The cabinet at its meeting today agreed to withdraw the controversial Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Amendment Bill 2013, which has been tabled for its first reading in Parliament.
The bill stirred a hornet’s nest for providing that the permission of one parent alone is sufficient to convert a minor.
In making the announcement, Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin said the status of a child after the father or mother embraces Islam was discussed in depth by the cabinet.
"There are various views that have been taken into consideration by the BN component parties.
The bill stirred a hornet’s nest for providing that the permission of one parent alone is sufficient to convert a minor.
In making the announcement, Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin said the status of a child after the father or mother embraces Islam was discussed in depth by the cabinet."There are various views that have been taken into consideration by the BN component parties.
"Based on this, the cabinet today decided to withdraw the bill. This is to ensure the determination of the religion of the child can be justly resolved," Muhyiddin said in a statement.
With the withdrawal, Muhyiddin said, it would give the government and all parties the chance to scrutinise the law holistically. The government would then table a fresh bill, after it is in agreement among all parties concerned.
The amendment bill was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat on June 26.
Muhyiddin also said that Article 12 (4) of the Federal Constitution states that the religion of a child under the age of 18 has to be decided by the parent or guardian.
Amendment bill based on Subashini case
He said that based on the Federal Court decision in the R Subashini vs T Saravanan case, as cited in the Malaysian Law Journal, the word `parent' was interpreted in the singular.
The amendment to Section 107 (b) in the Administration of Islamic Law (FT) Bill 2013, Muhyiddin said, was based on the provision in the federal constitution and the Subashini case.
Following today's cabinet decision, he said, any consequential amendments to the bill are also withdrawn.
“The government believes Islam is a just religion for all humans and the issue of the status of the religion of the children should be resolved in a just manner, based on the justice principles of Islam,” he added.
Despite what Muhyiddin cited on the Subashini case, veteran lawyer and lawmaker Karpal Singh said yesterday that the 2007 Federal Court ruling on the matter was grammatically wrong.
Bar Council president Christopher Leong had earlier pointed to the move to amend Section 107 (b) as unconstitutional.
MCA, MIC and Gerakan also oppose the controversial bill and have asked for it to be withdrawn and reviewed.
With the withdrawal, Muhyiddin said, it would give the government and all parties the chance to scrutinise the law holistically. The government would then table a fresh bill, after it is in agreement among all parties concerned.
The amendment bill was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat on June 26.
Muhyiddin also said that Article 12 (4) of the Federal Constitution states that the religion of a child under the age of 18 has to be decided by the parent or guardian.
Amendment bill based on Subashini case
He said that based on the Federal Court decision in the R Subashini vs T Saravanan case, as cited in the Malaysian Law Journal, the word `parent' was interpreted in the singular.
The amendment to Section 107 (b) in the Administration of Islamic Law (FT) Bill 2013, Muhyiddin said, was based on the provision in the federal constitution and the Subashini case.
Following today's cabinet decision, he said, any consequential amendments to the bill are also withdrawn.
“The government believes Islam is a just religion for all humans and the issue of the status of the religion of the children should be resolved in a just manner, based on the justice principles of Islam,” he added.
Despite what Muhyiddin cited on the Subashini case, veteran lawyer and lawmaker Karpal Singh said yesterday that the 2007 Federal Court ruling on the matter was grammatically wrong.
Bar Council president Christopher Leong had earlier pointed to the move to amend Section 107 (b) as unconstitutional.
MCA, MIC and Gerakan also oppose the controversial bill and have asked for it to be withdrawn and reviewed.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.