The Malaysian Bar - Forum will go on, says Bar Council

Home

Committees

Family Law

Forum will go on, says Bar Council

Thursday, 07 August 2008 08:14am

Ragunath Kesavan ©New Straits Times (Used by permission)
by V. Anbalagan

KUALA LUMPUR: The Bar Council's forum on religious conversion will proceed as planned.

Council vice-chairman Ragunath Kesavan said the council would continue with the forum despite Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar's reservations about it.

"The issue to be debated involves the rights of parties which have not been clarified by the Federal Court," he said, adding that it did not matter if the apex court was right or wrong in the matter.

Ragunath said a court ruling could be debated in a democratic society like Malaysia and that the body would not succumb to pressure on the matter.

He said it was not proper that problems faced by families in such situations be swept under the carpet.

"It is not proper that discussions and forums organised to address such concerns be disparaged, on the pretext that such forums can provoke misunderstanding."

Ragunath was responding to a statement by Syed Hamid that any dialogue or debate that could stoke racial sentiments and instil hatred should not be held.

The forum, entitled "Conversion to Islam: Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, Subashini and Shamala Revisited," will be held at the council headquarters here.

Ragunath said the problem would not go away if there was no open discussion and instead would only breed dissatisfaction, rumour mongering and hatred.

He said the council had invited all stakeholders to get a balanced view and a better understanding on the subject.

A representative of the Institute of Islamic Understanding of Malaysia (Ikim) and lawyer, Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdullah, who appeared for the Kuala Lumpur Religious Council in a conversion case, and two other constitutional lawyers have confirmed their participation.

Ragunath said the council was not questioning Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution conferring jurisdiction to Syariah Courts.

"Our concern is that there are increasingly more families caught up in the conflict of laws arising from the conversion of one spouse to Islam.

"This issue must be addressed and we must all work to seek an acceptable solution for all concerned parties."

On Dec 28 last year, the Federal Court held that a High Court had the authority to hear the matrimonial dispute in a non-Muslim marriage even if a spouse had converted to Islam.

In Aug 2006, R. Subashini filed a divorce petition in the High Court after T. Saravanan, whose Muslim name is Muhammad Shafi Abdullah, had gone to a syariah court to dissolve the civil marriage and gain custody of their son.

She then filed an injunction in the High Court to restrain Saravanan from annulling their marriage.

In the case of S. Shamala, the High Court had placed her two sons under her custody, pending the divorcee's petition against her husband, Dr M. Jeyaganesh, whose Muslim name is Muhammad Ridzwan Mogarajah.

The court instructed her to refrain from propagating her religious practice on her children pending the outcome of the petition.

It was reported in late 2002 that Shamala had left the country, taking her children, Saktiswaran, then 5, and Theiviswaran, 3 years and 8 months old, with her.