Posts Tagged ‘Religion’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

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:

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:

Malaysiakini clarifies on Muhyiddin small fry phrase

April 15th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I’m not sure if the below is an apology or a thinly veiled explanation. Thus their title of “clarification” is justified kot?

On April 12, Malaysiakini had attributed certain remarks to Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin in a report on the interfaith panel, in particular the phrase ‘small fry’.

In denying he had used the phrase, Muhyiddin clarified that he had not spoken in English during the event – a press conference in Rawang.

We wish to clarify that the phrase ‘small fry’ was our translation of his comments in Bahasa Malaysia, interpreted in the larger context of his statement that (paraphrased here):

  • the committee is not a council or commission;
  • it has no decision-making power; and
  • it has an administrative role under the Prime Minister’s Department.

In fact, the Utusan Malaysia online report of April 13 quotes the DPM as saying (our emphasis in bold):

“Sambil menasihatkan semua pihak supaya tidak bimbang dengan penubuhan berkenaan, Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin berkata, ia hanya sebuah jawatankuasa kecil yang tidak akan memutuskan sebarang keputusan berhubung undang-undang atau dasar berkaitan semua agama yang ada di negara ini.

“Ia dibuat di bawah pentadbiran Jabatan Perdana Menteri (JPM) supaya wakil di dalamnya boleh duduk berbincang. Saya tidak fikir ia akan mengamalkan dasar mengutuk perkara berhubung keagamaan. Ia cuma membuka ruang untuk semua bertukar pandangan.

“Tujuan pokoknya untuk mewujudkan persefahaman. Jawatankuasa ini tidak boleh memutuskan sebarang perkara kerana hasil perbincangan akan dibawa semula ke JPM untuk dijadikan panduan penambahbaikan perpaduan antara agama dan kaum,” katanya.

The DPM has since accused Malaysiakini of ‘acting with bad intentions’ and of ‘twisting the facts’.

We wish to put on record that there is no hidden motive in our coverage of events or in presenting the facts. Any misinterpretation of the DPM’s statement is regretted.

For me, they just summarised in few words what the DPM said in few sentences. The meaning is same but I do agree however that the summary (small fry) sounds like acting with bad intentions. Wrong choice of words by MK this time, and should apologise.  The impact is quite bad as religious leaders feel offended by the words. It can be easily spun out of control and thought as insulting religions. Another show cause letter for MK on the way?

Koh Tsu Koon already mentioned that the panel/committee will only discuss issues and put forth suggestions/findings to cabinet. So, what can we do the fellows in PERKASA still have problem understanding things? Laugh at them? Cry for them? Thank God we are not like them?

Comments Off on Malaysiakini clarifies on Muhyiddin small fry phrase »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

Inter Religious Understanding Committee coming soon

April 6th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Not sure how this committee is going to function. I’m still waiting  for some numbskulls who will be protesting on the basis of some supremacy nonsense to start their drama.

Its good that the minister says committee should not be having politicians, but the chairperson herself is an ex-MP, so it doesn’t really seem to be politically independent. Probably need to get a declaration from the committee members that they are not members of any political party as first criteria. However, this is Koh Tsu Koon’s justification (guess we have to take it at face value):

Koh elaborated that Ilani was the right person for the job.

“She is a hajah. She is the former MP for Kota Bahru but she has not been active politically for quite a while. Very significantly, she has been in good personal contact with all the major religious leaders in the country.

The Star reported as inter faith committee (article title) when in fact its not:

“We don’t want to call it an inter-faith panel, but a special committee to promote understanding and harmony among the various faiths.

“The idea of the committee is for the members to hold informal dialogues, not on only one issue, but also matters such as inter-marriages, religious conversions as well as custody of children.

“The committee will exchange their views and we will get feedback and get a better understanding on religious issues,” he told reporters at the Parliament lobby on Tuesday.

Malaysiakini reports:

An ‘Inter-religious Understanding Committee’ is being set up under the National Unity and Integration Department to promote harmony between the different religions in the country, Minister in Prime Minister’s Department Koh Tsu Koon told Parliament today.

“It is a committee to promote understanding and harmony, straightforward. Purely leaders of various religions sitting together with the relevant government departments. Let the religious leaders with all their spirituality sit down and have a dialogue.”

Koh (left) said the committee would be chaired by Ilani Isahak, the former MP for Kota Bahru, and would comprise senior representatives from the Islamic Development Department (Jakim), the Institute of Islamic Understanding (Ikim) as well as from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST).

Koh said the special committee was not a rigid structure and was just a framework to provide an interaction and interchange of ideas.

If we take two representatives from each group/religion, then it should be 2 from Jakim, 2 from Ikim, and two each from Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism, and Taoism for a total of 14 members. If one each, then its 7 in total. Or if “imbalanced” representation is used, then expect the number of people from Jakim+Ikim to be more than the total of others.

How about lesser known faiths like Bahaism, the indigenous people’s faith, Jainism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism etc?

So, would Indira Gandhi get her baby back? Would her children still be Hindus? Would converts who repent able to return to their original religion? Would there be a legal mechanism to monitor conversions? My expectation is for such a committee to “help” solve these kind of problems by providing the right inputs to cabinet, and I don’t think it will be wrong to assume that right-thinking Malaysians would expect the same. Anything less, and its would be just another empty talk and waste of tax payers money.

Comments Off on Inter Religious Understanding Committee coming soon »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags: