|
 Contributed by the National Young Lawyers’
Committee
The “YL Personality” series continues. This week’s interviewee is a
pupil-in-chambers, Nadia Ashikin binti Maduarin. A graduate from the
International Islamic University, she will be completing her pupilage early next
year. Interviewed by Richard Wee and Sarah Kambali, they gently posed
some burning questions on issues of the day.
Graduating from a renowned university, if you were given the opportunity to
go back and change the system at the university to make yourself better prepared
as a lawyer, what would you change?
It would be more practical if the University emphasises legal research. Perhaps
it is also good to have “Trial Advocacy” as a compulsory subject in the
University. This would improve the advocacy skills of future law graduates.
Moots and debates are less practical in practice.
How do you find the current system of pupilage?
I’m quite happy with the present system.
Would there be anything you would like to change in the current system?
The current system allows a pupil to appear in court after 3 months of their
short call. It is better to allow the pupils to have locus earlier to gain
hands-on experience of the judicial system.
How did you find the recent no-confidence EGM?
I wasn’t around for the EGM but I heard it was interesting.
Have you heard of the Young Lawyers Committee?
Yes.
As a pupil soon entering the legal profession, do you think the Committee is
still needed and why?
It is still needed to foster brotherhood and solidarity amongst lawyers.
If you were to lead the Bar one day, what would be the 3 things you would
like to do?
I would make it compulsory for senior lawyers to bestow their knowledge, ensure
that young lawyers are taken care of and avoid, as much as possible, ghost
ballots or pengundi hantu!
Moving away from the profession, do you think the recent speeches at the UMNO
General Assembly damaged the country in any way?
No, it did not damage the country. If anything the meeting serves as a wake-up
call for us Malays. Historically, there’s an unwritten rule that the Chinese are
involved with the country’s economics. At present time, other races feel that
Malays and Bumiputras are complacent with their current position. Hence the
question of equal rights for all races in Malaysia is raised. That’s when the
Malays have started to rise up and defend their rights.
But don’t you think that some of the statements were either seditious or
defamatory?
I’ve not looked up the proper definition of either sedition or defamation in the
relevant Acts but, it might just be seditious if it actually harms the nation.
Having said that, I still hold it’s just a wake-up call for us Malays.
If you were the delegate, what would you have done?
I would chant along, “Hidup Melayu…” and so forth, but I would also add “…tapi
tolonglah bangun sedikit.” ; in other words, to please wake-up.
The recent Rayappan case took a slightly surprising turn when the Cabinet
intervened. What’s your general position on the law regarding this?
In the Quran of Surah Al-Baqarah, there’s an ayat that
basically translated means that everyone has a free will to enter Islam; and in
a renowned Hadith it is translated to have said that, “Whoever changes
religion, kill him”. Muslims renouncing their Islamic faith is known as
murtad. Renouncing Islam can be done in three ways - by thoughts (niat),
by words and by actions. Those actions amounting to being murtad in my
opinion is haram.
However, having said that, Article 3 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia
states that Islam is the official religion of the nation. Many have interpreted
that this means Islam functions as an officially practised religion of their
citizens rather than adopting full Syariah law. Furthermore, the gist of Article
11 is that it gives the freedom to citizens to practise any religion.
From the Islamic point of view, it is a sin to propagate murtad. That is
why the majority of Syariah courts do not want to approve applications for a
Muslim to leave Islam. I’m not for murtad but when this matter relates
back to the Constitution, it does mention about freedom of religion and worship
but has no indication on registration. If registration was needed for one’s
practice of religion, it would have been embedded in the Constitution, but to
this present day, it is not.
As a Muslim, I hold that the act of murtad is not acceptable and whoever
does commit such an act should definitely be punished, if proven. However, the
said articles of the Constitution have been proven to be interpreted in a way
that Islam is just an officially practised religion of its citizens. This is one
of the most popular interpretations of Articles 3 and 11 of the Constitution.
Hence, I feel that the Constitution has given ample space to practise one’s
belief as they choose based on the said articles, and still gives priority to
Islam to be the official religion of the country. It is best that its citizens
don’t push the limits of the Constitution; as they say – “don’t push the
envelope”.
 |
About Us 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 297/2008
