1) I met a couple today. The father is Malaysian. The mother is Indonesian. They have two children, one of whom is now 15 years old. Neither child has a passport or an identity card.
2) Many years ago, the mother lost her passport. It was taken by an agent who did not return it. What may have begun as a small incident gradually became something more difficult to address.
3) She did not attempt to replace the passport. The reason was not indifference, but fear. She was concerned that approaching her own embassy might expose her to consequences.
4) This fear remained with her over the years. In the meantime, she built a family. Life continued, even as the legal issue remained unresolved.
5) The children were born without formal documentation. As time passed, the absence of documentation began to affect not only their present, but also their future.
6) The father recently began to seek help. His concern was immediate and practical. Without identity documents, the children would face increasing difficulty in education, healthcare, and employment.
7) He found someone online who offered to arrange a red identity card for one of the children. The cost quoted was RM6,000. It was presented as a straightforward solution.
8) I informed them that I could not support that approach. The use of irregular or unlawful means to obtain identity documents carries risks that are often not immediately visible.
9) Identity, once questioned, may be difficult to restore. What appears to resolve a problem in the short term may create a more serious problem later.
10) I suggested that they consider formalising their marriage. This would provide a clearer legal framework for the family, particularly in relation to the father’s role as legal guardian.
11) From there, an application could be made for the children to be recognised under Malaysian law. Such applications are not always successful, but they are grounded in legal process.
12) Where applications are refused, the courts may be approached by way of judicial review. This is not an easy path, but it remains an available one.
13) In some cases, representations made at a ministerial level may assist. These avenues are not guaranteed, but they form part of the system as it exists.
14) I also suggested that the mother consider approaching the Indonesian Embassy. The loss of a passport does not, in itself, result in the loss of citizenship.
15) She expressed concern that she might be detained or penalised if she did so. This concern is not uncommon among those who have been undocumented for a long time.
16) I shared with her a simple comparison. If a Malaysian were to lose his passport abroad, even through deception or negligence, the Malaysian Embassy would assist him. It would not treat him as an offender for seeking help.
17) Embassies exist, in part, to assist their citizens in precisely such situations. The administrative process may take time, but it is generally directed towards restoration rather than punishment.
18) If her status as an Indonesian citizen is re-established, it may be possible for the children to obtain Indonesian citizenship through her. This may provide them with a starting point.
19) There remains a third possibility, which is migration. This would involve relocating as a family to a country that offers a clearer pathway to legal status. It is a more demanding option, but it is sometimes considered.
20) Looking back on the conversation, it seems that the central issue was not the law itself, but the passage of time under the influence of fear. What is left unaddressed does not remain unchanged. It tends, quietly, to grow.