Posts Tagged ‘intolerance’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

cow head protestors sentence

July 27th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I was surprised to read that the cow head protestors pleaded guilty. Thought that these guys had “bertaubat” (repented)….until I read that the charges had been amended to illegal assembly instead of seditious act. Two of them were found guilty under Sedition Act and fined RM3000, and one of them have to serve 1 week jail sentence as well. The others paid RM1000 each as fine.

The 12 cow-head protesters, who pleaded guilty earlier Tuesday to a charge of illegal assembly, were fined RM1,000 each or a month’s jail in default by the Sessions Court here.

Two of the men were also fined RM3,000 each for a sedition charge, one of whom was sentenced to a week in jail as well.

Four others on the same sedition charge were given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.

Judge Hasbi Hasan fined the 12 men after they pleaded guilty to committing the offence at the State Secretariat building on Aug 28 last year.

The 12 were Ahmad Mahayuddin Abd Manaf, 36, Ibrahim Sabri, 43, Eyzva Ezhar Ramly, 31, Mohd Azmir Mohd Zain, 35, Ahmad Suhairy Zakaria, 30, Mohd Hilmi Ni, 40,Jainuddin @ Zainuddin Md Yusuff, 67, Mohd Jurit Ramli, 39, Mohamad Nordin Zakaria, 46, Jamil Mohamad Isa, 40, Rahimuddin Md Harun, 39, and Azhari Shaari, 39.

Eyzva Ezhar and Mohd Azmir Mohd Zain were each also fined RM3,000 or three months’ jail on the sedition charge. Eyzva Ezhar was also sentenced to a week in jail.

Eyzva Ezhar was ordered to serve his week in jail after he completes his current jail time. He is currently serving time in a prison in Jelebu for a previous drug conviction that will end on Aug 4.

Four – Ahmad Suhairy, Mohd Hilmi, Ibrahim and Ahmad Mahayuddin Abd Manaf – were granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal after the other two pleaded guilty to sedition charge.

The 12 were part of group – which brought a cow’s head to the gate of the State Secretariat building – protesting the relocation of a 150-year-old Sri Maha Mariamman Hindu temple from Section 19 to their neighbourhood in Section 23. They were all earlier charged under the Sedition Act 1948.

For me, it looks much lighter than a slap on the wrist. MHS says its warning for other possible protestors:

Hindu Sangam president Mohan Shanmugam described the fines imposed on the cow-head protestors today as “minimal” but still served as a warning to groups looking to stoke religious tension.

… “We welcome the justice,” he told The Malaysian Insider when contacted. “Although the charges are very minimal but it shows that everyone charged will be brought to justice. This is a warning for everybody.”

What do you think? Should the punishment be more harsh to show the seriousness of the issue?

Comments Off on cow head protestors sentence »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

Interview with head of inter faith panel

May 4th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The interview by Malaysian Insider via email is below. The last line is quite interesting.

KUALA LUMPUR, May 4 — Inter-faith dialogue in Malaysia has for years ended in a shallow cul-de-sac, until last month, when the Najib administration set up a Cabinet committee to firmly address growing religious conflicts.

The inclusion of senior bureaucrats from the powerful Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) and the influential national Institute of Islamic Understanding (Ikim) together with elected leaders of the various religions from the Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) showed the government was serious in dealing with the long-standing conflicts.

But little is known about the workings of this committee, and less still about its handpicked coordinator, Datuk Ilani Isahak, which has inadvertently put the fledgling committee in limbo.

The only known facts are that she had been an MP for Kota Bharu and is now a member of the National Unity and Integration Department (NUID) reporting to its minister Tan Sri Koh Tsu Koon and has been keeping very late hours these past few days.

The mystery woman recently agreed to an e-mail interview with The Malaysian Insider, which is as follows.

Q: What are you expected to do as coordinator to this special committee on inter-religious understanding and harmony?

A: My role is to facilitate the members from the various religions to achieve the objectives of the Committee as set out in its Terms of Reference. I would also ensure discussions are held in a conducive environment where everyone is respectful of each other. I also foresee playing an active role to encourage friendship between members which requires social interaction and activities outside meetings and formal events.

Q: What targets have you set for yourself so far?

