The Indonesian Citizenship Myth - Part 2
5 Jan 2010 - On Edit: Added a reference to "Nationalism and ethnic conflict in Indonesia".
"Paralegal" at Philip Berg's blog posted a long comment about my original article on Indonesian Citizenship. While the article was interesting, it doesn't tend to disprove anything I said. Let's take a look, shall we?
"I have read this post in detail and must say, with all due respect, I disagree. Some very important parts were left out, which I do not believe was intentional. Thus, I would like to respond accordingly.
First, I am unsure as to where badfiction obtained the Indonesian laws, I’m unsure as to the dates, etc. However, there are discrepancies."
The copy of Indonesian Law 62:1958 that I used is from the website of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Full URL is:
I provided the link in my original, so there was no reason not to check where it came from.
"Badfiction is correct in stating that if a woman married a foreign citizen they would have lost their U.S. citizenship status if married prior to September 22, 1922. However, there is more to this, see 8 U.S.C. Section 1435(a)(2) which states “on or after September 22, 1922, a women who lost United States citizenship by marriage to an alien ineligible to citizenship…” However, Indonesia also required Stanley Ann Dunham to relinquish her U.S. Citizenship, which is an affirmative act, therefore, Stanley Ann Dunham did not simply lose her U.S. Citizenship status by marriage alone."
8 USC Section 1435 (law.onecle.com) deals with former US citizens regaining their citizenship. Section a(2) says:
(Bold Face mine)
"(2) the application need not set forth that it is the intention of the applicant to reside permanently within the United States. Such person, or any person who was naturalized in accordance with the provisions of section 317(a) of the Nationality Act of 1940, shall have, from and after her naturalization, the status of a native-born or naturalized citizen of the United States, whichever status existed in the case of such person prior to the loss of citizenship: Provided, That nothing contained herein or in any other provision of law shall be construed as conferring United States citizenship retroactively upon such person, or upon any person who was naturalized in accordance with the provisions of section 317(a) of the Nationality Act of 1940, during any period in which such person was not a citizen."
Notice it says that should a person reclaim their US citizenship, it goes back to what it was before they took the other citizenship. In other words, if someone was natural born before hand, they become natural born afterwards in the eyes of US law.
I think "Paralegal" meant 8 USC Section 1435 c (1A):
(Bold face mine)
"(c) Oath of allegiance
(1) A woman who was a citizen of the United States at birth and
(A) who has or is believed to have lost her United States citizenship solely by reason of her marriage prior to September 22, 1922, to an alien, or by her marriage on or after such date to an alien ineligible to citizenship,
(B) whose marriage to such alien shall have terminated subsequent to January 12, 1941, and
(C) who has not acquired by an affirmative act other than by marriage any other nationality, shall, from and after taking the oath of allegiance required by section 1448 of this title, be a citizen of the United States and have the status of a citizen of the United States by birth, without filing an application for naturalization, and notwithstanding any of the other provisions of this subchapter except the provisions of section 1424 of this title: Provided, That nothing contained herein or in any other provision of law shall be construed as conferring United States citizenship retroactively upon such person, or upon any person who was naturalized in accordance with the provisions of section 317(b) of the Nationality Act of 1940, during any period in which such person was not a citizen."
PDF to entire Nationality Act of 1940 is here (library.uwb.edu)
Again, section 317(b) of the Nationality Act of 1940 says:
"From and after the effective date of this Act, a woman, who was a citizen of the United States at birth, and who has or is believed to have lost her United States citizenship solely by reason of her marriage prior to September 22, 1922, to an alien, and whose marital status with such alien has or shall have terminated, if no other nationality was acquired by affirmative act other than such marriage,shall, from and after the taking of the oath of allegiance prescribed by subsection (b) of section 335 of this Act, be deemed to be a citizen of the United States to the same extent as though her marriage to said alien had taken place on or after September 22, 1922."
Simply put, nowhere in 8 U.S.C. Section 1435 does it say what "Paralegal" claims it does.
Further more, neither Berg or any other birther have provided any evidence to support their claim that Stanley Ann Dunham ever gave up her US citizenship.
