The ‘Genuine and Effective Link’ whether the basis of citizenship conferral through s 1(e) was either the jus soli or jus sanguinis principle, or both. Following an analysis of several cases from other jurisdictions and having considered the wording of s 1(a), their Lordship held that conferral of citizenship by operation of law in the Constitution as a whole was premised on a combination of both principles. Chin Kooi Nah has since been cited with approval by the Court of Appeal of Malaysia. 14 B The Relationship between Malaysian Domestic Law and International Law Like the United Kingdom, Malaysia has a dualist legal system that distinguishes between domestic and international law. The Constitution provides for the Parliament to make laws on the implementation of treaties, agreements and conventions. 15 However, it is silent as to (i) whether such treaties must be incorporated into domestic law by way of an act of parliament to be given effect, and (ii) the primacy of domestic law over international law, or vice versa. The prevailing view is that incorporation of such instruments through primary legislation is required and mere ratification of a treaty or convention is insufficient. 16 Several recent High Court cases suggest a liberalisation of this position, but they are arguably exceptions to the general rule and/or those decisions can be confined to the specific facts of those cases. 17 It is also settled law that where domestic law and international law conflict, the latter gives way to the former. 18 Where international treaties are concerned, Malaysia is not a state party to the 1954 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons 19 or the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. 20 In 1995, Malaysia acceded to both the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (‘CEDAW’) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (‘CRC’). 21 However, several reservations were also entered over various provisions in both treaties (including in relation to the issue of citizenship) that remain in place. 22 At the time of writing, these reservations extend to art 9(2) CEDAW and art 7 CRC. The nature of these provisions and Malaysia’s reasoning in adopting the reservations offers some insight into our discussion viz citizenship, the 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 See, eg, Than Siew Beng v Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara [2017] 5 MLJ 662, [24] (‘Than’). Federal Constitution of Malaysia, art 74(1). AirAsia Berhad v Rafizah Shima bt Mohamed Aris [2014] 5 MLJ 318 (‘Rafizah Shima’). For a detailed discussion of the case law see Jaclyn Neo, ‘Incorporating Human Rights: Mitigated Dualism and Interpretation in Malaysian Courts’ (2012) 18 Asian Yearbook of International Law 1. Rafizah Shima (n 16) [53]. Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, opened for signature 28 September 1954, 30 UNTS 117 (entered into force 6 June 1960). Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, opened for signature 30 August 1961, 989 UNTS 175 (entered into force 13 December 1975). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, opened for signature 18 December 1979, 1249 UNTS 13 (entered into force 11 August 1958); Convention on the Rights of the Child, opened for signature 20 November 1990, 1577 UNTS 3 (entered into force 2 September 1990). ‘Deputy Minister: Malaysia Upholding Reservation on CEDAW Clause That Would Let Malaysian Women Pass on Citizenship’, The Malay Mail Online (online, 3 December 2020) <https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2020/12/03/deputy-minister-malaysiaupholding-reservation-on-cedaw-clause-that-would-l/1928455>. 313