Maria Hertogh Conversion

 

The year is 1950.

You are a young Malay man, currently standing outside the Tanjong Pagar Railway station in Singapore, waiting to receive relatives from Trengganu. Two days ago, you received news that a distant aunt Aminah Binte Mohamed and her 13-year-old daughter Nadra are coming down to Singapore urgently to settle some "family issues".

You have not seen Nadra since your last trip to Trengganu but you have a very distinct memory of her Eurasian features and halting Malay. That's because Nadra was adopted by Cik Aminah, your mother told you.

You learnt that Nadra, originally Maria 'Bertha' Hertogh, was born to Dutch-Eurasian parents in Java. After her father was taken as a prisoner of war during the Japanese occupation, Nadra's biological mother gave her up to Cik Aminah. Both Cik Aminah and Nadra moved to Kemaman, Trengganu after the war and never heard from the Hertoghs again.

Cik Aminah and Nadra arrived promptly on the seven o'clock train. You notice their tear-stained faces and wonder what is wrong. Nevertheless, you salaam Cik Aminah dutifully before bringing her and Nadra over to your place.

Once settled in at your home, Cik Aminah started to tell her story. It turns out that after the war ended, the Hertogh family enlisted the help of Dutch officials to help look for Nadra. They searched all over the region and finally found her in Kemaman. Now the Dutch have demanded that Cik Aminah bring Nadra to Singapore where she will be taken back to her biological parents.

"What am I going to do?" Cik Aminah weeps uncontrollably while Nadra hugs her tightly.

Round One: The court ruled in favour of the Dutch

The following week, on 17 May 1950, Cik Aminah and Nadra appear in court.

There was a palpable tension in the air. You glance over at the mother and daughter pair huddled together, and whisper a little prayer for them. Unfortunately, the court ruled in favour of the Dutch. Nadra has to return to the Hertoghs.

Cik Aminah is devastated but she is determined to appeal against the court's decision. In the meantime, while waiting for the appeal to be heard, the court orders Nadra to be sent to the Social Welfare quarters at York Hill for safekeeping.

During your calls with Nadra, you learn that a 22-year-old English tutor has been assigned to her at York Hill. His name is Inche Mansoor Adabi and Nadra seems to be enjoying her lessons with him a lot. It has been awhile since you heard laughter in her voice.

Round 2: The court overturns the earlier ruling

Two months later, on 28 July 1950, the court hears Cik Aminah's appeal and overturns the earlier decision. Nadra is now reunited with Cik Aminah. The family and Malay community celebrate with a belated Hari Raya feast at the home of the President of the Muslim Welfare Association.

The atmosphere was electrifying as guests after guests from the community came by and celebrated with Cik Aminah and Nadra. There was abundant music and food -- such a stark difference from her two months at York Hill.

Marriage

Shortly after Cik Aminah's successful appeal, Nadra announces that she is getting married to her English tutor, Mansoor Adabi. Cik Aminah is overjoyed that she has found a respectable husband.

Privately, you wonder if it is a wise decision to let a 13-year-old girl get married to a 22-year old man. While it is permissible under Muslim laws, some in the Malay community raise concerns about marriage.

The marriage takes place on August 1, 1950. It is a grand affair since amidst the ongoing court proceedings, Nadra is becoming something of a national celebrity. Reporters from the newspapers are rushing to snap pictures of the newlyweds while loud music entertains guests who came from all over Malaya. Little did everyone know that soon the tides would turn.

The beginning of the end

It is now the morning of November 15, 1950. The custody fight for Nadra has been renewed for about a month now. Nadra's biological mother, Adeline Hertogh, comes over for a visit, to convince Nadra to stop the fighting and go home with her.

The tense atmosphere in the living room is punctuated by Nadra's insistent 'No's to Mrs Hertogh's pleadings. Hidden away in the corner of the house, you catch snatches of their exchanges* in Malay:

Mrs Hertogh: "Whatever may be the difficulties, I will stay here and overcome them until I can take you back to your father and brothers and sisters in Holland."

Nadra: "If my parents love me, they should leave me where I am. Besides I cannot love you, because when I was a child you gave me away."

The final verdict

Fast forward to two weeks later, December 2, 1950. The court rules in Adeline Hertogh's favour - that the marriage between Nadra and Mansoor Adabi is not legal, and Nadra is to be given back to the Dutch. Cik Aminah applies for a stay of execution to be heard on December 11, 1950.

