excuses that the father gave consent, the mother was missing, the children had accepted Islam and others are irrelevant to the constitutional provision on conversion of minors as interpreted and decided by the Federal Court in 2018.
Nobody is turning the conversion of Loh’s children into racial and religious issue, but those who are making the allegations are doing precisely this to divert attention from the legality of the matter.
The application of habeas corpus by Loh will be heard by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Feb 21.
Following this, there will be judicial review of whether the parties involved in the conversions contravened the law.
The mother is determined to be reunited with her children. They might have said things differently to the mother in the first meeting in Kangar, Perlis.
But the mother’s love and the children’s reciprocal warming up with the mother show the basic indicators of a family reunion.
Beyond the law, the natural affinity between Loh and her children cannot be disrupted by “artificial forces” for long.
Ultimately, law is there to regulate society on the basis of accepted notions such as equality, justice and fairness. Any attempt to circumvent or disrupt these principles will be checkmated by the swing of the pendulum as described by Karl Polyani.
In the case of Loh and her children, the forces of natural justice are swinging in favour of her and her children. – Feb 20, 2022
