Syariah Courts only have jurisdiction over persons who declare themselves to be Muslims, meaning, non-Muslims do not have a legal standing in Syariah Courts as they are not bound by Islamic law.
This means non-Muslims have no say whatsoever in what goes on in the Shariah Courts and have no business interfering in the affairs of Muslims insofar as the religion of Islam and Islamic law go.
If Sharmini had a problem with the way the four men were punished, she should have questioned the duality of law and called for a discussion to review Article 121 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia instead of shaming the Shariah Courts in public by branding the punishment “criminal.”
What she did amounts to the propagation of Islamophobia in a Muslim majority society as her words were discriminative against those practising the religion of Islam and an insult to the Holy Qur’an, the Islamic way of life and the Sunnah.
GEORGE TOWN: Amnesty Malaysia’s Shamini Darshni should steer clear of Islamic related issues as it is of no concern to non-Muslims.
Shamini, Executive Director of the rights movement, referred to the punishment meted out by the Shariah Court against four men for having gay sex as “vicious” even though the punishment was constitutionally correct and allowed.
Her outburst amounts to a violation of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia which allows for a dual system of law and guarantees the right of every person to profess and practise his (or her) religion.
It also has the potential of demonising the Muslim way of life as enshrined in the Holy Qur’an, believed by Muslims to be the direct and unaltered word of God, and the Sunnah, consisting of words and actions attributed to the Prophet Muhammad as narrated in the Hadith literature.
The Constitution, by virtue of Article 3, provides that Islam is the religion of the country but that other religions may be practised in peace and harmony.
Syariah Courts only have jurisdiction over persons who declare themselves to be Muslims, meaning, non-Muslims do not have a legal standing in the courts as they are not bound by Islamic law.
This means non-Muslims have no say whatsoever in what goes on within the Shariah Courts and have no business interfering in the affairs of Muslims insofar as the religion of Islam and Islamic law go.
If Sharmini had a problem with the way the four men were punished, she should have questioned the duality of law and called for a discussion to review Article 121 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia instead of shaming the Shariah Courts in public by branding the punishment “criminal.”
What she did amounts to the propagation of Islamophobia in a Muslim majority society as her words were discriminative against those practising the religion of Islam and an insult to the Holy Qur’an, the Islamic way of life and the Sunnah.
I urge the authorites to take necessary action against Sharmini for promoting Islamophobia and for insulting the religion of Islam.
RJ RITHAUDEEN
