Two recent events have seriously shaken the notion of justice and democracy in this country.

One was the unanimous passing of the amendments to the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territory) 2005 at the Dewan Negara despite dissent and open acknowledgment of the inequality that the law provides for.

The other was the disrespectful struggle over the body of deceased M Moorthy, who is loved by his family as well as apparently, the state's religious department.

Both events are equally mind-numbing as they demonstrate the governing authorities' greater objective to exert power and control rather than providing fair and just legal remedy to affected citizens.

The legislative process which made way to the amendment of the Islamic Family Law gives rise to serious doubt. It does not make sense that a law which proposes to substantively shift the rights available to women and men in a matrimonial contract was only given two days to debate in Dewan Rakyat.

It also does not make sense that dissenting senators were not allowed to make their stand through their voting powers in the Dewan Negara which is an executive body that is obligated to act as a check and balance to the legislative process in this country.

The most senseless part of all is that despite the outrage and protest including by our prime minister no less the bill still went through. Pray tell what is the point of a legislative process when all it seems to do is rubber-stamp whichever proposed law that comes its way?

Should we then be surprised by the lack of interest in the some four million eligible voters to exercise their democratic rights when engagement in structures of governance leaves the common person feeling frustrated and helpless?

The other available structure for legal justice and remedy appears to be equally futile. Through the High Court's refusal to adjudicate on Moorthy's conversion into Islam, his wife S Kaliammal was not only denied her right to her own husband but was left with no legal remedy.

Although deeply saddening, this is not the first time where civil courts have refused to take accountability for clearing the ambiguities in issues of religious conversion. Shamala Sathyaseelan suffered the same dismissal last April by the High Court on the secret conversion of her two young children into Islam by her husband. Only Muslims seemed to have legal standing in the syariah courts.

What happens to those who fall through the cracks when civil courts refuse to play their role in upholding justice? It is completely unacceptable for civil courts to play pass the buck when there are real people's lives at stake.

The reality is that we live in a multi-racial, multi-cultural and multi-religious society. We are proud of this fact and even advertise it as a point for tourist attraction. But diversity needs great care, participation, freedoms and respect to sustain without causing violence or harm.

To do so, we cannot have institutions and structures that play hide and seek with issues of power over citizen's bodies, or those that bluster behind empty promises of future amendments for flaws that can be corrected now. We need to be able to count on structures of justice and equality that we have put in place to function with accountability, integrity and the very least - basic decency.