A+ | A- | Reset
Home arrow The Blogs arrow News/Commentaries arrow Conversion case puts govt’s promise to test

Conversion case puts govt’s promise to test PDF Print
Posted by admin   
Monday, 27 April 2009 09:24

(The Straits Times) - A custody dispute between a Hindu woman and her estranged husband who converted to Islam will be heard this week, putting to test the government’s promise to ban forced conversion of children.

The case of Shamala Sathiyaseelan will be heard by the Court of Appeal tomorrow after she lost in a lower court last year. She had failed in her bid to challenge the conversion of her two young children to Islam by her husband.

The Malaysian Cabinet last week decided that minors will remain in the common religion of their parents when they married, even if one parent later became a Muslim.

“We have to resolve this once and for all. I don’t think we should be deciding on a piecemeal basis every time a conversion issue crops up,” Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Aziz had said.

But it is unclear how far this policy pronouncement will be legally binding, lawyers say, as long as the law and Federal Constitution remain unchanged.

This is particularly so after Malaysia’s apex court ruled last year that either parent could convert a child of the marriage into Islam.

“I am uncertain as to how this policy position is to translate into practice as the Cabinet has little or no direct power in this regard,” lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar wrote on his blog. “Religion is a matter for the state and not the federal government.”

He is representing Shamala, whose case will be the first to go to court after the Cabinet pronouncement. The civil High Court had earlier refused to rule on the legitimacy of the conversion of her children.

It said the Syariah Court has jurisdiction as they were Muslims although as a non-Muslim, she has no legal standing in the Islamic court.

Malaysia has a parallel legal system for family issues for Muslims and non-Muslims. Disputes sometimes arise when a case straddles both jurisdictions, for example when one party to a marriage becomes a Muslim or if a Muslim attempts to convert out of Islam.

The civil courts have consistently refused to accept jurisdiction in cases such as Shamala’s.

The government has come under pressure in recent years to resolve the impasse. Last week’s pronouncement was its first attempt.

It came after yet another case surfaced. That case, with facts identical to Shamala’s, involved kindergarten teacher M. Indira Gandhi, 34, whose three children were converted by her husband.

The civil High Court has since ordered the three children to remain with her pending a final court order.

Her lawyer A. Sivanesan told The Straits Times that the full case will be heard soon, but in the meantime, he and several MPs plan to push for a more concrete solution.

“We want it to be made clear that a child can’t be converted without the consent of both parents, and that a civil marriage must be resolved under civil law,” he said.

The government has asked the Attorney-General to look into legal amendments.

Sivanesan said the Federal Constitution is currently worded in a way that suggests that one parent can convert a child. He also said the civil law on marriage and divorce had flaws in the manner it treats the non-converting spouse after one party became Muslim.

The number of disputes relating to conversions has been few but the cases have been high profile and contentious, straining racial and religious ties.

Sivanesan said he will be filing another two cases in court soon.

One involves a Hindu father against his estranged wife, who converted their two children to Islam.

The second case is that of a Chinese convert who wants to return to Buddhism as he is suffering from terminal cancer. He had converted to marry but the plans fell through.

The Cabinet pronouncement, while welcomed by non-Muslims, has been met with reservation by the Islamic authorities.

The Malaysian Syariah Lawyers Association deputy president Musa Awang was quoted by The Star as saying that the courts should be free from governmental interference.

The Islamic Development Department director-general Wan Mohamad Sheikh Abdul Aziz said the courts should look at both Islamic and civil laws in such cases.

The Cabinet pronouncement may not spell the end of the long-standing problem.

