Federal Court dismisses bid by 20 couples, single mother to intervene in child out of wedlock appeal

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court today dismissed an application by twenty couples and a single mother to be made parties in an appeal on whether a Muslim child conceived out of wedlock could take his or her father's name instead of "Abdullah" as surname.
Chief Justice Tun Md Raus Sharif, chairing a five-man bench, however told counsel Azhar Azizan Harun, who was representing the couples and the single mother, that he could appear as amicus curiae (friend of the court) and argued in the appeal proceedings.
He then instructed Azhar to make the application for him to appear as amicus curiae in the appeal hearing on Feb 7, this year.
"Counsel to apply to appear as amicus curiae during the proceeding," said Justice Md Raus after dismissing the intervener application brought by the couples and the single mother.
Presiding with him Justice Md Raus were Federal Court judges Tan Sri Zainun Ali, Datuk Balia Yusof Wahi, Tan Sri Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha and Datuk Alizatul Khair Osman Khairuddin.
Earlier, Azhar told the court that his clients, who were parents of children who were deemed born out of wedlock and were not allowed to have their father's name in the birth certificate, had wanted to apply to intervene in the appeal.
Justice Raus however said that in a judicial review application, one had to fulfill certain procedures before they could be heard, adding that the applicants, by applying to be interveners were "jumping straight" to the Federal Court.
Azhar said his clients did not know the existence of the case when it was filed at the High Court and only came to know about it when the matter was at the Court of Appeal.
The Federal Court will hear on Feb 7 the appeal brought by the National Registration Department (NRD), its director-general and the Government of Malaysia against the appellate court's ruling that a Muslim child conceived out of wedlock could bear his or her father's surname instead of "Abdullah".
On Sept 8 last year, the Federal Court granted the NRD and two others leave to appeal against the appellate court decision with three questions of law posed for the Federal Court's determination.
The Court of Appeal, in a written judgment released on July 25, last year, held that the NRD director-general was not bound by the 'fatwa' or religious edict issued by the National Fatwa Committee to decide the surname of a Muslim child conceived out of wedlock.
Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan and Mazlifah Ayob represented the NRD, its director-general and the government.
Outside the court, Azhar told reporters that he intended to apply as amicus curiae.
He explained that if applicants were allowed to intervene in the appeal, they would have a standing as a party but as amicus curiae, they are not parties. — Bernama