The conversion of three children by their father, Mohd Ridhuan Abdullah, without their mother M Indira Gandhi’s consent, after the couple’s separation continues to remain a point of contention.

Muslim NGOs have stressed that the children should remain as Muslims while various political parties and civil society members say it was wrong for the children to be converted in the first place, especially without the mother’s knowledge.

But what is the Islamic way to resolve such disputes?

To answer this question, Jihad for Justice chairperson Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim sought advice from various Islamic institutions, including from the influential Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband in India, and Nadwatul Ulama, Lucknow, as well as from Madinah.

Similar letters were written to the National Fatwa Council, Department of Islamic Development Malaysia (Jakim), and the religious department of Perak. But there has been no response from any of the local institutions.

Although Ridhuan has the right to embrace Islam, the scholars consulted by Thasleem unanimously said Ridhuan should have discussed the matter with Indira.

“He went and converted himself and the three children; he even took the 11-month-old baby who was still being breastfed.

“That is the worst crime a father can ever commit, from the civil perspective and I had scholars who told me this is the most un-Islamic act,” Thasleem (photo) said in an interview with Malaysiakini.

The whole conversion process is, therefore, haram (forbidden), he said.

“Some asked me why I say it is haram or why it is illegal. If it’s unjust, it is deemed haram,” he stressed.

Assured a place in heaven

But Thasleem concedes this view is not shared by Muslim scholars in Malaysia - a move he finds baffling because Muslims have an obligation to go against injustice.

Thasleem said Jihad for Justice had written 79 letters to the National Fatwa Council on similar cases. To date, there has been no response to even one letter.

“If you are a Muslim and you know that it’s un-Islamic and you are not voicing it out, you have done a great injustice and that is haram.

“It could be political, but just for political expediency and advantage, are you going to sacrifice this lady and smear the name of Islam?” Thasleem asked.

The decision not to side with Indira, in this case, could be driven by belief that Muslims are assured a place in heaven. This may lead some to ensure that the children are raised and remain Muslims.

Thasleem said Ridhuan, himself, had told Thasleem this when he contacted Thasleem for aid soon after he converted to Islam.

Thasleem said he told the new convert that what he was doing was unjust, but Ridhuan responded that his religious teacher had told him that he and his children are now assured a place in heaven.

What did Prophet Muhammad do?

One Malaysian Islamic scholar, however, disagrees.

“You can’t say that a child is Muslim,” preacher Wan Ji Wan Hussin said.

The religious teacher cited a case where the Prophet Muhammad was asked to resolve a custody dispute, and awarded custody to the non-Muslim mother. The child later chose to stay with his Muslim father.

“So the religious status of a child depends on the child’s inclination, even though a child may not know much, but the child’s inclination must be celebrated,” Wan Ji (photo) said.

However, he noted, the child’s welfare comes before his or her preference.

“If one of the parents fails to provide welfare (for the child), then there must be another decision involving the child’s custody.”

The various schools of thoughts in Islam - all considered valid by scholars - have differing views on custody disputes. The Hanafi school says a child can choose which parent he or she prefers, while the Shafi`e school of thought prioritises the protection of the child’s faith.

Islamic affairs departments in Malaysia mostly adhere to the Shafi’e school of thought, but have accepted various views for different situations, including in the payment of zakat in cash instead of livestock, as per Shafi’e traditions.

No compulsion in religion

Wan Ji understands that most are concerned over the children’s faith, but he advises them to recall that Verse 256 of the Baqarah chapter in the Quran states there is no compulsion in religion.

The verse, he explained, was revealed to Muslims in Madinah who had wanted their children, who were initially cared by Jews, to similarly convert to Islam.

“They met the Prophet to force their children to convert to Islam, but the Prophet did not allow it,” said Wan Ji.

In Islam, he said, fathers have the responsibility to educate their children on religion, but it does not mean forcing them to be Muslim.

“There is no need for a father to convert his child to Islam, he just has to explain about Islam to his child so that the child will be inclined to Islam. That’s his responsibility.

“For a father to force his child to convert would be against Quranic concepts, which clearly state that there is no compulsion in Islam,” Wan Ji stressed.

Even if the court decides that the child must be given to the mother, the court must also make it compulsory for the father to visit the child.

“The father still has to provide food and money for the child. The court, too, must tell the mother not to disallow the father from meeting his child,” he said.

Indira and Ridhuan’s children – then aged 12 years old, 11 years old and 11 months old – were converted without their presence and without Indira’s knowledge.

The youngest child, now eight, was snatched away from Indira and has stayed with Ridhuan ever since. Indira has not met her daughter for the past seven years.

Rulers’ role

The Federal Court last month instructed inspector-general of police Khalid Abu Bakar to arrest Ridhuan, after it found the committal order against Ridhuan issued by the Ipoh High Court to be justified as he had failed to bring the youngest child to the jurisdiction of the court.

However, police have failed to locate him.

Following Indira’s case, the cabinet in April 2009 decided that civil courts are the right forum to dissolve a marriage in the event that a spouse converts to Islam.

The then attorney-general was instructed to amend the relevant laws so that they would be in line with the cabinet’s decision.

The proposed amendments were held back following a decision of a special meeting of the conference of rulers on June 29 the same year.

Thasleem wonders if the rulers have met on this since then, and is planning to write to them to ask.

“It is high time that the rulers endorse these (the proposed amendments), get this Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act into place. I think that will resolve the issue,” he said.

This, Thasleem said, would ensure that there would be no repeat of such incidents and so that all parties would be more careful in future cases of conversions.

Court decides

On Thursday, the Federal Court will hear Indira’s leave to appeal the unilateral conversion of her children.

The Court of Appeal in January found the conversion of the three children illegal as Indira’s permission was not obtained and the children themselves did not affirm or recite the kalimah shahadah (affirmation of faith) as required.

Court of Appeal judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer in his dissenting judgment in the controversial case said that for a valid administrative conversion to take place, the application must be made by the three children with the consent of both parents.

Indira’s lawyer Aston Paiva said the Federal Court decision Tuesday could set a precedent on whether the courts can decide if a government agency can convert an individual to a religion without their consent.

Last week, a man who was registered as a Muslim as a child by his mother, who had converted to Islam, was told by the Federal Court to seek a declaration that he is not Muslim from the National Registration Department.

What this will mean for Indira’s long-drawn-out battle remains to be seen.