-
4. Conflict of Jurisdiction: Civil versus Syariah Law
- ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute
- Chapter
- Additional Information
62 4 CONFLICTOFJURISDICTION CivilversusSyariahLaw Thischapterexploresthelegalcontestovertheinterpretationoftwoarticles of Malaysia’s Constitution: Article 3, which declares that “Islam is the religion of the federation”, and Article 11, which outlines the liberty of freedomofreligion.Theprismthroughwhichthiscontestisexaminedis thecaseofLinaJoy,awomanwhowishedtoofficiallychangeherreligion fromIslamtoChristianity. LinaJoy’sseriesofhearingsfromtheHighCourtthroughtothehighest courtoftheland1 attractedagreatdealof(oftenheated)publicattention and spawned the freedom of religion movement described in Chapter 6. HercasecrystallizedthedebateoverwhetherMalaysiawasfundamentally guidedbyaliberalinterpretationoftheConstitutionorbyIslamicorthodoxy. If Lina Joy was to be given the right to convert to Christianity without hindrance,ashercounselarguedsheoughttobe,Malaysiacouldbeseen assecular.Ifshewaspreventedfromsodoing,orrequiredtheconsentof theSyariahcourts,Islamcouldberegardedasformingtheframeworkof Malaysianpoliticsandlaw. WhileshelostherfinalhearingintheFederalCourton30May2007, thediscoursesdeployedduringhercasetellusagreatdealaboutthelegal andpoliticalclimateincontemporaryMalaysia.Irecountbelowoneparticular dayofahearingintheCourtofAppeal.Apointofinterestisthe responseofthiswoman’scounselwhenthebroaderconstitutionalapproach, 62 05 I&AM.indd 62 3/22/10 2:54:03 PM ConflictofJurisdiction:CivilversusSyariahLaw 63 in which a liberal interpretation of Article 11 was defended, was coldly receivedbythejudges.Whenthisoccurred,hercounselturnedtoatechnical argumentfoundedonalegalloopholewhichIexamine.Ishouldnotehere thatthereaders’comprehensionoftheselegalargumentsisnotnecessary forunderstandingthebroaderpointsofthreelawyerswhoseviewsonthe particularlawsinquestioninthecaseIlaterrecount. THECASEOFLINAJOY LinaJoywasborntoMuslimparentsandnamedAzlinabinteJailani.On 21February1997,whenshewasthirty-threeyearsold,sheappliedtothe National Registration Department (NRD) in Malaysia to have her name changed from Azlina binte Jailani to Lina Lelani. This was intended to indicateherconversionfromIslam.Shehadalsostatedinanaffidavitthat shehadconvertedtoChristianityandhadbeenbaptizedinachurch.She alsointendedtomarryaChristianman.Afterherapplicationwasrejected bytheNRDsheappliedagaintohavehernamechangedtoLinaJoy.She alsoappliedtohavetheword“Islam”removedfromhernewidentitycard (knownasaMyKad)(Faiza2004,p.119). HerapplicationsforachangeofnamefromaMuslimnametoanonMuslim nameandfortheremovaloftheword“Islam”fromherMyKad wererejectedbytheNRDbecausethesewouldhaveindicatedthatshehad leftIslam.TheNRDdeemedthatbecausesheisaMuslim,sherequireda letterfromtheSyariahcourttoaffirmordeclarethatshewasnolongera Muslim.ItisworthnotingbrieflyherethattheSyariahcourtisastateand territorylevelcourtbecausetheadministrationoftheaffairsofMuslimsin Malaysiaiscontrolledatthestateandterritorylevel.Eachstateandterritory has a different set of Syariah laws which are legislated by the relevant parliaments. Lina Joy’s applications were made in the territory of Kuala Lumpur which is subject to the Syariah Criminal Offences Act 1997. Although this Act does not list apostasy as an offence, one who wished to convert from Islam could be regarded as committing the offence of takfir. Takfir isthemakingofanaccusationthatapersonorgroupofpersonsiseither (1)anon-Muslim,(2)hasceasedtoprofessIslam,(3)shouldnotorcannot be accepted as professing the Islamic religion, or (4) does not believe, follow, profess or belong to the Islamic religion (Kairos 2004, p. 42). Lina Joy’s lawyers argued that she should be able to change her religion withouthindranceasperherrightasaMalaysianunderArticle11ofthe Constitution. 05 I&AM.indd 63 3/22/10 2:54:03 PM [3.149.214.32...