PETALING JAYA (Jan 4, 2008): The Cabinet has ruled that restrictions on the use of the word “Allah” are still enforceable and thus Catholic weekly Herald cannot use the word although its printing licence has just been renewed.

In a statement yesterday, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Dr Abdullah Md Zin said apart from the word "Allah”, the use of the words “Solat”, “Kaabah” and “Baitullah” was also prohibited in other religions' publications as per the decisions of the Cabinet on July 30, 2002, on the restriction which had been enforced since Dec 5, 1986.

The minister, whose portfolio covers religious affairs, said the restrictions were being upheld as “it has long been the practice of this country that the word ‘Allah’ refers to God according to the Muslim faith”.

“It is only proper for other religions to use the word ‘God’ and not ‘Allah’ when referring to their God in their respective beliefs.”

He said the use of the word “Allah” should not be subject of public debate such that it will give the impression there there is no religiious freedom in this country.

“The use of the word ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims may arouse sensitivity and create confusion amongst the Muslims in this country,” he said.

On Dec 17, Herald had received a letter from the Internal Security Ministry stating that the Bahasa Malaysia segment of the weekly was to be abolished, with effect from the renewed permit for 2008.

However, it had been given the green light to publish the weekly in a Dec 28 letter. Herald's editor Father Lawrence Andrew was quoted in news reports as saying that the letter placed no restrictions.

Other than the English segment, Herald also has sections in Bahasa Malaysia, Chinese and Tamil to cater to the multi-racial and multi-lingual make-up of more than 850,000 Malaysian Catholics.

Even before the permit issue came up, Herald had filed a suit on Dec 5 against the government for prohibiting it from using the word "Allah".

Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) also known as the Evangelical Church of Borneo, has also filed for a judicial review against the internal security minister’s decision to stop it from importing Christian books which contain the word "Allah".

It is also seeking a declaration that Christians have the constitutional right to use the word "Allah" in all their religious publications and practices, and not just within the church.

SIB was prevented from importing children’s books that contained the word "Allah" and was informed by the ministry that the use of the words "Allah", "Baitullah", "Solat" and "Kaabah" was exclusive to Islam, through the order published in the Gazette PU (A) 15/82 and the circular KKDN. S.59/3/6/A dated Dec 5, 1986.

For archive report on this topic, click here.

30.12.2007

Civil or Syariah, still unclear
©The Sun (Used by permission)
R.Surenthira Kumar and Jacqueline Ann Surin

PUTRAJAYA (Dec 27, 2007): In handing down what is widely seen as an equivocal decision today, the Federal Court drew away from answering the question of which court, civil or Syariah, has exclusive jurisdiction to hear cases involving non-Muslim spouses whose partners had converted to Islam.

However the apex court made it clear, when it unanimously decided, that the High Court still has jurisdiction to hear cases involving non-Muslim spouses involved in a matrimonial disputes, even though the other partner had converted to Islam.

This was among the rulings that the three-man panel of judges handed down in the decision of the much awaited case of R.Subashini vs T.Saravanan today.

In the 2-1 decision, the head of the panel Datuk Nik Hashim Nik Abd Rahman and Datuk Azmel Ma’amor concurred while Datuk Abdul Aziz Mohamad gave a dissenting judgement.

The rulings allow Saravanan, 31, whose Muslim name is Muhammad Shafi Abdullah to continue to seek recourse in the syariah court while Subashini, 29, can proceed to file for divorce proceedings in the civil court.

Nik Hashim said by embracing Islam, the husband and the son became subject to Muslim personal and religious laws and it is not an abuse of process if Saravanan, being a Muslim, seeks remedies in the Syariah High Court as it is his right to do so.

The Federal court however cautioned that questions may arise as to whether Subashini would be bound by the syariah court's decisions because she is not a Muslim.

“To my mind, the dissolution order of the civil marriage by the Syariah High Court by virtue of conversion would have no legal effect in the High Court other than as evidence of the fact of the dissolution of the marriage under the Islamic law in accordance with Hukum Syarak," said Nik Hashim.

"Thus, the non-Muslim marriage between the husband and wife remains intact amd continues to subsist until the High Court dissolves it pursuant to a petition for divorce by the unconverted spouse under Section 51(1) of the 1976 Act,” he added.