Before leaving the court, you spot Cik Aminah and Nadra clutching at each other, crying loudly and refusing to leave. Your heart breaks for them. Nadra is then transported to the Convent of the Good Shepherd and placed under the care of Catholic nuns.

The girl with two faces

The newspapers sensationalize the situation.

The Singapore Standard publishes the headlines "Bertha knelt before Virgin Mary Statue" while Melayu Raya publishes a picture of Nadra caught between a mosque and a church. The Utusan Melayu runs pictures of a miserable Nadra with the headline "I am very miserable – forced to wear a gown" while The Straits Times publishes photos of a smiling and happy Nadra posing with Catholic nuns. Which is the real her?

You notice that many members of the Muslim community also feel that by nullifying Nadra's marriage to Mansoor Adabi and separating the couple, the court was not respecting the religious laws that Muslims abide by.

The tension snaps

By December 11, 1950, crowds of demonstrators gather outside the Supreme Court to demand the release of Nadra back to Cik Aminah. The situation quickly deteriorates into a bloodbath. As you scramble to run out of the way, you hear Eurasians and Europeans alike being stoned and beaten by the angry mobs.

From December 11, 1950, to 13 December 13, 1950, 18 people died, 173 people were injured, and damages to property amounted to more than 20,000 Straits Dollars.

Nadra was relocated to St John's island during the riots and subsequently taken back to the Netherlands. You never saw her again, just the carnage left behind in her wake.

A cautionary tale

In retrospect, there are many lessons to learn from Nadra's story, but perhaps most of all, it serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of religious disharmony, particularly in a religiously diverse place like Singapore.

Mutual understanding and accommodation of different religious beliefs can only happen when we educate ourselves and appreciate the intricacies of different religions. This is the goal of the Harmony in Diversity Gallery (HDG).

Harmony in Diversity Gallery (HDG)

Set up by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in collaboration with community partners such as the Inter-Religious Organisation, the HDG was opened on August 2 2016 as a key feature of the SGSecure movement.

It consists of four thematic galleries which aim to present a cohesive and broad understanding of the different religions here and how we can exercise mutual understanding when differences in beliefs create friction.

Visitors will witness unique religious artifacts from various religions in Singapore, as well as the commonalities in a religious expression such as prayer, meditation, and fasting.

While understanding different religions is important, the real test comes when friction from conflicting values creeps up in our daily interactions with each other. At the HDG, visitors can explore an interactive exhibit that demonstrates how our decisions can either build bridges that connect or walls that divide.

Controversial cases of unilateral child conversion in Malaysia

While M. Indira Gandhi won her case at the Federal Court against the conversion of her three children to Islam without her consent, a few other women were not so fortunate.

The apex court’s decision to nullify the unilateral conversion of Indira’s children ― which was done by her Muslim convert ex-husband who also abducted their youngest child nine years ago at the age of 11 months ― was the opposite of a previous verdict in another case of unilateral child conversion ― R. Subashini’s case.

The Federal Court yesterday ruled that according to the Federal Constitution, the consent of both parents is needed to convert a minor, while another apex court panel in Subashini’s case had interpreted the Constitution to only require the permission of one parent.

Here are three cases of the unilateral conversion of minors to Islam.

S. Deepa

In 2012, Izwan Abdullah, formerly known as N. Viran, converted his children, V. Mithran and V. Sharmila, without the knowledge of their mother, S. Deepa.

Izwan then applied and was given custody of the children by the Seremban Shariah court and changed Viran and Shamila's name to Nur Nabila Izwan and Muhammad Nabil Izwan respectively.

Deepa applied for and won in 2014 custody of her two children at the Seremban High Court.

Despite the Seremban High Court’s custody orders, Izwan reportedly abducted his son.

In 2016, the Federal Court split custody of the two children, granting Nabil to Izwan while Shamila was given to Deepa, after the judges spoke to both children about which parent they wished to remain with.

The panel recorded agreement by Deepa and her ex-husband to access their children once every two months on a Saturday, at the home of the children's Muslim maternal grandmother Siti Aishah Abdullah, who is also Deepa's mother.

R. Subashini

In July 2006, R. Subashini received a notice from the Registrar of the Shariah High Court Kuala Lumpur that her husband had commenced proceedings in the Shariah High Court for divorce and custody of their eldest son.

This was because her husband, T. Saravanan or now known as Muhammad Shafi Saravanan Abdullah, converted himself and their elder son to Islam in May 2006.

The couple, married since July 2001 under Hindu rites and registered under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, have two children ― Dharvin Joshua and Sharvin.

