Archive for the ‘BornInMalaysia’ category

IKIM on child conversion

August 26th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I read the following article which appeared in the Star few days back. It was an interesting reading, because the author at first seemed to agree with automatic conversion of children when one of the parents convert, but towards the end, he focuses on the need to get the marriage dissolved properly first (under the laws/religion that solemnised the marriage) before deciding on children conversion issue.

I wonder what happened to the cabinet decision, which was deferred by Conference of Rulers so that state religious departments can give more feedback. Are we to wait until another tragedy happens?

Religious conversion, children and confusion
IKIM VIEWS
By DR WAN AZHAR WAN AHMAD
Senior Fellow/Director,
Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science

It has been announced that when non-Muslim parents convert to Islam, the religion of their kids will remain in the same religion in which the marriage was solemnised. Such a statement contradicts the Federal Constitution, religious positions and causes confusion.

THE long existing misunderstanding over the religious status of minors resurfaced when an ill-informed Cabinet minister announced that the religion of minors from non-Muslim parents, upon the conversion of any of the parents to Islam, remains in the religion under which the marriage was solemnised. Such a statement contradicts the Federal Constitution and some religious positions. It worsens the confusion among the people and draws criticisms from both Muslims and non-Muslims.

The following explanation taken from Prof Dr Abdul Karim Zaydan’s voluminous al-Mufassal fi Ahkam al-Mar’ah (vol. 9, pp. 442-53) attempts to clear the air by explaining the standpoint of Islam.

Zaydan quotes authorities from reliable jurists of the past and their works. They include al-Kasani’s Bada’i’ al-Sina’i’, al-Marghinani’s al-Hidayah, Shirazi’s al-Muhazzab, Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi’s al-Mughni, al-Sharbini’s Mughni al-Muhtaj, etc. These scholars may come from different schools of laws but as a whole, they represent the position of Islam.

In Islam, if a child was born from Muslim parents, jurists unanimously agreed that he or she is a Muslim. Similarly, if the child was born from a Muslim father and a kitabiyah (Jewish/Christian) mother, he or she is a Muslim. The principle applied by jurists here is ‘al-shaghir yatba’u khayr al-abawayni dinan’ (in terms of religion, the child follows the best religion of his parent). Since Islam is deemed the best religion, the child follows the religion of his or her Muslim parent, either father or mother. [Herein lies the problem. Obviously each religion deems that its the best religion. So, its a bit perverted to use only one religion to make decision]

Kasani explains that a child must follow whatever religion confessed by his parent. This is fundamental as one cannot but have a particular religion whereby one is judged for all actions. For a child, due to a lack of reason and intelligence, the choice of his or her religion is made or determined through parents.

What is the status of a child’s religion if both parents renounce Islam and become apostates? Jurists from all legal schools maintain that the child remains a Muslim. This is the opinion of Maqdisi as stated in his Mughni, Kasani in Bada’i’, Shirazi in Muhazzab and Sharbini in Mughni al-Muhtaj.

Could a minor commit apostasy in the first place? A leading Hanafi jurist Imam Abu Yusuf holds that puberty is a pre-requisite for the validity of apostasy. Therefore, a minor cannot apostate.

Scholars from the Hanbali school state that a child’s apostasy is valid provided he or she is mumayyiz and do have some basic understanding about Islam, i.e. knowing that there is no God but Allah and that He has no rival, and that Muhammad (s.a.w.) is His servant and Messenger. It means that if the child is not mumayyiz and does not understand Islam in the basic sense, his or her apostasy is invalid and ineffective.

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, the founder of the Hanbali school, was in favour of the invalidity of a minor’s apostasy based on a prophetic Hadith narrated by Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. and Aisyah r.a.

Reported by great traditionists like Bukhari and Ibn Majah, it states that “The pen (i.e. accountability) is lifted from three groups of people: an insane person till he becomes sane, a child till he reaches the age of puberty, and a sleeping person till he wakes up.” The Shafi’i jurists are of the opinion that apostasy by an underage child is meaningless. If it happens, it does not fall through, even though he or she is mumayyiz because such a child is yet to bear any religious responsibility (taklif) until and unless he reaches the age of maturity.

Therefore, we can safely conclude that all three schools of law are in agreement that apostasy by a minor is immaterial.

