Rayappan’s aftermath - Syariah Courts debated
Two perspectives, one from Syariah Lawyers Association president Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, the other from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taosim (MCCBCHST) (gleamed from theSun).
The MCCBCHST has the fairly standard “We are not Muslims and therefore shouldn’t need to have anything to do with the Syariah Courts” ring to it, but the heartfelt statement is still worth a read.
En. Zainul tries a somewhat interesting angle. He argues that in the Nyonya Tahir case, the Syariah court very judiciously decided in favour of the family, and the deceased was buried according to Buddhist rites. He says this a) was possible because the family cooperated with the Syariah courts and b) shows that the Syariah courts are fair and just to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
An interesting take.
En. Zainul is also appalled that in the A. Rayappan case, the Syariah court’s insistence on demanding strict adherence to procedure was ignored by the Selangor Religious Council (MAIS). As in, the Syariah court did not in fact recognise MAIS’ decision to withdraw the claim to Rayappan’s body, deeming it illegal (as far as I understand).
While En. Zainul does not seem to genuinely believe A. Rayappan was a Muslim, he seems a real stickler for the letter of the law. He also blames the A. Rayappan family for refusing to appear before the court, stating that this precluded the possibility of a fair settlement, such as was apparently achieved in the Nyonya Tahir case.
En. Zainul adds:
Bukanlah tugas Mais menentukan seorang itu Islam ataupun sebaliknya. Adalah jelas ia di bawah bidang kuasa mahkamah syariah.
I’m unclear on this. Does that mean that at any point, the syariah court can decide it wants to determine whether you or I are a Muslim or not? Or does this only apply to people who were Muslim at one point in their lives? Should that make a difference?
I reckon these - and the whole issue of cooperation with courts whose jurisdiction one may not recognise - are interesting points. Your thoughts?
[...] Read More: nathaniel tan [...]
Dear readers,
The agreed fact is that Rayappan had converted to Muslim years back. Subsequently he purportedly reverted to Christianity. The question then should be whether the reversion by Rayappan was valid. I understand that the deceased had a 2nd wife who is a Muslim.
If the reversion was invalid, and Rayappan is shown to have committed acts inconsistent with his Muslim belief, may the Syariah Court make a declaration that Rayappan had committed shirik (associating other Gods with Allah)? The Syariah should make a declaration, and Rayappan’s immediate members should come forward as witnesses (not as disputants)to assist the Syariah Courts to make this decision i.e. Rayappan died not as a muslim. Only then his body may be claimed by those who claimed that Rayappan is not a Muslim at the time of his death. The cooperation by the relatives of the deceased Nyonya Tahir is a good example Malaysians should emulate.
Whether Rayappan reversion was valid in law, and whether he died not as a Muslim are matters within the jurisdiction of the Shariah Courts.
abdul Rani
I like to add further that disobedient by any person Muslims or otherwise to a subpoena validly issued by a Syariah Court is, it is submitted, an offence punishable also under the Penal Code.
Abdul Rani