Comments (12)Add Comment
...
written by Rundukon, April 27, 2009 09:50:58
I am baffed as to why the so-called Ulamaks are silent on the govt announcement. Harussaini, where are you?
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 17
...
written by MasterYoda, April 27, 2009 10:01:05
Dear Cabinet,

Please remove the Syariah courts. Life will be much better.
Please dismantle this 'thing' instituted by the fromer PM...
it has been a burden for the non muslims ...
report abuse
disagree 3
agree 21
...
written by Ken Liew, April 27, 2009 10:09:46
Every LAW have its own unique area. The problem is, when some moron are more powerful then the LAW. when someone said, noone can report this, and tat. then, this and tat will become law... no matter how unreasonable it is....

if someone said, i want ur wife. so u will have to give him ur wife... cos he got the LAWs in his hand. So how unreasonavle it is...... Not even the Sultan or Agong have such power. But someone in Malaysia is capable of it. And tat playman will always play with LAW.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 8
...
written by chanatak, April 27, 2009 10:29:05

Just name me a progessive country under syariah law. Or for that matter, name a people that has progressed under syariah law.

Wherever syariah law is imposed, human rights are ignored in implementation, despite all the sweet sounding propaganda that RPK writes about hudud. Wherever syariah law is in control, problems increase, people's views, opinions and feelings go underground. Education under syariah law regresses, and in countries like Afghanistan schools are even closed.

When a set of law has the above characteristics, how can a people progress. When a set of laws forces learning, free opinion and expression to go underground how can a people progress?


report abuse
disagree 3
agree 10
...
written by quietguy, April 27, 2009 10:40:40
Rundukon, the ulamaks are not silent. Read the latest edition of Harakah, you can read some statements by some ulamaks on the issue, including Harussani. It's just that the mainstream media is not airing their views since it's not totally in line with the BN government's stand.
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 5
...
written by garuda, April 27, 2009 11:18:31
The husbands/wives convert so readily for their own agends!! Never spared a thought for the kids, why do u need to convert them? if you converted thats yr prerogative but why a child?
Surely these converts dont know a thing about their own religion!! and worse they condemn the religion they were brought up in!! Why?
And they get bolder as the UMNO govt protects these converts and give them almost anything!! This is not what conversion is about is it? I am so angered by these hopeless individuals who put their kids to so much problems so early in life!!
And what life would there be if we as non muslims from birth are subjected to syariah law as soon as you convert? does it mean we lose all identity and evrything we had because of conversion to islam?
As we all can see after mahathir took over the country has been greatly divided, and till now its so apparent!!! give another 20yrs and we will implode with tremendous problems arising from all these issues, convertees pls leave the kids alone!!

report abuse
disagree 0
agree 10
...
written by mikewang, April 27, 2009 12:47:20
Laws should not flow from the mouths of the executive.
If this is so, we are no better than China which is trying very hard to shed her image as a country ruled by people and not ruled by law.

If the cabinet is sincere about this, it must initiate the legislative process to engrave that directive into law.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 4
...
written by Barking out loud, April 27, 2009 13:58:06
Malaysia is the only country that I know a person must convert to Islam to marry a Muslim. This is not practiced in Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand or Philippines. Or look at the Middle East, it is also not practiced there as well. I have seen in documentaries in Discovery Channel about People where the husband may be a Christian and the wife a Muslim, or where one spouse is a Jew and the other is a Muslim. There is no such problem there or anywhere, why do we Malaysians have to be more Islamic than anyone else?

I believe that religion comes from the heart. Not through marriage or law. If we have no choice but to practice Syariah laws, should we not practice it like any other country in this world? Do we have to be more pro-Islamic than everyone else?

I can still remember a sad case a few years ago where a fireman husband who died was supposed to have secretly converted to Islam. The authorities took away everything the young family had including the house they were staying in and all that the husband and father left for them. But after much hue and cry, the religious department decided to give back only the house to the family to live in but retain everything else. I believe doing this and leaving a young family destitute in the name of Islam is not Islamic, it is plain cruel. I am not muslim but I believe that Islam is not a cruel religion I'm sure it teaches us to be good and love our fellow humans whether they are Muslim or not.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 13
...
written by imanj, April 27, 2009 15:01:38
Issues and situation happen time and again ,only because it's caused by the individual who acted solely on their own decisions.

Look people,don't you see,the Laws are there,to protect,to follow,to guide,to use. Yes it may be favourable to some and then again unfavourable to others.If the individual adult did not act or decide wisely,then would you probably prompt an unfavourable act of Law.