What is mumayyiz? It refers to a certain point of age when a child attains the ability to differentiate between good and evil, right and wrong. This may happen to any child below the age of puberty.

What is the age of puberty in Islam? Some scholars say that for boys, the age limit varies from seven to 15. The majority held that the most appropriate age is 15. The main indication for this is when they experience their first wet dream. For girls, jurists unanimously agreed that they reach puberty after experiencing their first menstruation.

For both boys and girls, they begin to carry religious responsibilities, i.e. become personally accountable (mukallaf) for all their actions after reaching this age of majurity.

Let’s examine the religious status of children from non-Muslim parents. The earlier basic principle that children follow the religion of parents applies here. If a child is born from a non-Muslim parent, he or she is not a Muslim. Similarly, if a child is born from apostate parents, he or she is considered an unbeliever.

The religious status of children appears most problematic when parent converts to Islam, especially if only one party does so. Generally speaking, if both father and mother embrace Islam, their children become Muslim as well.

If only one parent embrace Islam, their underage child becomes Muslim too. Between the two parents, the position of the one who embraces Islam is ‘stronger’ compared to the non-converting spouse. Therefore, a child follows the religion of the ‘stronger’ party. [Hmm..why stronger? I guess due to nature of the country one lives in and the laws the country has.]

The above position, however, is not to be understood in isolation of other considerations. In resolving marital disputes following a divorce on whatever grounds, paramount consideration must be given to the best interest and welfare of the children. This has been acknowledged by both syariah and civil laws.

Under certain circumstances, the best interest and welfare of the kids concerned does not relate to religious status, but rather to their early care and upbringing that does not necessarily involve religious education. [Agreed. the religious status of the child is not related to the welfare and best interest, unless of course you throw in all the benefits one gets as a … you-know-who. So, it kind of makes the playing field uneven.]

In Malaysia, the application of Islamic law is largely based on the school of Shafi’i. As regard to the conversion of minors when any of the parents embraces Islam, the general public is made to believe that those underage kids simply and automatically follow suit.

Interestingly, Zaydan’s Mufassal shows otherwise. The Shafi’i jurists, like Sharbini, hold a different opinion altogether. To them, the conversion of a minor is invalid. Their ground is the Prophet’s hadith narrated from Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. and Aisyah r.a. quoted earlier.

The hadith means that anyone who falls under any of the three categories is not to be held responsible or accountable for one’s action unless one is in complete control of reasoning, i.e. doing something consciously and willingly, knowingly of its purposes and consequences.

Since minority is one of those not accountable for any action, a minor’s conversion to Islam is irrelevant. In short, a minor is not obliged to shoulder any responsibility/accountability.

Therefore, any notion that Islam sanctions conversion of minors to the religion is questionable. I am more inclined to say that all the hue and cry on this issue is the result of ignorance, leading to the mistaken emphasis or over zealousness on something having no ground or footing in religion. [Hmm…what is this fellow trying to say now? No such thing as a minor converting?]

When a marriage breaks down due to conversion to Islam, the best solution must be sought from the religion under which the marriage was solemnised or the law under which the marriage was registered. All disputes pertaining to property, custody of minors and other ancillary rights must be resolved under that religious or legal system.

Any just and satisfactory solution at this level is extremely important as it will facilitate the parents concerned, either father or mother, to proceed with the choice of education or religious upbringing he/she wants for the minor accorded to them by the court.

All parties must come to their senses that they will not get all they pray for in the court of justice. If it so happens that custody of a certain child was given to any party, all must be content with such a decision unless the court itself has ignored or overlooked certain important aspects of the trial causing severe injustice to any party.

I acknowledge the fact that it is the collective responsibility of Muslims to pay serious attention to anything pertaining to their religion, especially if it threatens their dignity and interests. The same applies, I suppose, to followers of other religions. [“I suppose” ???]

But in protecting the sanctity of each religion, followers must not turn ridiculous as it will badly damage the image of their own religion. As a result, instead of bringing one person closer to a religion, they are actually distancing many others no matter how rigorous they explain the truth of the religion.

