A I S E H M A N . O R G

that's more than enough to prove that malaysians are well deservingly be called as "malaysia bodoh"!!!

Yes, live in Malaysia is a real mess. Instead of making life easier for people the Government and BN is making double hard. What used to be simple case of family burying the deceased become a national headache.
The syariah court is not properly set-up, in fact the whole government is not functioning for the people.

Aisehman

You see... That's why many would agree that Malaysian are simply bunch of Malaysia Bodoh!

The country gotten half past six to run the government and including Cleaners too... that's why we can see 'shits' all over smells stink.

That chap... where is he, supposedly barking all over now remain silent, and you know who... kickdefella!

Good luck is all Malaysians need right now, and its no where near.

Something to ponder!

Malik Imtiaz has a good posting on this subject, please share:

http://malikimtiaz.blogspot.com/2006/12/tragedy-of-rayappan.html

Overzealousness, that has always been the attitudes for the officials of the Islamic authourities. Fighting over dead bodies will not bring any victory to the religion.

I think these officials better spend their time on how to assist the muslims who are in need of their assistance than fighting over suspected 'muslim' dead bodies.

now that the hadhari government had decided, just let it be. imam hadhari knows best even in his sleeps. the cabinet ministers and umno kakis just sokong.

ultimately, its the highest superior power decides whether rayappan is muslim or not.

lets hope no more of these nonsense crop up again in future and all mais, jais jawi etc should be diligent in their handlings of such cases.

the proper thing for these "convertibles" to do is to write a will to determine what kind of burial they want upon their death and make it a legal will. its their funeral afterall let them decide.

kalau hidup susahkan orang, mati pun jangan lah susahkan semua orang.

Two things...

One, the Syariah court lost a great deal of credibility with the latest episode.

Two, apparently the road to recognizing apostacy in Islam will be blazed by the saudara barus who quits Islam.

Plain speaking enough?

Malik Imtiaz wrote:

The dilemma with Rayappan’s case is simply that there is no dilemma.

There is no tragedy in Rayappan’s family not wishing to submit to the jurisdiction of the syariah court. In as much as they are entitled to not be compelled to give evidence in the manner the Majlis Agama wished, as a matter of law Rayappan’s family members cannot do so. The Federal Constitution has limited the jurisdiction of any syariah courts, such jurisdiction to be conferred by written law, to persons professing the religion of Islam. The family members are not such persons.

In the same vein, the Majlis Agama is not a person professing Islam. It cannot be. It is not a natural person. It is a body corporate. As such, it was not in any position to petition the syariah court for any order. Neither was the syariah court in a position to entertain any application by the Majlis Agama.

Additionally, the syariah court cannot order any state department or agency to do one thing or the other. Such departments or agencies are not ‘persons professing the religion of Islam’ within the meaning of the Federal Constitution.

And yet these things are happening. Orders are being granted. The crucial question is why. More significantly, why is the Government not doing anything about it? Most, if not all, of the actors involved are government servants. Surely there is a method by which these actors can be made to understand their roles and more importantly the legal framework in which they operate, constitution and all.

Any exercise of power which runs counter to the system envisaged by the Federal Constitution is an abuse of power. The system envisaged is not one which lends itself to discriminating against the widow of Rayappan or persons in her situation. The system is not one which envisages a distinction between muslims and non- muslims in the way they articulate the right to access justice.

Seen from this perspective, and when viewed in the context of manifest abuses of powers as noted above, the question is really why the government does not appear to be doing anything to correct the obviously incorrect application of legal principle. By its inaction, the government is accountable for what is clearly state supported discrimination. More so the Attorney General's chambers for permitting the wrongs to perpetutate and for not taking the position it should on the Federal Constitution.

This by any account is wrong and reprehensible, no matter the explanation. No matter the exhortations for Rayappan’s family members to submit to jurisdiction. No matter the directions from the Prime Minister.

The tragedy of Rayappan's case is that all the answers are provided by the Federal Consitution and that the answers provided cater to the needs of all concerned. The High Court clearly has jurisdiction. The issue is whether Rayappan passed away as a Muslim, the remedy needed a declaration. If there are elements of Islamic law that need to be understood in order to come to this finding of fact, expert evidence can be led. This procedure is invoked regularly in the High Court in various matters and there is nothing to distinguish cases of this type from any other case. This was the approach taken by the Supreme Court in a similar case called Dalip Kaur in 1992.

The tragedy of Rayappan's case is that the Constitution does not seem to matter any more.

There is no justification that can be offered to Rayappan's family for what it has had to undergo. I cannot say whether Rayappan did in fact pass away as a non-Muslim. The very minimum that his family members are entitled to are the certainty that they will be given a chance to air their grievances in a court of law and that the issue will not be adjudicated upon by stealth in the syariah courts, courts to which they do not and cannot have recourse

And the involvement of State actors in the scenario is inexcusable. The Government must be blamed. It cannot say that it was taken by surprise, that it has not been appraised of the way things are being handled and the law applied. This is what the Article 11 road shows were about. The Government also promised when Murthi's burial became a very public issue last year that the scenario would not repeat itself. Well, it has, repeatedly, in one form or the other.

For this reason it is equally inexcusable for the Government to have buried the Article 11 initiative and any like it under the mountain of lies that were spread about the same. The Government owed a duty to Malaysians to allow civil society to assist it in solving a situation that it does not appear to be able to solve. In killing the debate on the wrongs being caused by a misapplication of the law, the Government intentionally looked away. It still seems to be looking the other way.

