MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku


Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Amend constitution, law to bring certainty to child conversions, say legal minds

It is possible for another apex court not to follow the pronouncement in Indira Gandhi's case and the safest course is to amend Article 12 (4) of the Federal Constitution to end such conversions, says Sri Ram.
gopal-sri-ram-indira-1PETALING JAYA: The Federal Constitution and the Law Reform Act (Marriage and Divorce) governing non-Muslims must be amended to bring certainty to the Federal Court ruling that both parents must consent to conversion of minor children, a retired judge and lawyers said.
They said nothing would stop another apex court to depart from Monday’s ruling where a five-member bench allowed the appeal of kindergarten teacher M Indira Gandhi to set aside the conversion certificates of her three children.
It also ruled that spouses who have embraced Islam cannot convert their minor children without the consent of the non-converting partner of the civil marriage.
Former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram said it was possible, although not advisable, for another bench of the apex court not to follow the pronouncement in Indira’s case.
“The safest course is for the Federal Constitution to be amended to put the matter beyond doubt,” he said.
Sri Ram was responding to calls to the government to reintroduce clause 88A in the LRA which was withdrawn on Aug 7 by parliament after strong opposition.
Clause 88A states the religion of the child “shall remain as the religion of the parties to the marriage prior to the conversion and that the child can, after turning 18 and with the consent of both parents, convert to Islam.”
On Tuesday, Prime Minister Najib Razak said the government might consider amending the LRA to bring it in accord with the court ruling.
Sri Ram said Article 12 (4) of the constitution, the supreme law of the land, should read that “where a non-Muslim converts to Islam, the religion of his/her minor child of the marriage shall be determined by both parents.
“In the absence of such determination, the child shall be in the religion at the time of its birth.”
He said the government should not have any problem of getting the two-thirds majority, with the support of opposition MPs, as it was a socially beneficial amendment.
“The amendment should not be done from party or religious lines. Anyway, the parties in Barisan Nasional have always been secular,” he added.
Family law practitioner Ravi Nekoo said it would be sufficient to insert section 88A in the LRA to strengthen the judicial pronouncement made in Indira’s case.
“The contentious issue of unilateral conversion has come to a finality following the decision of the highest court in the land. The conundrum may reappear only if another bench decides to depart from the ruling,” said Ravi who is a member of the Bar Council.
He said the courts would have to give effect to the intention of parliament if a written law like the LRA was crystal clear.
Lawyer Balwant Singh Sidhu said judges must uphold the sanctity of the constitution, especially on unilateral conversions.
“They must abide by their oath of office to defend the constitution and not abdicate their responsibilities when it comes to the matter of jurisdiction of the civil court,” he added.
He said non-Muslim marriages were governed by the LRA which was a federal law passed by parliament and only the civil courts had the jurisdiction to dissolve such unions and provide ancillary reliefs such as custody, maintenance and division of property.
Justice Zainun Ali, who delivered the 101-page judgment of the court, said Article 12 (4) which states that the religion of children be determined by their “parent” cannot be given a literal interpretation.
Instead, she said it must be given a broader meaning and purposive approach as the provision fell under Part 11 of the constitution which covered the fundamental liberties of citizens.
Zainun said it must be noted that in translating Article 12 (4), it would appear that the real essence of the English version was eluded.
“The reason ‘parent’ is used in 12 (4) is to provide for a situation where indeed there is only one parent of the child – example a single parent situation. But where both parents exist, then the 11th Schedule shall be relied upon,” said Zainun.
The 11th Schedule in the constitution provides that in interpreting the supreme law of the land, “words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular”.
The ruling is a departure from a controversial 2007 majority judgment of the Federal Court in the case of Subashini Rajasingam v Saravanan Thangathoray, which said that a single parent could convert a child who is aged below 18.
As a consequence of the Subashini case, a spouse who became a Muslim could turn to the shariah court for remedy, including obtaining custody of children. -FMT