A: I would like to see the working committees set up getting down to work before the Committee meets again in June. Although I am not setting any time frame to achieve certain outcomes yet I would be monitoring the momentum to ensure smooth progress .

Q: Tell us more about yourself. Why do you think you were picked by Cabinet for this role?

A: I believe my experience in chairing the Working Committee on Inter-Religious Relations set up under the National Unity Advisory Panel in 2004 – 2008. Whilst in that capacity I had worked hard at establishing good relationship with several leaders from various religions. Perhaps my track record for reliability and delivery. My background includes being a senior lawyer, an ex-vice president of Malaysian Youth Council (a multi-cultural and multi-religious orgaisation), ex-Member of Parliament of Kota Bharu which has a multi-ethnic and multi-religious population and I studied comparative religion whilst doing my Diploma in Islamic Studies.

Q: What was your immediate response when you found out you were chosen?

A: Certainly, I was very pleased to once again be given the privilege and honour to serve the nation in the challenging field of inter-religious relations. I was also happy to continue and strive to complete the unfinished work. The previous Committee succeeded in initiating the process of interactions between leaders of various faiths and enhanced their willingness to work together. Although several closed-door dialogues were held yet they had not been able to progress to problem-solving mode due to time constraint as their work had to stop abruptly when the Committee’s mandate expired on December 31, 2008 and there was no renewal in 2009.

Q: What challenges are you bracing yourself to face?

A: The challenges include getting the leaders of the various religions to focus on getting our job done and not be sidetracked by extraneous issues. I also anticipate having to be very patient and allow for a cooling time whenever situations arise which lead to some members feeling aggrieved.

Q: Issues on religion are thorny. How do you plan to deal with them?

A: “When there is a will, there is a way”, so the saying goes, and I believe nothing is impossible. Religious issues require sensitive handling and a sincere commitment on the part of all members to find solutions mutually acceptable to them. The Committee has set up several Working Committees to handle a variety of matters and issues which approach allow for a greater number of experts to be involved and make possible for a speedier resolution.

Q: So far, how have the religious representatives responded to you?

A: Their responses have been motivating. They are truly sincere and I am optimistic we will be able to achieve our agreed objectives.

Q: In the past, there have been all kinds of objections from various religious groups just to sitting down together to talk about dealing with the problems affecting members of their communities. What do you think has changed to finally move the religious representatives to sit down at the same table?

A: Based on my past experience from 2004 – 2008, when they perceive there is mutual respect the religious representatives would readily cooperate to solve problems together .

Q: Malay rights group Perkasa has raised the gender issue as well when it questioned your qualifications to chair the committee, despite your appointment by Cabinet. They seem to imply that heading the committee is a man’s job. How do you feel about that?

A: The role of the chairperson in the Committee is to facilitate and does not involve making Islamic pronouncement. So their objection is untenable as the chair’s gender should not be an issue. The only major consideration ought to be the capabilities of the person to handle sensitive situations being part and parcel of inter religious work as well as secure the respect and cooperation of the members.

Q: How are you coping with the knee-jerk reactions from the various factions pitting the Muslim group against the non-Muslim group? The MCCBCHST has vowed to boycott talks with their Muslim counterparts following the DPM’s tactless remark and Perkasa and the Perak Fatwa Council have strongly objected to and rejected the validity of this Cabinet committee. Do you still have confidence in promoting any understanding among Malaysia’s diverse religions at this point?

A: I have great faith in MCCBCHST’s appreciation that the work of the Committee would largely benefit them and that the earlier we get down to work the quicker they get to enjoy the desired outcomes.

Comments Off on Interview with head of inter faith panel »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags:

hope Shamala and her children gets justice

April 29th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Actually, I don’t have a good feeling about this case. Something tells me Shamala will lose, even though I hope she will get justice. More discrimination I guess.

Come Monday, five judges from the highest court in Malaysia, will hear an application by a Hindu mother to challenge for the custody of her two underage sons, who became Muslim, after her husband converted them without her consent eight years ago.

The S Shamala vs Dr M Jeyaganesh case, will be heard by the Federal Court on May 3, and is bound to touch on racial and religious sentiments in multiracial Malaysia.

The case and its rulings will be a precedent to other child conversion and custody cases.

