Statelessness Working Paper Series No. 2017/9 to lawfully married parents, to at least one parent who is a Malaysian citizen or holding a permanent residence status. Gender inequality comes into play when a child is born outside Malaysia and when a child is born outside of wedlock. A child born abroad may acquire Malaysian citizenship automatically only if the father is a Malaysian citizen, while an illegitimate child is entirely reliant on his or her mother’s citizenship status. It is important to note that Malaysia’s Federal Constitution contains a strong legal safeguard against statelessness, mirroring the highest international standards for protection against statelessness at birth. Every person born in the country who is not born a citizen of any other country and who does not acquire any other citizenship within a year of birth is a citizen of Malaysia by operation of the law. 21 For foundlings, any new-born child found abandoned is taken to be born of a mother permanently resident in Malaysia until the contrary is shown. 22 However, the mechanics of the safeguards do not always prevent statelessness, as demonstrated in the majority of litigated cases involving the above categories of children. In a 2010 case decided by the High Court, legal adoption by Malaysian parents of a child born in Malaysia to unknown biological parents led to automatic acquisition of Malaysian citizenship by the child. This landmark decision is considered protective of the child’s best interest.23 It rested on the interpretation that the child concerned was a Malaysian citizen by virtue of having at least a parent who is a Malaysian citizen under Article 14(1)(b), Section 1(a) of Part II of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution, and that the child was proved to be born in the country after Malaysia Day and not born a citizen of any other country under Section 1(e) of the same Part II of the Second Schedule. When read together with the relevant provisions in the Adoption Act 195224 and the child’s lawful adoption order, it held to carry the effect of granting citizenship by operation of law to the child.25 The fact of the unknown biological parents was said to be an irrelevant consideration when the child would be rendered stateless. Apart from the above case, a string of comparable cases decided subsequently yielded decisions based on contrary interpretations. These decisions underscore firstly that the identity and whereabouts of the biological parents must be factored into consideration and secondly, unless citizenship was specifically raised in the Adoption Act 1952, the Act is considered irrelevant or inadequate in extending its effects on the citizenship of an adopted child.26 If the identity of a child’s biological parents is unknown, the immediate consequence is that the child will not be qualified to be a citizen of Malaysia by operation of law.27 21 Section 1, paragraph (e) of the 2nd Schedule of the Federal Constitution (to be read with Article 14(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution) stipulates “every person born within the Federation who is not a citizen of any other country is a citizen of Malaysia by operation of law”. Not only the mode of conferral of nationality prescribed is ex lege or automatic, the safeguard is also subject to no further requirement under the law. 22 Section 19B of Part III of the Federal Constitution. 23 Raymond Mah, Citizenship For Adopted Children- A Malaysian Perspective [2013] 1 MLJ xiii 24 Section 9(1) of the Adoption Act 1952 vests all rights, duties, obligations and liabilities exercisable by and enforceable against the adopter as though the child was a child born to the adopter in lawful wedlock. Section 25A supports this further by requiring that the word ‘adopted’, ‘adopter’, ‘adoptive’ or similar words not to appear in the birth certificate to avoid adverse psychological effect on an adopted child upon learning of his actual background or status. It was argued that recording the child as a permanent citizen when the adoptive parents are citizens would contravene the purpose of S 25A and against the best interest of the child. 25 Lee Chin Pon & Anor v Registrar-General of Births and Deaths, Malaysia [2010] (unreported) 26 Foo Toon Aik (suing on his own behalf and as representative of Foo Shi Wen, Child) v Ketua Pendaftar Kelahiran dan Kematian, Malaysia [2012] 9 MLJ 573; Than Siew Beng & Anor v Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara & Ors [2016] 6 CLJ; Lim Jen Hsian & Anor v Ketua Pengarah JPN & Ors [2016] 7 CLJ 27 See for instance Chin Kooi Nah (Mendakwa Bagi Diri Sendiri Dan Sebagai Wakil Litigasi Kepada Chin Jia Nee, Kanak-Kanak) v Pendaftar Besar Kelahiran Dan Kematian, Malaysia [2015] MLJU 1199; Pendaftar Besar Kelahiran dan Kematian, Malaysia v Pang Wee See & Yee Oii Pah @ Yee Ooi Wah, Civil Appeal No B-01(A)-7403/2016 8