A former Bar Council president stressed that Malaysia is a secular state, as stated in a Federal Court's judgement.

Speaking in Human Rights Day 2014 public forum in Petaling Jaya last night, Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari said that any law that contradicts the federal constitution would be deemed void, regardless it being syariah law or civil law.

Kuthubul Zaman was the chairperson of the Bar Council from 2003 until 2005.

He cited a judgment written by Mohamed Salleh Abas, former lord president of the Supreme Court, in a ruling on a Muslim drug trafficker to face mandatory death sentence, that Malaysia is a secular state rather than an Islamic country.

"This is a judgement of the Federal Court. That judgement is still valid.

"As far as I am concerned, this country is governed by a secular constitution and not an Islamic constitution, " said  Kuthubul Zaman ( left ).

He was responding to a question if Malaysia would still be governed by civil law or by syariah law in the future, as the government is pushing to establish a Federal Syariah Court which has the same power as the civil Federal Court.

Last month, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom had said that the government was mulling the proposal to set up a Federal Syariah Court. This will give it the same powers as the civil Federal Court.

"If you ask me, I still believe that whatever enactment passed, whether it is syariah law or the civil law, if it runs against the fundamental liberties provided under the constitution, then that enactment, whether it is syariah or civil, is against the constitution," he said.

He also said that the 25 eminent Malays who urged Prime Minister Najib Razak to show leadership in the face of intolerant voices, shared a similar perspective.

Also present were Michelle Gyles-McDonnough, UN Resident Coordinator for Malaysia, Ambiga Sreenevasan, former Bar Council president,and Saifuddin Abdullah, Global Movement of Moderates CEO.

Islamic in a secular constitution

Saifuddin, on the other hand, said he also wished to amend the constitution to be 100 percent Islamic, but at the same also acknowledged that our constitution is a secular one.

"But I am trying to present the case as it is. As it is, the constitution is secular, as it is, the constitution is supreme.

"It becomes a problem, when you are using a secular constitution, but you are behaving as if it is an Islamic constitution,"said the former Deputy Minister for Higher Education.

Responding to this, Ambiga stated that there is a basic structure doctrine in law, which prevents people from changing the fundamental structure of the law.

"For example, you try and say you want to amend the constitution to remove the parliament, you can't do it, because you destroy the basis of the constitution. You can only amend it that much.

"My view is that you can't amend it to change it into an Islamic constitution. So, anyway, you have to basically live with the constitution," she said.

Meanwhile, when asked to respond to Najib’s decision to retain the Sedition Act and the current status of Harmony Act, Saifuddin suggested that the provisions of the Harmony Act could be included in the "amended" Sedition Act.

"If I take the position that never mind about the name, then I would propose (to) adopt the proposed provisions in the Harmony Act into the new Sedition Act.

While waiting for the draft of amendments of Sedition Act by the Attorney General, he also pictured a few possible outcomes.

"I am not trying to jump the gun, but there is a possibility that the government still keeps the Sedition Act, but probably make it better.

"It may work hand in hand, at the same time, you still have the Harmony Act. Maybe we can have both, Sedition Act- make it better and make it fair - and have the Harmony Act at the same time," he said.

No disappointment in politics

However, when asked if there is any disappointment over Najib's decision to retain the Act, the UMNO politician admitted he was surprised but claimed "disappointment is not in my vocabulary".

"Well, I have been a politician for some time, nothing disappoints me anymore," he said.

As for Michelle ( right ), she said that the United Nations was of the view that the said Act restricts the freedom of expression.

"We have issued a number of statement on this Sedition Act during the course of this year.”

In waiting to see the draft of the Sedition Act's amendments, she said the UN will “continue to keep a careful watch" of the developments.

"However, we will continue to urge Malaysia to be responsible in enabling the freedoms… we do hope that if the Act is to remain, then the amendments to the Act are amendments that can bring it more in line with international standards. It is to be an Act where there is greater clarity, where citizens can have predictability," she stated.

Related stories

 

Court grants SIS leave to challenge Selangor fatwa

 

Why so insecure, US scholar asks Muslims