Normally, the Federal Court would have three judges hearing a particular case. However, owing to the complexity of this case as it involves constitutional matters, it had decided on a five-member bench.

Such cases have become contentious issues in Muslim-majority Malaysia as they centre on whether a parent has the right to convert their children, without the consent of the other spouse, in a civil marriage.

Other contentious issues which would be argued include whether the civil courts have the jurisdiction to hear cases concerning conversion of non-Muslim children by one parent, and whether the Syariah Court has exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether a conversion of a minor is valid or not.

… The Shamala case comes up almost a year after the appellate court heard her appeal and decided that the apex court had to rule on five constitutional questions.


Background to Shamala’s case

Shamala and Jeyaganesh were married in 1998 according to Hindu rites, with their marriage registered under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976.

Sometime in November 2002, Shamala’s husband converted to Islam, taking on the name Muhammad Ridzwan Mogarajah.

Subsequently he converted their two underage sons (then aged four and two respectively) to Islam without Shamala’s knowledge or consent.

She filed an application for custody of the children at the Kuala Lumpur High Court, and obtained an interim order from the court to grant custody of their children, while her husband was granted access.

However, before the interim custody order was made, Ridzwan obtained a hadanah custody order from the Syariah Court.

Shamala did not attend the Syariah Court hearing because she was a non-Muslim, and subsequently a warrant of arrest was issued against her, and also for failing to produce the children in the Islamic court.

After realising the children had converted to Islam, Shamala filed at the High Court for a declaration that the conversion of her two sons was null and void.

This is based on the Federal Constitution and the Guardianship of Infants Act granting her equal rights in determining the religion of the children.

However, in April 2004, the High Court dismissed her application stating that this was a matter for the Syariah Court.

Ridzwan meanwhile, obtained interim access from the High Court, and used his weekly visitation rights under the civil court to see the children.

At one instance, the father took the children from Shamala and refused to return them because he had obtained a Syariah Court hadanah (custody order).

Following this, Shamala filed for committal proceedings against her husband. He eventually returned the children after the High Court cited him for contempt, and held that he violated the interim custody order issued by the High Court.

In July 2004, the High Court granted Shamala ‘actual custody’ of the children, and decided that she would share ‘legal custody’ with her husband.

However, the court held she would lose custody if “there are reasonable grounds” to believe she would influence the children’s Islamic beliefs.

Five appeals filed

As a result of the case, five appeals were filed – four by the husband and one by Shamala at the Court of Appeal.

  • Ridzwan appeal’s over the High Court’s decision in dismissing his preliminary objection that the court had no jurisdiction to hear custody cases as the children had converted to Islam;
  • His appeal on holding him for contempt when he refused to abide by the civil court’s order to return the children to Shamala;
  • The husband appealing a warrant of arrest issued by the Syariah Court against his wife had been set aside by the civil court;
  • Ridzwan appeal over the High Court’s decision in giving actual custody to his wife, Shamala is cross-appealing against the decision seeking sole custody and the removal of the caveat she cannot influence her children’s faith; and
  • Shamala appealing to nullify the conversion of her children to Islam.

Following this, the Court of Appeal three-member panel headed by Justice Abdull Hamid Embong recognised the case involves important constitutional matters.

Since constitutional matters are within the realm of the apex court, it had decided to grant leave to appeal and transfer the case there. Hence, Monday’s hearing.

Questions to apex court

Five questions, which were agreed by the Court of Appeal and posed to the Federal Court to decide are:

1. Whether Section 95 (b) of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 is ultra vires (beyond the powers) of Article 12 (4) of the Federal Constitution (specifically concerning the right to determine the religion of the children under the age of 18 shall be determined by the parent or guardian) and Article 8 regarding equality rights?

2. Whether the same section in state law is inconsistent with federal law namely Section 5(1) of the Guardianship of Infants Act 1961, and is therefore invalid;

3. Regarding Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, where a custody order of children is made, which court, between the Syariah Court or the High Court is the higher authority.

4. When there is conversion of children of a civil marriage to Islam by one parent without the consent of the other, are the rights of remedy for the non-Muslim parent is vested in the High Court?;

5. Does the Syariah Court have jurisdiction to determine the validity of conversion of a minor into Islam, once it had been registered by the Registrar of Muallafs (Registrar for newly-converted Muslims).

