Haritharan a/l Mugunthan v Ketua Setiausaha, Kementerian Dalam Negeri & Ors

Appellant(s): Haritharan A/L Mugunthan

Respondent(s):

• Ketua Setiausaha, Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN)
• Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara, Malaysia
• Kerajaan Malaysia

• YA Datuk Azhahari Kamal bin Ramli
• YA Dato' Faizah Binti Jamaludin
• YA Datuk Hayatul Akmal binti Abdul Aziz

• The appellant, born in Malaysia in 2001 to a Malaysian father and a Thai mother who were never married, was thus illegitimate at birth; his mother later left him and could not be traced.
• Despite being issued a Malaysian international passport as a child and having various administrative records (MyKid number, immunisation and school records), an extracted birth certificate obtained years later recorded his status as "Bukan Warganegara" (not a citizen), and his prior applications under Article 15A were unsuccessful.
• He filed an Originating Summons seeking declarations of citizenship by operation of law under Article 14(1)(b) (read with the Second Schedule), and alternatively under Articles 18 and 19, which the High Court dismissed; he appealed to the Court of Appeal.

• Whether the appellant established citizenship by operation of law under Article 14(1)(b) read with section 1(a) of Part II of the Second Schedule, given that section 17 of Part III deems the relevant "parent" for an illegitimate child to be the mother (not the Malaysian father).
• Whether the appellant discharged the burden under section 1(a) of Part II of the Second Schedule (read with section 2(3)) of proving he was not born a citizen of any other country, particularly in light of Thai nationality law applicable through his mother.
• Whether administrative documents (passport, birth certificate, MyKid records) or doctrines such as legitimate expectation could independently establish or override the constitutional requirements for citizenship by operation of law, and whether Articles 18, 19 and 15A, or unreported/media-reported precedents, could assist the appellant's claim.

• The Court of Appeal, applying the binding Federal Court authority in CTEB v Ketua Pengarah Pendaftaran Negara, held that section 17 required the mother (not the Malaysian biological father) to be treated as the relevant parent for section 1(a), and since there was no evidence the mother was a Malaysian citizen or permanent resident at the time of birth, this ground failed.
• The Court held the appellant failed to discharge his burden under section 1(e) to prove he was not born a citizen of any country, noting Thai nationality law could confer citizenship through his Thai mother, and clarified that section 2(3) is merely a deeming provision on timing and does not relieve this burden.
• The Court affirmed that administrative documents (passport, birth certificate, MyKid records) are evidence of administrative acts, not the source of citizenship, and cannot found an estoppel or legitimate expectation against the Federal Constitution; the appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs, though the Court noted the appellant remained free to pursue applications under Article 19 (naturalisation).