MEDIA STATEMENT. 21st October 2010.
RE: 1)RESPONSE TO DATO NAZRI’S STATEMENT IN MALAYSIAKINI 18TH OCTOBER - “MUSLIM CONVERSION LAW REFORM HIT DEAD END”
2) AGONG’S CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO PROTECT 12 MILLION NON MUSLIM MINORITY INTEREST AND HAS NO VETO POWER TO HINDER PARLIAMENTARY AMENDMENTS.
3) UMNO BEHIND THE CONSPIRACY TO OPPRESS MINORITY RACES
4) RULERS ARE DUTY BOUND TO ASSENT TO CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS IN MALAYSIA’S PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY.
HINDRAF is shocked and surprised with UMNO’s legal mouthpiece the de facto Law Minister’s statement that the Muslim conversion Law reform proposals have hit a dead end for the following reasons;
1) The sultans feel they need to protect the Muslim subjects and Islam religion because it was their duty
2) The Sultans were not convinced that amendments to certain Islamic laws would not overlap with their duties as guardians of the Islamic faith in their states.
Malaysia practices Parliamentary democracy and the Yang Dipertuan Agong is merely a figure head and does not have the power to veto any amendments or Acts of Parliament passed by the Dewan Rakyat. Religious freedom in Malaysia is enshrined in Article 11 of the Malaysian Constitution not by the State Islamic enactments or the State Rulers. The Constitutional amendments proposed has nothing to do with the role of the Rulers in protecting the rights of Muslim subjects and the Islamic religion instead it is about providing equal protection to Non Muslims and their interests in Malaysia.
This whole religious saga was brought about by UMNO in its 1988 amendments to the Federal Constitution which added Article 121 1 (A) which recognised the existence of the Muslim Syariah Courts which is meant to be an inferior court to the civil High Courts. A close scrutiny of the Parliamentary Hansard on the amendments proposed and the statement by ex Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad in Parliament clearly prove that the intention of Parliament was Syariah Court was to adjudicate on Islamic family and property matters. However the Syariah Courts have crossed their boundaries and jurisdictions and usurped on the powers and duties of the Civil High Courts.
The amendments are necessary as the Civil High Courts have abdicated their powers and refused to adjudicate matters touching especially conversion disputes involving Non-Muslim families.
The current deadlock affects almost 12 million non-Muslims in Malaysia’s 26 million populations. The Yang Dipertuan Agong and state Rulers are equally responsible and duty bound to protect the rights and interests of non-Muslims under the Federal Constitution.
From Nazri’s statement it appears that the Ruler’s conference fail to comprehend that The Yang Dipertuan Agong is also duty bound to the second limb of Article 153 of the Federal constitution as the minority’s interest also need to be safeguarded in the current polarized state of affairs between the Muslims and the non Muslims.
In no instance do these proposals diminish the rights of neither a Muslim nor their obligation but rather to ensure the minority rights are not neglected in contrary to Federal constitution on unreasonability and installation of fear through religion as we have seen at a rampant stage in Malaysia of late.
As Rulers, it is undisputable fact they have the natural duty to safeguard and protect the Islamic faith. However if the current situation warrants the Rulers intervention to safeguard the non-Muslims against unlawful and unconscionable practice of Islamic authorities and Courts, then there should be no reason why the Rulers should be reluctant to act.
The consensus requested by way of amendments to clarify the Minority Rights will no doubt weather the storm of the currently strained race relation in Malaysia and enhance the position of the Rulers that they are indeed concerned with the second limb of Article 153 and provide equal protection to their almost 12 million non- Muslim subjects.
As for the UMNO & PAKATAN state governments, it is obvious that they are trying to do the balancing act to ensure their vote counts in their typical political manner whereas the public continues to suffer in silence. By pushing the buck to the Rulers does nothing but only undermine the faith of the people how ineffective they have become when the public’s interest is in stake.
This is indeed a very good opportunity for the Rulers’ Conference to show that they are equally concerned to ensure justice; reasonableness and fair play is afforded in their role as the rulers for the each and every Malaysian.
P.Waytha Moorthy
Chairman
HINDRAF.
