The Malaysian Insider
By Debra Chong
“Abdicating of jurisdiction over such matters will not resolve issues dealing with interfaith,” Ragunath added.
He pointed out that the main issue in the court case concerned a dispute brought by a non-Muslim and must be settled in the civil courts — not a religious court.
“Although the matter may be on religion, in such a situation… a non-Muslim has no locus to appear in the Syariah Court.
“The Federal Constitution states the Syariah Court is for Muslims only. For persons of other faiths, the civil court must entertain and deal with the issue,” he highlighted.
Kaliammal has been involved in a legal tussle with the Federal Territories Islamic Council and the federal government to claim Mount Everest climber Moorthy’s body since his death on December 20, 2005.
She maintained he had kept up Hindu religious practices before falling into a coma, from which he never awoke, and had not once indicated he had changed his faith to Islam.
The High Court ruled it had no power to decide on Islamic conversions and today, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision.
Ragunath disagreed with the ruling but stressed that the processes of the courts must be followed and exhausted fully before considering other steps to address the conflict.
“Unless the court decides otherwise, then the legislation will have to be amended,” he added.
Hindu Sangam president, Mohan Shanmugam, also voiced unhappiness with today’s ruling.
“We’re very upset with the Court of Appeal’s decision. Why should non-Muslims go to Syariah Court? We are Hindu, why should we go to a Muslim court? It’s totally unjustified,” Mohan complained to The Malaysian Insider.
“The civil court has already given its verdict. It’s not a good sign. They’re trying to say the civil court is nothing, that the civil court is only for non-Muslims,” he claimed.
The vocal Hindu chief added that if that was the case, “then Muslims should take their cases to the Syariah court, not only for religious [disputes] but for everything”.
“Even Anwar should go to Syariah,” Mohan noted, referring to the ongoing high-profile prosecution against Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim who is accused of sodomising former male aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
By Debra Chong
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 20 — The Bar Council today charged that the Court of Appeal’s ruling to stand aside in Islamic conversion disputes showed that the civil court was running away from performing its constitutional duty.
Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan said it was now up to the Federal Court to make the right decision on Islamic conversion disputes, after the Court of Appeal said it was powerless when dismissing the bid by widow S. Kaliammal to claim her husband, Sarjen M. Moorthy’s remains from Islamic authorities.
“It’s up to Federal Court now to decide. We look to the Federal Court to make [the] right decision,” he told The Malaysian Insider.
Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan said it was now up to the Federal Court to make the right decision on Islamic conversion disputes, after the Court of Appeal said it was powerless when dismissing the bid by widow S. Kaliammal to claim her husband, Sarjen M. Moorthy’s remains from Islamic authorities.
“It’s up to Federal Court now to decide. We look to the Federal Court to make [the] right decision,” he told The Malaysian Insider.
“Abdicating of jurisdiction over such matters will not resolve issues dealing with interfaith,” Ragunath added.
He pointed out that the main issue in the court case concerned a dispute brought by a non-Muslim and must be settled in the civil courts — not a religious court.
“Although the matter may be on religion, in such a situation… a non-Muslim has no locus to appear in the Syariah Court.
“The Federal Constitution states the Syariah Court is for Muslims only. For persons of other faiths, the civil court must entertain and deal with the issue,” he highlighted.
Kaliammal has been involved in a legal tussle with the Federal Territories Islamic Council and the federal government to claim Mount Everest climber Moorthy’s body since his death on December 20, 2005.
She maintained he had kept up Hindu religious practices before falling into a coma, from which he never awoke, and had not once indicated he had changed his faith to Islam.
The High Court ruled it had no power to decide on Islamic conversions and today, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision.
Ragunath disagreed with the ruling but stressed that the processes of the courts must be followed and exhausted fully before considering other steps to address the conflict.
“Unless the court decides otherwise, then the legislation will have to be amended,” he added.
Hindu Sangam president, Mohan Shanmugam, also voiced unhappiness with today’s ruling.
“We’re very upset with the Court of Appeal’s decision. Why should non-Muslims go to Syariah Court? We are Hindu, why should we go to a Muslim court? It’s totally unjustified,” Mohan complained to The Malaysian Insider.
“The civil court has already given its verdict. It’s not a good sign. They’re trying to say the civil court is nothing, that the civil court is only for non-Muslims,” he claimed.
The vocal Hindu chief added that if that was the case, “then Muslims should take their cases to the Syariah court, not only for religious [disputes] but for everything”.
“Even Anwar should go to Syariah,” Mohan noted, referring to the ongoing high-profile prosecution against Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim who is accused of sodomising former male aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
No comments:
Post a Comment