My comments : To the Judges of the Federal Court, be very very careful about whatever is put forth to you as 'Islamic law', 'Islamic shariah', 'god's law' etc.
The jurisprudential and sectarian arguments (of fiqh and mazhab) are NOT what they are put out to be.
They are really man made laws, subject to the faults and fallibilities of interpretations, religious hair splitting and unsubstantiated argument.
Throughout history their arguments have been the "argument of force". Meaning they resort to violence, either state sanctioned violence (police powers) or the violence of the street mobs.
There is certainly no such thing as "force of the argument". There is little or no intellectual content in their arguments. There is certainly, absolutely, with 100% certainty no real evidence of any sort in their arguments.
One Mufti has put it across very precisely : you cannot use logic and intellect when it comes to religious discourse.
So to the Judges of the Federal Court, what you have before you tomorrow are two arguments.
One of them is offering itself to be studied, questioned, criticised, analysed scientifically, willing to be proven or unproven and is prepared to present its case based on logic and intellect.
The other side subscribes to their illogic that you cannot use logic and the intellect to discuss their man made interpretations of religion.
In other words, you must become illogical and non-intellectual if you wish to enter their discourse. They say that this is part of their justice.
In other words, you must become illogical and non-intellectual if you wish to enter their discourse. They say that this is part of their justice.
Here is the news :
12 August 2015
The Federal Court will hear tomorrow an appeal against a landmark decision by the Court of Appeal declaring invalid the state shariah enactment that criminalises cross-dressing by Muslim men. – The Malaysian Insider
legal question which would be deliberated and determined by the Federal Court at the appeal hearing tomorrow.
The question of law which was framed by the court is whether Section 66 of the Shariah Criminal () Enactment 1992 contravened Article 5 (1), Article 8 (1), Article 8 (2), Article 9 (2) and Article 10 (1) (a) of the Federal Constitution.
Article 5 relates to a citizen's right to life and liberty while Article 8 is on equality.
Article 9 deals with prohibition of banishment and the right of a citizen to move around.
Article 10 is concerned with a citizen's right to freedom of expression.
On November 7 last year, the Court of Appeal ..declared invalid and unconstitutional Section 66 of the Shariah Criminal () Enactment 1992 which criminalises Muslim men for cross-dressing.
In their judicial review... artists said Section 66 did not apply to them as they had gender identity disorder.
On the same day, the Federal Court would also hear arguments .. on whether Islamic laws are subjected to the fundamental liberties guaranteed in the Federal Constitution.
The court would hear an appeal ..against a Court of Appeal ruling that non-Muslim lawyers were eligible to practise as shariah lawyers in the shariah courts of the Federal Territories.
The Court of Appeal in the ruling had declared Rule 10 of the Rules of the Shariah Lawyers 1993 mandating that only Muslims could be admitted as shariah lawyers was ultra vires the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993.
The Court of Appeal had overturned a high court decision which disallowed a judicial review application by a non-Muslim lawyer who was seeking to be admitted as shariah lawyer in the Federal Territories.
– Bernama, August 12, 2015.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/apex-court-to-hear-appeal-on-transgender-decision-tomorrow?ref=yfp#sthash.jlvWtrY7.dpuf
On November 7 last year, the Court of Appeal ..declared invalid and unconstitutional Section 66 of the Shariah Criminal () Enactment 1992 which criminalises Muslim men for cross-dressing.
In their judicial review... artists said Section 66 did not apply to them as they had gender identity disorder.
On the same day, the Federal Court would also hear arguments .. on whether Islamic laws are subjected to the fundamental liberties guaranteed in the Federal Constitution.
The court would hear an appeal ..against a Court of Appeal ruling that non-Muslim lawyers were eligible to practise as shariah lawyers in the shariah courts of the Federal Territories.
The Court of Appeal in the ruling had declared Rule 10 of the Rules of the Shariah Lawyers 1993 mandating that only Muslims could be admitted as shariah lawyers was ultra vires the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993.
The Court of Appeal had overturned a high court decision which disallowed a judicial review application by a non-Muslim lawyer who was seeking to be admitted as shariah lawyer in the Federal Territories.
– Bernama, August 12, 2015.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/apex-court-to-hear-appeal-on-transgender-decision-tomorrow?ref=yfp#sthash.jlvWtrY7.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.