After discovering Shafi’s custody application in the Shariah Court, Subashini filed a petition on August 4, 2006, which was after the husband’s conversion, for dissolution of the marriage and an application for custody and ancillary reliefs in the civil High Court. In September 2006, the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed Subashini’s application to stop Shafi from resolving their marital problems in the Shariah court.

The Federal Court decided, in a 2-1 decision in 2007, that the unilateral conversion of Subashini’s eldest son was constitutional, interpreting the word “parent” in Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution to be singular.

Article 12(4) states that “the religion of a person under the age of eighteen years shall be decided by his parent or guardian.” In the same judgement, the apex court also decided that the Shariah Court cannot dissolve a civil marriage and all dissolutions made in the religious court are only effective and applicable within the confines of Islamic law.

S. Shamala

In 2002, Dr Jeyaganesh C. Mogarajah embraced Islam and subsequently converted his two sons to Islam without the knowledge and consent of his wife, S. Shamala.

Dr Jeyaganesh, now known as Dr Muhammad Ridzwan, also obtained custody of both sons from the Shariah court in 2003.

Following the Shariah court’s decision, Shamala applied to the civil High Court for the custody of her sons.

The High Court granted joint custody to both parents on July 20, 2004, but Shamala was prohibited from teaching her children Hinduism and from allowing them to eat pork.

Shamala later reportedly fled to Australia that year with her two children.

This led the Federal Court in 2010 to avoid hearing constitutional issues regarding the conversion of children to Islam without the consent of both parents.

The majority of the panel also declined to grant time to Shamala to return to Malaysia to appear in the court to determine her referral application.

In 2011, Shamala withdrew her legal representative as she who did not want to pursue her civil case concerning her children's custody, following three appeals made by her husband.

She cited that there was no legal remedy following the Federal Court's decision to decline to answer five constitutional questions.

Loh Siew Hong

Controversy regarding Penang mother Loh Siew Hong’s objections to her three children’s conversion to Islam, a decision that was made unilaterally by her now ex-husband Nagahswaran Muniandy, has reopened discourse on high profile religious conversion cases in the country.

Malaysia is no stranger to cases like this, with some notable ones having garnered international attention and media coverage.

The following are some of the landmark religious conversion cases that have set legal precedents in the nation.

Lina Joy

Among the significant cases in Malaysia, one involving a Muslim converting to Christianity, is the case of Lina Joy, who was born a Muslim with the name Azlina Jailani.

In 1998 she converted to Christianity to marry her Christian boyfriend but was legally unable to do so seeing that her identification card (IC) stated that she is a Muslim.

After being baptised that year, the woman had sought to have her conversion legally recognised by the Malaysian court.

Although she managed to change her name, the National Registration Department (NRD) did not change the status of her religion in her IC, seeing that it did not receive any confirmation document from the shariah court.

Hoping to live as a Christian, in 1999 she filed a suit with the high court and bypassed the shariah court (the Islamic court holding authority on conversion and other Islamic jurisprudence).

In 2006, in her bid to embrace Christianity, Joy took the matter to the country’s apex court.

On May 30, 2007, her appeal was dismissed by the Federal Court in a 2-1 majority verdict – a three-man bench with chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and Datuk Alauddin Mohd Sheriff ruling against her.

They stated that: “A person who wants to renounce his/her religion must do so according to existing laws or practises of the particular religion. Only after the person has complied with the requirements and the authorities are satisfied that the person has apostatised, can she embrace Christianity.

“In other words, a person cannot, at one’s whims and fancies, renounce or embrace a religion.”

The dissenting view by chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak Datuk Richard Malanjum wrote: “Hence, in my view this is tantamount to unequal treatment under the law. In other words, it is discriminatory and unconstitutional and should therefore be struck down.”

“For this reason alone, the relief sought for by the appellant should be granted, namely for a declaration that she is entitled to have an identity card, in which the word ‘Islam’ does not appear.”

If Joy had succeeded in her bid, she would have created a precedent allowing Muslims to officially change their religion on their IC, while also removing the barrier for Muslim and non-Muslim marriages.

M. Indira Gandhi

Another notable case is M. Indira Gandhi, whose ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, also known as K. Pathmanathan, left their house with their youngest 11-month-old daughter, Prasana Diksa in 2009.

Prior to the separation, he had converted to Islam, and then unilaterally converted their three children to Islam after he left the house. This action was made without Indira’s knowledge.