Agong confident gov’t can help Malaysians face uncertain economy

The Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Muhammad V, today expressed confidence that the government will be able to come up with new and innovative ways to help the people face the uncertain global economy.
The king said he was happy with the cooperation extended by the private sector and NGOs to the government to realise development plans for the people.
"As we all know, the global economy remains uncertain. This situation will surely have a direct impact on the people, especially those with low incomes,” he said at the investiture in conjunction with the 2018 Federal Territories Day at Istana Negara in Kuala Lumpur.
The king also reminded the people of the importance of unity and expressed the hope that it would be strengthened.
“For Malaysia, which aims to be among the top countries of the world in terms of the economy, the wellbeing of the people and social innovation through the National Transformation 2050, understanding and unity among the people of various races and religions should be well nurtured for the success of the nation,” he said.
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Federal Territories Minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor were also present at the event.
The king reminded civil servants, as the backbone of the government administration, to prioritise integrity in carrying out their duties to ensure that all government plans and policies were implemented properly and effectively.
He said it was hoped that the excellence of the Federal Territories administration could be continued as it set a model for Malaysia in general.
The King also expressed gratitude to the many initiatives of the Federal Territories Ministry, which were being implemented for the well-being of the people in the federal territories.
He named some of the successful initiatives as the "Baiti Jannati" programme to help repair houses and settle the housing loans taken by the hardcore poor, the "Kad Ceria" discount card programme, use of biodegradable products, care for the homeless and management of water.
“I congratulate the Federal Territories Ministry and all the people of the Federal Territories for outstanding achievement in 2017 both in terms of programmes for the people and governance of organisations.
InsyaAllah, by continuing to use creative and comprehensive approaches, including people-centric ways and by going down to the ground for the benefit of society regardless of race, religion and ancestry, the Federal Territories retains excellence with the wellbeing of the people,” he said.
A total of 370 people were conferred awards and medals in conjunction with the 2018 Federal Territories Day.
Employees Provident Fund chairman Samsudin Osman was the sole recipient of the Seri Utama Mahkota Wilayah award, which carries the title "Datuk Seri Utama."
Twenty-two people received the Seri Mahkota Wilayah award that carries the title "Datuk Seri" while 69 received the Panglima Mahkota Wilayah award that carries the title "Datuk."
Thirty-nine people were awarded the Johan Mahkota Wilayah; 71, the Kesatria Mahkota Wilayah; 74, the Ahli Mahkota Wilayah and 94, the Pingat Pangkuan Mahkota Wilayah.
- Bernama

Lawyer: No legal provision for MACC honorary advisors

Lawyer Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla today questioned the legality of how the MACC and the government appointed four honorary advisors for MACC chief commissioner Dzulkifli Ahmad.
Haniff, who has acted for former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad in several cases, said the MACC Act 2009 does not have any provision for the appointment of honorary advisors for the chief commissioner.
He pointed out that the Act's Section 13 already sanctions the appointment of an Advisory Board for Corruption Prevention, which has its members appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

"There is no provision under the Act for honorary advisors to the chief commissioner. There is provision under Section 13 for the board of advisors, but not specifically for chief commissioner Dzulkifli."
"Where is the valid legal power for the formation of such a body to specifically advise Dzulkifli as the chief commissioner and what is the purpose of forming it?" he asked.
Hence, he said, their role and function could be challenged.
It was reported two days ago that former chief justice Zaki Azmi, Indah Water Konsortium Sdn Bhd chairperson Abu Zahar Ujang, Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute director Ramon Navaratnam and Malaysia Crime Prevention Foundation senior vice-chairperson Lee Lam Thye had been appointed as honarary advisers to Dzulkifli effective today until 2020.
According to the MACC, the advisors' role is to provide views and advice to the chief commissioner on operations, prevention, education as well as other matters relating to implementation activities at the request of the chief commissioner.

