OPINION: The National Registration Department’s (JPN) recent chest-thumping—insisting that permanent resident status and citizenship are granted only after a “strict vetting process” -- is not just misleading.
In light of the scandal surrounding seven foreign footballers granted “instant citizenship” last year, it stands as a direct insult to the intelligence and rights of ordinary Malaysians.
JPN’s statement, issued to allay concerns raised by the Pahang Sultan, pledged “careful consideration” in line with the Federal Constitution, ensuring grants do not compromise “security aspects, national interests, and existing citizens.”
It asserts that each application is reviewed by a committee and that nothing is granted arbitrarily.
If this is true, one must ask: Did the applications of the seven foreign footballers -- Gabriel Felipe Arrocha, Facundo Tomas Garces, Rodrigo Julian Holgado, Imanol Javier Machuca, Joao Vitor Brandao Figueiredo, Jon Irazabal Iraurgui, and Hector Alejandro Hevel Serrano -- ever go before this hallowed panel?
Were the “Born--in-Malaysia” birth certificates of their grandparents scrutinised?
“Careful consideration is given to ensure that Malaysian citizenship is granted to individuals who are truly eligible, in accordance with the Federal Constitution and related legislation, without compromising security aspects, national interests, and existing citizens,” JPN said in a statement.
But crucially, it said citizenship for non-citizens is not granted arbitrarily, with each application considered by a committee panel that meets periodically.
All applications were carefully processed and assessed in accordance with Part III of the Federal Constitution and the Citizenship Regulations 1964, taking into account national interests as well as the security and well-being of existing citizens.
Last October, Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail told Parliament that the seven had fulfilled all criteria under the Federal Constitution.
The Home Minister said the criteria, under Article 19 of the Federal Constitution, which covers citizenship by naturalisation, comprises three pillars under Article 19:
the applicant must have resided in the Federation for 10 years in the last 12 years;
Be of good character: and
Have adequate knowledge of the Malay language.
Did the seven qualify under the first limb, which requires the residency period?
No, but Saifuddin defended the decision, stating that he had granted them an exemption under Section 20(1)(e), which gives the home minister discretionary power when considering citizenship applications from foreigners, particularly regarding the fulfillment of minimum residency requirements.
But as Human Rights lawyer Eric Paulsen pointed out, the provision referenced by Saifuddin relates to calculating the period of residence for persons who have already resided in the country for a certain number of years when applying for citizenship.
Paulsen also challenged Saifuddin’s interpretation of the law.
“So, going by the minister's logic, he can just bring in a million foreigners tomorrow and just exempt them from any requirements. Obviously, this is wrong.
“Let me be clear, the minister possesses no such extraordinary power of exemption. If he had such power, it would have been spelt out clearly in the Constitution.”
So, how can the JPN now claim “careful consideration” when the basic requirement was overlooked, and the minister had erroneously exercised non-existent powers?
Technically and legally, the seven were granted citizenship wrongly, and hence, their status must be revoked.
JPN’s statement also said that citizenship is granted after taking into account national interests, security, and the well-being of existing citizens.
Really, but then, why are citizens walking up and down courthouses for the citizenship of their children and spouses, ignoring their well-being? Some of their cases have dragged on for more than four decades.
Apparently, citizenship in Malaysia is harder to win than a court case for your own child, unless you can dribble a ball — in which case, the Constitution becomes as flexible as a referee’s whistle.
What about being proficient in Malay?
FIFA’s Appeals Committee revealed a shocking detail: the seven footballers had passed the Bahasa Malaysia language test when applying for citizenship, but admitted being unable to speak the language
The committee, in addressing submissions by the players, noted that they did not speak the “Malaysian” language and did not read the citizenship application form they signed because they did not understand the language.
JPN conveniently avoided addressing the issue in its response, choosing instead to hide behind a so-called on-going investigation.
The conclusion is unavoidable. This episode is not a one-off irregularity -- it is a symptom. It reveals a department whose processes are elastic to the point of meaninglessness when political or prestige interests are at play.
But when ordinary folk apply for citizenship, the department becomes rigid with the rules and regulations.
It reveals a system in which ministerial overreach bypasses fundamental constitutional pillars, while official statements are crafted to obscure rather than clarify.
Therefore, JPN’s assurances are empty. Its claim of “strict vetting” has been publicly and utterly dismantled by the very case it seeks to deflect scrutiny from.
When the foundational requirements of residence and language proficiency are so blatantly ignored for some, while others wait a lifetime, the department has demonstrated it cannot be trusted.
It abandoned the very people it is meant to serve, revealing itself not as a guardian of sovereignty and law, but as an instrument of selective and arbitrary power.
The public’s trust has been broken, and it will take far more than a press statement to repair it.
In the end, JPN’s “strict vetting” looks less like constitutional guardianship and more like a football match where the rules are rewritten, goalposts moved mid-game, and ordinary Malaysians are left permanently benched.
Citizen Nades (citizen.nades22@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.