Aisehman

Rayappan is long gone turned ashes; am pretty sure that religious officers be it at management or enforcement, both are hunger for cash (basic undeniable fact) and physical touches like Maria Eva stuff.

They are bored to death and can't put in place Hadhari which they themselves don't understand.

We should not put blame to those religious people and cabinets; let the ashes take it... we malaysians are easy to forget and with Rayappan case now turned ashes, by next week... the newspapers will go back normal.

Its all a game to boost circulations... especially Tamil dailies; what do you think?

Ponder over it... there may be some truth!

Aisehman
Like everyone else in this blog, I fully agree with you that we are in one big humongous mess. To think that the problem was over when Rayappan Anthony's body was released back to the family is but wishful thinking. Unless Article 121 and other related constitutional matters are rectified, we will have this problems coming back to haunt us again and again and again. Furthermore, this is a judiciary matter. Why did the Executive branch of the government interfere? Have they become an arbiter to decide future cases of this nature? A precedent has been set and with it, the government have dug its own grave. Oh God, what has become of this country of ours???????

I remember an article written by none other than Marina Mahathir herself asking a very good question. Who are these people (the JAIS, MAIS, Syariah, etc)? They were not elected by the people so who are they to impose their laws on us?

Does it mean that when we vote BN, we voted these people in too? If that is the case, something is very wrong here. I don't remember casting my vote for the right of these instituitions to wave another set of laws at me that I certainly don't agree to.

It is time the Government spell it very clearly over this rather messy affair.

"If you demand the freedom to believe and to practice your beliefs, you must also acknowledge the rights of others to do the same."
(what u said in a newer post, but what i said is more relevant to this post.)

1, sadly, that's not practised much, if at all, in the arab world (note the news about Abdul Rahman the afghan apostate; saudi arabia's constant harrassment of christians, etc), although the christian world (usa n europe) allows islam to b practised freely.

2, what if someone demands his "freedom to believe and to practice his beliefs" WHICH DENY "the rights of others to do the same"???

Use ISA on those who leave Islam, says lecturer
http://www.malaysia-today.net/blog2006/newsncom.php?itemid=1072

"Negri Sembilan Mufti Datuk Mohd Murtadza Ahmad said the concept of freedom of religion in Islam had been misinterpreted.

"The Quranic verse ‘There is no compulsion in religion’ does not mean that a Muslim can leave Islam as he wishes, it means that non-Muslims cannot be forced to enter Islam.

"This verse has been misquoted by so many. Once someone is a Muslim, he is bound by its rules, just as those professing other faiths are bound by theirs," he said."

the verse never specified that "no compulsion in religion" is not enjoyed by MUSLIMS as well, n i've been told tha tthe qur'an never said that muslims cannot apostate, whether on the penalty of death or not. but how it could b interpreted in the above manner is not difficult to see - for political power n control, in the name of 'Islam'.

3, frankly, the 'impulse to impose' in 'Islam' (whether that's the 'correct Islam' is subject to debate...) is the main reason y so many non-muslims got 'worked up' by 'Islam' in the first place.

to most non-muslims, it's a very 'strange', 'uncivilised', authoritarian idea to claim that any religion can force itself down upon anybody, whether he likes it or not, especially in the case of born-muslims (feels like 'life imprisonment' to many) n non-muslims who r forced to convert because of marriage.

many non-muslims just cannot accept any compulsion at all in religion, regardless of how true, good or glorious that religion is. (but i guess to conservative muslims, that's because we r 'secular', do not 'totally submit to god', etc etc...)

i mean, even a primary school student could understand that to SEIZE a corpse for burial AFTER death, away from the grieving family, is simply INHUMANE, if not BARBARIC. 'insensitive' is too mild a word to use, honestly. these stubborn muslims officials should just imagine how THEY would feel if their loved one's corpse is SEIZED by a christian for christian burial just before the funeral. n i fail to see how does that help to improve the public image of Islam - or maybe they just don't care.

seriously, if muslims DON'T FORCE anybody, muslims or non-muslims, to face or accept Islam in their lives 1 way or the other, frankly, most of these disharmony, bickering n muslim/islam-bashing would have been avoided.

eg, little things like the loudness of the mosque's early morning call to prayer - it takes a very patient person to put up with it daily, n it's understandable if a non-muslim would feel irritated. it could have been done in a different way, with modern technology - eg. muslims could switch on the radio to listen to early morning call to prayer, or the mobile phone company could offer services which wake muslims up before daily prayer time. but some muslims just choose to do it in the LOUD (literally) n irritating (to a hardworking person who needs to get enough sleep) way. all because "this is a muslim country, so we can do whatever we want" (kind of).

if muslims don't do that kind of 'loud' things that affect others, i honestly believe that most non-muslims will have no incentive to talk about islam (often in an angry way) in public; except when they discuss about choosing which religion to believe in, which r mostly done in private - just like what non-christians do when they talk about christianity.

honestly, the world, especially malaysia, would have been a much happier n peaceful place...

to come back to your quote, speaking for myself only as a non-muslim, i hope muslims do understand that some non-muslims (like me) r NOT anti-Islam at all. we're only anti-IMPOSITION/FORCING of Islam down on anybody, muslim or non-muslim.