Freedom of Religion Upheld in NRD case

8 January 2026

KOTA KINABALU: The High Court in Sabah and Sarawak yesterday allowed an application by Abdul Manap bin Bakusai @ Abu Bakar and his three children from Pitas to amend their National Registration Identity Card (MyKad) records to reflect their religion as Christian.

In delivering her grounds of judgment, Judge Datuk Celestina Stuel Galid raised serious concerns over the National Registration Department’s (NRD) practice of assigning an individual’s religion without a proper factual or legal basis.

The Court made it clear that this was not a case of the plaintiffs renouncing Islam. Judge Celestina accepted the plaintiffs’ evidence that they and their family members, including their grandparents, had always practised Christianity and had never converted to Islam.

The Court noted that documentary evidence, including identity records, baptism certificates and letters from churches, supported this position.

The Court further stressed that the issue before it was not an isolated one. Judge Celestina referred to earlier judicial decisions, including Satiah Simbunar v Director of National Registration Department, Sabah [2022] CLJU 2411, decided by Leonard Shim (then Judicial Commissioner and now Judge of the Court of Appeal), in which the Court found that “Islam” had been wrongly inserted into an identity card based on assumptions made by registration officers.

More significantly, the Court also cited Zulkifli Adirin v Director of National Registration Department, Sabah [2021] MLRHU 2540, where it was found that, despite the applicants’ father expressly stating “Tiada” (none) for religion on the application forms, the NRD nonetheless registered the applicants as Muslims and recorded “Islam” in their MyKad details.

Judge Celestina referred to this case to underscore that even clear and explicit instructions had been disregarded, reinforcing her finding that such errors reflected a recurring administrative problem.

She described it as “fundamentally wrong” for the NRD to determine an individual’s religion on its own initiative, holding that the department had exceeded its administrative role. She noted that, in the present case, the defendant had provided no affidavit evidence explaining why the fourth plaintiff’s religion was recorded as Islam despite her application form stating otherwise.

The Court described the situation as particularly troubling as it involved illiterate applicants who relied on government officers for assistance. Judge Celestina found that such actions went against the applicants’ wishes and had the effect of denying them their constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of religion under Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.

The Court also rejected the NRD’s position that issues of religious determination should be left to the Syariah Court, while at the same time having administratively determined the plaintiffs’ religion.

These broader concerns mirror recent developments reported in the media. In May 2025, news reports indicated that a police report had been lodged in Sabah by a woman who alleged that her identity had been fraudulently used to register her as a Muslim more than a decade earlier, without her knowledge or consent. The report raised public concern that similar cases may exist, particularly among individuals in rural communities.

Having found that the plaintiffs had proven, on a balance of probabilities, that they were never Muslims and that the incorrect religious entries had been wrongly inserted by NRD officers, the Court allowed the application with no order as to costs.

The judgment underscores the importance of strict adherence to constitutional safeguards and affirms that administrative processes must operate within the limits of the fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.