ADMINISTRATION OF MUSLIM LAW BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

3.50 p.m.

The Minister for Labour and Law (Mr K. M. Byrne): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's recommendation for this Bill and I beg to move, "That the Bill be now iead a Second time.'

The Bill, as can be seen from the Comparative Table attached to the Bill, follows the pattern of the consolidation of the legislation relating to the administration of Muslim law in the States of the Federation of Malaya.

The Bill provides for the establishment of a Majlis Ugama Islam to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Negara on matters relating to the Muslim religion in Singapore. It establishes a general endowment fund to be kept by the Majlis Ugama Islam and this will enable the Majlis to deal with wakaf, nazr and other trusts which are intended for Muslim religious and charitable purposes. The endowments at present administered by the Muslim and Hindu Endowments Board will be transferred to this Majlis. The Majlis Ugama Islam is made the trustee of all Muslim religious trusts, including mosques and burial grounds, and it is also given the power, with the approval of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, to collect zakat and fitrah to be used for Muslim charitable purposes.

3.52 p.m.

[Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr G. KANDASAMY) in the Chair]

The Minister for Labour and Law (Mr K. M. Byrne): The distinctive features of the Muslims Ordinance in Singapore and in particular the powers of the Shariah Court are retained in the Bill. The Shariah Court has been, I am glad to say, a successful experiment in Singapore and the Bill seeks to retain and in certain aspects to extend the powers of the Shariah Court.

The Bill also does not follow the legislation in the Malay states of the Federation in the punishment of Muslim offences. Provision has been made for the punishment of cohabitation outside marriage and enticing an unmarried woman from her wali as it is considered that these provisions are necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of the Bill relating to the solemnization and registration of Muslim marriages.

In its broader aspects, Sir, the Bill aims at re-organising the administration of the Muslim law and Muslim religion in Singapore. The mosque will be the centre of Muslim activity in the various parts of Singapore. There will be constituted a mosque area, daerah masjid, around the mosque and the Muslims living in the area will be given an opportunity to take part in the administration of the mosque and its activities. The Imam of the mosque will be paid by the Majlis Ugama Islam, and if he is suitably qualified, he will be appointed the Naib Kathi to solemnize and register Muslim marriages in the mosque area, to register consent divorces, and he will also be appointed the Collector for the purpose of collecting zakat and fitrah.

The Majlis itself, although it will be the nominal trustee and will supervise all Muslim religious trusts, will appoint local trustees for such religious trusts. Although the Bill provides that notwithstanding any provision in any written law, instrument or declaration, the Majlis shall be the sole trustee of all religious trusts, in practice, the day-to-day administration of such trusts will be left to the trustees, whether appointed by the instrument or declaration or by the Majlis.

The central organisation for the solemnization and registration of Muslim marriages and divorces will remain with the Shariah Court and the Kathis. It is proposed that the post of Chief Kathi be abolished and that there should be, in the first instance, two Kathis to deal with marriages where the woman to be wedded has no wali and where the wali refuses to give his consent to the marriage, and with marriages where the man to be married already has a wife or wives living. Other marriages may be solemnized and registered in the mosque area where the bride resides by the Naib Kathi of the mosque area. The Naib Kathis will not be paid by the Government but will be entitled to retain the prescribed fees for the solemnization and registration of the marriage.

The Shariah Court will continue to deal with all cases of disputed applications for divorce. Divorces by consent will be registered by a Kathi or a Naib Kathi.

As it is intended that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee, I do not propose to deal with the other detailed provisions of the Bill at this stage. I would add, Sir, that the Bill has been considered in detail by the Muslim Advisory Board and that it has been approved by this Board.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.55 p.m.

Dato Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat (Geylang Serai): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill before us, "The Administration of Muslim Law Ordinance" is a hybrid one and the clauses have, in some instances, been taken out in toto from the Muslim Law Enactments of Selangor, Pahang and Penang. For this reason, Sir, if not for any other, I welcome the Minister's proposal to commit the Bill to a Select Committee.

Sir, when the first Muslims Ordinance, 1880, was introduced in Singapore, the lawmakers then had in mind not so much the desire to control the way of life as a whole of the Muslims of Singapore, hut rather the object was to lay down certain principles of Islamic law which had been abused by some sections of the Muslim population and which conflicted with the non-theocratic laws of the State. In fact, the provisions of the first Muslims Ordinance never went beyond that. The intention was specific and to the point where, in effect, it became merely an accessory to the existing laws of the country, although it was part and parcel of the Statute Book.

Amendments were made to the Ordinance from time to time, but even so the guiding principle was never forgotten.

The present Bill, Mr Deputy Speaker, goes beyond the original Muslims Ordinance, 1880, and the Muslims Ordinance, 1957, both of which, if I may say again, tended to accord certain principles of the Muslim law with the existing civil laws of the State.