After all, if we really believe in the omnipotence or omniscience of God, none should worry as to where one would end up in the next life. A non-Muslim today may become Muslim tomorrow, and vice versa. Even if a corpse is cremated to ashes, the Almighty God knows where his place is. [This paragraph is what I like about the article]

Penang Govt gives up on Kg Buah Pala

August 20th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


After yesterday’s event, I kind of expected this response from the state government. The state government is washing its hands off the problem of Kg Buah Pala since the residents have approached the Federal government.

Now the residents have chosen their path, and can’t turn back.  Most likely they will end up with nothing unless federal government waves a magic wand.

I think the state government were looking for an excuse,  and the residents provided one just in time.  We can only hope that the residents have been given the correct advice by those involved.

The Penang government said its mediator role between Kampung Buah Pala residents and the landowner and developer is “as good as over.”

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said as far as the state government was concerned, the matter ended when some of the villagers sought help from the Barisan Nasional.

“We have done our part and as far as we are concerned, the matter ends there.

“Since they have gone to see the Barisan, the matter ends there,” he told reporters at a Ramadan aid presentation to mosques at Politeknik Seberang Prai here on Thursday.

On Wednesday, Kampung Buah Pala residents association committee chairman M. Sugumaran handed over a 17-page memorandum to Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin at the Permatang Pauh Barisan Nasional operations centre.

Sugumaran told Muhyiddin that only the Barisan could help resolve the villagers’ problem, claiming that the Penang government had “merely made empty promises.”

Sugumaran said he hoped Muhyiddin would shed some light on the matter since land issues were generally under the Federal Government’s purview.

Lim said the move to meet the Muhyiddin merely validated the state’s concern that the residents could have been used by certain quarters, or that they might have a “political agenda.”

Lim said he did not understand why the Kampung Buah Pala villagers were doing this.

He claimed that the Barisan had not done anything for the residents, while the Pakatan Rakyat-led state government helped them obtain an offer of double-storey terrace houses with a 99-year lease title.

Kg Buah Pala residents give memo to DPM Muhyiddin

August 19th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I got to hand it to the residents, they are really pushing every possible button in order to save their land. If state government not able to help, go to Federal. Even though PM Najib already said land matters are state issue, DPM Muhyiddin seem to indicate otherwise.

Not sure what he meant by “The deadline (for the residents to vacate the land) is Aug 31. We want to see how the state government can resolve the issue”. If after 31st August only want to do something, most probably they will only see a flattened land. The developer is itching to demolish the place, so I’m not sure where the DPM is leading the residents to. A false hope? Now the state can turn around and say since the Federal government seem to indicate can do something, we’ll just leave it to them. That’s the peril of jumping ship. Its like burning the bridge at both ends.

I’m sure the residents are aware their problem was caused by the same group from which they are asking for help now. When desperate, have to  resort to desperate measures. Can’t blame them. Now, its up to Federal government to save them. How? Maybe federal government and coalition can make some deal with the coperative and/or the developer, bypassing the state government. Err..along the way, MIC need to be given some role to play as well.

So, its with (in)sincere feeling that the rep, Sugumaran pleads:

“…Now we realise that only the BN can really help the people,” said Sugumaran.

Kg Buah Pala issue may also impact the upcoming by-elections in Permatang Pasir, so each coalition needs to play its card properly. Will this be turned into a racial point? corruption point? administation weakness point? Which coalition can milk the most out of Kg Buah Pala sage to entice the 70% over Malay voters and minority Chinese and Indian voters?

The federal government has so far not intervened in the Kampung Buah Pala land ownership issue as it wants to see whether the Penang government is capable of resolving the issue.

Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin said this to Kampung Buah Pala residents association chairperson M Sugumaran after receiving a memorandum on the issue from him.

“The deadline (for the residents to vacate the land) is Aug 31. We want to see how the state government can resolve the issue,” he said.

The seven-page memorandum was handed to Muhyiddin when he visited Permatang Pasir, near here, to look at the Barisan Nasional’s preparations for the upcoming by-election.

Sugumaran said in the memorandum, the association urged the federal government to intervene in the issue in order to save the traditional village and turn it into a planned village.

He said the residents were forced to ask for federal government intervention following the state government’s failure to keep its promise of helping the villagers if the opposition was given the mandate to govern the state.

“(Lim) Guan Eng (chief minister) cannot assist us. Now we realise that only the BN can really help the people,” said Sugumaran.

