PETALING JAYA: Civil society groups have welcomed the move to drop two controversial proposed constitutional amendments on citizenship but believe there are still weaknesses in other amendments.
These amendments, they say, will have a negative impact on stateless children, undocumented Malaysians, including Orang Asli and Orang Asal, and foreign wives of Malaysian men.
ALSO READ: Govt drops changes to Constitution’s citizenship law after backlash
Any proposal to amend the Federal Constitution that reduces or takes away existing rights to citizenship must not be hastily pushed forward, says the Malaysian Citizenship Rights Alliance (MCRA).
The amendments that remain controversial include the removal of automatic citizenship for permanent residents (PR) and Article 15A, which reduces the age of registering citizenship under special circumstances from 21 to 18.
There is also Article 26(2), under which a foreign wife could have her citizenship revoked if the marriage is dissolved less than two years after she is granted citizenship.
Currently, the clause reads that she could lose her citizenship if the marriage is dissolved, other than by death, within two years beginning from the “date of marriage”.
The groups say the amendment could render these wives stateless upon a divorce.
Yesterday, Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail said the government had agreed to drop two controversial proposed constitutional amendments.
Wanita MCA national chairman Wong You Fong said the government must continue to engage with stakeholders to get proper feedback before making any decisions.
“It is crucial to ensure that these efforts, although well-intentioned, do not compromise the rights and dignity of vulnerable communities,” she said yesterday.
She said the resolving of the longstanding issue of children born to overseas Malaysian mothers as a “positive step forward” but added that there were still worries over the bundling of other provisions with the proposed amendments.
Lawyers for Liberty adviser N. Surendran, while also lauding the Cabinet’s decision, expressed disappointment that several “regressive” provisions were not dropped.
“The amendments should never have been proposed in the first place,” he said.
Family Frontiers, in an Instagram post, thanked those who had made “a lot of noise” on the citizenship issue.
However, it was noted that there were still contentious provisions under the proposed amendments.