Haniff said Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and Dzulkifli should explain the appointments further, adding the public may see it as Najib seeking to control the chief commissioner's office, or Dzulkifli wanting to free himself from control by Najib's government.
He also questioned Dzulkifli and Najib's silence over a media report that quoted the Judicial and Legal Service Commission as recommending that Dzulkifli be sacked, following a video purportedly showing him in Bali with a married woman surfacing in the public domain.
Haniff questioned whether this was the reason behind the appointment of the four honarary advisors.
The Judicial and Legal Service commission was said to have made the proposal to the government following the allegations of misconduct made against Dzulkifli.
The allegations are also being investigated by the police under Section 498 of the Penal Code which deals with the enticing of a married woman with the intent of having illicit intercourse.
Prior to being MACC chief commissioner, Dzulkifli was head of the Forfeiture and Anti-Money Laundering Division at the Attorney-General's Chambers.- Mkini

No cheating? Bring in observers then, says Harapan

Pakatan Harapan has challenged Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to invite independent election observers to Malaysia for the next general election to prove the latter's claim that the polls are free from cheating.
The coalition's deputy president Muhyiddin Yassin said this was the only way for Najib to prove his claim that there was "no room" for cheating.
"Harapan urges the government to invite independent election observers from the Commonwealth Secretariat and the United Nations," he said.
Malaysia has never invited established international election observation teams before.
During the 2013 elections, observers from the Election Commission's counterparts in the Asean region were invited, but they were not allowed to make public their findings.
It has been pointed out that such reciprocal arrangements will likely lead to bias.
Muhyiddin said Najib's claim that there was no room for cheating was meaningless, because the "cheating" was already taking place.

For instance, Muhyiddin accused the EC of being in cahoots with BN in the ongoing exercise to redraw electoral boundaries in the ruling party's favour.
"Anyone who studies the electoral maps will know that changes were intentionally made to favour BN. Is this not a form of cheating?" asked Muhyiddin in a statement today.
Secondly, Muhyiddin pointed out that there are thousands of dubious entries in the voter list, often without proper addresses.
Finally, he said the EC now wanted to expand the definition of postal voters, although there was no necessity to do so in previous elections.
"If the government really wanted to allow civil servants to vote, they'd make voting day a public holiday," he said.- Mkini

Armoured van carrying RM4m cash turns turtle

An armoured van carrying about RM4 million in cash turned turtle close to the Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport in Subang this morning.
According to Petaling Jaya police chief Mohd Zani Che Din, the accident near the Kelana Jaya exit of Jalan Lapangan Terbang Subang occurred when a Nissan Livina MPV collided with the van.

According to the MPV driver, the van had crossed in front of her, and she was not able to avoid hitting the van in time.
The collision sent the van into a divider, causing it to flip onto the road.
The drivers of both the MPV and armoured van were unharmed, but two security personnel in the van suffered minor injuries.
"The money in the van was transferred to another van securely," Zani said in a statement today.
The case is currently being investigated by police.


Police peeved by Dr M fan page's 'China police cars' post

Police are not amused by a posting made by a Dr Mahathir Mohamad Facebook fan page questioning why there were police cars with "emblems" from China in Malaysia.
The posting on the "Mahathir The Legend" Facebook page showed two white cars with sirens on top and the words "Police" written in English and Chinese on the sides.
The post then asked why the Home Ministry allowed police cars with Chinese police emblems in the country.
"What is so special about China that they can do this?" the posting wanted to know.
However, Bukit Aman corporate communications chief Asmawati Ahmad clarified the cars were props for a movie being filmed in Putrajaya and meant for cinemas in China.
"The film is about the life of a police officer in the fictitious 'Han City' and is for screening in China.
"Police take seriously the allegations and questions raised by the Facebook page because it clearly has ill-intent and tries to create a negative perception towards a government agency," Asmawati (below) said in a statement today.