For my part, I welcome these new additions for the effect it would have in regularising the code of conduct of certain aspects of Muslim law. But, Sir, what we agree to do or not to do in this Assembly is not enough if we do not carry the support of the people Outside. Doubts have been raised by Muslim scholars as to whether this Assembly can introduce such a Bill. And here, Sir, the question is not the academic question, similar to the one we debated not so long ago, of whether this Assembly is competent to debate the issue under our Standing Orders, but rather whether in a non-secular State like Singapore, Islamic laws can be enacted to govern Muslims in their way of life. Some Muslim theologians hold the view that under Islamic law only a Muslim Government can enforce the laws of the Koran, like the Government of the Federation of Malaya whose State religion is Islam.

Now, Sir, before I go any further, I would like to stress for the purpose of clarification to this Assembly and also to the Press - The Malay Press in particular - that I am not here giving my views on the Islamic law but rather expressing the views of Muslim religious leaders outside this Assembly.

4.00 p.m.

Mr Deputy Speaker, there is then again another group of Muslims who contend that the provisions contained in this Bill are not enough to cover all aspects of Islamic law, even to the extent of gaoling a Muslim for non-observance of his daily prayers and fast, both of which to a Muslim and under Islamic laws are the pillars and two of the five fundamentals upon which Islamic religion stands. Sir, these are some of the thoughts now occupying the minds of some, if not all, religious leaders since this Bill was published.

I would like now, Sir, to touch on some aspects of the Bill which I feel require re-thinking. The most important parts of the Bill, as I see it, are Parts IV (dealing with financial problems), V (Mosques and Religious Schools), and IX (Offences). Under clause 59, a General Endowment Fund will be established into which all zakat and fitrah collected by the collectors will be paid. Clause 73 enables the Majlis, with the approval of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, to make rules "to prescribe from time to time the amount of zakat and fitrah to be paid by all Muslims in Singapore", and also the distribution of the zakat and fitrah to those eligible.

Here, Mr Deputy Speaker, arise two points. The first is the determination by the Majlis of the amount of zakat and fitrah. Now, how and in what manner, and by what means, and by what yardstick is the Majlis to determine the amount? Is this going to be another Assessment Department of the Income Tax Office? For all I know, it could be an arbitrary decision depending upon the whim and fancy of the members of the Majlis. Fitrah, of course, is not so difficult since the calculation is based upon a flat amount, whatever the means of the person concerned, that is to say, those who are not exempted. But when it comes to zakat, the question of determining a person's property upon which a tithe of 2½ per cent will be imposed is a highly complex operation.

The second point is the method of distribution and entitlement thereof. In Singapore today, Sir, we have public assistance by the Social Welfare Department, which pays a mere subsistence allowance to those unemployed. Under Muslim law, the poor and the needy will be amongst those first eligible for the distribution of zakat and fitrah, and these people will probably be the same people who are also eligible for public assistance. Now, Sir, is it the Government's intention, once the Bill becomes law, to withdraw public assistance from those who are eligible for zakat and fitrah? It may well be that the individual shares of zakat and fitrah could amount to more than the pittance they get from public assistance. I hope it is not going to be so.

Actually, Sir, we Muslims in Singapore (at least the good Muslims) pay two types of what we may call taxes - one to the Government in all forms, and the other in the form of zakat and fitrah.

I now come to clause 77 which prohibits a person from erecting a mosque, without the approval of the Majlis. Sir, this raises a very serious question. Since the time of the Prophet, there has been, to my knowledge, no religious restriction on the building of a mosque. I know this provision is taken from the Selangor and Penang Muslim enactments. But I would like to ask the Minister: why introduce it here?

Then we come to the Offences section which is in Part IX. Part IX begins with clause 126 which reads:

`Save as is otherwise in this Ordinance expressly provided this Part of this Ordinance shall only apply to Muslims.'

I repeat, Sir, "shall only apply to Muslims." Further on, under the same Part, clause 131 is on cohabitation Outside marriage. This clause states that any man or woman who cohabits outside marriage shall be guilty of an offence and shall be punishable to a fine not exceeding $500 or for a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months or to both. Now, Mr Deputy Speaker, this means that if you (anonymously) were to cohabit with a Muslim woman outside marriage, the Muslim woman can be sentenced to six months' imprisonment and to a fine of $500, but you will go scot-free. That is what this clause means. Where is the equality and justice, Sir? My information is that under Muslim law both should be punished. I would seriously suggest, Sir, to the Government that this clause should be totally deleted. In fact, Sir, even in the Malay States, i.e. in the Federation of Malaya, where the State religion is Islam, there is no provision of this nature in the Muslim enactments.

Finally, Sir, I know that both the Minister and the State Advocate-General have put in hours of work in compiling the Bill. I hope their efforts have not been wasted, but I would appeal to the Government, on such a highly controversial subject, that it would be better to go slow on the Bill and not to rush it even in Select Committee. No one. Sir, least of all myself, can speak with any authority on the Muslim religion. We have to seek outside advice, and the Select Committee is the best place for it.

I would also appeal to all concerned that in moulding this Bill into its final form, both sides of this House should work as a team and party politics should not be brought in, either into this Assembly or into the Select Committee. In this connection, Sir, on a parting word of advice to the Minister, I would advise him to print as many copies as possible of the Malay version of this Bill for distribution to Muslim leaders and organisations throughout Singapore long before the Select Committee begins its deliberations.

