Thursday, February 01, 2018

PPMM's dangerous proposals by stealth

Star Online - Place Syariah courts on par with civil courts (extracts):

Syariah Courts are subordinate courts and only equivalent to Magistrate Courts 

PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Muslim Lawyers Association [PPMM] has urged state governments to amend their state constitutional laws to place the Syariah courts under the state’s constitution.

This move, which has been done by the Terengganu government, would place the Syariah courts on par with the civil courts, said association president Datuk Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar.

“I also urge that all laws which restrict Syariah courts only to Muslims should also be amended to give flexibility to non-Muslims to appear in Syariah courts.

“By doing so, non-Muslims can also seek justice in the Syariah courts,” he said in a statement yesterday.

Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar has proposed two things, namely:

(a) placing Syariah Courts on par with Civil Courts, and

(b) allowing non-Muslims to appear in Syariah Courts.

Currently Syariah Courts, being subordinate courts (equivalent to only Magistrate Courts) are restricted to ONLY Islamic issues such as Muslim family laws including family inheritance and marriage & divorces, khalwat, non-observation on Muslim fasting and yamseng-ing (etc).

The maximum quantum of punishments the Syariah Courts can award has been restricted to what is colloquially known as 3-5-6, or a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment, maximum fine of RM5,000 and whipping up to six strokes.

They cannot award anything more than 3-5-6, let alone heavy duty punishments such as life imprisonment or Allah swt forbid, the death penalty.

The limitation on its punishment awards is by itself already a clear indication of both the Syariah Courts as subordinate courts and Malaya-Malaysia as a secular state. 

Zainul Rijal's proposal to put the Syariah Courts on par with Civil Courts will mean the Islamic Courts can thereafter impose life imprisonments and capital punishments (death sentences), which by logical extrapolation, will also mean they will be able to award lesser punishments such as amputation of limbs and gouging of eyes, and naturally unlimited amount of flogging. And the death sentences may even be by stoning rather than hanging.

In another name, it's the full range of hudud punishment, and by dangerous stealth.

Then, when non-Muslims "choose" or are "persuaded" to appear in Syariah Courts, alhamdulillah, the Malaysian judicial system will be 100% syariah complaint for all citizens and not just Malaysian Muslims.

By then, Malaysia will become what Mahathir said it was back in 2002, namely, that our nation was a fundamentalist Islamic nation, and which Lim Kit Siang had railed, ranted and raved against in his 929 and 617 Declarations but which today a treacherous Kit Siang pretends not to remember.

Cina mudah lupa 

Just a reminder - From MM Online (15 May 2015) - The position of the Shariah Court in the Malaysian legal system — Rosli Dahlan and Fawza Sabila Faudzi (extracts):

* About the authors:

Rosli Dahlan ( heads the Corporate & Commercial Disputes Practice Group at Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill who regularly appears at the High Court and appellate courts on public law issues.

Fawza Sabila Faudzi ( graduated from the Ahmad Ibrahim Kuliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia, and is currently a pupil-in-chambers with the firm

The Federation of Malaya government, in a White Paper published in 1957, explaining the changes to the recommendations of the Reid Commission, stated:

“There has been included in the proposed Federation Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practise his own religion and the right to propagate his religion, though this last right is subject to any restrictions imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.”


Quite clearly, the idea of a “dual” legal system in Malaysia of civil law and Shariah law is misconceived. Shariah law is only applicable to Muslims and only as personal law, with provision for certain offences against the precepts of Islam. Nothing in the Federal Constitution suggests that the Shariah court is to compete with or be parallel to the civil court on the same subject matter, and this is supported by judicial authorities.

This issue is of vital importance to the people of Malaysia, with their multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious history.

The nation called “Malaysia” has no existence outside of the Federal Constitution, which is the supreme law of the country. A united and functional Malaysia can only exist when legal issues are determined in accordance with principle, in well-reasoned judgments by the courts, with a willingness to grapple with difficult issues without glossing over or avoidance or oversimplification or a giving way to sentiment.

The authorities reviewed in this article have in the main avoided these dangers and provided guidance and a path to the future, although with some anomalies that need in due course to be resolved.

Amin, Alhamdulillah, Hallelujah, Omi-Tofu, Aum, we should NOT even and ever consider the proposals by the Malaysian Muslim Lawyers Association.


  1. The problem with people like Ktemoc who are fixated on the Evils of Mahathir, and maintain absolute silence on Najib's accountability.
    People 20 years from now will be having the shameful arguments about the evils which occurred during the Najib Administration, which were ignored or swept under the carpet at the time (as in today).

    Evil occurs because people don't hold accountable those who commit evil - at the time, not 20 years later.

