KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 20 — Gopal Muniandy is still waiting at the age of 52 to officially be called a Malaysian, and his appeal for citizenship will be heard at the Court of Appeal today.
Born in an estate in Sungai Petani, Kedah, Gopal was abandoned as a child and has been unable to find his parents.
By now, the two Malaysian women who had taken care of him as a child have also died.
Gopal said he was left with the first woman, P. Rukumani, after his birth while the second woman A. Alamaloo took him in as her adopted son from age two.
His parents did not register his birth and the illiterate Alamaloo did not know how to apply for his birth certificate and this resulted in him only attending one year of primary school.
Gopal finally got his birth certificate in 2003, which says he is a “non-citizen” and that there is “no information obtained” on his parents’ names and their citizenship status.
He has spent his whole life in Malaysia as a stateless person, and he only has a green identity card known as MyKAS to enable him to continue staying legally here as a “temporary resident”.
The National Registration Department (NRD) typically issues MyKAS to those whose citizenship status is still undetermined. It is only valid for five years and has to be renewed.
This court case is important as Gopal’s MyKAS will expire in less than three weeks on February 7, and being a citizen will open doors to a better life for him, his Malaysian wife and Malaysian child.
“I am unable to own properties in my name as a citizen and I also have great difficulties in obtaining loans from banks,” he had previously told the courts of his difficulties because he is not recognised as a Malaysian.
The same panel of judges at the Court of Appeal will also be hearing five other citizenship cases today involving children adopted by Malaysians.
Why are today's six court cases important?
What happens to children who were:
- born in Malaysia,
- abandoned by unknown biological parents,
- but were then adopted either informally or officially by Malaysians?
In many of these cases, lawyers argue that these Malaysia-born children should be entitled to automatically be Malaysians based on what the Federal Constitution says, as they did not become citizens of any country within one year of their birth.
If these children are not recognised as Malaysians, they would have to live in Malaysia as stateless persons or persons without any nationality.
The High Court had in many cases found that it was important to know the biological parents’ identity in order to prove the children are truly stateless, as it said these parents’ nationality would determine the child’s citizenship status.
But with these children not knowing who their parents are, another issue that often comes up is whether it is them or the government that has to prove whether they are truly stateless.
The High Court had also ruled that having Malaysians as adoptive parents would not enable a Malaysia-born child to automatically be Malaysian, as it said the Federal Constitution instead requires the biological parent to be either a Malaysian or permanent resident.
The High Court had also rejected attempts to argue these children should automatically be Malaysians because they were abandoned, as it said the facts in the cases did not prove this.
This is because the High Court said the Federal Constitution specifically covers only “new born” children abandoned at the birthplace by an unknown biological mother, and all these conditions must be proven.
Today, the Court of Appeal will have a chance to examine these issues again.
What happened in those five other cases
These are brief summaries of some key facts of the five other cases today, based on High Court judgments:
E (will be 30 this year)
E was abandoned as a baby after her 1996 birth in a Johor house.
A Malaysian couple adopted E, and gave their names as her biological parents when her birth was registered days later.
When she wanted to renew her MyKad at age 22, NRD’s investigation resulted in her adoptive parents admitting that she is not their biological child.
The NRD issued a new birth certificate stating “no information obtained” for E’s parents and her citizenship status as “not determined”. E currently has a MyKAS.
G (aged 29)
Born in 1997, she was found abandoned at a Pahang bus station at around age one by her adoptive mother, and her adoptive Malaysian parents have been caring for her since then.
G was issued two birth certificates (BCs):
First BC in 2009 : Parents = “No information”, G’s citizenship = “Not determined”.
New BC (After adoptive parents formally adopted in 2012 via courts) : Parents = Adoptive parents’ names, G = “Non-citizen”.
In 2012, 2014 and 2018, the government rejected the adoptive parents’ three citizenship applications for G.
M (will be 18)
M was allegedly abandoned after her 2008 birth in a Klang clinic.
M’s birth was registered soon after, with the adoptive Malaysian parents stated to be the biological parents and M recorded as a “citizen”.
When M applied for a MyKad at age 12, NRD noticed that the child and adoptive father looked different, and found out that the adoptive parents were not the biological parents.
The adoptive father was convicted in 2022 of two separate offences of giving false information when registering M’s birth and when applying for M’s identity card.
M was then issued with:
- Second BC: Parents = unknown, M = non-citizen.
- Third BC (after 2023 formal adoption): Parents = adoptive parents’ names, M still = non-citizen.
T (will be 25)
After T’s 2001 birth in a clinic in Ampang, Kuala Lumpur, the child’s birth was registered by a permanent resident who stated herself to be the mother.
As T’s facial features and skin colour did not resemble the adoptive mother’s, T’s MyKad application at age 12 saw the NRD discovering that her biological parents are unknown.
T was then issued with:
Second BC: Parents = “no information”, T’s citizenship status was changed from “citizen” to be “not determined”.
Third BC in December 2018 (after formal adoption by the adoptive mother’s Malaysian brother): Has adoptive father’s name, T = “non-citizen”.
T’s adoptive father applied in January 2019 for her citizenship, but this was only rejected almost four years later without any reason in a letter dated October 4, 2022 and received in November 2022.
L (will be 17)
Soon after L’s 2009 birth in Klang, he was given to a Malaysian couple, together with a birth certificate naming them as the parents and recording the child as a citizen.
But when the adoptive parents brought L to apply for his MyKad at age 12 in 2021, the NRD officer felt suspicious after noticing their facial features and skin colour were different from the child’s.
After the adoptive parents admitted they were not the biological parents, NRD issued a second BC which changed L’s status to be “non-citizen” and stated “no information obtained” for his parents.
L was handed over by the adoptive father’s cousin who had died in 2020, and the adoptive parents could not find the biological parents despite a 2023 newspaper advertisement.
The adoptive parents officially adopted L in 2023, but the third BC — which now has the adoptive parents’ names — kept the child’s status as “non-citizen”.
This is the only case today where the child won at the High Court.
The court said L would be stateless if not considered a Malaysian now, as L’s registration at birth as Malaysian meant it would be impossible for the child to have been born a citizen of another country.
The High Court said it would be illogical to require the adoptive parents to prove L was not born a citizen of any country, and said the NRD had not proven the child had acquired another country’s citizenship.
L’s case is back in court today as the Registrar-General of Births and Deaths, Malaysia appealed against the High Court decision in his favour.