Justice Abdull Hamid, who has now been elevated to Federal Court is unlikely to hear this appeal as he has heard it in the Appellate Court.

It is hoped the hearing and verdict would help resolve the long-standing issue which has affected many families facing a similar situation.

One of the cases likely to be affected by the outcome of the Shamala case include the M Indira Ghandi case in Ipoh.

Similar to the Shamala case, Indira’s husband converted to Islam and also converted their three children.

Indira is seeking the custody of the children and requesting the annulment of the children’s conversion.

Comments Off on hope Shamala and her children gets justice »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian, Religion

Tags:

Ibrahim Ali says give no aid for Chinese

April 26th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I’m not sure what he had consumed recently, but this statement should be seeing him under ISA or at least charged for some sort of crime. But knowing Bolehland, he and some other monkeys get to say whatever they like. It will be considered as “voicing their displeasure” or some other nonsense according to the twisted logic of some politicians.  Just imagine other groups doing the same, and you can see the swift attack.

Well, this is what the trouble-maker said according to Malaysian Insider:

“Amat wajar kerajaan tangguh dulu apa jua peruntukan dan kelulusan kepada masyarakat kaum Cina, terutama desakan-desakan MCA dan Gerakan kerana jelas masyarakat Cina di Hulu Selangor serta India tidak menyokong BN.

“Mereka langsung tidak hargai apa yang diberi oleh kerajaan BN walaupun kerajaan BN terpaksa mengguris hati orang Melayu dan Bumiputera,” kata Ibrahim yang juga Ahli Parlimen Bebas Pasir Mas mengulas keputusan malam tadi yang memihak BN tetapi majoriti cuma 1,725 undi.

Walaupun analisis menunjukkan sokongan pengundi Cina masih belum memihak kepada BN tetapi ia menerima peningkatan undi komuniti India hampir 10 peratus.

BN meletakkan sasaran majoriti 6,000 undi.

Dalam kenyataan kepada The Malaysian Insider awal minggu lalu Ibrahim sendiri meletakkan majoriti 3,000 kepada BN tetapi Khamis lalu menurunkannya kepada 1,500 undi.

Kata beliau, apa saja yang kaum Cina minta kerajaan sedia berikan tetapi mereka tidak berterima kasih.

“BN kena ambil hati orang Melayu yang tetap setia pada BN.

“Oleh itu dasar afirmatif untuk memperkasakan kaum Melayu dan Bumiputera mesti diterus dan dilaksanakan dengan tegas,” kata beliau dengan merujuk kepada Model Ekonomi Baru yang sedang dirangka.

Malam tadi, Setiausaha Agung BN, Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor berkata walaupun menang dengan majoriti 1,725, tetapi pengundi Cina didapati tidak menyokong BN, bukan sahaja dalam pilihan raya kecil itu tetapi juga semasa pilihan raya umum 2008.

“Kita perlu melihat di mana silap kita. Saya akan berjumpa dengan parti-parti komponen untuk membincangkan perkara ini, tetapi kita gembira kerana pengundi India kembali menyokong BN. Begitu juga dengan pengundi Melayu.

“Kita hilang kerusi pada pilihan raya 2008 dengan majoriti kecil 198 undi tetapi kini mengekalkan kembali kerusi dengan majoriti yang lebih besar. Ini menunjukkan rakyat menyambut baik konsep yang diutarakan pucuk pimpinan seperti gagasan 1Malaysia dan Model Ekonomi Baru,” katanya.

Presiden MCA, Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek pula berkata, MCA memerlukan anjakan paradigma bagi mendekati masyarakat Cina yang dilihat tidak begitu memberi perhatian kepada soal kehendak dan keperluan asas.

Ibrahim berkata kemenangan BN membuktikan rakyat mahu ketenangan dan kesetabilan politik.

“Ia juga bukti rakyat menerima kepimpinan Datuk Seri Najib (Razak) sebagai perdana menteri. Ia juga membuktikan politik perkauman ditolak rakyat.

“Cuma pengundi kaum Cina nampaknya tidak berterima kasih pada kerajaan BN. Jelas pengaruh MCA dan Gerakan ditolak masyarakat Cina.

