LETTER | How can a well-respected leader such as Hannah Yeoh be hauled up for questioning by the police simply for raising a legitimate concern regarding underage marriage? Worse, some quarters even twisted her words to paint her as anti-Islam when all she was doing was being a proponent for children’s rights.

It was also revealed that Yeoh (above) is being investigated for a seditious statement that she didn’t even utter. Since when is someone liable for made-up quotes associated with them and not the anonymous entities which crafted the slander in the first place?

What on earth is going on in our beloved tanah airku?

It is the right and in fact the duty of every Malaysian, let alone a former minister, to quiz the government on fundamental issues such as underage marriage. Equally, it is the duty of the ones in power to provide the rakyat with answers, not abuse it to reprimand those who speak up.

Have the flames of xenophobia been stoked too hard that even underage marriage needs to be made into a race and religion issue? For those who are blindly enraged by Yeoh’s statement, let us look at her statement as objectively as possible.

 She said 1,845 children were denied the joy of childhood in 2017. First, let’s address the fallacy that non-Muslim Malaysians have no business to even speak about the marriages of minors amongst Muslims within our country. The argument given was that they are more underage minors getting married within the Malaysian non-Muslim community hence they are standing on a lower moral ground. Indeed, 2017 statistics show that a total of 1,845 underage minors have entered into a marriage with an adult, of which 968 were non-Muslims and 877 of them were Muslims.

While there is no denying that underage minors amongst non-Muslims have been higher, reading the said statistics with a division between Muslims and non-Muslims in this respect is completely missing the point. The sole statistic that we need to focus on is that a staggering 1,845 Malaysian children in 2017 have been robbed of the joy of childhood and more importantly, a proper education. This is not a race or religion issue, but it is an issue that needs to be rectified as a nation.

Underage marriage is a dire global issue that seriously needs to be addressed. According to the United Nations, more than 140 million girls became unwilling brides between 2011 and 2020; a whopping 39,000 every day. That's why almost all countries in the world have pushed for a review of existing laws that allow for the marriage of minors.

One country which recently banned underage marriages altogether may surprise you. In a historic move by its ministry of justice, Saudi Arabia put into law the prohibition of any marriage for those below the age of 18. Previously a widespread practice within the kingdom, this was part of a series of efforts to improve the rights of Saudi women and children. The civil rights progress of what the global world sees as an ultra-conservative country is remarkable, to say the least.

So the question arises then, how can an ultra-conservative country that didn’t even allow women to drive up until two years ago could beat us into banning child marriage? Surely if Saudi Arabia could prohibit child marriages, we could also emulate it?

Of course, it is not as easy as it sounds. The world is not black and white and the laws governing marriages in Malaysia definitely fall under "grey". For those not in the know, Muslims and non-Muslims are governed by two separate entities when it comes to marriages. Regulating a consistent minimum age at a national level is complicated as several state's enactments and ordinances pertaining to Muslim marriages need to be amended.

This was definitely apparent when the national roadmap in handling the causes of child marriage was carried out by the Pakatan Harapan government. A total of seven states disagreed with the legal amendments they being Sarawak, Pahang, Terengganu, Perlis, Negeri Sembilan, Kedah and Kelantan. The right of these respective state’s Islamic authorities to reject the amendment is absolute and undeniable.

However, it is the responsibility of the federal government, should they want to regulate the minimum age of marriage, to persuade them into agreeing to the amendments. Differing opinions is Islamic jurisprudence is nothing new and is something that should be celebrated instead of being the cause of division. In this instance, to say that setting a minimum age for marriage is against the teachings of Islam as being the sole valid view in Islamic jurisprudence is untrue. If it was, then why did Saudi Arabia prohibit underage marriage?

Therefore, the statement by former Federal Territory mufti and current de facto Islamic affairs Minister Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri regarding the matter is most relevant here. In his justification for agreeing with the amendment for the federal territories Islamic authority, he said that underage marriage was not al-tsawabit (fixed and permanent) in Islamic jurisprudence but al-mutaghayyirat (changeable) in accordance with the situation, time and locality. 

Zulkifli further asserted that the Islamic ruling on underage marriage should follow the law set by the country hence if it prohibits it, the law must be followed by Muslims.

In order for Putrajaya to convince the state Islamic authorities to adhere to the amendments in accordance with the national roadmap for handling the causes of child marriage, the effort must be headed by someone who believes in such amendments in the first place. Hence, the appointment of Rantau Panjang MP Siti Zailah as deputy minister for Women, Family and Community Development will arguably put a dent in these efforts.

Given Zailah’s track record of having a dissenting voice on the matter, surely Yeoh’s concerns have their merits. Previously, Zailah disagreed with the tabling of the Sexual Offences Against Children Bill 2017 saying that there is a difference between sexual offences against children which is an act of violence and underage marriage, which she described as being a "blessing".

As controversial as Zailah’s statement was, she has her own reasons to say so. Similar to Kelantan’s roundtable decision in rejecting the amendment of the minimum age for marriage, Zailah views of underage marriage is still relevant in certain Malaysian states in order to deter social ills. 

This definitely rings true in the study conducted by the national roadmap whereby it was found that poverty, deterring social ills, limited education and social pressure to marry in order to solve problems were the cause for underage marriage in Malaysia. Regardless of whether you agree with Zailah’s view or not, one can easily see a conflict of interest when a national roadmap is headed by someone who has disputed similar enforcement in the past.

Back in March, the deputy minister said that Pakatan Harapan policies which don't clash with Islam will still go on. The question is then, who will decide on whether a policy constitutes a clash with Islam or not? Is it based on Siti Zailah’s personal views or will there be an authority set up to do so?

Most importantly, what is the Perikatan Nasional government’s stance on the matter? After a series of controversial statements which saw Siti Zailah deactivate her Twitter account, Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin came to her defence and urged the nation to give her a chance. In one of the rare question-and-answer sessions with the press held by Muhyiddin on March 16, he said that “what is important is not her personal view but what the government thinks about it”.

So what is the government’s official view on underage marriage? Is it Zailah’s stance or the one taken by the de facto Islamic affairs Minister? If having a differing view with Zailah constitutes an offence, should Zulkifli Mohamad also be investigated? The move to reprimand Yeoh for voicing out a legitimate concern is alarming and the recent wild accusations by certain parties associating her with insulting Malay rulers is downright ludicrous.

Speaking of which, the timing at which the Segambut MP was hauled up by the police is rather suspect. The tweet was from March, so why is Yeoh being investigated a whole three months later? More suspiciously, she is the fourth opposition MP to be questioned by the police under just over 100 days of Perikatan Nasional rule. 

Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman was questioned by Bukit Aman for an interview he did with Al Jazeera. Previously, Sivarasa Rasiah and Xavier Jayakumar were also hauled up for different reasons. Surely, this is more than just a coincidence.

Perhaps the question we should not be focused on right now is what will happen to our national roadmap to fight child marriage. With the way things are going, perhaps we should be more concerned about what is seeing more and more likely to be a Malaysian national roadmap back to being a kleptocracy.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.