Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
Dec 30, 05 5:23pm Malaysiakini
Everest hero and ex-army commander M Moorthy would not have expected
that his death could spark a movement to amend the constitution on the
rights of non-Muslims.
Already plans are afoot as lawyers for his wife, S Kaliammal, argued that
Article 121(A) of the federal constitution, which separates the
jurisdictions of civil and syariah courts, as "unconstitutional".
Whereas Article 8 of the constitution provides for freedom of religion,
Article 121(A) effectively locks non-Muslims out of the Syariah Court and
prevents them from pursuing their rights through the Islamic legal system,
they said.
"There is not even a double standards here. With double standards, at
least the other party gets a less favorable deal. But here, one party has
got no deal at all, which infringes Article 8 (of the constitution)," said
lawyer A Sivanesan (photo).
Sivanesan represents Kaliammal in the tussle between Moorthy's family, who
insists that the Mt Everest climber died a practicing Hindu, and the
Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council, which maintained that he had
converted to Islam.
Last Thursday, the Syariah Court, on an application by the council, ruled
that Moorthy - who passed away Dec 20 - was a Muslim and should be buried
accordingly.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court two days ago ruled it had no jurisdiction to
review the Syariah Court's decision.
Article 121 (1A), said High Court judge Mohd Raus Sharif, states that
the civil court has no jurisdiction on matters pertaining to Islam and
such issues should be handled by the Syariah Court.
Backing sought from politicians
At a press conference held yesterday at his office in Kuala Lumpur with
Kaliammal and other family members, Sivanesan said among the first steps
to be taken in the campaign "to rescue Article 8" is to call for support
from all political parties - both ruling and opposition.
"We will be writing to all political parties to convey to them what has
transpired, the agony (Kaliammal) is going through, and what legislators
should do, and (for) quick action (to be taken)," said Sivanesan.
"Whenever they are willing to meet us, we are willing to go," he said.
"This is not Kaliammal's cause. This is (all) Malaysians' cause. We are
not questioning Islam or the rights of Muslims... We are saying
non-Muslims should have legal remedy."
Sivanesan said he hoped the next cabinet meeting would see the issue
raised by Indian-based party MIC leader S Samy Vellu as the controversy
"involves an Indian woman".
In the wake of the High Court decision, non-Muslim interfaith body
Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and
Sikhism has urged for changes to the constitution to ensure that
non-Muslims' rights are recognised.
Appeal to higher courts
Meanwhile, another lawyer, M Manoharan, said the notice of appeal against
the High Court decision had been filed yesterday morning.
Apart from hoping to obtain a date for the hearing as soon as possible,
Manoharan said he would like the Court of Appeal to declare outright that
Article 121(A) is unconstitutional.
"We wanted to know whether Moorthy really did convert. We went there (the
courts) to find out, but the civil court said, 'This is not the place for
you to know. You must go to the Syariah Court.' But we cannot go to the
Syariah Court," he said.
Reporters were also told that the army's legal advisor, Lieutenant Colonel
Zulkarnain Ahmad, had assured the family that he would expedite all
benefits, such as pension payments, to which Kaliammal was entitled from
her husband's long service in the army.
Sivanesan also said the family was assured that there would be no problems
with Kaliammal inheriting from Moorthy despite the court's declaration
that he had died a Muslim.
"The court has recognised her as the legal wife. There shouldn't be any
complications (on the matter)," he said.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail has been sent via JARING webmail at http://www.jaring.my
No comments:
Post a Comment