Under Indonesian law 62:1958, Article 7:
"Article 7. (1)A foreign woman married to a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia, acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if and when she makes a statement as to that effect within 1 year after contracting said marriage, except in case when she acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia she possesses still another nationality, in which case the statement may not be made."
There are no records supporting a renouncing of US citizenship. Indeed the evidence (returning to Hawaii in the early 70's, the 20 August 1980 Soetoro-Dunham divorce, etc.) suggests strongly that she kept her US citizenship.
And in either case, her citizenship status wouldn't have changed Obama's status as a US citizen from birth due to having been born in the United States.
"Badfiction claims that a parent cannot expatriate a child’s U.S. citizenship, however, this is not correct. See The Nationality Act of 1940, revised 1952, Section 318
(a) “A former citizen of the United States expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents and who has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents may be naturalized upon filing a petition for naturalization before reaching age of twenty-five years and upon compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws with the following exceptions:
(b) No former citizen of the United States, expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents shall be obliged to comply with the requirements of the immigration laws, if he has not not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents, and if he has come or shall come to the United States before reaching the age of twenty-five years.
(c) After his naturalization such person shall have the same citizenship status as if he had not been expatriated.”
Now this part is interesting. Let me bold some parts of Section318(b)
"(b) No former citizen of the United States, expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents shall be obliged to comply with the requirements of the immigration laws, if he has not not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents, and if he has come or shall come to the United States before reaching the age of twenty-five years."
Notice that age of twenty five years. Obama returned to the US in 1971, when he was ten. What this law says is that a child who was expatriated though the actions of his parents without taking any affirmative act on their own, and who returned to the US before the age of 25, does not lose their US citizenship and does not have to comply with with the naturalization laws.
(c) After his naturalization such person shall have the same citizenship status as if he had not been expatriated
And such a person, again, has the same citizenship status they were born in the US with.
"Renewing an Indonesian Passport after the age of 18 is an affirmative act, as you are swearing allegiance to another Country. Soetoro/Obama renewed his Indonesian Passport when he traveled to Pakistan, that is why he had to stop in Indonesia first."
This is pretty much pure conjecture on "Paralegals" part. The reason cited for such a passport renewal would have been the claimed travel ban on Pakistan in 1981. However, as I pointed out in The Pakistan Travel Ban Myth, no such ban was in place.
There is no evidence to support the claim that Obama had at any time an Indonesian passport. Furthermore, at this point, Obama hadn't lived in Indonesia for over ten years. And last but not least, it was after his mother divorced Lolo Soetoro.
"Remember, in 1981, Dunham was divorcing Soetoro in Hawaii and was not in Indonesia. Obama/Soetoro admits to traveling to Indonesia first and then onto Pakistan. Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams from my father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro."
Stanley Ann Dunham left Lolo Soetoro in 1972 and came back to Hawaii for several years. She returned to Indonesia for her field work, and spent time in both locations. The Soetoro-Dunham divorce was on 20 August 1980. Since her field work in her degree was related to Indonesia, there's no reason why she couldn't be living as a US expat in Indonesia and have her legal US residence be in Hawaii.
"In addition, the State Department has stated in response to a FOIA request that they do not have a U.S. Passport application on file for Barack H. Obama."
It is my understanding that FOIA requests for passport info of that type cannot include living people due to privacy laws. Further more, at no time has Berg or any other birther provided any credible evidence to back up this claim.
It is interesting to note however, that the US government HAS indeed answered these questions, In Strunk v US Department of State, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL), the United States Government, though deputy Asssistant Attorney General Michael F. Hertz, Deputy Branch Director Elizabeth J. Shapiro, and Attorney Brigham J. Bowen, stated that:
(Scribd link here)
"20. Allegations concerning President Obama are subject to a pending motion to dismiss, and no response is therefore required. To the extent this paragraph refers to a document, Defendants refer the Court to the document referenced as Exhibit H for a complete and accurate representation of its contents. To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama may be an illegal alien or that President Obama is or ever was a citizen of Indonesia, those allegations are denied."
