Yesterday, Islamic Institute of Understanding Malaysia (Ikim) and the Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia (JKSM) proposed that non-Muslims committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly, but in the civil courts. They also proposed to setup "Syariah Bench" in the civil courts to handle cases involved people of different religions. These were among the proposals made at the two-day seminar organized by them.Syariah Law Not For Non-Muslims
According to the Federal Constitutions Article 121(A), Syariah Court's jurisdiction is restricted to Muslims only. Syariah Law should not be applicable to non-Muslims as non-Muslims are subject to civil laws. Even though Khalwat is widely recognised as immoral act by many religions and societies, nonetheless, it is not a civil offence under the civil law in Malaysia. If this proposal is to be accepted, what'd be coming next? This is an implied way of imposing Syariah Law on non-Muslims.Malaysia : Secular State, Multi-Racial, Multi-Religion
Even though there were various versions of claims on whether Malaysia is an Islamic State within Barisan Nasional (UMNO said Yes, MCA said No), component parties in Pakatan Rakyat (especially DAP) had many times proclaimed that Malaysia is a Secular State with Islam as the official religion but not an Islamic State.We are a multi-racial and multi-religion country. We should respect each other ways of living and faith. No one should impose their own Religion Laws on the others who are not of the same religion and do not believe in the same faith.
1 comment:
i found this at IKIM website. i hope it can be settled
----------------------------------
http://www.ikim.gov.my/v5/index.php?lg=1&opt=com_article&grp=1&sec=&key=1557&cmd=resetall
Statement by the Director-General of IKIM
03/04/2008 |
I would like to refer to the article on page 3 in the Tuesday, April 3 2008 edition of The STAR in which the headlines read "Proposal to prosecute non-Muslims for khalwat". I feel it incumbent to clarify certain matters highlighted in the aforementioned article, the contents of which are contentious to say the least.
First of all, IKIM's objectives for the 2 day seminar held in collaboration with the Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia (JKSM) was intended to review existing syariah laws to see if there were any laws that were redundant and also to propose a solution to some of the issues currently plaguing the syariah judiciary system in Malaysia.
The article in the STAR which reports that the seminar had proposed that non-Muslims caught committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly but in the civil courts, is entirely erroneous. No such proposal was made, and therefore if what is reported in the Star as being comments allegedly made by Syariah Court of Appeal Judge, are also in error.
Conversely, it is our opinion that non-Muslims cannot fundamentally be charged under any provision in Islamic law by virtue of the fact that they do not profess the religion of Islam. In addition, to my knowledge, there is no such provision in the civil courts to charge a person for khalwat, and therefore it would be premature to assume that non-Muslims can also be subjected to the charge of khalwat in the civil courts.
I am disappointed with the article highlighting comments allegedly made by Datuk Mohd. Asri Abdullah which emphasized the banal, when in reality the more important substantive proposals having to do with laws protecting the rights of divorced women and their rights to maintenance, were ignored.
Towards the end of the article, it also alleges that there was a proposal calling "for the establishment of a rehabilitation center for those convicted of offences related to morals and faith such as prostitution and effeminate men". To my knowledge, I have never interpreted being effeminate as an offence. But more importantly this so called proposal as reflected in the article is not representative of the proposals made during the seminar at IKIM. If indeed the learned Syariah Court of Appeal Judge made those statements, we strongly advise that it would behoove the learned Judge to be more circumspect in future.
Post a Comment