Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2021 3(2) 1962 to supplement the existing jus soli requirement. 6 During parliamentary debates on the Bill, then-Deputy Prime Minister Tun Haji Abdul Razak justified this addition on the basis that citizenship ought to be granted only to those with ‘real genuine ties’ and an ‘attachment to the country’: 7 [I]n the interest of our country and in the interests of our people … people who have no right to be citizens and who obviously have no attachment to this country should not be allowed to become citizens. Therefore, in the light of all these occurrences Government [sic] decided to re-examine and review our Citizenship requirements. … Clause 2 of the Bill, subject to an amendment in Committee, seeks to add a third category by providing that a person will not acquire citizenship by operation of law by reason of birth in the Federation, if at the time of birth neither of his parents was a citizen or a permanent resident in this country. … It will not prejudice rights already acquired, nor will it operate so as to render the child stateless. … [C]hildren of persons who have no right to be in this country and who have no attachment to the country should not have the right to become citizens by operation of law. 8 A second amendment was introduced in the Malaysia Bill when Singapore and the Borneo states were admitted into the Federation of Malaya to form Malaysia, leading to the current provisions. 9 The substantive provisions in art 14 were moved to the sch II of the Constitution, and a new ground for citizenship was introduced in sch II pt II s 1(e). 10 Surprisingly, no explanation was tendered nor did debate occur specifically in relation to this new ground. At the introduction of the Bill, the Government explained that its provisions were a mere structural change that did ‘not affect the existing rules as to citizenship in relation to the States at present comprised in the Federation of Malaya’. 11 In the same speech, however, it was also stated that ‘[i]n general, outside Singapore, birth or residence anywhere in the Federation … will make a person a federal citizen or qualify him for registration or naturalisation under the same conditions as at present’. 12 Therefore, there existed a possibility that s 1(e) reintroduced a strict jus soli pathway to citizenship by operation of law, subject to the condition that they (i) were not born a citizen of another country and (ii) had not acquired any citizenship in the year following their birth (sch II pt II s 2(3) above). This possibility was rejected by the High Court in Chin Kooi Nah v Pendaftar Besar Kelahiran dan Kematian, Malaysia (‘Chin Kooi Nah’). 13 The judge heard submissions from both the applicant and the respondent Federal Government on 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Constitution (Amendment) Bill 1962 (Malaysia), discussed in Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 31 January 1962, 4485 3(2)(42) (‘DR Hansard 31 January 1962’). ibid. Constitution (Amendment) Bill 1962 (Federation of Malaya), discussed in Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 29 January 1962, 4167 3(40) (‘DR Hansard 29 January 1962’). See also the DR Hansard 31 January 1962 (n 6). Malaysia Bill 1963 (Federation of Malaya). Malaysia Act 1963 (Malaysia) s 24. Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 15 August 1963, 971 5(9). ibid 1019 (emphasis added). Chin Kooi Nah v Pendaftar Besar Kelahiran dan Kematian, Malaysia [2016] 7 MLJ 717, 746–47 (‘Chin Kooi Nah’). 312