“Pelbagai tuntutan kaum Cina, kerajaan layan, tapi balasannya tidak seberapa,” katanya.

Katanya, usaha pihak tertentu untuk memburukkan nama Perkasa dalam pilihan raya Hulu Selangor juga tidak memberi kesan.

In English, it means something like this:

Malay rights group Perkasa wants the Barisan Nasional (BN) government to review election pledges made in Chinese areas in Hulu Selangor because of the community’s poor support for the coalition.

Its president Datuk Ibrahim Ali (picture)said despite BN’s success in winning the semi-rural seat from PKR, the Chinese voters had largely chosen to back the federal opposition.

“It is necessary for the government to delay any allocation and approval of projects for the Chinese community,” said Ibrahim in a statement responding to the by-election result.

Ibrahim added that the government should also ignore all the demands made by BN members, MCA and Gerakan, as the Chinese of Hulu Selangor had rejected the ruling coalition.

“They show no appreciation to BN government’s efforts, even though the BN government had to hurt the feelings of the Malays and the natives,” said Ibrahim.

“All their demands are fulfilled by the government but they do not know how to be grateful,” he added.

Ibrahim, an independent MP, had actively campaigned for BN during the campaign.

His Perkasa is fighting for affirmative action policies favouring Malays to be retained permanently.

In the by-election which saw BN’s P. Kamalanathan defeating former Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim by 1,725 votes, the ruling coalition lost badly in Chinese dominated polling districts.

During the final campaigning days for the Hulu Selangor by-election Datuk Seri Najib Razak promised an allocation of RM3 million for a Chinese school near in new village.

The BN chairman also promised RM90,000 for the Ulu Yam Kwang Tung cemetery and more allocations for Hokkien and muhibbah associations in the area.

However the support level from the Chinese voters was reduced from about 35 per cent in Election 2008 to less than 30 per cent yesterday.

BN’s victory was guaranteed by strong support from the Malay-dominated Felda settlements and villagers in rural Hulu Selangor.

Ibrahim said the outcome showed that the pro-Malay affirmative action policies should be maintained.

“BN must now keep the Malay happy as they have been loyal to BN. Therefore the affirmative action policies to strengthen the Malays and the natives must be maintained and implemented thoroughly,” he said.

This is what the useless paper mentions:

Dalam pada itu Ibrahim berkata, pilihan raya kali ini juga memperlihatkan penolakan kaum Cina terhadap kerajaan.

‘‘Walaupun kerajaan telah memberi layanan kepada mereka, balasan yang diterima masih tidak seberapa.

‘‘Mereka masih belum berterima kasih kepada kerajaan BN dan ini jelas membuktikan bahawa pengaruh MCA dan Gerakan terus ditolak oleh masyarakat Cina,” katanya.

See??? Nothing at all about the issue of recalling back the aid. Another confirmation of the paper that is not even worth to be used in toilets.

What will newly elected YB Kamalanathan say about his buddy Ibrahim now since this affects his constituency directly? cannot say “no comments” or “i’ll answer later” any more” 🙂

At least this time, MCA did say something in reply:


He explained, “when you try to buy them at the last minute, telling them to vote for BN and they will get rewarded, some of them feel insulted.

“It is like treating them like beggars. The Chinese will be your long term friend if you be fair and treat them well. But, they will turn away from you if not.

“It is not that they don’t like Najib, they adore Najib, but they do not support these few BN leaders who are ‘extremists’ like Ibrahim Ali.”

Sadly, he said, some of the BN leadership are emulating Ibrahim’s racist stance.

“There are those who keep saying that Malays are first and the Chinese should be grateful,” he added. This is not the way to win the Chinese over,” he stressed.

Meanwhile, Dong Jiao Zhong committee member Chow Siew Hon stressed that the money used for the allocations belongs to the government and not to any political party.

“The money ultimately belongs to the rakyat. We are all entitled to it. Nobody can say that you cannot get the funds just because you don’t support BN.

“The vote is your personal choice, whoever you want to support. I strongly disagree with that gentleman (Ibrahim),” said Chow.