The Federal Court recently ordered the residents to vacate the 2.6ha village land belonging to Koperasi Pegawai Kerajaan Pulau Pinang (KPKPP), to make way for a housing project.

However, the Federal Court yesterday fixed Friday to hear a new application by the residents to set aside the Appeals Court’s decision made on May 11, that KPKPP is the rightful owner of the land. – Bernama

Employer and Eve

August 19th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Nope this is not some salacious romance story, folks.  Sorry to disappoint 🙂

I wonder if anyone have experienced situations where your organisation (the Employer) decides to hold a meeting/talk/discussion etc on the Eve (I bet you guys thought of a lady, eh?) of an important date or public holiday or long weekends. And this meeting/talk/discussions will take place as late as possible – 5pm, 6pm or even at night.

Imagine, coming Thursday is a public holiday, and a memo arrives today from your boss, saying there’s a compulsory talk on “How to save money by switching of lights” by a consultant at 6pm on the eve (Wednesday).

Or how about a meeting to discuss “company trip” on eve of first day of the fasting month?

National Day falls on a Monday, so you’ll have a long weekend, and most of us will have planned for a trip. Imagine on Friday evening, the CEO wants to meet the employees and give his monthly talk.

I guess you get the point.

If happens one time, OK la. But if all the time – Chinese New Year, Deepavali, etc pun sama.  People want to go back and try avoid jam, but employer has other ideas.

Is it a rarity or normal thing that happens everywhere?

One Merdeka wish coming true?

August 18th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Update at 2.05pm: The Star quotes DPM Muhyiddin as saying:

The Cabinet is studying a proposal to drop the column in official forms that require race information, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said.

He said the pros and cons would have to be fully studied before a decision can be made.

Looks like have to wait for the final decision.

——————————————————————

Hmm…two years ago, I listed some of my wishes for our 5oth Independence Day. One of it took a small step towards becoming a reality:

1. removal of the words “gender”, “race” and “” in any language in all application/registration//entry forms used in our country except for those that requires specific characteristics e.g. imam must be a muslim.

Today, Malaysian Insider reports the following:

Despite the sharpening racial debate in the country, the Najib Administration’s move to push 1 Malaysia to unify its 27 million citizens of various ethnicity has received a boost with the Cabinet’s agreement to drop “race” from most official forms and documents.

It is understood that Malaysians can opt out of stating race in official forms and documents that still have such a requirement. The category has been in all forms since the country achieved Merdeka in 1957.

“The Cabinet made the decision in early August,” a government official familiar with the move told The Malaysian Insider.

He said the civil service is now working to eliminate the category in all new forms and documents being printed.

However, it is understood that some forms will continue to have the category in relation to special privileges for Bumiputras.

In an immediate reaction, Pulai MP Datuk Nur Jazlan welcomed the decision as a Merdeka gift for the country’s 52nd independence anniversary.

“That’s great news. We are all Malaysians from Perlis to Sabah so putting race is divisive,” Nur Jazlan told The Malaysian Insider.

The two-term MP also hoped the civil service will implement prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s 1 Malaysia efficiently and effectively.

“The concept is the basis of how our country started in 1957 with the Alliance in power and then Barisan Nasional. We need to narrow our differences and widen our common characteristics,” he added.

Many activists and non-governmental organisations have long called for an abolition of the category, calling it archaic and divisive in multi-racial Malaysia.

The latest to take up the call was International Trade and Industry deputy minister Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir who agreed that Malaysians should not be required to state their race in most official forms and documents.

He said in Penang on Aug 9 that it was unnecessary except for certain forms relating to the special privileges of Bumiputras,

“I would highly encourage that such columns for race be removed. This is in line with the 1Malaysia concept,” Mukhriz said.

I do wonder why such an important decision was made in early August, and yet not revealed to the public. Odd. No such report came out in other media channels. So, I may be forgiven in  doubting the validity of the above news.

Anyway, if the news is true,  the next step is to ensure that everyone  in public sector is aware of the decision, especially those that are involved in application form processing.  Computer systems need to be modified for those online applications, while the mandatory symbols need to be removed from existing forms.

This step by the government should then be promoted in the private sector as well, starting with the GLCs, MNCs, etc.