`


THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!


 


Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Is ‘parent’ in the Constitution male or female?

If the original English version had meant to give the right to just one of the parents, would the drafters have not said ‘by his mother or father or guardian’?
COMMENT
jamir-khir
By Ravinder Singh
According to Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Jamil Khir Baharom, either parent can give consent for the conversion of a child below 18. He asserts that the proposed law to make it clear that the consent of both parents is required for the conversion of minors will be unconstitutional.
The Malay version of the relevant article i.e. Article 12(4) reads: “(4) Bagi maksud Fasal (3) agama seseorang yang di bawah umur lapan belas tahun hendaklah ditetapkan oleh ibu atau bapanya atau penjaganya.”
The English version states: “For the purposes of Clause 3 the religion of a person under the age of eighteen years shall be decided by his parent or guardian.”
It is the norm that if there is any problem with the Malay translation of a law that was originally in English, the English version must be fallen back upon for the proper meaning.
The English version states “by his parent or guardian.”
Could Jamil enlighten us about the following:
  1. Is “parent” a male or a female?
  2.  Is a child produced by just one parent i.e. either the male or female parent?
  3. Which parent, the male or the female, does the Constitution give the power to, to decide the religion of the child?
  4. A single parent of which religion does the Constitution give this power to – only to a single Muslim parent or to a parent of any race or religion?
  5. What happens if one parent converts the child to one religion and the other parent converts the same child to another religion, as this can be easily done on paper?
  6. Who decides which parent, the male or female, is the one rightly authorised by the Constitution to convert the child’s religion unilaterally as the Constitution is silent on this?
  7. The Constitution says: “by his parent or guardian”. Could Jamil confirm that this means the Clause applies only to boys and not to girls?
If the original English version had meant to give the right to just one of the parents, would the drafters have not said: “by his mother or father or guardian”?
So were the translators correct to translate the words “his parent or guardian” into “ibu atau bapanya atau penjaganya” and not “ibu atau bapa atau penjaga anak laki-laki”? Why did they leave out “his” in the translation?
Shouldn’t the correct translation have been “ibu-bapa atau penjaganya”? Was there mischief in the translation?
I hope Jamil Khir can enlighten us on these issues.
Ravinder Singh is an FMT reader.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.