MCA state assemblyperson for Kuala Kubu Baru Wong Koon Mun refused to comment on the issue of allocations but hit out at Ibrahim, saying that he is a “rotten apple” and a “party to the effort to topple BN.”

BN Secretary General’s response:

Barisan Nasional (BN) secretary-general Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor said today that the government will not neglect the Chinese voters in Hulu Selangor.

“We cannot take back the allocations for the Chinese. There are also Chinese who voted for BN in the by-election,” he explained when asked if the government would heed the suggestion of Perkasa chairman Ibrahim Ali.

The independent MP had suggested that the Chinese voters in Hulu Selangor should be punished by the government for not fully supporting MIC candidate P Kamalananthan.

Tengku (left) added that as BN is a multiracial party, they need to help the rakyat irrespective of their race or religion.

He then brought up Kelantan which is ruled by PAS.

“We give Kelantan a lot of money for its development even though BN is not the state government.”

Nevertheless, the Putrajaya MP said that Umno will work closely with MCA to understand why the Chinese voters are not supportive of BN and how they can overcome this problem.

“I believe that if we conduct a post mortem (on the Hulu Selangor by-election) we can get answers on how to regain the Chinese votes,” he told reporters in a press conference at the Umno headquarters.

He added that it is important for all the component parties to work together towards finding the root cause and not penalise MCA.

“We cannot punish a member of our component party if they don’t perform. What we can do now is to analyse what happened and what can be done to improve things,” he continued.

I like to quote Wong Chun Wai’s tweet:

Ibrahim Ali wants govt to ignore demands by MCA n Gerakan. Maybe he shd find out who r the largest tax payers in Msia.

5 comments »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

Interview with Indira Gandhi

April 16th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Reproduced from Malaysian Insider article.

By Clara Chooi

Indira with her daughter Tevi (left) and son, Karan (right) at their home in Ipoh. — Pictures by Choo Choy May

KUALA LUMPUR, March 25 — Unlike most traditional Indian marriages, kindergarten teacher Indira Gandhi married K. Pathmanathan out of love.

Theirs was not the stuff of novels; it was just a run-off-the-mill high school romance that eventually resulted in an exchange of wedding vows.

What they did not know was that three children and 14 years later, their marriage would be torn apart by a highly-publicised inter-religious custody battle that, until today, remains unsolved.

In an exclusive interview with The Malaysian Insider in her home city of Ipoh recently, Indira vented her frustrations over the ambiguity of the country’s religious laws, and recalled the many trials and tribulations of the past year that had very nearly caused her to give up Hinduism just to keep custody of her children.

The drama, said Indira, actually began from the day after she and Pathmanathan became Mr and Mrs Pathmanathan. Once a doting boyfriend and first-love, Pathmanathan wasted no time in shedding his sheep’s clothing, she said.

“Shortly after we got married, he began to beat me. Over and over again. Most of the time over small, petty arguments,” she claimed. Her allegations cannot be independently verified and is not a subject of her legal case.

Indira, however, said she kept quiet about the beatings, not wanting to blow the problem out of proportion and praying daily that her high school sweetheart would soon return.

And so the couple moved on with their lives without much fanfare. In 1997, Indira gave birth to her first baby girl, Tevi Darsiny. A year later, a baby boy, Karan Dinish, joined the growing family.

The couple struggled through difficult years as financial problems eventually began to cause serious dents in their marriage.

“I took a job as a kindergarten teacher. My husband switched from job to job and we had to move around Malaysia quite a bit. I hardly got to see my family members, not even during Deepavali,” said Indira.

To top it off, she had to settle the household bills and take care of the children all by herself, as Pathmanathan was frequently on the road.

Indira claimed she had to put up with abuse and infidelity.

“Not only that… he began to have an affair with a Thai woman. I knew about it but what could I do?

“Even my children knew about this. Imagine what it felt like when my daughter came home one day and told me — `Amma, I saw daddy with another woman’,” said Indira.

Still, like many broken marriages, Indira and Pathmanathan stayed married for the good of the children.

It was in March last year that the real drama really exploded, she explained, barely a year after she had delivered her third child, Prasana Diksa, a chubby little baby girl who should have been the uniting factor in a disintegrating marriage.

