PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court on Tuesdaystruck down the Perlis state government’s final attempt to argue why the three children of Hindu mother Loh Siew Hong should be recognised as Muslims, despite their previous conversion to Islam being ruled illegal.
A three-member panel chaired by Chief Judge of Malaya Datuk Seri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim delivered the unanimous decision alongside Federal Court judges Datuk Nordin Hassan and Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera.
Tuesday’s decision follows an application filed by the Perlis state government last year to review the Federal Court’s May 2024 decision denying them leave to appeal the appellate court’s ruling which quashed the conversion of Loh’s three children to Islam without her consent.
The latest ruling effectively endorsed the earlier Federal Court decision which had in May 2024 unanimously decided against the Perlis Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council (MAIPs), the Perlis government, and other respondents in the years-long legal battle to have the children’s conversion to Islam declared unconstitutional.
We find no merit in the review application as the applicant has not met the threshold under Rule 137 of Rules of the Federal Court 1995.
“Therefore Enclosure 1 (application for review) is dismissed with no cost,” she said. Loh previously challenged the children’s conversion in 2022, losing initially at the High Court but later winning at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court.
On May 14, 2024, the Federal Court reaffirmed the binding Indira Gandhi precedent requiring both parents’ consent for child conversions.
The Perlis state government then filed an application on October 29, 2024 to review the Federal Court’s decision.
In its application, the Perlis state government had sought a review by a new Federal Court panel, claiming its right to be heard was “severely compromised”.
It wanted the Federal Court to set aside the May 2024 panel’s — chaired by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat — decision to refuse leave.
Perlis also wanted the apex court to either rehear the application for leave to appeal, or directly grant leave to appeal.
Rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 recognises the Federal Court’s inherent power to review its previous decisions in order to prevent an injustice or an abuse of process, and it has been mostly used to set aside Federal Court’s decisions.
Ultimately, Perlis wanted the Federal Court to hear its full appeal to argue that the three children’s unilateral should be declared valid.
But Perlis failed to get the Federal Court to set aside its May 2024 decision to refuse leave to appeal.
In May 2024, the Federal Court said the Court of Appeal’s decision to invalidate the three children’s unilateral conversion was correct, noting Perlis’ arguments would encourage the “unconstitutional practice of unilateral conversion to persist”. In short, this means the children remain Hindus and the unilateral conversion illegal.
