This article attempts to compare the strategies of discoursing the political identity of Sinophone Malaysian literature employed by three literary critics- Tee Kim Tong, Ng Kim Chew and Chong Fah Hing. It seeks to understand the discourse practices and the strategies of interpretation taken by the critics from different positions of criticisms, and to explore the complex considerations and challenges that they face. At the same time, it measures their conflicting views and compromising positions, recalibrating the possibility for cross-references. Three of them have always demonstrated clear-cut distinctions in justifying their stances on their own "presences" in different locations, their declarations on the subjectivity of literature, or even the presuppositions in articulating the literary "Other". And I think it might be useful to employ the method of considering the "literary citizenship right" when reflecting on the political identity of Sinophone Malaysian literature. This is thereby to ponder upon the rights of literary citizens, and the relationship between literature, nation and citizenship. This article also aims at reconstructing the connotation of "citizenship", arguing that "literary citizenship" is not attached to the passport identity or the nationality of a single nation-state. Instead, it suggests that whether it is in the "other place" which is away from home, or in "this place" that indicates the current place of residence, both of which locations are endowed with the sense of literary citizenship. They supply us with the possible meanings in expanding the idea of literary citizenship (right). As a whole, literary citizenship emphasizes multiple discourses in literature, which echoes to the notion of multiculturalism. It might help break the hegemonic apparatus of a monocultural literary system. However, it remains an academic point of view, and thus more discussions are needed to explore its pragmaticality and practicability.