MAIWP lawyer’s contention that Islamic Law is above constitution raises disturbing question of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s commitment to the fundamental constitutional principle that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land


(Scroll down for BM version of this statement / Terjemahan BM di bawah)

The contention by the lawyer of the Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (MAIWP) to the Federal Court today that all Islamic enactments are excluded from fundamental liberties in the Federal Constitution raises disturbing questions of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet’s commitment to the fundamental constitutional principle that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

While the Federal Court has set August to hear the arguments on “a new point of monumental importance” in the case of lawyer Victoria Jayaseela Martin’s appeal in the Federal Court, seeking the right to practise Islamic law in the Shariah Court, the questions about the Prime Minister and the Cabinet’s commitment to the fundamental constitutional principle that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land must be asked and answered.

The MAIWP is a government body, whose Chairman is Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic Affairs; the Deputy Chairman, Dato Othman Mustapha, Ketua Pengarah JAKIM and ex officio members include the Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail, the Datuk Bandar and representatives from the Chief Secretary and the Inspector-General of Police.

It is reported that the postponement of the Federal Court hearing of the case today to August will also give the Attorney-General’s Chambers time to decide which position to take.

This is most ridiculous as the Attorney-General is an ex-officio member of MAIWP.

Did Gani Patail agree to the legal argument to be presented to the Federal Court on behalf of MAIWP that all Islamic enactments are excluded from fundamental liberties in the Federal Constitution and the inapplicability of Article 4 that the Constitution is the supreme law of Malaysia or was the Attorney-General kept completely in the dark until today?

Furthermore, has the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Jamil Khir Baharom, given his approval to the contention by the MAIWP lawyer in the Federal Court attacking the supremacy of the Constitution as the law of the land?
Is this also the stand of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet?

The Prime Minister and the Cabinet cannot plead ignorance to such a “monumental” attack on the constitution, especially as it is presented as made with the approval of a Cabinet Minister.

Any lawyer can argue any “monumental” interpretation of the Constitution as to undermine its core principles, but it is a different matter if such a contention is presented in the Federal Court in the name of the Government or Cabinet or any part thereof.

Such a development would be unheard of under the five previous Prime Ministers of Malaysia from 1957 to 2009.

Can Datuk Seri Najib Razak explain why it is happening under his watch as Prime Minister?

———————

(Teks Bahasa Malaysia)

Hujahan peguam MAIWP bahawa undang-undang Islam melampaui Perlembagaan membangkitkan persoalan membimbangkan terhadap komitmen Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet terhadap prinsip-prinsip asas Perlembagaan serta kedudukan Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang tertinggi negara

Hujahan peguam Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (MAIWP) di Mahkamah Persekutuan hari ini bahawa kesemua enakmen Islam dikecualikan daripada hak-hak asasi yang termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan membangkitkan persoalan membimbangkan terhadap komitmen Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet terhadap prinsip-prinsip asas Perlembagaan serta kedudukan Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang tertinggi negara

Sementara Mahkamah Persekutuan telah menetapkan bulan Ogos untuk mendengar hujahan yang sangat penting dalam kes rayuan peguam Victoria Jayaseela Martin yang memohon hak untuk beramal di Mahkamah Syariah, persoalan tentang komitmen Perdana Menteri dan Kabinetnya terhadap prinsip-prinsip asas Perlembagaan serta kedudukan Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang tertinggi negara mesti dijawab.

MAIWP adalah sebuah badan kerajaan yang dipengerusikan Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri yang bertanggungjawab ke atas hal-ehwal Islam; manakala timbalan pengerusinya ialah Dato Othman Mustapha, Ketua Pengarah JAKIM, dan mempunyai anggota ex-officio yang terdiri daripada Peguam Negara Tan Sri Gani Patail, Datuk Bandar dan wakil-wakil daripada Ketua Setiausaha Negara dan Ketua Polis Negara.

Dilaporkan bahawa penangguhan pendengaran kes tersebut di Mahkamah Persekutuan hari ini ke bulan Ogos nanti akan turut memberi masa bagi Jabatan Peguam Negara memutuskan pendirian apa yang bakal diambil.

Ini sangat mengarut memandangkan Peguam Negara adalah anggota ex-officio MAIWP.

Adakah Gani Patail bersetuju dengan hujahan yang akan dikemukakan kepada Mahkamah Persekutuan bagi pihak MAIWP bahawa semua enakmen Islam adalah dikecualikan daripada hak-hak asasi yang termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan bahawa Perkara 4 yang menyatakan Perlembagaan adalah undang-undang tertinggi negara adalah tidak terpakai; atau adakah Peguam Negara langsung tidak dimaklumkan tentang hujahan tersebut sehingga hari ini?

Selanjutnya, adakah Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Jamil Khir Baharom telah bersetuju dengan hujahan oleh peguam MAIWP di Mahkamah Persekutuan yang menyerang keluhuran Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang negara?

Adakah ini juga pendirian yang diambil oleh Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet?

Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet tidak boleh berkata mereka tidak tahu tentang serangan yang begitu hebat terhadap Perlembagaan, terutamanya setelah ia dikemukakan dan dibuat dengan persetujuan salah seorang menteri Kabinet.

Mana-mana peguam pun boleh menghujahkan sebarang tafsiran terhadap Perlembagaan yang melemahkan prinsip-prinsip terasnya, tetapi lain pula halnya sekiranya hujahan tersebut dibuat di Mahkamah Persekutuan di atas nama Kerajaan atau Kabinet atau mana-mana bahagian yang berkaitan dengannya.

Kejadian seperti ini langsung tidak pernah didengar di bawah lima Perdana Menteri Malaysia sebelum ini sejak 1957 sehingga 2009.

Bolehkah Datuk Seri Najib Razak memberi penjelasan kenapa hal sebegini boleh terjadi ketika tempoh beliau berjawat sebagai Perdana Menteri?

(Kenyataan media di Kuala Lumpur pada hari Khamis 14 Mei 2015)

Print Friendly

  1. #1 by yhsiew on Thursday, 14 May 2015 - 6:39 pm

    Such audacity by MAIWP’s lawyer to illigetimately declare the country a theocracy is utterly reprehensible.
    .

  2. #2 by yhsiew on Thursday, 14 May 2015 - 6:44 pm

    Oops!

    “illigetimately” should be “illegitimately”.

  3. #3 by Bigjoe on Friday, 15 May 2015 - 9:01 am

    Why should they not be audacious? In Malaysia, when the PM and UMNO/BN is weak, these religo-zealots gets even more audacioius because they know the PM and UMNO/BN has to pander to them for political survival..

    We have a PM common knowledged that boinged everything in sight since his teen years and his own father testified to it, preaching against perversion and liberalism for his selfish political capital..Why wouldn’t the religo-zealot take advantage of his obvious weakness of his hypocrisy?

  4. #4 by good coolie on Tuesday, 19 May 2015 - 1:21 pm

    Indeed Islamic Law, from the religious point of view, is above the Federal Constitution. I don’t think any Muslim would deny this. But this is at the level of the conscience of the Muslim person where one draws one’s morality.

    As a matter of the law of the nation, however, nothing is above the Federal Constitution, not even Islamic Law. Holding otherwise would amount to dismantling the Federation. Seeking to dismantle the Federation by force or by surreptitious means is seditious. However, seeking to convince citizens to make Malaysia an Islamic Country under Islamic Law is any one’s right.

You must be logged in to post a comment.