1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 1. ) Suriani Kempe (President and office bearer of Association of Family Support & Welfare Selangor & Kuala Lumpur (Family Frontiers))

1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 1. ) Suriani Kempe (President and office bearer of Association of Family Support & Welfare Selangor & Kuala Lumpur (Family Frontiers))

The Court held that the word 'father' in Article 14(1)(b) and Part II s.1(b)/(c) of the Second Schedule must be given its plain and ordinary meaning as referring to the father only; the Court may not read 'father' to include 'mother' or otherwise rewrite constitutional citizenship provisions — such changes are for Parliament; therefore the High Court decision in Appeal 531 was wrong and must be set aside while the High Court decision in Appeal 273 is affirmed.

Citation
W-01(NCvC)(A)-531-09/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant (appeal 273): Mahisha Suhaila Abdul Majeed; Appellant (appeal 531); Respondent (appeal 273): Government of Malaysia; Respondents (appeal 531): Suriani Kempe & others (Mothers)
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 August 2022
Case Number
W-01(NCvC)(A)-531-09/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Constitutional Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment — Appeals Decided
Outcome
Appeal 273 dismissed (High Court decision affirmed). Appeal 531 allowed (High Court decision set aside). No order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Citizenship by Operation of Law, Constitutional Interpretation, Gender Equality, Statelessness, Stare Decisis, Separation of Powers
Source Language
Malay/English
Constitutional Law Citizenship Law Administrative Law Family Law Citizenship by Operation of Law Constitutional Interpretation Gender Equality Statelessness +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahisha Suhaila Abdul Majeed

Appellant (appeal 273)

Government of Malaysia

Appellant (appeal 531); Respondent (appeal 273)

Suriani Kempe & others (Mothers)

Respondents (appeal 531)

Procedural Posture

Civil Constitutional Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment — Appeals Decided

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the word 'father' in Article 14(1)(b) and Part II s.1(b)/(c) of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution can be read to include 'mother'
  2. 2 Whether Article 8(2)'s gender equality obligation requires reinterpretation of citizenship provisions
  3. 3 Whether the High Court correctly applied purposive/harmonious/organic interpretation to read 'father' as including 'mother'

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the word 'father' in Article 14(1)(b) and Part II s.1(b)/(c) of the Second Schedule must be given its plain and ordinary meaning as referring to the father only; the Court may not read 'father' to include 'mother' or otherwise rewrite constitutional citizenship provisions — such changes are for Parliament; therefore the High Court decision in Appeal 531 was wrong and must be set aside while the High Court decision in Appeal 273 is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal 273 dismissed (High Court decision affirmed). Appeal 531 allowed (High Court decision set aside). No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Mahisha's appeal (Appeal 273) dismissed; High Court decision affirmed.
  • Government's appeal (Appeal 531) allowed; High Court decision set aside.