37. Allegations concerning President Obama are subject to a pending motion to dismiss, and no response is therefore required. To the extent this paragraph refers to a document, Defendants refer the Court to the document for a complete and accurate representation of its contents. To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States or that President Obama is or ever was a citizen of Indonesia, those allegations are denied.
38. Allegations concerning President Obama are subject to a pending motion to dismiss, and no response is therefore required. To the extent this paragraph refers to a document, Defendants refer the Court to the document for a complete and accurate representation of its contents. To the extent this paragraph alleges that Lolo Soetoro is or ever was President Obama’s father by birth or adoption, that allegation is denied. To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is or ever was a practicing Muslim, that allegation is denied.
39. Allegations concerning President Obama are subject to a pending motion to dismiss, and no response is therefore required. To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is or ever was an Indonesian citizen, that allegation is denied.
40. Allegations concerning President Obama are subject to a pending motion to dismiss, and no response is therefore required. To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is or ever was an Indonesian citizen, that allegation is denied."
So in other words, the official position of the United States Government is that Obama is a US citizen, was never an Indonesian Citizen, and was never adopted by Lolo Soetoro. Under the Hague Convention of 1930, this falls under Article 1, It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals
"Despite the above however, Indonesia required Obama/Soetoro to do a bit more upon his 18th birthday. In fact the Indonesian law gives until the age of 21. Soetoro/Obama would have had to sign an Affidavit relinquishing his Indonesian citizenship and said Affidavit had to be sent to the Indonesian Government before reclaiming any U.S. citizenship he may have once held."
Again, according to Indonesian Law 62:1958, Obama was too old to be granted Indonesian Citizenship via adoption. Furthermore, under the above-cited US laws, Obama would have had to do nothing to reclaim his US citizenship, since under US law he never lost it.
"When it comes to the citizenship of individuals in other countries, we are prevented from interfering, Hague Convention 1930. Speaking of Indonesia, during the late 60’s all the way up until 2006 Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship. In 2006 they changed their laws to permit dual citizenship, however, Indonesia has had its battles with enforcing their new law permitting dual citizenship."
Which also means that Indonesia was prevented from interfering with the citizenship of a US citizen as well. And Obama's citizenship status would have been governed under US law for the purposes of US citizenship. The Hague Convention does not interfere or preclude the United States from applying the citizenship laws of the United States to one of their own citizens
(Scribd link to the Hague Convention of 1930 here)
Article 1 It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals. This law shall be recognised by other States in so far as it is consistent with international conventions, international custom, and the principles of law generally recognised with regard to nationality.
Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of a particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of that State.
In other words, the Hague Convention of 1930 states in the first two articles that it is up to each country to determine under their own law who is a citizen of that country.
And under US law, Obama was and is a US citizen, therefore under the Hague Convention of 1930, it is US law that determines his citizenship.
Note: Article 4 of the Hague Convention reads:
A State may not afford diplomatic protection to one of its nationals against a State whose nationality such person also possesses."
This is known as the "Master Nationality Rule", and what it means is that a dual national cannot be given assistance from country A while in the territory of country B. Therefore a US/Canadian citizen could not ask for US help while in Canada, or Canadian help while in the US.
What does this mean? Simply put, even IF Obama had been granted Indonesian citizenship, (again, he was over the age and no credible evidence to support this claim has been given), the only effect to the United States is that the US couldn't provide diplomatic assistance while he was in Indonesia. And once Obama returned to the United States, he would have been treated by the US exactly like any other US citizen.
"With this said, from the research we have done, it appears that Soetoro became an Indonesian citizen."
I'm curious as to what kind of research this was, since none of the evidence I'm finding is supporting this claim in the slightest.
" When Soetoro/Obama was approximately four (4) years old his parents divorced and thereafter, Soetoro/Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia."
According to records, Stanley Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro in fall of 1966 or in 1967. At that time, Obama would have been five or six - too old under Indonesian Law 62:1958 Article 2.
Here's a secondary source, from Time Magazine:
"S. Ann Dunham Soetoro When her son was almost 2, Ann returned to college. Money was tight. She collected food stamps and relied on her parents to help take care of young Barack. She would get her bachelor's degree four years later. In the meantime, she met another foreign student, Lolo Soetoro, at the University of Hawaii. ("It's where I send all my single girlfriends," jokes her daughter Soetoro-Ng, who also married a man she met there.) He was easygoing, happily devoting hours to playing chess with Ann's father and wrestling with her young son. Lolo proposed in 1967."
