The Star
by M. MAGESWARI
The children — Saktiwaran, 10, and nine-year-old Theiviswaran — were born before Dr Jeyaganesh, also known as Muhammad Ridzwan Mogarajah, embraced Islam in 2002. Days after his own conversion, he converted the boys to Islam.
Shamala, 38, married Dr Jeyaganesh, 42, in 1998 according to Hindu rites. The marriage was registered under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act.
Muralee, in raising a prelimary objection yesterday, also submitted that a High Court had on May 6, 2004 granted leave to commence contempt proceedings against Shamala and ordered her to bring the children back to the country.
“The appellant (Shamala) left Malaysia on April 16, 2004. She fled to Thailand through Padang Besar and then to Australia.”
Thus, Muralee said, Shamala had breached the High Court order and that she should not be heard in Federal Court “until she purges the contempt order”.
Dr Jeyaganesh, who was present yesterday, had not seen his children since 2004, Muralee said.
The Federal Court was supposed to hear five questions of law, including over constitutional rights on the conversion of children.Shamala’s lead counsel Datuk Dr Cyrus Das submitted that the right to be heard in a court of law was too fundamental for a person to be shut out.
Furthermore, he said the High Court had found Dr Jeyaganesh to be in contempt over maintenance payment for his children.
He said the High Court had ordered Dr Jeyaganesh to pay RM250 for each child. Another High Court renewed the order by asking him to allocate 20% of his income for his children, he added.
“The husband is in contempt as he did not pay according to this. We have to see the conduct of both persons,” he said.
Dr Cyrus argued that it would be in the best interest of justice for the apex court to hear the wife’s part as it would have an impact on other similar pending cases.
“It is about family life. She wants the Federal Court to decide whether it is constitutional for one parent to unilaterally convert the religion of the children in a marriage. That is a very fundamental question and it is an opportunity for the apex court to make a conclusive finding on this.”
Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi, who led a five-man panel, reserved ruling after hearing submissions by both parties on the preliminary objection.
“The issues are quite complex. We would like to read through the cases and understand the issues and law properly,” he said, adding that they might need three weeks to do so.
Lawyer Azmi Mohd Rais, who acted for Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council, adopted the preliminary objection, saying that it was in line with syariah principles.
Shamala’s brother Dr S. Sharimalan and her parents told the media that they had been praying for her, adding that they had not seen her for the past six years and that she had been living in fear.
by M. MAGESWARI
PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court will determine whether a Hindu woman has a right to be heard in the apex court after she is alleged to have breached visitation rights given to her convert husband over their two sons.
The lawyer for Muslim convert Dr M. Jeyaganesh in a custody battle with his wife has argued that she has no right to be heard in the Federal Court because she is facing contempt proceedings.
S. Shamala, who is in Australia with the boys, failed to bring the children to Malaysia so that Dr Jeyaganesh could have access to them, thus breaching an interim access order dated April 17, 2003, said lawyer Muralee Menon.
The lawyer for Muslim convert Dr M. Jeyaganesh in a custody battle with his wife has argued that she has no right to be heard in the Federal Court because she is facing contempt proceedings.
S. Shamala, who is in Australia with the boys, failed to bring the children to Malaysia so that Dr Jeyaganesh could have access to them, thus breaching an interim access order dated April 17, 2003, said lawyer Muralee Menon.
The children — Saktiwaran, 10, and nine-year-old Theiviswaran — were born before Dr Jeyaganesh, also known as Muhammad Ridzwan Mogarajah, embraced Islam in 2002. Days after his own conversion, he converted the boys to Islam.
Shamala, 38, married Dr Jeyaganesh, 42, in 1998 according to Hindu rites. The marriage was registered under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act.
Muralee, in raising a prelimary objection yesterday, also submitted that a High Court had on May 6, 2004 granted leave to commence contempt proceedings against Shamala and ordered her to bring the children back to the country.
“The appellant (Shamala) left Malaysia on April 16, 2004. She fled to Thailand through Padang Besar and then to Australia.”
Thus, Muralee said, Shamala had breached the High Court order and that she should not be heard in Federal Court “until she purges the contempt order”.
Dr Jeyaganesh, who was present yesterday, had not seen his children since 2004, Muralee said.
The Federal Court was supposed to hear five questions of law, including over constitutional rights on the conversion of children.Shamala’s lead counsel Datuk Dr Cyrus Das submitted that the right to be heard in a court of law was too fundamental for a person to be shut out.
Furthermore, he said the High Court had found Dr Jeyaganesh to be in contempt over maintenance payment for his children.
He said the High Court had ordered Dr Jeyaganesh to pay RM250 for each child. Another High Court renewed the order by asking him to allocate 20% of his income for his children, he added.
“The husband is in contempt as he did not pay according to this. We have to see the conduct of both persons,” he said.
Dr Cyrus argued that it would be in the best interest of justice for the apex court to hear the wife’s part as it would have an impact on other similar pending cases.
“It is about family life. She wants the Federal Court to decide whether it is constitutional for one parent to unilaterally convert the religion of the children in a marriage. That is a very fundamental question and it is an opportunity for the apex court to make a conclusive finding on this.”
Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi, who led a five-man panel, reserved ruling after hearing submissions by both parties on the preliminary objection.
“The issues are quite complex. We would like to read through the cases and understand the issues and law properly,” he said, adding that they might need three weeks to do so.
Lawyer Azmi Mohd Rais, who acted for Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council, adopted the preliminary objection, saying that it was in line with syariah principles.
Shamala’s brother Dr S. Sharimalan and her parents told the media that they had been praying for her, adding that they had not seen her for the past six years and that she had been living in fear.
No comments:
Post a Comment