The syariah courts which do not interfere with the jurisdiction of the civil courts should also be given due rights and responsibilities in performing their duties, said principal fellow of the

Islamic Law and Politics Research Centre at the Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia (Ikim), Assoc Prof Dr Shamrahayu Ab Aziz.

She said the tabling of the private bill on Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) in Parliament last week, did not in the least interfere with the jurisdiction of the civil courts, but rather to enhance the institution of the syariah courts.

According to her, if there were certain parties who questioned the proposed amendments, they should re-examine where the supposed conflict lied with the constitution.

"This is because the syariah court does not handle cases related to theft, robbery or murder," she told reporters after presenting a working paper titled 'Moderation and the Constitution of Malaysia, A View', at the Prime Minister's Department in Putrajaya today.

Shamrahayu said Muslims should be given the right to freedom of religion, as enshrined in the Federal Constitution, as long as there were no conflicts of interest, and thus the proposed amendments to the bill should not be turned into a polemic.

She said opposition from non-Muslim politicians on the proposed amendments should be addressed by improving their understanding of the concept of celebrating diversity, as enshrined in the federal constitution.

Shamrahayu also highlighted the fact that this was not the first time the bill pertaining to the syariah court’s jurisdiction was tabled.

"When it was introduced in 1965, it received a lot of support and during the first amendment in 1984, there were no such protests as opposed to today," she said.

"In 1965, the (maximum) fine was RM1,000, and only after 20 years it was amended to RM3,000, but the question of amending the law did not arise, as it did not change any of the offences, but only raised the punishment, and it does not affect non-Muslims," she said.

- Bernama