We, the members of G25, are deeply concerned with the Ministry of Home Affairs for the apparent disregard for established requirements and the double standards in the administration of Malaysian citizenship exposed by the controversy involving the Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) and the seven foreign footballers.
The controversy emerged in September 2025, when Fédération Internationale de Football Association (Fifa), the international governing body of football, found that falsified documents had been submitted to establish the eligibility of seven foreign-born footballers to represent Malaysia. The scandal brought shame and embarrassment to Malaysia, damaging our international reputation. Subsequent proceedings upheld sanctions against FAM for this, while the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission’s (EAIC) July 2026 investigation identified irregularities in the processing of the players’ citizenship approvals.
The Home Minister’s remarks on Oct 16, 2026, defending the decision to grant the footballers citizenship despite some applicants having never resided in Malaysia for the required period, raised some serious questions about how ministerial discretion for citizenship approval is being exercised. Article 19(3) of the Federal Constitution sets out the residency period requirement for naturalisation for the application of citizenship as not less than 10 years in the 12 years immediately preceding the date of application, while the relevant provisions also provide for ministerial discretion in specified circumstances. While we acknowledge that discretion does exist, it must be exercised with sufficient justification, due diligence and consistency. This discretion must not become a means of bypassing the safeguards intended to protect the integrity of the Malaysian citizenship process.
The Home Minister’s explanation that time spent abroad could be treated as residence in Malaysia has naturally sparked criticism. It is shocking that, after Malaysia has already been disgraced by the Fifa scandal, the government appears prepared to compound that wrongdoing by proceeding with the footballers’ citizenship approvals this way. Having been exposed for wrongdoing, the country should be demonstrating accountability, correcting its failures and restoring its credibility. The doubling of these failures is deeply disturbing and reflects a troubling disregard for the integrity of our institutions, the rule of law, and the reputation of our country. What message does this blatant approval of a wrong send to the public? That the government is above the law when it suits its purposes? That achieving a desired outcome justifies disregarding or “bending” legal requirements? That two wrongs can somehow make a right? Such conduct by those entrusted with upholding the law sets a dangerous precedent for what we allow those in power to get away with.
The EAIC’s findings of irregularities also make it imperative for the government to explain how the footballers’ applications were processed so quickly and whether all relevant safeguards were observed. More fundamentally, the role of the National Registration Department (NRD), which falls under the Home Minister’s authority, must be fully investigated. Did the NRD process applications or issue official documents on the basis of forged, falsified or otherwise fraudulent information? What evidence was used to support the issuance of documents relating to the players’ alleged Malaysian ancestry, and were proper verification procedures followed? The NRD director general’s September 2025 statutory declaration to Fifa stated that supporting documents had been obtained and cross-verified, but Fifa subsequently published original birth certificates that contradicted claims made by the NRD. These discrepancies demand a clear and credible explanation.
The home minister must also account for the exercise of his authority and the actions of the department under his charge. The government must establish whether any officials facilitated, approved or knowingly processed applications involving falsified documents, and whether there was any failure of oversight or accountability. The possibility of criminal wrongdoing cannot be dismissed as a mere administrative irregularity. More than a year after the scandal emerged, the absence of prosecution is deeply troubling. The public deserves to know whether a criminal investigation has been conducted, what action has been taken against those responsible, and why no news of any prosecution has followed. Until these questions are answered, assurances about ministerial discretion and procedural compliance will do nothing to assuage suspicion of wrongdoing by our government officials.
The contrast between this case and the experience of other citizenship applicants is particularly troubling. Malaysian mothers whose children were born overseas to foreign fathers have spent years campaigning for their children to enjoy the same citizenship rights as children born overseas to Malaysian fathers. Despite the passing of constitutional amendments in 2024 to address this inequality, implementation has continued to be delayed. As recently as September 2026, the home minister said the government was still finalising arrangements for the amendments to take effect, while hundreds of applications involving children born overseas to Malaysian mothers remain undecided.
It is difficult to reconcile these prolonged delays with the apparent urgency and flexibility shown in facilitating citizenship for the seven footballers. For mothers and children who have endured years of uncertainty, this contrast is deeply disheartening. It creates a troubling perception of double standards that citizenship can be facilitated swiftly when it serves an immediate national objective, while families seeking recognition of their legitimate ties to Malaysia are left waiting. Even if the legal routes and circumstances differ, the government must explain why such a stark contrast in treatment has arisen.
The same question applies to foreign lecturers, scientists and researchers who have served Malaysian universities and institutions for years, contributing to education, scientific advancement and national development, yet continue to await decisions on their citizenship applications. Their contributions may not bring immediate international recognition, but they are vital to Malaysia’s long-term interests. The government should have a transparent and credible policy that recognises sustained contributions to the country, rather than allowing applications to remain in uncertainty without clear explanations.
G25 recognises the importance of developing Malaysian football and strengthening the national team. However, sporting ambition cannot take precedence over the integrity of citizenship procedures, the rule of law, and public confidence in our institutions. Nor should citizenship be treated as a convenient instrument for achieving short-term objectives.
We, G25, call on the government to provide a full and transparent account of the roles played by FAM and the relevant government authorities in the processing and verification of the players’ documents, including how the discrepancies arose and what safeguards failed. It should clarify the legal basis and criteria for any exemptions granted, and ensure that the findings lead to appropriate corrective action and accountability through the proper criminal process for all those involved.
The government must also expedite the implementation of the citizenship amendments for children born overseas to Malaysian mothers, address outstanding applications fairly, and establish clear, consistent and transparent criteria for all citizenship applicants.
Citizenship is not merely an administrative convenience or a means to achieve immediate national success. It carries fundamental rights, responsibilities and a sense of belonging. Malaysia must demonstrate that its citizenship policies are administered with integrity, fairness and consistency, and that no applicant receives preferential treatment simply because their case serves a more visible or immediate national interest.
The credibility of our institutions depends not only on the rules we establish, but on whether the public can trust that those rules are applied fairly to all and that those who have done wrong are held accountable for their crimes.
G25 Malaysia is a Malay-Muslim group of former civil servants and individuals with deep experience across diverse fields, united by a shared vision for a more just, cohesive, and progressive Malaysia. As a civil society organisation, G25 is committed to advancing its vision for a moderate Malaysia by promoting values of moderation in religious discourse and by engaging the public and policymakers on constitutionalism, the rule of law, good governance, institutional reform, education, human rights, and social cohesion in our multiracial society.