21.10.2010
RE: 1)RESPONSE TO DATO NAZRI’S STATEMENT IN MALAYSIAKINI 18TH OCTOBER - “MUSLIM CONVERSION LAW REFORM HIT DEAD END”
2) AGONG’S CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO PROTECT 12 MILLION NON MUSLIM MINORITY INTEREST AND HAS NO VETO POWER TO HINDER PARLIAMENTARY AMENDMENTS.
3) UMNO BEHIND THE CONSPIRACY TO OPPRESS MINORITY RACES
4) RULERS ARE DUTY BOUND TO ASSENT TO CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS IN MALAYSIA’S PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY.
HINDRAF is shocked and surprised with UMNO’s legal mouthpiece the de facto Law Minister’s statement that the Muslim conversion Law reform proposals have hit a dead end for the following reasons;
1) The sultans feel they need to protect the Muslim subjects and Islam religion because it was their duty
2) The Sultans were not convinced that amendments to certain Islamic laws would not overlap with their duties as guardians of the Islamic faith in their states.
Malaysia practices Parliamentary democracy and the Yang Dipertuan Agong is merely a figure head and does not have the power to veto any amendments or Acts of Parliament passed by the Dewan Rakyat. Religious freedom in Malaysia is enshrined in Article 11 of the Malaysian Constitution not by the State Islamic enactments or the State Rulers. The Constitutional amendments proposed has nothing to do with the role of the Rulers in protecting the rights of Muslim subjects and the Islamic religion instead it is about providing equal protection to Non Muslims and their interests in Malaysia.
This whole religious saga was brought about by UMNO in its 1988 amendments to the Federal Constitution which added Article 121 1 (A) which recognised the existence of the Muslim Syariah Courts which is meant to be an inferior court to the civil High Courts. A close scrutiny of the Parliamentary Hansard on the amendments proposed and the statement by ex Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad in Parliament clearly prove that the intention of Parliament was Syariah Court was to adjudicate on Islamic family and property matters. However the Syariah Courts have crossed their boundaries and jurisdictions and usurped on the powers and duties of the Civil High Courts.
The amendments are necessary as the Civil High Courts have abdicated their powers and refused to adjudicate matters touching especially conversion disputes involving Non-Muslim families.
The current deadlock affects almost 12 million non-Muslims in Malaysia’s 26 million populations. The Yang Dipertuan Agong and state Rulers are equally responsible and duty bound to protect the rights and interests of non-Muslims under the Federal Constitution.
From Nazri’s statement it appears that the Ruler’s conference fail to comprehend that The Yang Dipertuan Agong is also duty bound to the second limb of Article 153 of the Federal constitution as the minority’s interest also need to be safeguarded in the current polarized state of affairs between the Muslims and the non Muslims.
In no instance do these proposals diminish the rights of neither a Muslim nor their obligation but rather to ensure the minority rights are not neglected in contrary to Federal constitution on unreasonability and installation of fear through religion as we have seen at a rampant stage in Malaysia of late.
As Rulers, it is undisputable fact they have the natural duty to safeguard and protect the Islamic faith. However if the current situation warrants the Rulers intervention to safeguard the non-Muslims against unlawful and unconscionable practice of Islamic authorities and Courts, then there should be no reason why the Rulers should be reluctant to act.
The consensus requested by way of amendments to clarify the Minority Rights will no doubt weather the storm of the currently strained race relation in Malaysia and enhance the position of the Rulers that they are indeed concerned with the second limb of Article 153 and provide equal protection to their almost 12 million non- Muslim subjects.
As for the UMNO & PAKATAN state governments, it is obvious that they are trying to do the balancing act to ensure their vote counts in their typical political manner whereas the public continues to suffer in silence. By pushing the buck to the Rulers does nothing but only undermine the faith of the people how ineffective they have become when the public’s interest is in stake.
This is indeed a very good opportunity for the Rulers’ Conference to show that they are equally concerned to ensure justice; reasonableness and fair play is afforded in their role as the rulers for the each and every Malaysian.
P.Waytha Moorthy
Chairman
HINDRAF.
21.10.2010