1967 would have meant Obama was 5-6 at the time. Again, above the age limit according to Indonesian law. The article also mentions that:
"Mother and son spent months preparing to follow him to Indonesia—getting shots, passports and plane tickets. Until then, neither had left the country."
Now it defies belief that the United States would allow a US citizen minor out of the country without a US passport. And under Indonesian law, Barack Obama wouldn't have qualified for an Indonesian passport. Therefore, logically the conclusion is that Obama traveled as a child to Indonesia under a US passport, and there's no evidence he returned under anything other than a US passport.
" Evidence points to the fact that Lolo Soetoro either signed a government form legally “acknowledging” Soetoro/Obama as his son or “adopted” Soetoro, either of which changed any citizenship status Soetoro/Obama had to a “natural” citizen of Indonesia."
Again, Law 62:1958, Article 2:
"Article 2. (1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child."
So again, Obama was too old under Indonesian law to be granted citizenship. In addition, take a look at Law 62:1958, Article 3:
(Bold face mine)
"Article 3. (1)A child outside a marriage of a mother who is a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia or a child out of a legal marriage, but who has in a case of divorce been assigned to the care of its mother, a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia, who follows the nationality of the father, a foreigner, may present a petition to the Minister of Justice in order to acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if, after, having acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, it possesses no other nationality or states at the same time to have released another nationality according to the procedure stipulated by the legal provisions of the country of origin. and/or according to the procedure stipulated by the agreement on the settlement of the bi-nationality between the Republic of Indonesia and the country in question"
Again, under US law, there was no way for Obama or his mother to renounce his US citizenship.
In addition, it's highly unlikely that even if an adoption took place, that the name "Soetoro" would have been used.
Why? Because of Indonesia's high percentage of Muslims (86.1% of the population). Lolo Soetoro himself was a non-practicing Muslim. And under Islamic law and guidelines on adoption, (islam.about.com) an adopted child does not take the name of the adopted father. To cite the Qur'an:
"...Nor has He made your adopted sons your (biological) sons. Such is (only) your (manner of) speech by your mouths. But Allah tells (you) the Truth, and He shows the (right) Way. Call them by (the names of) their fathers; that is juster in the sight of Allah. But if you know not their father's (names, call them) your brothers in faith, or your trustees. But there is no blame on you if you make a mistake therein. (What counts is) the intention of your hearts. And Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful." (Qur'an 33:4-5)
Under Islamic Law, even if Lolo Soetoro was to have adopted Barack Obama, the last name would have remained "Obama", as to do otherwise would have "taken his father's name away"
"At the time Barry Soetoro was in Indonesia, all Indonesian students were required to carry government identity cards or Karty Tanda Pendudaks, as well as family card identification called a Kartu Keluarga. The Kartu Keluarga is a family card which bears the legal names and citizenship status of all family members."
And do you have a copy of this Kartu Keluarga by any chance?? If not, you can't infer anything on it.
"Soetoro/Obama was registered in a public school as an Indonesian citizen by the name of Barry Soetoro and his father was listed as Lolo Soetoro, M.A. Indonesia did not allow foreign students to attend their public schools in the late 1960’s or 1970’s, and any time a child was registered for a public school, the child’s name and citizenship status were verified through the Indonesian Government."
I've seen this claim before, but what I don't see is any evidence to support this claim. In over a year of searching, I have still have not found any evidence that non-citizens were denied access to Indonesian schools.
I did, however, found these references in "Nationalism and ethnic conflict in Indonesia" By Jacques Bertrand (Google Books Link)
“The government banned Indonesian citizens from attending alien schools which meant that Indonesian Chinese could no longer attend Chinese language schools." - Page 63
And then, on Page 65, we see:
"The regime sided with the assimilationist perspective of the LPKB, instead of the integrationist approach that Baperki had propounded. Chinese Indonesians who had joined the anti-communist movement and who were close to the regime viewed assimilation as the best option. The New Order regime consequently adopted policies to eliminate the distinctions marking Chinese Indonesians from other Indonesian citizens. It banned alien schools and urged all Chinese (citizens and non-citizens) to attend Indonesian national schools." - Page 65
These strongly suggest that there was no ban on non-citizens attending Indonesian schools.