She advised the public to use social media responsibly and to verify the things they intend to post before spreading material that can cause public unease.- Mkini


BUTTERWORTH: The 14-year-old schoolgirl, who tried to hang herself after being accused of stealing a teacher’s handphone, has died.
Malaysian Tamilar Kural president David Marshel, who has been following the case since it happened, confirmed that the girl died in Seberang Jaya Hospital at about 3.30am on Thursday (Feb 1).
“A post-mortem will be carried out this morning before the family members are allowed to claim her body,” he said when contacted.
Marshel added that he is at the hospital to help the family with the procedures.
The girl tried to hang herself with a shawl at her house a few hours after being accused of stealing her teacher’s handphone last Wednesday (Jan 24).
She left a note to her parents saying that she did not steal the phone.
The teenage girl, who is the youngest of four siblings, also said she did not want to cause her family any more trouble.
She had been clinging on to life at the Seberang Jaya Hospital’s intensive care unit comatose with brain damage.
Her father, who is in his 50s, said his daughter was brought home by the class teacher and her husband at about 6.15pm.
“They said that the theft was captured on CCTV but they could not confirm whether the girl in the footage was my daughter.
“And my daughter denied that she stole the phone when I asked her,” said the former cook during an interview last week.
He said his daughter later locked herself in the room and when he opened the door, he found her unconscious with a shawl around her neck tied to some piping.
Those in need of a sympathetic ear can call Befrienders in the Klang Valley (03-7956 8145) and Penang (04-281 5161/281 1108).
They can also email sam@befrienders.org.my.
A 13-YEAR-OLD girl who attempted suicide after being accused of stealing a teacher’s handphone has died.
M. Vasanthapiriya died about 3.30am today after lying in coma at the Seberang Jaya Hospital’s intensive care unit for two weeks.
Malaysian Tamilar Kural president David Marshel said the girl’s family were currently claiming the body at the hospital.
The Nibong Tebal SMK Methodist pupil was accused of stealing a teacher’s iPhone 6 at school on January 24. She was reportedly questioned by three teachers, including the one who said her smartphone was stolen.
When the parents returned later at night, Vasanthapiriya did not answer after they called her repeatedly. The father broke into the room and found the teen hanged to a pipe.
She was still alive when they found her. She reportedly left a suicide note, saying she did not steal her teacher’s phone. She also said goodbye to her parents and grandmother.
The Penang education department launched an investigation into the case.

