One lie from an adoptive father, in exchange for a fake birth certificate? In-depth breakdown

📌video case

Case Main Character:

Ms. E (about 30 years old now)

Background:

In November 1996, her adoptive parents learned from an acquaintance at a night market in Johor that a newborn baby girl had been abandoned. They then paid RM500 in a house in Segamat to take the child. In December of the same year, they falsely reported to the GEMAS police station that they were the child’s biological parents, obtaining the first birth certificate.

Incident:

In 2018, when 22-year-old Ms. E went to renew her ID, her MyKad was confiscated, her birth certificate was canceled, and her status became “Belum Ditentukan” (undetermined) as a stateless person.

Judgment:

In June 2026, the Court of Appeal ruled against Ms. E, meaning she could not automatically obtain Malaysian citizenship.

⚖️3 Key Legal Truths from the Court of Appeals

A lie led to a ‘voided’ birth certificate.

• The real story: The adoptive parents back then didn’t report to the police or notify social services. Instead, they just took the child home and lied during registration, claiming they were the biological parents.
• Court ruling: In 2018, when JPN investigated, they found that the adoptive father’s statements were inconsistent—first he said the child was a friend’s daughter, then he changed it to not knowing who the biological parents were. This dishonesty made the court think they might be hiding the biological mother’s identity, so under Section 27(3) of the 1957 Births and Deaths Registration Act, the original record was canceled.

“Private transactions” are not the same as legal “abandonment of infants.”

• Common misconception: Some people think that as long as you adopt an abandoned child, you can invoke Article 19B of Schedule II of the Constitution and claim that the newborn “found abandoned” should be presumed to be born to a local mother.
• Court ruling: Legal “abandonment” requires that the child is found without any trace of the parents. Since the adoptive father admitted to taking the child at a friend’s house and paying for it, the court saw it more as a prearranged private transaction rather than finding an abandoned infant on the street. Therefore, Article 19B does not apply.

The really tough-to-cross ‘bloodline principle’ burden of proof (Constitution Article 14(1)(b))

• Legal requirement: To automatically acquire nationality, you have to meet the ‘bloodline principle’ (Jus Sanguinis), meaning the applicant needs to prove they didn’t inherit a foreign nationality at birth.
• Real-life dilemma: Since Ms. E’s biological parents are unknown, the court thinks it can’t rule out the possibility that she might have inherited another nationality at birth, so she can’t meet this burden of proof.

💡 Advice for parents who are adopting or have adopted children

• The cost of private transactions: A ‘reward’ of RM500 could ruin a child’s life—private transactions are not the same as legal adoption.

• You must follow proper procedures: The first thing you should do when you find an abandoned baby is call the police. Without a police report, the law will hardly recognize the child as ‘abandoned.’

• Lies will eventually be exposed: Even if you manage to get away with it at 12 when applying for an ID, background checks at 22 may catch it.

• Final advice: Identity cannot be faked, and the law is not a game. If you encounter a similar situation, be sure to consult a professional constitutional lawyer, and avoid handling it based on hearsay or in private.