What burden of proof lies with the Registrar-General in such cases?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Registrar-General Bears the Burden of Proof in Disputing Abandoned Child Citizenship Claims

The Federal Court has definitively ruled that the burden of proof rests with the Registrar-General of Births and Deaths Malaysia (NRD) to demonstrate that a child found abandoned was not in fact abandoned, or that their mother was not a permanent resident of the place where the child was discovered. This landmark decision, which overturned previous High Court and Court of Appeal rulings, clarifies the interpretation of Section 19B of Part III of the Federal Constitution, which presumes a newborn found exposed was born to a mother permanently residing in that location, until proven otherwise. The court emphasised that citizenship by operation of law is a fundamental right, not subject to discretionary decisions, and that the NRD must actively investigate and present contrary evidence if it disputes an abandoned child's claim to citizenship.
Rebutting the Presumption of Permanent Residence

In cases involving abandoned newborns, Section 19B of the Federal Constitution establishes a presumption that the child was born to a mother who was permanently resident in the location where the child was found. The Federal Court has clarified that it is the responsibility of the Registrar-General to rebut this presumption. This means that if the NRD wishes to deny citizenship on the grounds that the mother was not a permanent resident, they must provide evidence to support this claim. The court found that in the case of the 17-year-old boy abandoned at Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, the Registrar-General had failed to discharge this legal burden, as no evidence was presented to counter the presumption.
Investigating Abandonment and Parental Identity

The Federal Court underscored that the Registrar-General, and by extension the Home Ministry, possesses the governmental machinery to conduct thorough investigations into the circumstances of a child's abandonment and the identities of their biological parents. The court noted that the Registrar-General could have accessed hospital admission records from Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia to ascertain the identity of the child's biological mother. The failure to present any evidence to suggest the child was not abandoned or that the parents' identities were known and deliberately concealed meant that the adoptive parents' statements regarding the abandonment were accepted by the court.
Broad Interpretation of "Found Exposed"

The Federal Court adopted a broad interpretation of the phrase "found exposed" within Section 19B to encompass children abandoned at their place of birth, particularly when the biological parents' identities are unknown. This interpretation is crucial for preventing statelessness, a significant concern for abandoned newborns. The court acknowledged the harsh realities of children being left in various public places and stated that a narrow interpretation of "exposed" would render the constitutional purpose of preventing statelessness illusory. This means that the NRD must consider a wide range of abandonment scenarios under this provision.
No Room for Discretion in Citizenship by Operation of Law

A key tenet of the Federal Court's decision is that citizenship by operation of law, as defined by Article 14(1)(b) and Section 1(a) of Part II of the Second Schedule, is an automatic entitlement based on established conditions. The court explicitly stated that this right leaves "absolutely no room for subjective notions on what is citizenship or any room for discretion." Therefore, the Registrar-General does not have the authority to deny citizenship based on personal judgment or to render a child stateless if they meet the criteria outlined in the Constitution. The focus must remain on whether the legal conditions for citizenship by operation of law have been met.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What burden of proof lies with the Registrar-General in such cases?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends