I wish to comment on your report Appeal lost, apostates may go for review by Claudia Theophilus.

The Federal Court ruled that the persons were still Muslims at the time of their offence. I find the whole case rather sad, especially when freedom of religion is not at the heart of this matter.

Ever since Al-Arqam was banned, the government has used the label of 'deviant teachings' to arrest anyone suspected of starting a religious group. Actually, the whole issue is about the right of assembly and association instead of the right of apostasy.

However, by mischievously calling them religious deviants, the only legal recourse for the three is to renounce Islam. After all, since the Malaysian Federal Court does not have jurisdiction in the after-life, one can still be a Muslim in the eyes of God, even after renouncing Islam in a court of law.

Another sad case is about the choice of religion for the children of a Hindu mother and a Muslim father. Once again, freedom of religion is not at the heart of the matter. It is custody of the children which is being fought over for.

The Hindu mother is worried that if the children are to be raised as Muslims, sooner or later, the children will be handed over to the father by the Syariah Court. This is not necessarily true, but understandably the mother feels she is in a precarious and insecure position.

Much is left to be desired in the implementation of laws for governing Muslims in Malaysia.