Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©New Straits Times (Used by permission)

KUALA LUMPUR: The Federal Court’s judgment that disputes between a Muslim and non-Muslim on family and religious matters should be settled in a civil court was welcomed by the Bar Council.

Its chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan said the decision on Wednesday was a welcome relief as it clarified the law for Muslims and non-Muslims.

She said the judgment also explained what matters might be dealt by the civil and the syariah courts.

"It has meticulously examined the Federal Constitution, its history and previously decided cases before coming to its conclusions."

She said that in the past, the nation had been confronted with a series of issues that straddled the civil and syariah jurisdictional divide.

"It has affected Muslims and non-Muslims. While the courts grappled with the jurisdictional issues, ordinary people faced traumatic situations, with children being the worst victims."

Ambiga said the Bar commended the apex court as the timely judgments gave emphasis to the importance of acting in conformity with the Constitution.

She said the judgment had dealt with the effect of the relevant constitutional provisions and the position of the civil and syariah courts.

"It has also satisfactorily resolved the questions as to whether implied power can be a source of jurisdiction."

She said this decision had also brought about some certainty as to where Muslims and non-Muslims might go to pursue their legal remedies.

"There is, however, one possible area of concern. The judgment envisages a situation where there may be matters that are outside the jurisdiction of the civil and syariah courts."

In other words, she said, there could be situations where there was no available remedy in either courts.

"This, therefore, has to be comprehensively addressed either by the courts or by parliament as suggested in the judgment."

Ambiga said this in response to the 54-page judgment written by Judge Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad who, among others, said it was not the function of the civil courts to review laws passed by parliament.

He said the civil court could only apply the law, not make or amend law that was not made by the legislature.

In the judgment, Hamid said he was attempting to take a fresh look at the jurisdiction issue from a broad perspective since the Federal Constitution was now 50 years old.

The judge made this remarks in deciding whether monies in two joint accounts of Datuk Sharibun Wahab and Latifah Mat Zin were subject of hibah (gifts) under Islamic law.

Latifah, the third wife of the late Sharibun, had claimed the monies were entirely hers as it was a gift.

Meanwhile, Rosmawati and Roslinawati, daughters of the second wife of the deceased, claimed the monies belonged to the estate of Sharibun.

Hamid, who sat with judges Datuk Arifin Zakaria and Datuk S. Augustine Paul dismissed Latifah’s appeal.

Their decision was unanimous.

Hamid said both parties should go to the syariah court.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed