Meaning of the Subashini Judgment

The following clear interpretation of the outcome of the Subashini is provided by Malaysiakini-the news portal that exposes everything.

Of the three Muslim Malay judges, one of them dissented.

The landmark judgment in a nutshell
Soon Li Tsin | Dec 27, 07 8:36pm

It took more than an hour for the judgment to be read in court. The majority decision was delivered by Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman - who headed the Federal Court three-member bench - while Abdul Aziz Mohamad delivered the minority decision.

Majority decision - Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman and Azmel Ma'amor

• Subashini’s divorce petition under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act is deem null and void because it was filed before the requisite three months period.

• Saravanan and Subashini’s civil marriage can only be dissolved using civil law. The husband can still dissolve it under syariah law but it will have no effect in the civil courts.

• Saravanan can seek relief in the syariah courts but it cannot compel Subashini to do the same because she is a non-Muslim.

• Saravanan did not abuse the process by converting his child because the consent from one parent is sufficient according to Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution .

Dissenting ruling - Abdul Aziz Mohamad

• The evidence of Saravanan’s conversion must be tried in order to determine whether the conversion date was based on his certificate or on facts made available to Subashini.

• Saravanan had abused the process in seeking the custody of the children in the Syariah Court because the religious court has no jurisdiction over a non-Muslim marriage.

• Saravanan’s conversion of the children is not unilateral and the wife has a right to object to the conversion as well as seek an injunction to stop the procedure.

• The High Court has exclusive jurisdiction in matters of dissolution of marriage, maintenance, custody and other ancillary reliefs because the marriage was solemnised under civil law.

A Question of Malaysian Fairness.

This case bothers Malaysians a lot because one of the big questions that has to be answered is whether the mutual parental consent of both parents in a marriage or divorce are needed when one parent converts to Islam and permits the Islamic authorities to convert a child who is under the age of consent.

The court has just ruled that one parent could have the child converted without the consent of the other marriage partner!

Subashini case: Divorce comes under civil court
Soon Li Tsin | Dec 27, 07 12:24pm

The Federal Court today ruled that the syariah courts cannot dissolve a civil marriage and all dissolutions made in the religious court is only effective within the confines of the Islamic law.

“The non-Muslim marriage between the husband and wife remains intact and continues to subsist until the High Court dissolves it pursuant to a divorce petition by the unconverted spouse under the LRA,” said justice Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman.

This is a minor victory for company secretary R Subashini as her marriage with Islam-convert husband T Saravanan was a civil marriage and she could go to the civil courts for her divorce.

Subashini, 28, a Hindu, is trying to stop her husband, who has converted to Islam and assumed the name Muhammad Shafi Saravanan Abdullah, from taking matrimonial proceedings to the Syariah Court.

Her husband converted in May 2006 along with their eldest son, Dharvin Joshua, 4. The husband then launched proceedings in the Syariah Court for divorce as well as the custody of their second son, Sharvin, 2.

However, the issue of custody of their children remain unclear as the Federal Court today also ruled that Saravanan did not abuse the law by converting his four-year-old son to Islam without the knowledge of the mother.

It said that according to the Federal Constitution, only the consent of one parent is sufficient in the conversion of a child.

The court also ruled that it was within the right of Saravanan as a Muslim to file the divorce proceedings in the Syariah Court.

Nevertheless, the Federal Court three-member panel today delivered a blow against Subashini by throwing out her case on a legal technicality - that her divorce petition was 'premature and invalid'.

In a 2-1 decision, the country’s highest court said that Subashini’s divorce petition was prematurely filed under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (LRA).

According to the act, the wife can only file for divorce three months after the date of her husband T Saravanan’s conversion to Islam, as stipulated under Islamic law.

However, Subashini’s divorce petition was filed about two weeks before the three months expiration date. The divorce petition is deemed null and void. Nevertheless, Subashini can apply for a fresh application.

Justices Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman and Azmel Ma'amor struck out Subashini’s case while justice Abdul Aziz Mohamad was the lone dissenting voice.

Federal Court overruled lower court

During her appeal to the Court of Appeal on March 13, justices Suriyadi Halim Omar and Hassan Lah who made the majority 2-1 decision told her to take her case before the Syariah Court instead, while justice Gopal Sri Ram dissented.

According to the majority decision, the injunction sought by Subashini was unsustainable because the Syariah Court is competent enough decide on the matter.

However, on March 30, Subashini was granted an interim injunction by the Court of Appeal restraining Saravanan from pursuing his claims in the Islamic court.

The injunction also effectively restrained him from converting their Sharvin to Islam and from pursuing his custody claims in the Syariah Court.

It was also held in the landmark ruling that a Muslim could apply to the Islamic court to convert his or her underage children without permission from the non-Muslim spouse.

Anwar: Malaysia's JFK

I'm gradually convinced Anwar is going to be a great leader. He speaks out on issues that matter most to Malaysians, reacting at the right time and providing practical solutions.

As a once ago naive die-hard government supporter... I am increasingly seeing the potential Kennedy-Reagan-Clinton leadership style in a prime-ministerial role.

