No Self-Incrimination?
Technorati tags: Religion, Islam, Syariah Court, Lina Joy, Revathi
Walski's Intro Note: From time to time, reader's of myAsylum leave comments that are worthy of full posts. The following, from Juslo, is one of them, and was left in relation to two previous posts, here and here. The comment posted here has been edited slightly for style, flow and language, but with the contents essentially intact.
The fears of some of us about self-incrimination were right (unfortunately).
Wan Zafran has tried to assure us that the criminal provisions criminalizing apostasy would NOT apply to someone who is applying for an apostasy order at the syariah court, in his post, entitled Lina Joy, The Decision (Counsel’s Explanation).
But he was WRONG, it seems.
The syariah court system itself HAS ANSWERED the qeustions/fears we had - in the recent Revathi case.
It seems that it's NOT TRUE that the syariah criminal provisions punishing acts apostasy would not be applied to punish somebody for applying to the syariah court for an apostasy order. they DO apply.
In other words, Justice Richard Malanjum was CORRECT to say that to send Lina Joy to Syariah Court would be SELF-INCRIMINATION, and the majority of the Federal Court was telling us is a BIG FAT LIE.
So, the Lina Joy majority decision could be summed up as: go bang your head on the syariah court wall, don't come to civil court. If u bleed, KEEP banging. Any other person who still wishes to defend the majority's decision in Lina Joy, please show that I am WRONG... please. Because I WANT TO BE WRONG.
(Juslo's wrong proven right, and left wanting, in the full post)
Walski's in-post note: The following are excerpts quoted by Juslo to justify his statement above. Sources and links are provided for each of the articles mentioned.
From Harakah: Kes Siti Fatimah: PAS, Umno perlu bincang bersama
by Roslan SMS
"Pada 23 Jun 2006 Siti Fatimah telah mengemukakan permohonan di Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Melaka untuk keluar dari Islam dan menukar namanya dari nama Islam ke nama Hindunya atas alasan beliau tidak lagi menganut Islam, telah berkahwin dengan V. Suresh menurut agama Hindu dan kini mempunyai seorang anak Diviya Dharhini hasil dari perkahwinan itu.
Mahkamah walau bagaimanapun telah mengeluarkan perintah menahan Siti Fatimah untuk 100 hari mulai 8 Januari tahun ini (dan kemudiannya dilanjutkan ke 80 hari lagi) di Pusat berkenaan dan perintah tersebut disahkan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Selangor yang diberi kuasa ke atas responden memandangkan pusat tersebut berada di Selangor."
From The Malaysian Bar Council:
‘Revathi, that’s my name - forever’
Friday, 06 July 2007, 04:45pm
©Malaysiakini (Used by permission)
by Andrew Ong and Ng Lin Fong
Woman released from Islamic rehab camp
M Revathi, 29, still steadfastly wants to remain a Hindu, despite her six month detention by religious authorities and ongoing 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 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.
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 follow 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).
“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 run 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 won’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.
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.
‘Waste 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.
“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?” she asked.
“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.
"Because of their behaviour, I hate (benci) Islam even more now," she added.
--------- o ---------
Woman released from Islamic rehab camp
by Andrew Ong
A woman who had been forcibly separated from her Hindu husband and 18-month-old baby girl on the grounds of her religion has been released from custody in an Islamic rehabilitation camp yesterday.
However, the woman - Revathi Masoosai, according to her husband V Suresh, or Siti Fatimah, according to her parents and religious authorities - is prohibited from staying with her husband.
Yesterday, the woman was brought to the Malacca Syariah High Court where she was told that she was freed from the Ulu Yam rehabilitation camp in Selangor.
She had been held there for six months.
The court also ruled that she must stay with her Muslim parents, along with her child. The baby has been looked after by Revathi's parents since she was sent to the rehabilitation camp in January.
Revathi was also told that she could not convert out of Islam.
Suresh had previously claimed that she was not a practising Muslim, but a Hindu born to Muslim parents. The couple is from Malacca.
Revathi told reporters that the rehabilitation camp was like a prison and that religious officials tried to force her to pray and wear headscarf.
"Because of their behaviour, I hate (benci) Islam even more now," she added.
Case in court
The habeas corpus application today to seek her release was to have been heard this morning at the Shah Alam High Court.
However at the court proceedings, lawyers for the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Jais) Mohamad Haniff Khatri Abdulla said the matter has been rendered academic and redundant following her release from the rehabilitation camp yesterday.
Suresh’s lawyer Karpal Singh on the other hand told the court that the matter must be heard as it was a matter of public interest as it would set a precedence for similar cases.
In the end the court agreed with Haniff and dismissed the application.
Justice Su Geok Yiam said she allowed preliminary objections from Haniff that the Shah Alam High Court had no jurisdiction on grounds that Revathi was no longer in detention.
“The law is clear on this. If the subject of a habeas corpus application is released, then the courts have no jurisdiction to hear the application,” said Justice Su after a one-hour recess to make the ruling.
In an immediate response, Karpal said he would file an appeal at the Federal Court on Monday.
Representatives from the Bar Council, Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism and the Melaka Islamic Religious Council (Maim) were also present to observe proceedings.
From The Malaysian Bar Council:
Syariah Court dismisses Revathi's application to renounce Islam
Contributed by Desmond Ho Chee Cheong
Friday, 06 July 2007, 08:01pm
MALACCA, Fri: Revathi’s (aka Siti Fatimah) application to seek the Malacca Syariah High Court’s order to renounce her religion came up for hearing at 4.00pm on Thursday 5 July 2007.
We were informed earlier on that the judge would hold his court in session at 3.00pm but we were kept waiting with Revathi who was dressed in a green coloured saree.
Tuah bin Atan was the syariah lawyer acting for Majlis Agama Islam Melaka, and the Bar Council held a watching brief through Nizam Bashir.
The Malacca Bar Committee showed its concern for the case and had in attendance a sizeable number of lawyers, including its Chair, Ng Kong Peng.
The learned judge was informed by Tuah that the maximum 6 months rehabilitation period has lapsed and would have expired at 12am that night and upon reading the progress report of the officer in charge of the rehabilitation centre in Ulu Yam, Tuah went on to state that there was a possibility of repentance on Revathi’s part and thus a recommendation was made for continual counseling sessions with the hope that she would return to embrace Islam.
The judge then asked Revathi whether she still insisted on proceeding with the application to renounce Islam and she answered in the affirmative. Nizam Bashir then requested the court’s indulgence to take into consideration that Revathi is an adult before delivering his judgment.
Revathi was then allowed to speak once again and she courageously told the court that she has two families and despite her filial duties to her parents, she also has a duty to her own family with husband. However, Tuah brought to the court's attention that, subject to proof, Revathi has only one recognised family, i.e. her parents.
The learned judge then informed the court that he would allow Revathi’s parents to speak in court . When both of them appeared, they informed the court that they wished for their daughter to be placed in their custody.
The learned judge then delivered his judgment and stated that in Islam there is no compulsion and there is a recognition of the concept of freedom of religion provided in Article 11 of the Federal Constitution. However, this freedom of religion, according to him, meant that no one can be compelled to be a Muslim. The learned judge went on to state that once a person has embraced Islam, that person cannot leave Islam. He went on and remarked that in Islam, in the instance of a man, the punishment of death is permissible in 3 instances, namely, murder, adultery and apostasy. For a woman, in the event she renounces her religion, the sentence would be indefinite imprisonment until she repents. The learned judge explained that in Islam, religion is not merely between Man and God but between Man, God and community and a person renouncing Islam would affect the community. The learned judge apparently equated apostasy to treason in western civilization and stated that in many countries around the world, treason is a serious offence as it is of national security concern and punishable by the harshest penal sentence.
Despite Nizam’s earlier plea to take into consideration Revathi’s adult status, the learned judge dismissed the application seeking an order to renounce Islam and ordered Revathi to be placed in the custody of her parents and that she would undergo continual counseling sessions.
Walski's end-note: And so, the assertion that an application to apostasize made in the Syariah court CAN be self-incriminating, probably depending on which state court the application is made. The assurances made by Wan Zafran in his blog, as have been proven, are either empty assurances, or worse, the counsel who wrote the contents of that post did so knowing full well that it was untrue. Walski thanks Juslo for his effort in bringing this matter to the attention of Walski, and the bloggerhood. Again, Walski asks: Justice, or "Just Us"?
12 comments:
I can only feel shame that this cruelty is being inflicted on Revathi in the name of my religion, Islam. On whom does the sin of making her hate Islam rest?
Shame, shame, shame!
i love u walski... ;P
thanks man, for this.
once again - WALSKI FOR PM!!
HIDUP IMP!!
Hi walski. It's depressed me to read your post, but I suppose that's to be expected.
I feel a great weight of despair today, because I know deep in my heart that this will never be my country.
What a MP said recently about the "Birth of a Nation"; when Wan Zafran refers to Islam being the 'law of the land' before the birth of our nation-state; how we are still called 'pendatang'; and now, the ultimate travesty: prisons of the mind and the soul.
Perhaps it is time for me to consider other solutions. Maybe I'll hide myself in somebody's luggage when they're headed overseas. :)
Good coverage, btw. :)
Walski for PM.
If you can make individuals like Revitha appreciate you, you are definitely going places.
Please do run the subsequent election.
Ironicly, the folks at Ulu Yam only made her forsake her previous religion more, by forcing her to love it.
You see, thats what happens when religion and state get mixed up. It ceases to be about praise & worship of God, and becomes a bureaucracy for controlling people & for the powers that be to abuse their authority for power and money.
"The learned judge apparently equated apostasy to treason in western civilization and stated that in many countries around the world, treason is a serious offence as it is of national security concern and punishable by the harshest penal sentence."
an interesting 'clash of worldviews' there...
i think it's time the 'secular-minded' people (muslims & kafirs alike) try to look at apostasy from a different angle - or religion as a whole, for that matter - when it comes to talking about islam with the wahhabis.
call it 'islamic exceptionalism' if u like, but i wonder if it could be argued that these so-called muslims (the wahhabi type especially) see islam as (using 'western, secular, liberal' terminologies, the wahhabis & menj would say) a NATION, a POLITICAL entity - n a MILITANT one at that.
in other words, it's NOT JUST a 'faith' as such.
the judeo-christian tradition looks at faith as something 'personal' with god, but that's not how wahhabis regard the status and obligations of a muslim vis-a-vis the ummah.
it seems to me that to them, being a muslim is being a citizen of the global, pan-islamic polity, to which the muslim owes a higher degree of loyalty and positive obligations than those owed by the citizens to the common, post-19th century secular democracies.
eg. in the western liberal democracy, people could sometime have 3-4 citizenships!! (owen hargreaves, the new man united footballer, apparently has canadian, english n german citizenship.) to them, political loyalty is more like a contractual relationship (which u can break off, check out AND leave anytime u like), much more 'casual' than the wahhabis would like.
so, i guess that explains how nik aziz could come up with this:
“It’s like joining the army. You can choose to join. But if you wear a uniform, start training only to desert later, you’ll be caught by the military police,”
- he diplomatically refrained from adding: "and JUSTIFIABLY BE EXECUTED FOR DESERTION."
http://asylum60.blogspot.com/2007/06/sparta-and-other-bad-analogies.html
so, quitting islam is not just about changing your 'faith', like the judeo-christian traditions would characterise. to the wahhabis, it's TREASON, MILITARY DESERTION, running away half-way thru the Armageddon (with the kafirs).
whose interpretation of islam is right, whose wrong, is a another debate for another day, but to me, this, my friends, is history in the making.
here and now, we r witnessing the battle of ideologies among the muslims, of how and what they want their islamic 'faith'/'nation' (depending on which side u r on) to be.
and judging from the recent events, it seems that the wahhabis are fast gaining the upperhand, while the moderates just sit back, relax, while once in a while, and watch... while the wahhabis infiltrate/take over the schools and mosques and turn the next generation of muslims into soldiers/mujaheedens of god...
which is why the western democracies r allowing themselves to be destroyed FROM WITHIN with their misunderstanding of what wahhabis try to achieve.
