Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this

At a time when the recent passing at Dewan Negara of the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) (Amendment) Bill 2005 has ironically jolted the core of its subjects, the Muslims in Malaysia, another controversy of greater proportion is highlighted here and abroad.

Malaysia's forgotten Everest hero M Moorthy - who failed to get the kind of recognition and wealth for his achievement - has unfortunately got worldwide attention only after he died.

If this indeed is not a disgrace, the wrestle and tussle for his dead body adds a further dimension and blemish to a nation driven more by form than by faith.

As such, I cannot help but join the long chorus of peace-loving, ethical, morally upright Malaysians of all races, religions and creeds to urge the Barisan Nasional-led government - which was swept to power on calls for accountability, good governance and transparency - for amendments to the federal constitution to allow the High Court to decide on cases of religious conversion.

This is in view of the recent High Court's 'tame' refusal to review a Syariah Court decision which declared Moorthy a Muslim and that he should be buried according to Islamic rites.

The call to amend the constitution is justifiable because Malaysia is a country where almost half of its population are non-Muslim. The Syariah Court cannot assume jurisdiction over persons of other faiths.

I am advised that a proposal has already been sent to the National Unity Advisory Council panel and the relevant authorities on this matter, which has already been highlighted in the international media.

In all fairness, the call on the government to urgently cure this grave defect in our legal system by making the necessary amendments to the federal constitution and all other legislations so that jurisdiction to determine the validity of conversions into and out of Islam be vested in the High Court - where all Malaysians can be parties and have equal rights as witnesses - is certainly not against simple logic and ethics, no matter from which angle one sees it.

It goes against all fundamental rights when a person is prevented to do so or to have legal remedy. One need not be a rocket scientist or a Harvard professor of law to see that the present situation in Malaysia pertaining to this matter, where non-Muslims, as in Kaliammal's case, have no legal recourse to claim the husband's body is simply unacceptable.

Can the Syariah Court override Article 8 of the constitution that guarantees religious freedom? If this is true than there is no legal remedy for Malaysia's non-Muslims and therefore Malaysia's non-Muslims must take a stand on this matter to protect their rights and interest as according to the federal constitution, failing which, they should bring this matter to the International Court of Jurist in Geneva!

ADS