Here is an insightful look at the leader as reported by Malaysiakini-the news portal that rocks.

Anwar tells PM: Negligence is greater threat
Terence Netto | Dec 27, 07 1:25pm

Malaysia is in greater danger from the negligence of those in power than from the rage felt by its recalcitrants, said PKR's de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim.

"Our society is in greater danger from executive negligence than from the extremism of its recalcitrants,” he said in an immediate response to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's Christmas Day strictures on religious extremism.

On Dec 25, Abdullah had taken the opportunity of his attendance at the Christmas Day tea party, jointly organised by the Christian Federation of Malaysia and Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur Murphy Packiam, to inveigh against religious extremisn.

The prime minister called on moderates in Malaysia to speak up to pre-empt fanatics from taking centre stage.

This drew an immediate riposte from Anwar, who with his wife Wan Azizah, also attended the tea party at the invitation of Archbishop Packiam.

"On the birth celebration of the Prince of Peace, it is right and fitting to remind every citizen of his or her value as a channel of peace, moderation and tolerance,” said Anwar, who also former deputy prime minister.

"But bear in mind that peace is not just the absence of conflict; it is the presence of justice. Where there is little or no justice, there will be a deficit in peace."

Anwar’s advice to PM

Anwar observed that Christian social teaching held peace and justice to be obverse sides of the same coin.

Of Abdullah's strictures on extremism, Anwar opined: "He is a purveyor of platitudes. He keeps his counsel when he ought to speak up.

“When he does speak up, he mouths pious platitudes which are about as useful as buying an umbrella after it has started to rain."

Anwar offered this piece of advice to the prime minister: “Look to the causes of disorder and not its symptoms, just don't treat the bark when the roots need remedy, reach for the panacea and not be satisfied with the placebo."

Revathi, that's my name forever.

The following news report is attributed to Malaysiakini, 6/7/07. ‘Revathi, that’s my name - forever’

Andrew Ong and Ng Ling Fong Jul 6, 07 4:20pm

M Revathi, 29, still steadfastly wants to remain a Hindu, despite her six-month detention by religious authorities and on-going efforts to make her a Muslim. “My name is Revathi. I want to hold on to that name - forever. I want to drop the name Siti Fatimah,” Revathi, sporting a pottu (Hindu symbol) on her forehead, told reporters outside the Shah Alam High Court today. Born Siti Fatimah Abdul Karim to Muslim convert parents, she was called Revathi Masoosai by the grandmother who raised her. She married to V Suresh in 2004 according to Hindu rites and has a 18-month-old daughter. In January this year, Revathi was detained at the Malacca Syariah High Court when she attended a hearing over her application to have her official religious status be recognised as a Hindu. She was detained at the court and subsequently held at the Ulu Yam religious rehabilitation camp in Selangor for six months until she was freed yesterday. In March, the Islamic authorities seized her daughter from her husband and handed the child to Revathi's Muslim mother. Speaking about her experience inside the camp, Revathi today described that she was subjected to ‘mental torture’ and claimed that she defied attempts to coerce her to attend religious classes. “Their programmes are solely on religion. (There were also) prayer classes. I never attended (any of them). I only attended counselling. During counselling, they said I had to do this and that. They said I had to follow (religious) laws. I just buat tidak tahu (ignore)," she said in fluent Bahasa Malaysia. “I argued that I had a right to choose my religion, but they replied that I should not talk about (my) rights,” said Revathi who is presently living with her Muslim parents as ordered by the religious authorities. ‘Many ran away’ She claimed that many had ran away from the "jail-like" conditions of the camp but she had not. “A lot of people ran away, even though (the camp was for Muslims). Though I’m a Hindu, I could bertahan (bear with the conditions), because I’m upholding the good name of Hinduism,” she added. During her detention, she was not allowed visits. Recalling the only time she got to see her husband during her detention, Revathi said: “Even though I was not allowed to meet my husband, I got to see him (standing) outside the camp, without their permission. I saw his car and I ran towards the fence. It was only once (I got to see him during the detention). After that, they (from the centre) dragged me away. “Before, it was not enclosed. Now, they used zinc (sheets) to surround the area. You can’t see inside and we don’t know who is outside,” she said. The emotional moment where Revathi and Suresh were momentarily reunited was captured on film by Al-Jazeera and aired on April 23 in current affairs programme 'Everywoman'. [View video] Revathi was initially detained for 80 days at the camp but her detention was extended for 100 days twice. Her stint ended yesterday when she was presented before the Malacca Syariah Court, just before a hebeas corpus application filed by her husband was to be heard today. A writ of habeas corpus is an application to the court to order the authorities to produce a detainee in court to determine whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he or she should be released from custody. ‘Wasted of my time’ She was ordered to live with her parents and undergo counselling. She lamented that she was “unsatisfied” with the decisions made by the court. “They held me for six months, only to say that I cannot leave Islam. If that is the case, they should have told me earlier, so I don’t have to go into the centre," said a defiant Revathi. “Who’s going to compensate for the six months I was there? (It is a) waste of my time! I was separated from my child and husband. How are they going to compensate? “I have a right to choose my religion. In six months, they cannot make me change my mind, how can they do it now?” She also said that religious officials tried to force her to pray, eat beef and wear a headscarf. It is part of Hindu tradition to avoid the consumption of beef. "Because of their behaviour, I hate (benci) Islam even more now," she added.