the 'liberals' allow the wahhabi/militant version of islam - which is in fact a POLITICAL IDEOLOGY just like nazism & communism, not a 'faith' as such - to be preached and spread in their countries in the name of 'religious freedom'.
while on the other hand, they DISALLOW/DISCOURAGE any genuine criticism of this militant ideology which is WORSE than nazism & communism combined - in the name of, again, 'religious freedom'.
when their forefathers were defending their democracies from attacks by the nazis & communists, there were OPEN & FIERCE attacks/criticism/discussions of these anti-freedom/liberalism ideologies. these political ideologies were given their rightful place in the public domain and discourse - as POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES, to which there is NO LIMIT for criticisms.
but when it comes to wahhabi/militant islam, this ideology is SHIELDED by 'religious freedom' and 'anti-hate speech' laws.
whenever people criticise militant islam on tv, u can hear the muslim/pro-muslim talking heads hide behind 'religious freedom', and attempt to stop discussion right there and then. "what muslims choose to believe in is none of others' damn business, if we still believe in liberalism, the very foundation of our democracy blah blah blah..."
this has allowed the wahhabis/militants to use religous freedom to spread religious UNfreedom, to use anti-hate speech laws to propagate hate speech. yet the liberals in the west don't seem to even realise that...
to me, this is the blind spot of liberalism, which would prove to be its FATAL weakspot.
(sorry walski; just trying to air some of my thinking... i can think of no other place in the malaysian bloggerhood to do this.)
for completeness' sake:
(particularly, note the parts enclosed by ***** sign)
http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=18488
Woman freed from Islamic centre, court dismisses habeas corpus application
R.Surenthira Kumar
SHAH ALAM (July 6, 2007): The High Court here today dismissed an application by the husband of a woman whom he claimed was unlawfully detained for 180 days in an Islamic faith rehabilitation centre in Hulu Yam Baru in Batang Kali, Selangor.
Lawyers representing Siti Fatimah Abdul Karim's husband V.Suresh had prepared to argue the Habeas Corpus application but were only informed late yesterday about her release from the Baitul Aman Faith Rehabilitation Centre in Hulu Yam.
The remand period, initially for 80 days and then extended to 100 days, was supposed to expire midnight today.
Suresh had claimed his wife, who goes by the name M.Revathi, 29, was being unlawfully detained in the centre after she was taken away by officials from the Malacca Islamic Religious Council officers (MAIM) when she turned up at the Syariah court on Jan 8.
Lawyer representing the Superintendent of the centre and the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (MAIS) Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla told the court Siti Fayimah was released from detention and ordered to be placed under the custody of her parents following a decision by the Syariah court in Malacca yesterday.
"Since the Syariah court in it's wisdom, based on the various state enactments, has made an order to release Siti Fatimah, she is no longer under detention and therefore this application becomes redundant," said Mohamed Haniff Khatri.
He cited several Federal Court cases and decisions on the issue to support his argument and appealed to judge Datuk Su Geok Yiam to dismiss the application.
Lawyer representing Suresh, Karpal Singh appealed to the court for the case to be heard despite it becoming academic after Revathi's release.
He said it was necessary for the matter to be heard as it was a case of public interest and perhaps it was an appropriate time for the court to ventilate further on the case because there was an increasing trend in such cases.
Karpal also cited some Federal Court cases on the issue and appealed to the court to give Revathi a chance to tell the court what transpired in the Syariah court.
He also said the Syariah court's order for Revathi's parents to take custody of her was odd because she was no longer a minor and is married.
Judge Datuk Su Geok Yiam, in her decision, said since Siti Fatimah was no longer under detention and therefore she had no choice but to dismiss the case.
"The law on this issue is clear, once the subject matter of a habeas corpus application is no longer under detention, the court has no jurisdiction to hear the application," said Su.
*****
Later outside the courtroom, Revathi claimed the following took place at the centre:
- not given medical attention when she was sick;
- no proper food and was also forced to consume beef;
- forced to wear headscarf;
- not allowed to meet her 18-month-old daughter Diviya Dharshini; and
- threatened her "thali" (saffron coloured woven thread or gold chain worn around the neck by Indian women who are married) would be removed and forced to embrace Islam.