"See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Chapter 13, Law No. 62 of 1958 (all citizens of Indonesia have a right to education). "
I think here "Paralegal" has gotten confused. (Understandable, since Berg's filings make the same jumble.)
Let's start with the Constitution of Indonesia of 1945 first: (asnic.utexas.edu)
Chapter XIII. Education
1. Every citizen has the right to education.
2. The government shall establish and conduct a national educational system which shall be regulated by law.
Nowhere does this say anything that the right to education is denied non-citizens.
And as for Law 62:1958, that's the "Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia", and doesn't reference education at all. In effect, "Paralegal" has jumbled together the Indonesian Constitution AND Law 62:1958 and created a claim that doesn't appear to have any basis in fact.
"The Indonesian school record, indicates that Soetoro/Obama’s name is “Barry Soetoro;” his nationality is “Indonesia” and his father “Lolo Soetoro, M.A. "
I could (and more than likely should) write up a whole new entry about the "Indonesian School Record", since the birthers place so much credit in it and read so much into it. But I will say this right now.
1) The original of that document would be considered Prima Facie evidence that Obama attended that school during that time period. The copy on line could be considered secondary evidence that he attended that school during that time.
2) It does not prove or claim citizenship. Again, there is no credible evidence in either the Indonesian Constitution or Law 62:1958 to support the claim that access to public schools were denied non-Citizens.
3) It does not prove or claim adoption.
4) It does state that Obama's birthplace is "Honolulu, USA". This places birthers like Berg in the position of having to argue that this document they use as "proof" of adoption and Indonesian citizenship, is suddenly not reliable in terms of showing birthplace.
"There was no way for Soetoro/Obama to have attended school in Jakarta, Indonesia legally unless he was an Indonesian citizen, as Indonesia was under tight rule and was a Police State. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Law No. 62 of 1958."
I have seen both the 1945 Indonesian Constitution AND Indonesian Law 62:1958, and there is nothing in either to support this claim. Please see the documents linked above as proof.
"These facts indicate that Obama/Soetoro is an Indonesian citizen, and therefore he is not eligible to be President of the United States."
These aren't facts. They are conjecture based on faulty claims.
"Under Indonesian law, when a male acknowledges a child as his son, it deems the son, in this case Soetoro/Obama, an Indonesian State citizen. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 62 of 1958 concerning Immigration Affairs and Indonesian Civil Code (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Perdata) (KUHPer) (Burgerlijk Wetboek voor Indonesie)."
Again, "Paralegal" seems to be confusing the Indonesian Constitution and Law 62:1958. Since the Indonesian Constitution says nothing about adoption, and Law 62:1958 provides for citizenship only if the child is below the age of five.
"Furthermore, under the Indonesian adoption law, once an Indonesian citizen adopts a child, the adoption severs the child’s relationship to the birth parents, and the adopted child is given the same status as a natural child and the child takes the name of his step-father, in this case, Soetoro. See Indonesian Constitution, Article 2."
Article Two of the Indonesian Constitution:
1. The Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat *) shall consist of members of the Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat**) augmented by delegates from the regional territories and the groups in accordance with regulation prescribed by statute.
2. The Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat shall sit at least once in every five years in the capital of the State.
3. All decisions of the Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat shall be determined by majority vote."
Article two of Law 62:1958 (again)
"Article 2. (1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child.
(2)Said declaration of legality by the Pengadilan Negeri shall be requested by the person adopting the child within 1 year after such an adoption or within 1 year after enforcement of this law.
Note that the former doesn't mention or concern adoption at all, and the other says nothing about severing the relationship to the birth parents. In addition, since Lolo Soetoro was married to one of the birth parents, a relationship could not be severed save though divorce.