Make Money Converting Natives!

Remember to click image to enlarge!

The desperation by dubious means by some Islamic zealots to convert others to Islam has never failed to amaze me. From bribery to non-muslims with offers of timber concession land in Sarawak by some in the past to the latest devilish incentives by the opposition PAS government, I need hardly imagine the zealots' other unscrupulous devious methods. I have heard about other unethical methods that they use which are not publicised publicly.

The Bernama report is found in The Borneo Post dated 29/6/06.

Tan Sri Datuk Dr. Wong Soon Kai's Sensational Letter

CLICK ONCE OVER IT TO ENLARGE FOR CLEAR READING!

1987... THE YEAR OF THE MING COURT AFFAIR...What a hell of an exciting year in politics for Sarawak, a partner in the confederation of Malaysia (together with Sabah)!

A former Chief Minister and governor of Sarawak, Tun Abdul Rahman Yakub attempted a dramatic Shakespearan come back by calling his loyalist politicians to Malaysia's federal capital, Kuala Lumpur for a meeting in a high class hotel called The Ming Court. Any significance in choosing the location of Ming Court? Have a look at Wikipedia here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_dynasty and be the judge). His nephew, his anointed successor, Tan Sri Datuk Taib Mahmud dug in and steadfastly stood his ground and fought hard. Taib won!

Twenty-seven Sarawak state assemblymen met in Kuala Lumpur. The dramatis personae: According to the New Straits Times dated 11/3/1987 eight of them were from PBDS, Datuk Daniel Tajem (Lingga), Mr. Gramong Juna (Machan), Dr. James Masing (Balleh), Datuk Edmind Langgu anak Sagga (Krian), Mr. Joseph Kudi (Ngemah), Dr. Jawie Masing (Pakan), Haji Bolhassan Kambar (Tatau) and Mr. Mikai anak Mandau (Batang Ai); eight from PBB, Datuk Noor Tahir (Lawas), Datuk Hafsah Harun (Petra Jaya), Datuk Tajang Laing (Belaga), Haji Zainuddin Satem (Saribas), Encik Mohamed Hilary Tawan (Gedong), Wan Madzihi Mahzar (Oya), Datuk Wan Yusof Tun Tuanku Haji Bujang (Kalaka) and Wan Abdul Wahab Wan Sanusi (Semera); five from SNAP, Datuk Edward Jeli (Marudi), Mr. Michael Ben (Tebakang), Mr. Nueng anak Kudi (Pelagus), Mr. Geman anak Itam (Meluan) and Mr. Joseph Balan Seling (Telang Gusang); four from SUPP, Mr. Hollis Tini (Sri Aman), Mr. David Tiong Chiong Chu (Igan), Mr. Wilfred Kiroh anak Jeram (Dudong) and Mr. Sim Choo Nam (Engkilili) and three were independents, Mr. Wilfred Nissom (Bengoh), Wan Habib Syed Mahmud (Balingian) and Haji Saadi Haji Olia (Kuala Rejang).

In the ensuing war (or was it merely a battle?) a lot of dirty logging polluted water under our many bridges was exposed to the hungry open-fish mouth public which was fed eye-bulging, eye-opening savory delicious morsels of enlightening food through the news media both locally and abroad ...

Billions of ringgit(dollars) worth of timber wealth - contracts that were shamelessly given to numerous cronies were exposed. Other scandalous shenanigans were the conversion to Islam by enticement with lucrative timber contracts; gifts of blue ICs (In those days this meant proof of Malaysian citizenship) to non-Malaysians and the involvement of the top state leadership in throwing political opponents into prison and so on. (Just read the letter, found in the Borneo Post dated 15/4/1986! This open letter was written in response to an earlier fascinating one by Yakub in the Sarawak Tribune dated 11/4/1987).

Of course, some of us Sarawakians knew a lot of these outrageous shenanigans were happening and our well-respected honest Minister of Works and Infrastructure (Tan Sri) Datuk Wong Soon Kai's letter only served to confirm what we knew all along. Wong Soon Kai was the Secretary-general of SUPP (Sarawak United People's Party, a component party of the state and federal National Front (known officially as the Barisan National, headed by Mahathir Mohamad). Formerly, Yakub's man, he was loyally alligned to Taib Mahmud.

Personally, Wong Soon Kai's expo`se made me recall the story of the outspoken boy who said, "... but he wears NO clothes!" when he saw the naked vain pompous powerful emperor riding by on his horse... and all the by-standers of course knew he was in the nude but dared not say a word...

Go on! Grab and read the famous book THE EMPEROR WHO WORE NO CLOTHES ... (Hmmmnnnn THE EMPRESS WHO WORE NO CLOTHES will surely attract more readers of us males of the human species, I'm sure).