In that same year, he was granted permanent custody of the children by the shariah court. However, the Ipoh High Court granted Indira full custody of the children the following year.

While her two eldest children have stayed with Indira, she is still unable to contact her youngest daughter and despite the ruling, the police were not able to recover Prasana.

Riduan also remained missing, even though the high court had issued an arrest warrant in 2014. Prasana was just 18 months old when Indira last saw her.

Nyonya Tahir/Wong Ah Kiu

Wong Ah Kiu was born in 1918 to a Muslim family as Nyonya Tahir but was later adopted by a Chinese family and raised as a Buddhist.

In 1936, she married a Chinese man, who did not convert to Islam, and she continued to practice Buddhism and adopted the Chinese way of life, with her children also culturally raised as Chinese.

While her children were recorded as ethnically Chinese in their identity cards, she was still recorded as a Malay. In 1986, when she applied to change her name and religion recorded in her IC, the application was denied after being investigated by the Alor Gajah Islamic Affairs office.

When her husband died in 1989, she wished to be buried next to him, but this was not possible without legal recognition of her status as a Buddhist.

She then filed two more applications to recognise her change of religion in 1991 and 1998 but both were rejected.

Wong left behind a written declaration stating that she was Buddhist and that she wanted to be given a Buddhist funeral instead.

When she died on January 19, 2006, her burial was put on hold after the Negri Sembilan Religious Affairs Department had the Tampin Shariah Court issue an injunction after they found out she was a Malay.

The head of the Negri Sembilan Religious Affairs Department went to her family’s house to present the order that she be buried in Muslim fashion.

However, after hearing testimonies from her children, the shariah high court eventually ruled that she lived and died as a Buddhist, which permitted her family to proceed with Buddhist funeral rites.

She was finally buried next to her husband in the Chinese cemetery in her birthplace of Simpang Ampat, Alor Gajah.

This case marked the first time that a non-Muslim had testified in a shariah court in Malaysia and it remains as one of the most well-known religious conversion cases until today.

Juli Jalaludin

Juli Sumardiati Mohd Jalaludin was born in Ketereh, Kelantan as a Malay and was raised in a Muslim family with a strict cultural and religious upbringing.

However, her faith slowly eroded over the years after she started questioning the rules she had to adhere throughout her life.

In her blog, she said “I wanted to know the answers to simple questions I had since I was a child. For example, why was hijab mandatory? Why were dogs forbidden to be touched?

“Why were we still being taught the prayer and fasting rituals for a slave even though slavery had been abolished more than a hundred years ago?

“Slowly, I started to see the imperfections of Islam. I thought, what else could be wrong? Little by little, as I got more answers, my faith in Islam gradually weakened.”

She also disliked the fact that she was taught that “infidels” would not earn a place in heaven.

Unlike other notable cases, Juli did not go through any court processes but instead, she made controversial postings online.

At first, she joined a local apostate group on Facebook to find other like-minded folk. But eventually, she and other members of the group were harassed online.

This took a severe toll on her that caused her to suffer from depression. However, she chose to fight back as she realised that “my silence would only make bullies stronger”.

She left Malaysia in June 2013 after receiving a job offer in Norway.

She, together with a group of Facebook friends, went on to create the Facebook pages, Murtad di Pantai Timur (Apostate in the East Coast) and Murtad in Kelantan (Apostate in Kelantan).

However, these pages were perceived to provoke and insult Islam, and were later blocked by the government.

The Muslim community also reacted aggressively and sent threatening messages to her posts that encourage her to gain the status of an asylum seeker in the United States as she did not feel safe at home.

Syarifah Nooraffyzza, Tiong Choo Ting, Salina Jau, Jenny Peter

Even though the previous cases saw issues hitting Peninsula Malaysia, Sarawakian Muslims wishing to convert out of the religion also face similar problems as their Malayan counterparts.

In Syarifah Nooraffyzza’s case, she is ethnically Malay but had left Islam and embraced Christianity in 2009. On the other hand, Tiong Choo Ting, Salina and Jenny had all converted due to their marriages.

Although Sarawak has its own high court separate from the peninsula, the state’s high court still deemed that it has no jurisdiction to hear apostasy cases and dismissed their appeals for a civil court hearing.

Even though the four of them had taken their case to Sarawak’s Federal Court, they were still unsuccessful in their bid to renounce Islam. Instead, the state’s apex court ruled that their apostasy applications can only be heard by the Sarawak Shariah Court, resulting in successful applications.