Please.i'm not defending Islam,just cause i'm a muslim convert.But look at the cases reported.Isn't it a case of adults who doesn't know what they want? They make decision based on selfish emotions,out of spite,insincerity and uncertainty.

While husbands who don't want to be with the wife they married under civil law,why couldn't they just get a divorce before converting to Islam,whether it was genuine for the religion or if it was if they wanted to marry another who was muslim?

Same goes for wives who decided they no longer want to be with husbands in their civil marriage,why convert and impose it on the children born under in civil marriage and where the father could still be legal guardian.

And then there are those who converted because of love,it didn't work out and then they decide 'i want out of the religion'.

Also for those who have disrupted their children's welfare and peace by converting them without consent or discussion by all parties concern.

This isn't a game for heaven's sake.Everyone should know by now that if your preception of Islam is negative,you would be negative on all matters pertaining to this religion.Born muslims are not scott free of their actions,if it's not accepted by the religion.Can we help change how people of authority who chose to execute the teachings or laws of Islam in the manner they do today.

For those wanting at this present day,to become muslim at least in this country,please be absolutely sure that's what you want.Malaysia Laws require both parties marrying to be muslims in Islam.When the marriage fails,it's not possible for a change,even for children.Unless you end up in court fighting against it.Easy said,but really why are non-muslims putting themselves in such situations in the first place.They and unwise decisions made by authorities should be responsible.
And from now on,stop such situations from happening.

report abuse
disagree 0
agree 3
...
written by Sutha, April 27, 2009 16:13:24
Haroosani had his say recently.

He said that if one parent is a moron, the children are automatically morons, according to moronic principles. Very simple and straight forward.

Well, he is a notorious expert on these matters.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2
...
written by Sutha, April 27, 2009 16:28:01
Imanj,

I always respect you because of your fair views. However, on one point I differ.

Laws are there supposedly to protect, guide and to use. But that is not the case here, It did not protect the aggrieved party (Indira, Sharmala, Subacini etc). You may say that it was abuse by the irresponsible husband (and father of the affected children). Don't the officials have enough grey matter to reject the children's conversion without the consent of both parents in every case?

Was it mere zeal on part of the concerned officer to collect the numbers or was the law so skewed that it did not recognise the right of the weaker parent? Why is the department contesting when the parent is in tears seeking justice? Where is the protection offerred by the law?

Any religion can be official but never superior
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 4
...
written by imanj, April 27, 2009 19:24:46
Dear sutha,

Thank you kindly and i understand your need to have a difference of opinion.My comment is actually to state,we are layman that didn't write the laws,of directly involve in making them.I am for the families and parents,who are faced with the predicament of their children's unconsented conversion.

While i say that firstly,adults everywhere who are making decisions without considering consequences,must understand when faced with the laws,there is no turning back.Unless we are in a Country where it seem easy enough to go back and revert anything with no qualms.

For non-muslims who are put themselves and others in such situations,should first go back to the Laws that protect them,before making drastic decisions where only one party seems like,he or she has the Law on their side.

However,the personal family situation got out of hand without first,seeking help from Civil Court,before the husband's conversion.He and like the other case where the mother who became muslims and converted their children are acting out on personal wishes,without a second thought for anyone.In this case the authority who allowed the conversion on their on judgement,had not considered the reaction of the non-muslim parent.

Again,i would think,we should know better not to cause such a grave situation on ourselves and anyone.And for just saying we are human,and 'who cares',is not going to cut it.Stop allowing what isn't unfavourable to fall onto your doorstep.All men and women out there,it's time you acted responsible for the sake of children everywhere.Why would it be so hard to do the right thing??? Are you saying bad and don't care attitude is better??

If anyone was willing to embrace any religion,he or she would not resort to drastic decisions to first hurt anyone."GOD" is superior,it's the Law of man that is made official to control,and it may not be the Law we can accept.So why be bait to it??

report abuse
disagree 1
agree 1

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
 
Some Images Hosted With
Thank You ImageShack!
 BLOGGERS AGAINST ISA

Powered and Optimized for:
Malaysia Today by MT-TEAM