4.08 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Inche Yaacob bin Mohamed): (In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Administration of Muslim Law Bill, which has been tabled by the Minister for Labour and Law today, is a Bill which could, be described as creating a new chapter in the history of Singapore consonant with the Constitution of Singapore, which enunciates the protection and safeguard of the islamic religion of the Malays and Islamic people of Singapore. I do not wish to dwell at length on this point because this Bill was actually promulgated on the advice of many religious experts, and it has received the blessing of the Muslim Advisory Board, and their views and findings have been accepted.

On the subject of zakat, we are adhering to the school of thought called Shafei. On the distribution of the zakat, it will be distributed according to the provisos contained in the Muslims Ordinance. For instance, in the Muslims Ordinance the tithe is divided into eight persons because two of these conditions are absent in this law, and another one, the ibni sabil which is non-existant in this country. There are only six left. So only those people who qualify under those six conditions are eligible. There should be no controversy arising because there is provision for the mufti to give it his ruling.

The second point is the question of building mosques. This has never happened, but according to the Shafei school of thought, if there are two mosques in the same area, then they should set different times of prayer. This is merely to prevent two mosques in the same kampong from being erected which will eventually result in misunderstanding among the people, but if it happens, as it does happen because of certain misunderstandings, a group decides to erect a mosque and then not far away, say, 10 feet, there is another surau built, then it is with this in view that we have made provisions to restrict the building of mosques.

Similarly, on the offences, we merely punish people of Islamic faith who commit the offences. There are other religions where, when you are in love with each other, no problem arises; it is not an offence. But in Islamic law, the marriage should be solemnized before a priest or imam and witnessed by witnesses. So it is necessary that the Muslim who commits the offence should be punished. However if a free thinker cohabits with a woman, that is another matter. On this aspect of the Bill, too, this has been discussed at great length by the religious leaders. However, as a result of the wise decision of the Minister for Law to commit the Bill to a Select Committee, it is hoped that many more religious leaders who are experts on Muslim law will come forward to give their views and opinions so that the incidents that took place with regard to the Muslims Ordinance will not happen again.

4.15 p.m.

Inche Ahmad Jabri Bin Mohammad Akib (Southern Islands): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, as a Muslim, I support this Bill in principle. Mr Deputy Speaker, this is an important Bill as it affects the Muslim community in Singapore and because the powers therein are wide, and are more closely related to the Muslim people in Singapore. I am of the opinion that it is not for me to discuss this Bill. I am not competent to do so. It requires religious experts to be able to discuss this Bill. However, as my responsibility in this Assembly is to draft an Ordinance in the interest of the State of Singapore, I will give this Bill my consideration and careful study. However, as stated by the Member for Geylang Serai just now, as this Bill should be given thorough consideration by the whole Muslim community, it is proper, therefore, that it should be translated into Malay and copies of it distributed to all Muslim organisations.

Just now the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development said that the Administration of Muslim Law Bill did not receive the response as should be expected from the religious experts. The reason why no response was forthcoming was that they were not able to understand the provisions of the Bill. Moreover, even those who have a knowledge of the Muslim religion do not have a proper knowledge of the English language. So I support the suggestion by the Member for Geylang Serai that the Bill be translated into Malay and copies of it distributed to the various Muslim organisations. Let us not accept this Bill just because it has been approved by the Muslim Advisory Board. It is not enough, because I know that although the Muslim Advisory Board is the body to advise the Government on religious matters, it does not reflect public opinion. So at the suggestion of the Minister for Labour and Law himself to commit the Bill to a Select Committee, which is a commendable step, I welcome this Bill in the hope that it will be enforced in the interest of the Muslim people in Singapore.

Another point which I would like to remind the Government about is that the Bill can be modified to fit in with our wishes but the question of enforcement is a matter which must be given careful thought. From the provisions of this Bill, I think powers have been vested in the Majlis Ugama Islam which will issue rulings, administer finances and decide on administrative matters concerning the erection of religious schools and so on. Members of the Majlis Ugama Islam will be nominated by the Yang di-Pertuan Negara. I only wish to remind that this Board should not be a place where people merely wish to be nominated for the sake of being nominated. It may well be that although they are of the opinion that a certain matter is contradictory to the Muslim law, they, as nominated members, may not dare to voice their opinion openly. Because they are nominated members, therefore, their interest is in being members of the Board and nothing else. What we hope is that the members of this Board will serve on the Board to discharge truly their responsibility towards the religion of Islam.

One point which impresses me, Mr Deputy Speaker, is when the Parliamentary Secretary stated that when people cohabit, the punishment is imposed only on the Islamic people. According to the Parliamentary Secretary, this is because the Islamic man has committed the offence. If considered carefully, he said originally that the aim of the Bill was to abide by the provisions of the Constitution. It is expected that the Constitution will safeguard the provisions of the Islamic law. We should be able to guide the people of Islam along the right Islamic path for the reason that the Islamic law cannot be applied to non-Muslims. So I strongly urge this matter to be carefully considered in the Select Committee.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven other Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection. -[Mr Byrne].