Nik Hashim said there is no impediment for Saravanan to appear in the divorce proceeding at the High Court albeit as respondent, as the jurisdiction of the High Court extends to him, unlike the Syariah High Court which restricts its jurisdiction to persons professing the religion of Islam only.

The court also paved the way for Saravanan to carry on with his other aims, including to seek custody of the two children and conversion of the second child to Islam, when the court set aside the Erinford injunctions obtained by Subashini previously against Saravanan.

But in this particular case, the court ruled that it could not grant the injunction because Subashini’s divorce petition was premature, due to the fact it was filed short of the three-month requirement.

For full text, click http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=20334

17.1.2008

House of Lords allows "hybrid" embryos

London, Jan. 16, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The British House of Lords has rejected an effort to ban the creation of "hybrid" embryos combining human and animal tissues.

By a vote of 268- 96 the House of Lords defeated a proposed amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill that would have prohibited the creation of the hybrid embryos. In its final form the legislation allows researchers to produce the hybrids, provided that they are not implanted in the womb.

Evan Harris, a Liberal Democrat who had led the parliamentary campaign to allow the practice, applauded the vote by the House of Lords, saying that it was "not rational" to bar the creation of hybrids, since the legislation allows the use of fully human embryos for research purposes. In either case, the embryos are destroyed once scientists have harvested the desired tissues.

Source : http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=55999

24.1.2008

Orang Asli church sues for basic needs
Fauwaz Abdul Aziz | Jan 31, 08 6:31pm (c) malaysiakini.com

Following the footsteps of the Temiar Orang Asli in Kelantan, another Orang Asli church - this time in Kuala Krau, Pahang - has gone to court against its own local and state governments.

The difference is however while the Temiar church was demolished, the Kuala Krau church has had its requests for water and power supplies falling on deaf ears.

Two Kuala Krau villagers - Wet Ket and his son Yaman Wet from Kampung Pasu - had their application filed at the Temerloh High Court today for a judicial review of the decision by the Temerloh land and district office to deny the supply of electricity and water to their church building.

Their suit - in which the Pahang government was named as second respondent - also seeks the court’s declaration and an order directing the local authority to supply the said amenities to the church building.

The Temerloh land and district office had, in a letter dated Apr 11, 2007, informed the plaintiffs of its decision not to provide water and electricity supply to the said building. The reasons for the decision, however, was only conveyed by the office in a letter dated Oct 8, 2007.

The grounds for the decision, said the land and district office, was that the land on which the church stands has not been reserved or gazetted as Orang Asli land.

The church itself was built without the permission of the local authority as stipulated by regulations, it said further.

The villagers, who are represented by lawyers Annou Xavier and Lee Swee Seng, stated in their affidavit that the Federal Constitution in Article 5 enshrined the right to life and liberty and, by implication, the amenities which are necessary to both.

As Article 11 of the Constitution, they stated further, provides for the right to practice one’s religion, the proper exercise of that right includes having a church with all the basic facilities expected of one.

The position of the Temerloh land and district office that the church should not be provided with water and electricity because it stands on un-gazetted or unreserved land was also untenable, said the villagers.

Asking for basic needs

They argue that they have lived on the land for generations. The family of Wet Ket and Yaman Wet, in particular, have been there since 1920.

Addressing the question why the villagers were only now filing their application given the time period stipulated by the laws to seek judicial review is 40 days, Xavier said while the decision - to deny the provision of water and electricity supply - was conveyed April last year, lawyers for the villagers only obtained the grounds for the decision six months later.

There are sufficient legal precedents for the villagers to have some confidence the application would be allowed, he said further.

“The Orang Asli are only asking for water supply and electricity, which are so basic to the needs of all human beings,” he told Malaysiakini.

Xavier also noted that the church had in September 2003 been demolished by personnel and workers of the Temerloh land and district office.

Following an appeal, however, the villagers received RM35,000 in 2004 as compensation from the office of the Prime Minister which was used to build their church anew.

Xavier said judicial commissioner Abdul Halim Aman set March 27 as the next hearing date.

In Gua Musang, Kelantan, Temiar Orang Asli from the village of Kampung Jias have filed a suit against the Gua Musang District Council and the state government over the demolition of their church.