*****
She added her husband took care of their daughter before Diviya Dharshini was handed over to her parents' custody.
Revathi said her parents had converted to Islam before her birth but she was raised as a Hindu by her grandmother.
She married Suresh in March 2004 according to Hindu rites in a temple in Malacca, but the marriage was not registered. Revathi had sought to renounce Islam and *****was told to go throught the Syariah court to obtain the necessary approvals and certificate***** when she was taken away by MAIM officers for rehabilitation.
*****
The couple is now having difficulties registering the birth of Diviya Dharshini.
*****
MAIM spokesman Tuah Atan, who was present in court, said Siti Fatimah is a Muslim and her parents were given custody to enable her to continue living as a Muslim.
He said they will assist Siti Fatimah to "return to the right path" in due time.
Suresh, meanwhile, said he is glad his wife has been released but was uneasy about the Syariah court order handing custody of his wife to her parents, adding he will seek advice from his lawyers on the next course of action.
Mohamed Haniff Khatri was assisted by counsels Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, Rahim Sinwan and Abdul Halim Bahari.
Karpal was assisted by J.Amardas and Nicholas Netto while Edward Saw held a watching brief for the Malaysian Bar and Sunil Lopez for the Malaysian Consultative Council on Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST).
Updated: 05:31PM Fri, 06 Jul 2007
blood, violence , intolerance, vengeance, hate , annihilation. These will forever be the legacy passed down the generations. It is beyond redemption. A poison coated apple of peace, available and alluring to all, but fatality in its ultimate form.
Perhaps this recent article by a former radical will shed some light on the chasm between theology and the real world. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2115891,00.html
marina m. - ironic, no? On the one hand expounding the mercy that is Islam, and inflicting cruelty on the other... and still remaining in denial of the path towards certain doom, if they continue to behave in such a way.
juslo - no problems, friend. Dunno about the PM and IMP thing, tho... I do hope someone that can accomplish something DOES pick up on it. With Walski's compliments.
xpyre - I share your despair, my friend, as I'm sure many other Malaysians do. All I can hope for is that more silent suferrers speak up... if not, save some space in that suitcase for me, won't ya?
ck - I'd rather be a consultant to whomever wants that unenviable position... :p
brighteyes - the road to Hell, as they say, is paved with good intentions... and yes, it has become a religious bureaucracy more than anything else.. Religion + Bureaucracy + Politics = Sure DOOM.
fk - great input, as usual :-) And don't worry... you may air your thoughts here any 'ol time!
juslo @ 5:31PM 7/06/07 - thanks for including the article. It's almost like saying "you're gonna stay a Muslim, like it or not, or die trying to resist". What Revathi has exhibited is nothing short of sheer will and determination, and I pray that she be allowed to live life on her own terms one day...
anonymous - very apt observation...
trashed - thanks for the link, which if doesn't appear properly, can be accessed here. Yeah, a very interesting analysis from a former terror insider... It's the waking up and smelling the 21st century part that's gonna be the biggest challenge...
It's amazing how much she's been through. And like Marina said, who's going to bear the sins for making her hate Islam?
Maybe this would revolutionize Malaysia in the long run. One can only hope.
The truth is 'almost there'...
Read this article "Younus Shaikh - Dr. Younus Shaikh on 'Islam and Women'" at http://www.flameout.org/flameout/islam/younus_shaikh.html
Especially the ending part:
"You civilized people! Yesterday you refused to acknowledge the dangers inherent in the rise of the Christian Nazi and Communist ideologies. Yesterday you supported Islamic Taliban even when they trampled rights of their women under their feet. Your refusal to confront militant Islam today may cost us more dearly than our individual lives-our cherished achievement -our civilization. Beliefs have consequences-the centrality of Islam to mental, social, intellectual and cultural backwardness; organized offences against women and minorities; fundamentalism, extremism and modern terrorism are impossible to deny. "Religions of peace and tolerance" are mere empty words.
Islam is an organized crime against humanity!"
Post a Comment