yeah, the bigger problem is with islamic group. any small disagreement, and there won’t be any progress.

I respect your opinion but I still don’t see why there is a need to consult the non-Muslim groups as the cabinet decision was based on their request. That’s why I said unless there is a change, I dont see any reason to consult them.

However, the issue with the Islamic group is different as this needs to be approved by the rulers, the state as well as the Islamic authorities. And this was made worse by Anwar and PAS who tried to politicise the issue.

the points you mentioned about islam is state matter was clarified in the papers at that time. that’s why the initial proposals were shot down by the council of rulers, and asked to to do more research.

i don’t agree with the idea that “there is no need to consult them as long as the core principles of the cabinet are retained”. Many things are ideal, but the implementation (the finer, smaller details) are the reasons why situation is bad nowadays. We need to be vigilant and be in the process from A to Z. We can’t simply leave things to authorities to finalise everything. No point complaining later.

I too hope that the non-muslim groups, bar council etc will be consulted. that’s just common sense, but you never know. if never ask, may never get.

I think the issue is a bit more complicated that it is. Let me try to explain and also why I brought up the matter of Anwar.

Firstly, about it being a directive. It is a directive to the AG to work on the amendments of the law. However it is not a directive to the court as the cabinet cannot direct the courts as there is a separation of the executive and judiciary. The role of the court is the interpretation of the law and they cannot be directed by anything other than law.

If you go back and read the news about Indra, even at that time some people were calling the court to abide by the decision of the cabinet but then someone also pointed out the same thing ,ie, this has to be made into a law before can be used in the court ruling.

I don’t know what happened to Indra but I guess most likely both sides would have agreed to postpone the case until the law is amended.

Ok, now the part about Anwar. You see Anwar tried to play the religious card by saying the cabinet didn’t consult the ulamas before making the decision and PAS also created much chaos saying this was an insult to Islam.

This put the govt on the defensive and as such what happened what that they govt had to go and get the concensus of these ulamas first.

The reason for this is simple as Islam is a state matter and any amendments needed to be agreed by the state religious authorities and the royalty as well.

So my guess is that the AG is trying to convince these folks first and this is still in progress.

On why MCCBBCSHT has not been consulted, well, that’s easy. The cabinet decision was agreed and wanted by the non Muslims so there is no need to consult them as long as the core principles of the cabinet are retained.

The main party that has objection is the Islamic ulamas and these people need to buy off the idea.

I am sure the non Muslim groups, Bar Council and other stake holders will be consulted before the amendments are tabled.

Hope this helps to clear the issue.

It was cabinet directive, as all the papers refer to it as such. And of course it was not possible to followed since its not a law. that’s why the minister in PM dept in charge of islam went in personally to solve the problem in a muhibbah manner. i’m not bothered if anwar protested or not. the point is that the directive was a pre-emptive shot, as a starting point for the amendments. but what happened to problem it was supposed to solve – indira’s child? no news on the outcome now. where is the child? did indira convert? where’s the other two children? what happened to the husband? i have no idea at all.

Thanks for link. It clears the air a bit. But why no consultation with the MCCBCSHT yet? these proposals are put forth to one party only, and if they oppose? why not the AG office just issue simple statement – first round consultation is with muslim groups, second round with non-muslim groups, 3rd round with bar council (or something like that). so easy right, and no one will be having confusion or apprehension. When we start to blog or make noise in media, then only the firefighting starts. and guys like you have to come and in offer some defence for them. you and i are not free all the time to be doing this. cannot be like this la…

However, if you also recall the “multi-racial champion” Anwar disputing the cabinet decision saying the govt did not consult the ulamas.

You are mistaken in this, the decision has not been made nor it will be bulldozed through. See below the actual statement from the Federal Counsel taken from Bar Council’s website.He also said that these proposals will be open for debat.

As for the child conversion, both you and Harcharan are wrong again. There is no such thing and I guess this must the work of the pro-Pakatan media trying their usual misinformation tactics. See what the Federal Counsel actually said below.

———————————–

On child custody, a new provision under section 88B prohibits any parent or guardian from registering the change in religion for the child below 18 years old without obtaining the other parent’s or guardian’s permission.

Other amendments in Act 164 also include that converted spouse do not necessarily have to inform the family of the conversion.

“It is the responsibility of the registrar of the converts to inform the family and it need not be the parents of the convert but any member of the family, like even the in-laws,” he said, adding that the proposals are open for debate.

http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal/general_news/proposal_to_let_converts_file_for_divorce_in_civil_court.html