The National Registration Department's (NRD) requirement for Zarina Abdul Majid to seek a declaration from the Syariah High Court that she is not Muslim is unconstitutional.
Beruas MP Ngeh Koo Ham said this is in light of the federal constitution that allows a person to choose his own religion.
"Such a requirement contravenes Article 11(1) ... as (it implies) the decision to decide one’s faith now rests with a third party (the court)," said Ngeh.
A simple statutory declaration from her should suffice, he added.
“I call on the NRD to accept a statutory declaration as sufficient proof of the choice of the religion or personal faith that a person has made.
“Once the religious status of a person has been resolved through the change of the particulars in his or her identity card, the issues and conflicts in the many cases that we have seen will resolve on its own,” he said in a statement today.
Zarina, a practising Hindu as raised by her mother, had her official religious status changed to Muslim by her estranged father without her knowledge.
On June 1 Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (Jais) distupted herwedding at a Hindu temple in Petaling Jaya and detained her on assumption she is Muslim, citing alleged complaints.
Problem caused by society
Since then, Jais has reportedly advised her to make a third attempt to ask the NRD to change her religious status, while the Syariah Lawyers Association (PGSM) has said her predicament could be resolved if she applies for the Syariah Court to declare that she is not a Muslim.
Ngeh said cases like Zarina’s is but one of many, and many couples cohabit without marrying because society prohibits them from doing so.
“Many children have been born out of wedlock through such unions.
“We scorn on unmarried couples and children born out of wedlock, but in these cases our society must be scorned upon and even stand condemned for causing miseries to such couples who want to be married but are prevented from doing so,” he said.
The DAP deputy secretary-general reminded that Article 11(1) of the federal constitution also allows for Muslims to leave Islam.
He said that just as another Article 11(4) allows the government to restrict the propagation of other religions amongst Muslims, it does not bar Muslims from leaving the faith.
“Non-Muslims must accept the fact that laws may be passed to prohibit them from propagating their religion to people of the Muslim faith.
“Muslims must accept the fact that if a Muslim on his or her own free will wants to leave the religion of Islam he or she must be allowed to do so.
“This god-given freedom of choice and guaranteed by our federal constitution must be respected,” he said.
'Follow the constitution'
He argued that the constitution has clearly defined the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in the country, and many cases conflict between the two groups can be avoided if its provisions are followed.
In case one of the parents of a child coverts to another religion, for example, he said the religion of the child should be determined by the parent who has custody of the child until the child reaches the age of 18, after which the child can choose his own religion.
He cited Article 12(4) of the federal constitution that states the religion of a person below the age of 18 shall be determined by “his parent or guardian”.
As for determining which set of personal laws should apply when one person in a marriage decides to convert in or out of Islam, Ngeh argued that it should depend on the laws under which the marriage was solemnised.
“If they were married as non-Muslims, the Law Reform (Divorce and Marriage) Act 1976 will apply and if the couple married as Muslims, the Islamic laws will apply.
“Marriage is a form of contract between the couple and therefore, it is fair that the law be applied shall be the law under which the marriage was celebrated or contracted,” he said.
Beruas MP Ngeh Koo Ham said this is in light of the federal constitution that allows a person to choose his own religion.
"Such a requirement contravenes Article 11(1) ... as (it implies) the decision to decide one’s faith now rests with a third party (the court)," said Ngeh.A simple statutory declaration from her should suffice, he added.
“I call on the NRD to accept a statutory declaration as sufficient proof of the choice of the religion or personal faith that a person has made.
“Once the religious status of a person has been resolved through the change of the particulars in his or her identity card, the issues and conflicts in the many cases that we have seen will resolve on its own,” he said in a statement today.
Zarina, a practising Hindu as raised by her mother, had her official religious status changed to Muslim by her estranged father without her knowledge.
On June 1 Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (Jais) distupted herwedding at a Hindu temple in Petaling Jaya and detained her on assumption she is Muslim, citing alleged complaints.
Problem caused by society
Since then, Jais has reportedly advised her to make a third attempt to ask the NRD to change her religious status, while the Syariah Lawyers Association (PGSM) has said her predicament could be resolved if she applies for the Syariah Court to declare that she is not a Muslim.
Ngeh said cases like Zarina’s is but one of many, and many couples cohabit without marrying because society prohibits them from doing so.
“Many children have been born out of wedlock through such unions.
“We scorn on unmarried couples and children born out of wedlock, but in these cases our society must be scorned upon and even stand condemned for causing miseries to such couples who want to be married but are prevented from doing so,” he said.
The DAP deputy secretary-general reminded that Article 11(1) of the federal constitution also allows for Muslims to leave Islam.
He said that just as another Article 11(4) allows the government to restrict the propagation of other religions amongst Muslims, it does not bar Muslims from leaving the faith.
“Non-Muslims must accept the fact that laws may be passed to prohibit them from propagating their religion to people of the Muslim faith.
“Muslims must accept the fact that if a Muslim on his or her own free will wants to leave the religion of Islam he or she must be allowed to do so.
“This god-given freedom of choice and guaranteed by our federal constitution must be respected,” he said.
'Follow the constitution'
He argued that the constitution has clearly defined the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in the country, and many cases conflict between the two groups can be avoided if its provisions are followed.
In case one of the parents of a child coverts to another religion, for example, he said the religion of the child should be determined by the parent who has custody of the child until the child reaches the age of 18, after which the child can choose his own religion.
He cited Article 12(4) of the federal constitution that states the religion of a person below the age of 18 shall be determined by “his parent or guardian”.
As for determining which set of personal laws should apply when one person in a marriage decides to convert in or out of Islam, Ngeh argued that it should depend on the laws under which the marriage was solemnised.
“If they were married as non-Muslims, the Law Reform (Divorce and Marriage) Act 1976 will apply and if the couple married as Muslims, the Islamic laws will apply.
“Marriage is a form of contract between the couple and therefore, it is fair that the law be applied shall be the law under which the marriage was celebrated or contracted,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.