  2. Just watch Mullah Najib carry out all the necessary Constitutional amendments to pander to Islamist extremists, once he regains 2/3 BN majority in Parliament.

    The reason there have been Zero Constitutional amendments in the last 10 years is not because Najib respects the Constitution, but because he refuses to consider the necessary negotiations with Pakatan to get to a 2/3 majority vote in Parliament.

  3. Islam Banking is not inferior to conventional banking, just look at sukuk (Islamic Bonds). If we can have a dual banking system which is working well, then why can't we have a dual legal system?

    1. The syariah component is a magistrate level judicial system with very little or nil experience in precedence etc. Judicial system requires hundred of years of running, experience, constant training and monitoring to get where the civil courts are at (we benefited from the labours, trials and tribulations of our British predecessors)

      And why have a parallel system when the civil courts has already been established and superior in its competence and secular impartiality

    2. I think dual legal sys is okay as long as both muslim n non muslim is given a choice to be tried under syariah n civil.

  4. just wonder how much so called Islamic Banking you have done. My guess is you have only superficial heard about it but not really dealt with it as in calculation, understanding the documentation, describing them in legal terms........I'll have to do a KTemoc here...... else.........wakakakaka

    1. I was part of the team under Dato' Dr Sudin Haron that set up INCEIF. I have presented papers on Islamic Finance.

    2. What's the diff between blr & bfr other than terminology? Care to enlighten?

    3. BFR is for Islamic rent purchase contract term and the rate is capped. In the event of default the 'interest' will not be compounded.

    4. Hahaha, 'interest' will not be compounded when the obligation is in default, meaning the element of interest (profit?) becomes part of the the financing (loan). You know why islamic banking can run parallel to the conventional one, becos they are the same species. Loan becomes pembiayaan but Allah swt does not prohibit loan only tak boleh mintak lebih dari pinjaman, islam is simple, kita yg buat susah. Menghalalkan riba atas nama just beli.

    5. Not the right thread to engage you. I write the interest between quotation marks for easy understanding. But I will agree with you that a few Islamic financing terms maybe just cosmetics.

    6. A better place to understand the in&out of Islamic financing mechanism is to follow Outsyde the box blog.

      His critical analysis of islamic finance can he unprintable to the eyes of the zombies.

      The only saving grace is he keeps delecting his postings after a few days, depending on the article's 'sensitivity'.

      Wakakakaka....a real smart mamak!

  5. I think DAP should seriously consider TK Chua's latest opinion piece that DAP should break away from PH and contest on its own. That will satisfy all anti-Ms, including KTemoc.

    1. That may mean massive majorities in Core DAP constituencies, but the broad picture is that it will cement DAP permanently as a Ghetto party.

  6. The very important difference between Islamic Banking and Islamic Courts is
    a) Freedom of Choice with Banking, No such Freedom with Courts
    b) Courts Coercive Power , vs. Very Limited Coercive Scope for Banks. Courts can order you to be jailed.
    Banks coercive power only come in when you are unable to pay your loans.

    c) The adversarial nature of Court proceedings involving 3 parties. Customer-Bank relationships usually only involve 2 parties, much simpler.

  7. Hi Rahn... Music time, let your hair down..enjoy the song.


  8. I think ultimately the Nons can deal with Islamism. It is not welcome, but survivable as long as it is not violent, and people can continue to practice their religion in private.

    Not being able to Gamble 4 Digits or drink beer in a public place is no big sweat.

    What the Nons, and really the whole country cannot "Deal With" , in fact no country on this earth can survive it for long is Mega Corruption.

    1. Chinese, Indians, Americans and the world have been dealing and surviving with corruption, the Chinese and Indians for 5,000 years, the Americans for almost 250 years, and the world in varying duration from 5,000 years to less. But Spain, Greece, etc under Ottoman rule and India under Mogul empire? And the Myanmarese Rakhine State under the Rohingyas?

    2. Forget about living amidst the slow-moving empires of the past 5,000 years that were able to cushion external economic threats for years, decades, even centuries.

      You should read Thomas Friedman's The World Is Flat, one of the most accessible recent works on the Globalised Economy.

      Globalisation is a double edged sword - it facilitates , makes easier Mega Corruption. The speed, scale and secrecy of 1MDB would have been much more difficult to achieve in 1950.
      At the same time it magnifies the penalties to a country from corruption. Mahathir got a taste of it in 1998.
      Zimbabwe is in a pit it cannot climb out of without major housecleaning. But at least it now has a short window of opportunity now that Mugabe is gone. Whether they seize it is another matter.

      Venezuela is falling into a bottomless abyss.

      Of course, as expected, Ktemoc would defend Najib by saying he's not bad, and anyway, Corruption is no big deal...