Denying a mother’s natural rights is not compatible with any religion
YESTERDAY, the Kuala Lumpur High Court allowed Loh Siew Hong’s habeas corpus application to compel the immediate release of her three children, who were unilaterally converted by her ex-husband, from the Perlis Welfare Department.
What is so startling about this case is that Loh was compelled to apply for habeas corpus despite already having sole custody of her children. The Perlis religious authorities and institution’s insistence on keeping the children shows their blatant refusal to obey the High Court’s order.
The facts in Loh’s case are strikingly similar to previous high-profile cases involving the unilateral conversion of underaged children in the absence of their mothers: Shamala Shanathan in 2003, Subashini in 2006, S. Deepa in 2012 and Indira Gandhi in 2009, to name a few. In Indira’s case, the High Court compelled the return of her children in 2014. With the police saying it is a challenge to locate her ex-husband and youngest daughter’s whereabouts, Indira remains forcefully separated from her daughter 13 years since the date of the child’s conversion.
But in Loh’s case, the children’s whereabouts are known. She tracked them down on her own, without any help from the authorities.
To be clear, Loh has done everything a devoted mother can do to ensure her children are back with her. In just days upon leaving the women’s shelter after having her limbs fractured by her ex-husband, she quickly sought and obtained interim custody of her children while simultaneously applying for a divorce. Despite the Covid-19-triggered lockdown she continued her search, lodging nine different police reports.
She then sought and obtained full custody of her children in March 2021 from the Kuala Lumpur High Court.
Within the very limited means of this single mother, she has exhausted every kernel of effort known to her. We can only imagine how terrified she must have been for the past three years. Yet she remained utterly resilient in her efforts to have her young children – 11-year-old twin daughters and a seven-year-old son at the time of the physical assault – back in her arms.
The law as laid down by the Federal Court in Indira’s case in 2018 is clear: a unilateral conversion in the absence of the other parent (mother or father) is null and void. As such, the Perlis mufti and the state’s religious department have been grossly negligent in allowing the conversion to proceed even though the mother was absent.
The learned mufti and the Perlis state apparatus have not issued any apology and have shown no public remorse for causing unimaginable anguish to this single mother. On the contrary, the Perlis mufti disrespectfully turned a blind eye to Loh’s pain by claiming that “the children don’t want to return to their mother”.
This case is one of now too many displaying the same pattern: violence towards the mother, removal of the children from the mother, conversion of the young children to Islam, which is then used as a means of separating the mother from her children. Names of children are also usually changed upon conversion, which further entrenches the divide between mother and children. This is truly a potent technique of emotional assault on both mother and children.
The unilateral conversion of Loh’s three children will soon be challenged in a judicial review. The outcome of this case has serious repercussions. This is about undercurrents in Malaysian society caused by threats to peace. If the religious authorities claim that such conversion cases are “sensitive”, then what about stability and harmony among the different races in Malaysia? Isn’t that a greater good? Isn’t that more “sensitive” and in need of protection at all costs?
The right of a loving and responsible mother is a natural right respected in every religion. It is a sacred right as inalienable as fundamental rights to life, property, and freedom. Violating it while harming an innocent mother is a betrayal of this sacred right.
Loh’s desperate plea that she would be willing to convert to Islam just to have her children back with her is a disturbing cry of unmistakable anguish. It calls into question the very foundation of love that every religion stands on.
In any event, a nine-judge panel of the Federal Court chaired by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat had also declared yesterday that any attempt to carry out judicial reviews of Islamic authorities’ decisions by the Syariah courts goes against the Federal Consti-tution. The message to “little Napoleons” in Malaysia’s religious bodies on this issue is clear: respect our Federal Constitution as the highest law of the land. End the use of this tactic of unilateral conversion that is tarnishing both the good name of the noble religion of Islam as well as the authorities’ own.
CHAN QUIN ER
Lawyer & MCA Central Committee member
No comments:
Post a Comment