Judiciary has upheld shared commitment of 1957

The decision of the Federal Court is a landmark constitutional decision. This article will only focus on the first part of the judgment, i.e. the jurisdiction of the civil and syariah courts
The problem can be traced back to the 1980s. The rise of Islamisation and the attack on the judiciary eventually culminated in an amendment to the Federal Constitution on March 17, 1988.
The term “judicial power” was removed from Article 121(1) and clause (1A) was added to provide for the exclusive jurisdiction of the syariah courts.
The amendment had an apparent impact on how the courts approached matters on Islamic administration. Generally, the courts would refrain from exercising their jurisdiction over such matters even when there were clear constitutional violations.
The strong observations of the former lord president, Salleh Abas, in Che Omar bin Che Soh v Public Prosecutor[1988] 2 MLJ 55 (“Che Omar”), to “set aside personal feelings” when wearing the hat of a judge was unfortunately forgotten.
Though some decisions had attempted to solve the perceived dichotomy, the issue remained. The courts still declined jurisdiction the moment the matter was one concerning the administration of Islam.
The Federal Court has finally made a firm stand. It first started with the decision in Semenyih Jaya Sdn Bhd v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat & Another Appeal, where the court declared that the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary are part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
The Federal Court effectively struck down the amendment to the Article 121(1). However, the wider concepts of separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary are nothing but meaningless forms without the necessary power to realize them.
That power is termed as ‘judicial review’, i.e. the power of the courts to review the actions of public bodies. This aspect has been comprehensively dealt with by the Federal Court in Indira Gandhi.
Many have erroneously placed the Syariah courts on par with the civil courts. This proposition does violence to the Constitution. The following observations by the Federal Court in Indira Gandhi are pertinent:
The power of the courts of judicial review forms part of the basic structure and cannot be limited by any law, including an amendment to the Constitution. That power cannot be given to any other tribunal.
Only the civil courts can determine matters concerning constitutional and administrative issues, including the actions of Islamic bodies. This also includes the interpretation of “legislation enacted for the administration of Muslim Law”.
Syariah courts are creatures of statute in that their existence and jurisdiction is dependent on the state legislature. Such jurisdiction must be expressly provided for within the ambit of Item 1 in the State List and can only extend over persons professing the religion of Islam.
The jurisdiction of the syariah courts when it comes to Islamic law is confined to its private aspect and “does not extend to its public one”.
Judicial power cannot be vested in the syariah courts as are constituted as a “superior court” within the meaning of the Constitution.
Importantly, the Federal Court questioned its earlier decisions in Lina Joy v Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (“Lina Joy”) and Haji Raimi bin Abdullah v Siti Hasnah Vangarama bt Abdullah, terming the latter as being “unduly simplistic”.
Just because matters of conversion involve Islamic law and practice, it does not mean that the civil courts do not have jurisdiction. The civil courts have jurisdiction as long as the matter involves a constitutional issue.
As I see it, the following are the larger implications from the said decision.
Ouster clauses cannot be interpreted to oust the jurisdiction of the courts to review decisions on the grounds of illegality, proportionality, reasonableness and procedural impropriety.
Preliminary objections on the basis of jurisdiction when the underlying matter concerns constitutional issues should no longer be entertained.
Section 66A of the Selangor Administration of Islamic Law Enactment which confers judicial review powers to the Syariah Court must be reviewed.
The court’s observation that Islamic law cannot extend to its public aspect has huge implications. This reinforces Che Omar, which means Islamic law must be confined to personal law.
I believe this puts the “hudud” debate to rest. The states do not have the power to legislate “hudud” as it pertains to the offences that are public in nature.
This would also put the status of many of the existing Islamic criminal offences in doubt, as they mostly pertain to public law (for a detailed analysis, see this article on Confronting the Constitutionality of Hudud.
The courts observation on conversion matters is significant. The court cited Richard Malanjum CJSS’s dissent in Lina Joy with approval, where his lordship said:
“Hence when jurisdictional issues arise civil courts are not required to abdicate their constitutional function. Legislation criminalising apostasy or limiting the scope of the provisions of the fundamental liberties as enshrined in the Constitution are constitutional issues in nature which only the civil courts have jurisdiction to determine”.
This necessarily means that the question of whether a person professes the religion of Islam, being one that involves the constitutional right to profess (or not to profess) a religion and the right to freedom of expression, can be dealt with by the civil courts. This requires further legal analysis which will not be dealt with here.
The larger significance of this decision is that it clarifies the secular nature of the Constitution. For too long has our country been plagued with religious extremism. The judiciary has finally taken a stand.
The institution has upheld our shared commitment that we undertook in 1957 when we declared ourselves citizens of an independent nation. That commitment pertained to an essential objective of inter-communal co-operation and national unity, focused on equality of all people regardless of race and religion.
The judiciary has put aside its personal convictions and spoken up to defend the Constitution. It is time all of us do the same, regardless of our religious beliefs.- Mkini


SHAH ALAM – Veteran Umno leader Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah has alleged that the political exploitation of Islam is usually the work of leaders without grounding in the religion, and they include Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who established Jakim, the federal department for Islamic development.
Jakim was a result of Umno’s attempt to out-Islamise PAS and its establishment was unconstitutional, the Gua Musang MP told FMT in a recent interview.
He said Mahathir saw PAS as a threat when he was in power. “So he went on with his Islamic programmes, setting up Jakim, for instance.”
He said those Umno politicians who joined the “who-is-more-Islamic” race were mostly people who lacked Islamic knowledge to any appreciable depth. “That’s why they go all out on religion, to compensate for what they lack, just like Mahathir.”
Jakim’s establishment was formally announced in 1997. It is a unit of the Prime Minister’s Department. Among its responsibilities is to determine the halal validity of products from the consumer food sector, which is worth billions of ringgit.
Ku Li also referred to the “Inculcation of Islamic Values” policy announced by Mahathir soon after he became prime minister in 1981.
The policy became more aggressive after firebrand Islamist leader Anwar Ibrahim joined Umno a year later, in what was then considered a major catch by the Malay party in its bid to neutralise the influence of PAS, which had begun to promote its idea of an Islamic state.
According to Ku Li, Umno has no need for such a policy .
“Umno is already Islamic,” he said. “You need not tell the world that we are Islamic. We are already Muslims. And there’s no such thing as extreme Islam or moderate Islam. Islam is Islam.”
He said many of the former prime minister’s moves in the name of Islam were “just to show that Umno is more Islamic” than PAS.
He disagreed with a suggestion that Umno, as a party, was leaning towards regressive Islamic conservatism.
He acknowledged that some of the party’s leaders were promoting such conservatism, but he said this was not the case with those at the grassroots. “Just go to the kampungs and talk to the Umno leaders there,” he added.
Ku Li and Mahathir were pitted in a bitter battle for the Umno presidency in 1987. This led to a break-up of the ruling party between the pro-Mahathir “Team A” and pro-Razaleigh “Team B”.
The Kelantan prince is not the first to question Jakim’s status, which has frequently been accused of promoting extreme Islamic conservatism.
One prominent critic is Sultan Ibrahim of Johor, who in 2015 questioned the huge annual budget allocations for the department.
“We are the heads of religion in our own states,” the sultan has been quoted as saying in a press interview. “Jakim can give advice or propose guidelines but it is up to us whether we want to accept it or not.”
Late last year, Jakim again came under attack from the Johor ruler after a preacher in its employment, Zamihan Mat Zin, criticised the palace’s order to close down a Muslim-only laundrette in the state.
Three years ago, former MP Tawfik Ismail suggested that Jakim be abolished, sparking a debate on its constitutionality.
Excerpts from the interview: Ku Li on PAS
FMT: You have first hand experience in dealing with PAS. In fact with your help, PAS won Kelantan in 1990, and for the last five general elections, it’s still with PAS.
Ku Li: It’s not my help, it was the Kelantan people’s help. They were upset with Mahathir whom they thought cheated me out of the election for the presidency of Umno. So the Kelantan people said, “Now I want you to be in PAS”. I could sense it, they wanted to teach Mahathir a lesson, and so they went in droves and supported PAS.
FMT: Strange bedfellows these days. We see Umno and PAS are becoming closer.
Ku Li: For limited programmes, like in the Rohingya issue, to help Al-Azhar graduates.
FMT: But the fact is there is a marked difference with the rhetoric coming from PAS top leaders these days when it comes to Umno…
Ku Li: But we’re still not one!
FMT: But what would your advice be for Umno when dealing with PAS, whether for politics or not?
Ku Li: For the sake of society, we should not think too much of PAS’s extremist views, because it divides society and also the Muslims. We cannot tolerate that. We live in a multiracial society that must have tolerance and unity. That’s what Umno wants. Umno might be fighting for Malays, because the Malays were left behind by the British. But that’s history now. The Malays are coming into society now so let’s be together.
FMT: Multiracial, tolerance, these are words a lot of Malaysians want to hear. But then you see the hardline position taken by the ruling party.
Ku Li: That’s by one or two people, not a party policy.
FMT: But they are in the senior leadership positions…
Ku Li: Because they have power. People with executive authority must not act independently and exercise discretionary powers. There should not be high-handedness in dealing with things. Like the Attorney-General, he can say whether there is a case or no case, whether you can be hung or not hung. This is the British system. It’s good, but unless we follow the law to the letter, people tend to abuse their position.
Ku Li on religious conservatism
FMT: Do you think that Umno is leaning towards more “conservative” Islam?
Ku Li: Not Umno, but the leaders. They are able to wean the influence because they have power. How long they are going to be there?
FMT: But Umno has become more conservative now.
Ku Li: As reflected by the thoughts of a few. Not the general members. Go to the kampungs and talk to the Umno leaders there. Now it’s top-down, not from bottom-up. I believe in the bottom-up, so did Tunku Abdul Rahman. So was Dato Onn, to listen to the people.
– http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

Ku Li : JakIm Institusi "Haram" (Melanggar Perlembagaan Penjajah)

Ku Li :   Jakim (is) result of Umno’s attempt to out-Islamise PAS 
political exploitation of Islam without grounding in religion
its establishment unconstitutional, Gua Musang MP told FMT 
Jakim - federal department for Islamic development.

Ku Li not first to question Jakim’s status
Jakim frequently accused of promoting extreme conservatism
prominent critic is Sultan Ibrahim of Johor
questioned huge budget for Jakim

last year attack by ruler after Jakim preacher criticised palace
closing down Muslim-only laundrette in Johor

3 yrs ago former MP Tawfik Ismail suggest abolish Jakim 
sparking debate on its constitutionality

Mahathir saw PAS as threat 
So set up Jakim
Umno joined “who-is-more-Islamic” race 
lacked Islamic knowledge to any appreciable depth
they go all out on religion, to compensate what they lack

Jakim established 1997
unit of PM's Dept 

Ku Li referred “Inculcation of Islamic Values” policy 
more aggressive after Islamist Anwar Ibrahim joined Umno 
Umno has no need for such a policy 

You need not tell the world we are Islamic 
We are already Muslims 
Islam is Islam

“just to show Umno more Islamic” than PAS

My comments :  Indeed the existence of JAKIM is unconstitutional. Someone should challenge this in Court. 

Before the Perlembagaan Penjajah was drafted,  religion was (and still is) the domain of the Malay Rulers of the respective States. Religion is a State matter.

When the Perjanjian Persekutuan (1948) and then the Perlembagaan Penjajah were drafted the Malay Rulers were clearly stated as being the heads of religion in their respective States.

There is no such thing as a Federal Authority over religion in Malaysia.

That is why Kassim Ahmad was acquitted of his charges. The Jakim clowns had him arrested in Kedah and then transported him to KL. The Court ruled that this was against the law.  

Because  there are no federal religious laws. There is no inter-state religious authority. ALL religious laws are in State only and are only applicable inside the State. 

That is why the Pusat Pemulihan Akidah are also unconstitutional. You cannot arrest someone for a religious offence in Perak and send him to the Pusat Pemulihan Akidah in Negeri Sembilan. That is unconstitutional.

In practise they overcome such breaches by using the Ministry of Home Affairs. 
For example some people who are summoned to appear before Jakim receive letters using the letterhead of the Ministry of Home Affairs.  They have to do this because Jakim has no authority. They have no power. That is why they use the Ministry of Home Affairs letterheads. 

But this is questionable and most likely against the Perlembagaan Penjajah.  Someone must challenge this in the Courts.

Same with Jakim's halal stickers.  Jakim earns millions of Ringgit from the halal stickers. 

Jakim has no power or authority to take any action to impose the halal stickers. 

It is unconstitutional for Jakim to even issue the halal stickers in the first place. 
Who gave them the authority to issue halal stickers and collect money from the people?
Again this should also be challenged in the Courts.

If Jakim issues halal stickers, each and every state can also issue their own halal stickers.   Why give the monopoly to Jakim. 

There is no law that can prevent a State from also issuing its own halal stickers.

Also since the Sultan of Johor has banned Jakim from Johor this means that Jakim's halal stickers are unlawful in the State of Johor.  

Johor must start issuing its own halal stickers.

Tengku Razaleigh is correct when he says that Jakim is unconstitutional. 

The easiest option is to just shut down Jakim.