Posts Tagged ‘Syariah Law’

family laws and conversion problem

September 14th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Earlier IKIM article talked about child conversion, while the one below focuses on the two set of laws that govern family/marital matters. The main point is the inability of the converting spouse to initiate divorce proceedings in civil court. I think it should be done before the person converts, not while/after converting. Get a clean slate and then continue with life. Or just set up a marriage dissolution tribunal, for example, to make the separation process easier and faster. The convert-t0-be can also be made to provide proof of divorce to the relevant state Islamic religious departments before he is processed for conversion.

Conversion and the family

IKIM VIEWS
By PROFESSOR DATUK DR ZALEHA KAMARUDDIN
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL

Various legal hurdles still stand in the way of a dissolution of the marriage and custody of the children where only one spouse embraces Islam.AS DIFFERENT family laws apply to different communities within the same national legal system, by right, there should be minimal inter-relationship. However, on the few occasions that they intersect, there is much confusion and tension is created.

Family law in Malaysia now consists of Islamic law for all Muslims — contained in state legislation comprising administrative provisions and the substantive law based on the Quran and Sunnah (the primary sources) and authoritative interpretations (fiqh) and — since 1976, the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act (hereafter the Act) for all non-Muslims.

The separation extends to the courts: Syariah courts for Muslim family matters, which is the substantial part of its jurisdiction anyway, and a state entity, and the civil court, a Federal entity, for non-Muslim families. The Syariah court is prohibited by the Federal Consti­tution from assuming jurisdiction over non-Muslims.

Notwithstanding the same provision spelling out that the matters listed in it (mainly family matters) are within the jurisdiction of the Syariah court, the civil courts have encroached on the remit of the Syariah courts, in some instances, even in the same case.

To overcome this problem, the Constitution was amended to provide that the civil court will not encroach on matters within the jurisdiction of the Syariah court. However, the separation is still not complete.

The legal issues and problems that may arise upon conversion may be adumbrated as follows:

First, in Muslim family law a Muslim cannot marry a non-Muslim. So upon conversion, the marriage becomes invalid after a fixed period; the Act requires that it be formally dissolved.

Second, the Act recognises conversion to Islam as a ground for divorce (Sec. 51) and an imperative one at that; the two-year minimum period of marriage that must lapse before a petition may be presented is dispensed with [Sec. 51 (3)].

Third, the converting spouse is not allowed to petition for divorce; he or she may appear in the civil court only in response to the proceedings initiated by the non-Muslim spouse [Sec. 51 (1) of the Act]. [so, it means the non-converting spouse has to start the divorce process]

Fourth, if the non-Muslim spouse does not petition for divorce, is he or she entitled to the estate of the Muslim spouse, and what are the rights of the Muslim who has married the converting spouse? [These are the problems being faced]

Fifth, which law is to apply, the Act or Syariah, to the dissolution of the marriage and the custody of the children? [major problem here]

Sixth, which court is to decide? Strictly speaking, this is not a substantive family law question, but experience has shown that it has complicated matters with the civil and Syariah courts making conflicting, pre-emptive decisions.

For these complex questions to be resolved, there should, to begin with, be only one forum for both parties to go to as of right. [yeah, good idea]

The Royal Commission on Non-Muslim Family Law Reform (hereafter the Ong Commission), which drafted the Act, took the view, as it said so in its report, that married individuals, nearly always men, converted to Islam only to escape their obligations under their existing marriages, which is of course insulting to Islam and Muslims.

The failure to amend Section 51 of the Act is all the more difficult to understand as other provisions have been amended to ensure that the non-Muslim wife’s rights are not affected by the other spouse’s conversion to Islam, and should discourage conversion to Islam for the perceived purpose of avoiding marital obligations.

The position taken by the Ong Com­mission is also incompatible with its avowed aim to do away with “fault” in the sense of matrimonial misconduct as the basis for divorce, and to replace this with the modern concept of “breakdown” of the marriage: whether, taking the relationship in totality, the marriage could be said to have broken down irretrievably.

Conversion to Islam though a right under Islamic law and the Federal Constitution is, as far as the Act is concerned, to be seen as a matrimonial offence for which the converting spouse has to be put at a considerable disadvantage.

In providing that the Muslim spouse should remain trapped in a marriage that has broken down, the legislation goes against one of the principal considerations of the Ong Commission, that estranged spouses should be given an expeditious dissolution of their marriages.

Authoritative Muslim and non-Muslim family law scholars and lawyers are of the view that the Act should be amended to allow the Muslim spouse to go to the civil court on his/her own initiative as the marriage was at its inception a civil law marriage. [yes, this should be allowed!]

Since 2007, the Attorney-General has organised a series of face-to-face meetings between Muslim and non-Muslim groups to arrive at fair, practically negotiated solutions to all questions of ancillary relief consequential upon divorce.

To both Muslims and non-Muslims the discussions have been salutary; they had to think not only in terms of what was demanded by their side only but also to think in terms of what was and fair and acceptable to both sides.

And Muslim representatives ex­hausted the whole range of interpretations of Islamic law to find solutions rather than relying on some basic propositions. However, they had to be extra careful, not only taking into account that the Sultans are heads of religion in their respective states but also that observing Islamic law and teachings in all aspects of life is the main Islamic duty of all Muslims, as encompassed in the concept of tauhid.

It is expected that the earlier provisions having been accepted by both sides (without any further interventions from unseen hands), will be an interesting instance of harmon­isation of Malaysian civil law and Islamic law, and will be a truly Malaysian contribution to the resolution of conflict of laws within a national legal system.

So, has it been accepted or not? I still remember the ex-PM Badawi saying there’s some sort of team set up to settle the inconsistencies in the laws so that problems related to conversion can be sorted out. Until now no news. Another case will come up, we make more noise. Then quiet again. Till another case. The cycle continues, but no solution in sight.

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]

Delay in conversion law changes

June 29th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The council of Rulers who met today decided to get the views of state religious councils on the approval of changes to laws involved in conversion before making a decision. The Sultans are head of the religion in the states, so probably they want to discuss at state level first before putting it in front of the Council of Rulers.

The laws in question are Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 and Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984. The amendments are postponed now until its cleared at both levels before brought into parliament.

Rulers Council to discuss law amendments on conversion

June 28th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Remember the controversial cabinet directive on child conversion? Well, the latest news is that the amendments will be discussed in the Rulers’ Council meeting on Monday. Funny thing is, I never read anything in the papers about the proposed changes. Will it be made public at any stage before being brought to parliament?

Amendments to laws to accommodate the cabinet’s decision on conversion to Islam will be discussed by the Rulers’ Council on Monday.

The proposed changes, once endorsed by the council and passed by Parliament, will put to rest some of the issues relating to controversial conversions.

The three laws involved are the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, Islamic Family (Federal Territories) Law 1984 and Administration of Islam (Federal Territories) Islamic Law 1993. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Maj-Gen (rtd) Datuk Jamil Khir Baharom said any amendments would have to be endorsed by the council first before they were tabled in Parliament.

The government has formed a five-man committee on conversion, although moves to introduce the changes started in 2007.

Apart from Jamil Khir, other ministers entrusted to look into the issue are Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz, Senator Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, Human Resources Minister Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam and Women, Family and Community Development Minister Senator Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.

By the way, did Indira get her baby?

No solution for Indira yet

May 6th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The court granted interim stay on the earlier interim grant. I’m getting confused with all these terms, so why not look at it in a timeline manner:

24 May 2009 – inter-parte hearing for the husband to provide his arguments.

14 May 2009 – Court hearing of application by Pathmanthan to set aside the interim custody order

5 May 2009 – Interim stay of the interim custody order granted to husband, thus Indira will not be getting her baby back soon.

24 april 2009 – High court issues interim custody order granting rights of custody to mother, Indira

23 april 2009 – Cabinet decision that children in a case where one parent converts are to remain in the original religion. Further to that, the cabinet also decided that civil marriages must be resolved in civil courts and the convert can’t use the excuse that he converted to escape from his obligations.

20 april 2009 – Committee headed by Koh Tsu Koon meets over the issue of Indira Gandhi.

4 April 2009 – Husband snatches baby away from the home and disappears.

11 March 2009 – Pathmanathan converts to Islam.

On May 14, Wan Afrah will also give her decision on whether contempt of court has been committed by Ridzuan for evading service of the interim custody order issued on April 24.

The issue of contempt was raised orally by Indira’s team of counsel during submissions by Ridzuan’s team, led by counsel Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdullah, on the application to obtain a stay of the interim custody order.