皇冠现金网官网寻求亚洲战略合作伙伴,皇冠现金网官网代理招募中,皇冠现金网官网开放会员注册、充值、提现、电脑版下载、APP下载。

首页体育正文

以太坊块高度开奖(www.326681.com):A ray of hope in Malaysia\u2019s Constitution

admin2022-08-254

以太坊块高度开奖www.326681.com)采用以太坊区块链高度哈希值作为统计数据,以太坊块高度开奖(联博统计)数据开源、公平、无任何作弊可能性。联博统计免费提供API接口,支持多语言接入

IT was a devastating day for all the Malaysian mothers who sought citizenship for their children who were born outside Malaysia via the operation of law. The Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision with a majority of 2-1.

As reported, judge Kamaludin Md Said ruled that the High Court had erred in the decision by equating the word “father” to also mean “mother” under part II of the second schedule of the Federal Constitution, read with article 14(1)(b) of the Constitution.

The contention was that the word “father” here must be interpreted as it is. It must retain the original meaning of what was intended by the Federal Constitution.

However, the dissenting judgment by judge S. Nantha Balan said the interpretation in a harmonious manner was correct. In which, interpreting the citizenship clause in a rigid manner would only cause conflict as to the bloodline (jus sanguinis).

Malaysia follows constitutional supremacy, as stated in the case of Ah Tian v Government of Malaysia. As such, the court cannot with its own whims and fancies interpret something that is not in the Federal Constitution.

The Federal Constitution is not subjected to the same limitations that apply to ordinary law where the intention of the drafter takes precedence.

The hallmark of constitutionalism is only to administer what is being fair and just, and its limitations begin with the basic structure doctrine.

,

彩客网www.99cx.vip)是一个开放皇冠体育网址代理APP下载、皇冠体育网址会员APP下载、皇冠体育网址线路APP下载、皇冠体育网址登录APP下载的官方平台。彩客网上彩客分析专家数据更新最快。彩客网开放皇冠官方会员注册、皇冠官方代理开户等业务。

,

In interpreting the law, there are two ways – one is clear-cut provisions and a prismatic approach, which allows the court to lift the veil in the context of the provision with its proper meaning without changing or creating a new provision altogether.

The problem here again lies in the Constitution itself. Thus, the only way is to amend the Federal Constitution under part II of the second schedule, by replacing the word “father” with “parents”.

This gives rights to both mother and father in conferring their citizenship to their children.

To grant citizenship or not to grant citizenship has always been a conundrum.

However, as mentioned in the previous article, the CCH case has shown how a conundrum can be overcome, but this again is confined to a case-to-case basis.

So can this, too, be amended and passed, as how the anti-party hopping bill was approved with a more than two-thirds majority by parliament? – August 6, 2022.

* Matilda George reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.


转载说明:本文转载自Sunbet。

网友评论