YOURSAY ‘The constitution does not allow unilateral conversion of minors.’
Gov't allows unilateral conversions of minors
Aries46: Such venomous interpretation of the constitution in defence of secret conversions is certainly flawed as this is not in the spirit of our forefathers’ struggle for independence nor the constitution under which the British granted us independence.
The cabinet decision of 2009 as well as the recent civil court decision testifies to that.
If there is any truth to Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Jamil Khir Baharom’s claims, why hide these conversions especially from the non-converting spouse who have a legitimate claim and interest in the matter?
And what about the plight of the minor children if on majority they disagree with their forced conversion? Are they condemned to stay an apostate to one day become a victim of body snatching ?
This is why unilateral conversion of minors is forbidden in civilised societies and human rights conventions.
These in fact need not even be matters for the constitution, provided conversions are done openly respecting the inherent and legitimate rights of non-Muslim marriages and their minor children.
Tholu: Clause (4) of Article 12 of the federal constitution cannot be read and interpreted of its meaning in isolation and with seclusion of clause (3) of Article 12.
Read together with clause (3), clause (4) would mean that a child under the age of 18 cannot be forced by anyone (who is not the child’s parent or guardian) professing a religion other than the child’s, to convert to the religion professed by the proselytiser. That is exactly what clause (4) says.
Further, under section (4) of our Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967, “words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular”.
This means that the word ‘parent’ or ‘guardian’ used in clause (4) of Article 12 of the constitution should be interpreted to mean that in the event the child’s father and mother (parents) are alive, the conversion of the child’s religion can be effected only with the consent of both parents.
If only one parent decide to convert the child’s religion, without the consent of his/her living legal spouse, the ensuing conversion would be illegal and therefore void in law.
Jamil Khir, if you do not understand the contents and legal implications of our constitution, please refrain from commenting on it.
Haven't you learned your lesson from the brickbats you got from saying that our country is not a secular country despite the heap of evidence to the contrary?
Are you enjoying yourself exposing your stupidity to the whole wide world. It appears so to me.
Gggg: There is no such thing as unilateral conversion. It only works for one religion and after that the other parent cannot re-convert the child. I don't see the law to be fair.
I am worried about my family if any one spouse can take the law into his or her own hands.
Telestai!: For the life of me, I cannot understand why Muslim authorities support secret or stealth conversions.
If the conversions are likely to face opposition from family members and loved ones, they need to be confronted them from day one.
If Islam truly transforms a person for the better, sooner or later his or her loved ones will accept the conversions.
Be that as it may, child conversion must have the consent of both parent regardless of their religion or marital status.
It is time for Muslims to show good faith on matters pertaining to conversion. Trust begets trust.
Well Thats Fantastic: This is beyond insane, how can one person be permitted to decide another's choice of religion? Again, it needs to be said, there is no compulsion is Islam.
Anticonmen: To each his own belief, so they say, simply because the infinite supreme soul who pervades his creation cannot be comprehended by the limited human mind.
After all, that is why the basic articles in the constitution provides for freedom of religion for all citizens, as propounded by the Reid Commission and the founding fathers of this nation in our constitution.
Why be so fanatical in controlling believers? Did God give you the right or make you controller over the beliefs of his children? What you are practising is not religion but egomaniacism. Respect the constitution and the rights of all citizens equally and you respect God.
Where in the federal constitution does it say unilateral conversion by one parent is allowed? Such an article, if it exists, contradicts and goes against the basic right of freedom of religion.
Anonymous_1371473234: Distraction of the public attention is at play here.
What better than to stir problems between various hot topics to keep everyone occupied, to avoid and keep the media away from the real deals behind closed doors to pocket more money from the Treasury?
In the constitution, ‘parent’ a collective noun
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
