[UPDATED] Saifuddin’s promise broken: citizenship rejections by Home Ministry remain unexplained, says Family Frontiers

KUALA LUMPUR – Putrajaya continues to reject citizenship applications without providing reasons, despite Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail’s promise that each rejection would be supported by an explanation.

Family Frontiers president Suriani Kempe said the network had collected information from Malaysian mothers with foreign-born children and found 40 rejection letters that provided no reason for rejecting citizenship applications.

Of the 40 mothers, 34 reside overseas. 

Suriani said that this goes against Saifuddin’s promise on March 24 that his ministry would provide reasons for citizenship application rejection letters.  

“It is all the more important for the Home Affairs Ministry to inform applicants on what grounds their applications were rejected because citizenship by registration is granted on a discretionary basis,” she said at a press conference at the Kuala Lumpur Chinese Assembly Hall today. 

“In some instances, mothers with citizenship applications for two children have received approval for one child and rejection for another.

“Mothers who have received rejections are left anxious and unsure of any possible error on their part, or how to improve their reapplications to increase their chances of approval,” Suriani added.

In March, Saifuddin told a special meeting of ministries, government departments, agencies, and the media that, following constitutional amendments, the ministry would notify those whose citizenship applications were denied of the grounds for rejection. He acknowledged the complaints regarding this matter.

The Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2024 pertaining to citizenship was tabled in the last parliamentary sitting in March but was not debated. The next parliamentary sitting begins on Monday.

The bill finally gives Malaysian mothers the same right as men to automatically pass their citizenship to their foreign-born children, but the law will not be retroactive. 

Suriani said this meant the new constitutional provisions would not apply to children born before the amendment. 

“This situation will affect mothers with children whose citizenship applications under Article 15(2) have yet to be processed, particularly those overseas who are unable to resubmit new applications in Putrajaya, as well as those who faced obstacles in their attempts to apply for citizenship.

“Among those overseas are divorced or widowed Malaysian women with children desperately seeking to return home,” she added. 

“We call on the government to ensure that the constitutional amendment to recognise Malaysian mothers’ right to confer citizenship to their overseas-born children by operation of law be applied retroactively.”

Suriani also told the media that Family Frontiers’ had made several unsuccessful attempts to meet with Saifuddin about proposed changes to the constitutional amendments.

“We could never secure an appointment,” she said.

Family Frontiers is also urging the government to remove other proposed amendments deemed regressive for potentially worsening statelessness, in particular those that threaten automatic citizenship rights for vulnerable groups, such as children born to parents who are Orang Asli or indigenous persons married to migrant workers.

“It should be noted that there are still three other amendments in the bill that are considered regressive.

“For example, some who are currently entitled to citizenship automatically will not have such a privilege in the event the law is passed.

“We stand resolute in our call for the government to proceed only with the amendment for Malaysian mothers to confer citizenship to their overseas-born children by operation of law on a retroactive basis and to halt the remaining three regressive amendments,” Suriani said.

Currently, Family Frontiers is also embroiled in a legal battle with Putrajaya after it filed an application at the Kuala Lumpur High Court seeking a declaration that the constitutional provisions related to citizenship were gender-discriminatory.

In 2021, the court ruled in favour of Family Frontiers, prompting the federal government to appeal the decision. 

The Court of Appeal decided in favour of the government in August 2022, setting aside the high court ruling. 

The Federal Court granted Family Frontiers leave to challenge the Court of Appeal’s decision on January 29 this year. 

According to Family Frontiers, the apex court is scheduled to hear their appeal on September 5. – June 19, 2024