MCA takes Jamil to task over unilateral conversions row

The MCA today hit out at Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom for stating that laws that ban unilateral conversions contradict the Federal Constitution.

The party's religious harmony bureau chairperson, Ti Lian Ker, said Jamil should know that the Federal Constitution was constructed with the intention of protecting the rights of all races and religions, including the minorities.

“Hence, it is important for the executive as well as for all citizens to uphold the spirit of the Federal Constitution; recognise both parents’ rights to determine religion even in a conversion-reversion scenario,” he said.

Jamil has said in his written reply in Parliament today that “legislation that bans unilateral conversion contradicts Article 12 (4) of the (Federal Constitution), which allows the father or mother to decide the child’s faith”.

Said Ti: “The conversion-reversion of minor children should be legally protected rather than the one-way street of embracing a religion registered with the state religious authorities,” he said.

Ti added that if a muallaf (recently converted Muslim) is legally permitted to run off to state religious departments to unilaterally convert a minor in haste, likewise the non-converting spouse has the right to revert the minor's child religion.

He said that for added security, legislation must be enacted whereby the NRD and state religious departments are not to convert any minor child unless both parents are physically present along with the minor children, and the non-muallaf spouse has given written consent.

Ti pointed out that MCA's position is that Article 12 (4) on determining the minor child’s religion should be read as “ibubapa” and not “ibu atau bapa.”

There has been continuing conflict following the decision made by former Federal Court judge Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman in the S Subashini case which interprets the phrase “ibu bapa” to mean either parents and not both parents.

Ti said that if a dispute arises, then the child’s faith must remain status quo as announced by the then de facto law minister Nazri Abdul Aziz in 2009.

“MCA emphasises that in such cases of dispute, only when the child has reached the majority age of 18, can the minor child select his/her own creed.”

It should be pointed out that the Federal Constitution clearly states that that the minor child’s religion will be decided by the 'ibu-bapa', which indicates in the plural sense.

“It is urgent to find out how along the way, over the years, in a matter that is so crucial, how 'ibu-bapa' in its plural form was mysteriously and clandestinely reprinted, reinterpreted to be 'ibu atau bapa' or in its singular form without the lawmakers and the senate noticing it.

“Was it a deliberately amended by overzealous 'little Napoleons' out to expand the Muslim population?

“The reinterpretation enables muallaf to legally (albeit unethically) exploit the mysterious re-interpretation to unethically convert the minor children without informing the non-converting spouse,” he said.

Ti also pointed out that Section 2(95) of Article 160(1) of the Eleventh Schedule of the Federal Constitution also states that “words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular”.

The Federal Court would decide on the finality of the issue when it hears the appeal by kindergarten teacher M Indira Gandhi on the third question of law posed: whether the mother and father (if both are still surviving) of a child of a civil marriage must give consent before a certificate of conversion to Islam can be issued in respect of the child.-Mkini