“He came home that day, telling me he wanted to talk to me. When we got the chance, he told me `Why not we all become Muslims? Life would be easier, we would get better opportunities, money would come easier’. He said `Come to Kelantan with me, they will give us land’. I was shocked,” she said.

“I refused and so did my two older children. We fought and he got angry… he began to beat me. My daughter yelled at him, saying `Don’t you ever lay your hand on Amma’. He got angry with my daughter but he did not beat her. He is a very good father to them,” said Indira.

In the midst of the argument, she said, Pathmanathan grabbed 11-month-old Prasana and stormed off.

“The other two did not want to come with him so he just took Prasana,” she said.

Losing Prasana was just a harbinger of worse to come.

At the police station later, Indira was dealt with a stunning revelation — that Pathmanathan had already embraced Islam earlier in the month and had become “Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah”.

“I was shocked because he has always been the religious… he would even go with us to the temples on occasions,” she said.

It was the first mile of a long, bad road from that day onwards, said Indira.

Mohd Ridzuan had even converted all three children into Islam without the presence or knowledge of their mother, after taking the children’s birth certificates from the family home.

“He changed all their names and even informed their schools they were now Muslims,” she said.

It was then that Indira discovered the flaws in the country’s religious laws and just how sticky a custody battle could be when it involved a Muslim-convert and a non-Muslim.

With little choice in her hands, Indira was forced to take her struggle to the courts, and until today, her dilemma has not been solved.

She sought two things — that her children remain as Hindus and that she gets to keep custody of all three.

Since her husband absconded with Prasana, Indira has been living with her two older children in Ipoh.

To date, two conflicting custody orders have been granted to the couple — one to Mohd Ridzuan from the Syariah Court last April and one to Indira from the civil High Court on March 11 this year.

Which order should prevail, however, is still unknown as the country’s laws are silent on that matter.

Meanwhile, Indira’s application to seek leave for judicial review to quash the conversion of her three children to Islam has been set for April 3.

Indira contemplated embracing Islam, in order to be allowed to keep her children.

“I was happy when I was granted custody but yet a part of me also knew that the fight was far from over. I just wish that this never happened. I do not know why he has to do this. If he has found happiness in another religion, I do not care, go ahead with it, but leave the children out of it. I want my baby girl back…” she said.

Indira said that the last time she had caught a short glimpse of Prasana after a year-long separation was in January this year, when Mohd Ridzuan was ordered to bring the toddler to court to meet with High Court Justice Wan Afrah Wan Ibrahim.

Although she had been forewarned by her lawyers, the sight of her 21-month-old baby girl weighed down by a large tudung (Malay headscarf) had moved her to tears.

She voiced frustration at having missed out on so many firsts in Prasana’s growing years, like her first words, her first steps, and even her first birthday.

“I just missed so much… I missed so much. She was taken when she was just 11-months-old. I missed everything. She was such a pleasant child, very easy to care for and we all loved her. As a mother… and a kindergarten teacher, I see children everyday but I can’t see my own baby. Now, I do not know anything about her, how long her hair is, what she likes… I miss my child,” she said.

In fact, Indira said she had very nearly given up at one point and had even toyed with the idea of converting to Islam for the good of the family.

“It was my two older children who stopped me. My son said `If you want, you can go ahead. I do not want to be a Muslim’. He is a bold child… but my children were right… why should we convert?” she said.

She lashed out at the glitch in the country’s religious laws and condemned the government for not acting quickly on the matter.

To date, the government has given no indication on when it would amend the laws governing such religious conflicts.

Indira’s lawyer, M. Kulasegaran, recently said that he would bring the battle back to Parliament again soon, and blamed the legislative body for not moving fast to solve the deadlock.

In the meantime, Indira’s fight continues in the courts.

Today, the Ipoh High Court will hear Mohd Ridzuan’s application for a stay of the custody order granted by the civil High Court to Indira.

But the feisty 35-year-old said she was ready to do just about anything to win custody of her children, especially baby Prasana.

“There is no fight too difficult for me to handle, I will not give up, not surrender because my children’s futures are at stake here. I love them too much,” she said.

She said that she intended to fight this to the very end, even if it meant challenging the country’s 52-year-old system.

The system, Indira firmly added, may fail, but never the love of a mother for her children.

1 comment »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags: