BY IDA LIM
Thursday December 31,
2015
06:54 AM GMT+8
06:54 AM GMT+8
Lawyer Musa Awang
says children who have been unilaterally converted to Islam can seek redress
after they turn 18. ― File pic
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 31
― Children who have been unilaterally converted to Islam will have to wait
until age 18 to ask the Shariah courts to recognise them as non-Muslims, lawyer
Musa Awang has confirmed.
The president of the
Malaysian Shariah Lawyers Association (PGSM) was commenting on the high-profile
case of Hindu mother M. Indira Gandhi’s legal challenge to reverse the
unilateral religious conversion of her three children by her former husband
after he embraced Islam, after losing in a 2-1 decision at the Court of Appeal yesterday.
Musa said that while
a non-Muslim parent cannot initiate a lawsuit in the Shariah courts on behalf
of their children under existing laws, the converted children could do so after
reaching the age of maturity.
“Yes, when they are
18, they [can] apply to the Shariah court to declare that they are no longer
Muslims,” he told Malay Mail Online when contacted yesterday.
He added that there
are many such cases in the Islamic courts.
For those who have
yet to turn 18 however, Musa said they will have to rely on a Muslim family
member or Muslim friend who knows of their situation to file a lawsuit on their
behalf in the Shariah courts.
He clarified that a
Shariah lawyer would not be able to initiate legal proceedings on behalf of
children who are still considered minors.
In Malaysia, those
who reach the age of 18 may determine their own religion.
Musa also said that
while non-Muslim parents like Indira cannot be a party to their converted
children’s legal proceedings in the Shariah courts, they can still file
applications there and ask to present their statement to support their
children’s bid to be recognised as non-Muslims.
Following the civil
court’s deferment to the Shariah court yesterday on child conversions, the
Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and
Taoism (MCCBCHST) questioned the likelihood of non-Muslims being served justice by an Islamic
court when the law prohibits their appearance there.
But Musa disputed the
non-Muslim interfaith panel’s argument.
“Because I feel that
the Shariah courts never refused any application to give statements. You look
at the case of Nyonya Tahir in Malacca, the non-Muslim family came to court and
gave statement. Before the court gave its judgement, they called all the family
members, but they are non-Muslims,” he said, referring to the 2006 landmark
case.
“Not true to say no
justice for non-Muslims,” he added.
The case of Nyonya
Tahir is seen as significant because the Negri Sembilan Shariah Court had
declared the woman of Chinese-Malay descent born Wong Ah Kiu to be non-Muslim
at the time of her death aged 89 as she had been raised a Buddhist and had
practised Buddhism her whole life.
Malaysia’s
constitution stipulates that all Malays are automatically Muslims but those who
convert out are regarded as apostates, which incurs a heavy social stigma.
Musa confirmed that
while non-Muslims cannot be witnesses in the Shariah courts, they can still
appear there to present their views and assist the judges.
He acknowledged that
Shariah courts have no jurisdiction over non-Muslims, but emphasised that its
judges have discretionary powers to call anybody, including non-Muslims, to
court to give a statement, especially when no Muslim witnesses are available in
a case.
The Shariah Courts
Evidence Enactment Perak 2004’s Section 87(2), he said, is an example of state
religious law in which the testimony of non-Muslims can be tendered in a Muslim
case.
Elaborating, he said
a non-Muslim such as a doctor who appears in the Shariah courts can either give
an oral statement or a written statement in the form of an affidavit, and can
be cross-examined and questioned just like a witness despite not having such
status.
He explained that
testimony from non-Muslims is regarded as “bayyinah” while a Muslim’s testimony
is known as “syahadah”, with the difference being that the former is not
binding on the Shariah judges.
In Malaysia, Islamic
matters fall under the jurisdiction of each respective state.Malay Mail
Online’s check of Islamic evidence laws in several states showed that
Muslims who are not deemed as competent to give evidence in the form of
“syahadah” may be able to give “bayyinah” instead.
When evidence from
both Muslims and non-Muslims are available in the same case, the Shariah courts
will take into account the strength of evidence presented and favour the
stronger evidence, he said.