"The Indonesian citizenship law was designed to prevent apatride (stateless) or bipatride (dual) citizenship. Indonesian regulations recognized neither apatride nor bipatride (stateless or dual) citizenship. Since Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship; neither did the United States (since the United States only permitted dual citizenship when ‘both’ countries agree); and since Obama/Soetoro was a “natural” citizen of Indonesia, the United States would not step in or interfere with the laws of Indonesia. Hague Convention of 1930."
However, the Hague Convention of 1930 also states that "It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals." and "Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of a particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of that State" Since Obama was and is a Natural-born US citizen, US law under the Hague Convention of 1930 applies to his status as a US citizen.
"As a result of Soetoro/Obama’s Indonesian “natural” citizenship status, Soetoro/Obama could never regain U.S. “natural born” status, if he in fact he ever held such, which we doubt. Soetoro/Obama could have only become “naturalized” if the proper paperwork were filed with the U.S. State Department, after going through U.S. Immigration upon his return to the United States; in which case, Soetoro/Obama would have received a Certification of Citizenship indicating “naturalized.”
Incorrect. See 8 USC Section 1435 Former citizens regaining citizenship:
"Such person, or any person who was naturalized in accordance with the provisions of section 317(a) of the Nationality Act of 1940, shall have, from and after her naturalization, the status of a native-born or naturalized citizen of the United States, whichever status existed in the case of such person prior to the loss of citizenship: Provided, That nothing contained herein or in any other provision of law shall be construed as conferring United States citizenship retroactively upon such person, or upon any person who was naturalized in accordance with the provisions of section 317(a) of the Nationality Act of 1940, during any period in which such person was not a citizen."
"We are informed, believe and thereon allege Obama/Soetoro was never naturalized in the United States after his return."
Because he didn't need to. Under US law, he never lost it.
"Soetoro/Obama was ten (10) years old when he returned to Hawaii to live with his grandparents. Soetoro/Obama’s mother did not return with him. Therefore, it appears that she did not apply for citizenship for Soetoro/Obama in the United States."
Because she didn't need to. Under US law, neither Obama or his mother never lost it.
"If citizenship for Soetoro/Obama had been applied for in 1971, Soetoro/Obama would have a Certification of Citizenship."
No. Again 8 USC Section 1435. His status would have been the same as before he went to Indonesia.
"If Soetoro/Obama returned in 1971 to Hawaii without going through U.S. Immigration, today he would be an “illegal alien” – and obviously not able to serve as President, but also his term as a United States Senator from Illinois for nearly four (4) years was illegal."
Again, under US law, no loss of citizenship took place.
"We further believe Soetoro might have reentered the United States at age ten (10) by showing a copy of his Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth, which he received when his birth was registered in Hawaii."
Customs officials don't look at birth certificates, they look at passports. In addition, the US State Department accepts the Hawaiian COLB as Prima Facie evidence of US birth and citizenship. Even if he lost his US passport in Indonesia, his mother could have provided the info for the US Embassy in that country to provide him a new one.
(Note, later Hawaiian law provided for certificates for the adoption of children born outside of Hawaii. However, under the same law, said certificates give the child's birthplace and location, and are marked so they are not seen as evidence of United States Citizenship. The section in question is HRS §338-20.5 (capitol.hawaii.gov)
" The true or probable country of birth shall be known as the place of birth, and the date of birth shall be determined by approximation. This report shall constitute an original certificate of birth; and
(4) A request that a new certificate of birth be established.
(b) After preparation of the new certificate of birth in the new name of the adopted person, the department of health shall seal and file the certified copy of the adoptive decree, the investigatory report and recommendation of the director of human services if any, the report constituting the original certificate of birth, and the request for a new certificate of birth. The sealed documents may be opened by the department only by an order of a court of record or when requested in accordance with section 578-14.5 or 578-15. The new certificate of birth shall show the true or probable foreign country of birth, and that the certificate is not evidence of United States citizenship for the child for whom it is issued or for the adoptive parents. [L 1979, c 203, §3; am L 1990, c 338, §3]"
"In addition, we have been unable to locate any legal documents wherein Soetoro’s name was legally changed from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama. "
Nor have you been able to locate any legal documents or court records showing his name was ever changed to "Barry Soetoro" in the first place.
It's a very good try "Paralegal". But in the end, I still have to mark this myth as busted.