ADMINISTRATION OF MUSLIM LAW (AMENDMENT) BILL (As reported from Select Committee)

Order for Third Reading read. 3.47 pm

The Minister for Community Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move "That the Bill be now read a Third time."

Sir, the Muslim community has shown keen interest in the development of the amendments to the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). My colleagues, the Malay Members of Parliament, and I received much feedback from the public last year and also this year. Members of the public have also written or discussed the Bill with my Ministry and MUIS. The Select Committee on this Bill received a total of 31 written representations from a wide variety of individuals and organisations. I am grateful that so many have taken time to give their views and suggestions on the Bill and I thank them all for their contributions.

Sir, the Select Committee considered all the representations submitted. It heard oral evidence from seven representors. To reflect the diverse views, the Committee also decided to publish four other written representations in its Report submitted to Parliament.

The Committee recommends a number of amendments to the Bill after studying the written submissions and the oral evidence of the representors. The Committee also considered all the views that Members of Parliament expressed during the debate on the Second Reading of the Bill. The Report of the Select Committee has been circulated to Members of the House last month.

Sir, let me now highlight the Select Committee's deliberations and recommendations.

Allowing the Civil Courts to Hear Ancillary Matters on Divorce

Sir, read with section 17A of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (SCJA), section 35A of the amendment that provided for the Civil Courts to hear matters ancillary to Muslim divorces, namely, custody and division or disposition of matrimonial property on divorce, drew the most interest and comment from the Muslim community. Eighteen representors expressed concern over or were against the amendment and four supported it. The main issues raised by these representors were:

(i) that the amendment would dilute the status and powers of the Syariah Court;

(ii) that the Civil Law applied by the Civil Courts may contradict Syariah law; and

(iii) that more Muslims would turn to the Civil Courts to resolve their matters when they should be going to the Syariah Court instead.

Sir, allow me to present the Committee's deliberations on these concerns. On the first point, the Committee notes that the Bill does not - and I repeat - does not dilute nor remove the powers of the Syariah Court. The amendment is really to clarify the jurisdiction between the Civil Courts and the Syariah Court on ancillary issues. In the Second Reading of the Bill, I emphasised that the Syariah Court continued to have jurisdiction over all matters presently within its jurisdiction where the parties are Muslims or were married according to Muslim law. In fact, under new provisions in the Bill, parties would now be required to obtain the Syariah Court's leave or to be counselled before commencing or continuing proceedings in the Civil Courts on issues relating to property on divorce or custody of children. The provisions in AMLA make it explicit and transparent the system for applying for leave to commence or continue civil proceedings and the staying of these proceedings.

On the second point, the Committee finds little cause for concern over possible conflict between Civil and Syariah laws if ancillary matters were heard in the Civil Courts. Some representors, for example, were particularly concerned over how Civil law would apply to disputes on the custody of Muslim children. The Committee consulted the Attorney-General's Chambers, Muslim lawyers who practise in both civil courts and Syariah Court and MUIS and found that there are no differences in basic principles between Syariah law and the Guardianship of Infants Act, as both consider the welfare of the child to be of paramount importance. The AMLA, in addition, also specifically provides for the Civil Courts, in cases where religious issues could be a consideration, to seek advice from the Legal (or Fatwa) Committee of MUIS.

Sir, several representors strongly pushed for the Syariah Court to be the only forum to hear matrimonial disputes between Muslims, fearing that giving an avenue to the Civil Courts would undermine and diminish the authority of the Syariah Court. They felt that in the past, Muslims had little choice but to go to the Civil Courts, as the Syariah Court did not have adequate resources to deal with their disputes. The Select Committee deliberated over these concerns at length. It concluded that Muslims, as citizens of this country, must be allowed the same right of access to the Civil Courts as non-Muslims.

There may also be instances where the legal issues in a case need to or can only be resolved in the Civil Court. For instance, in disputes over property, the legal claim could involve third parties who are non-Muslims. Another example will be cases involving property or parties overseas. Let me reiterate that the Bill does not in any way undermine the authority of the Syariah Court.

The Select Committee saw the need for sufficient safeguards to ensure that parties intending to resolve ancillary issues in the Civil Court did so with full knowledge and understanding of the implications. Under the Bill, the legal processes give that person ample opportunity for such knowledge and understanding. Firstly, he or she must first seek leave of the Syariah Court. Secondly, he or she may appeal to the Appeal Board in MUIS for a final decision, if dissatisfied with the Syariah Court's ruling. However, the Committee found that there is no such safeguard for couples who, by mutual consent, want to go to the Civil Court to settle their matrimonial disputes.

Some representors held that the Bill should provide a safeguard in the form of counselling for this group. They will at least be making an informed decision should they insist on going to the Civil Courts despite being counselled. The Committee agrees and recommends amending the Bill to provide for mandatory counselling to such couples.

Sir, some members of the community expressed concern that the legal process which I have described may generate more work for the Syariah Court and distract it from performing its core functions. This is unlikely to be the case, because a clear jurisprudence on the conditions for granting leave will develop after the initial set of cases going before the Syariah Court and the Appeal Board. Over time, there should be fewer applications as the Syariah Court grows in stature and improves its efficiency.

Strengthening the Syariah Court

Sir, I now turn to the measures to make the Syariah Court stronger. The Select Committee received several useful suggestions on ways to improve the Syariah Court. The Committee considered all the suggestions received and recommended the following:

(i) To appoint a Senior President amongst the Presidents in the Syariah Court to head and provide directions for the Court and to issue practice directions, lay down court procedures and review rules and regulations;

(ii) To appoint a panel of ad hoc Presidents of the Syariah Court to help cut down the present backlog of cases; and

(iii) To appoint a Registrar to help relieve the Presidents of their non-substantive legal work.

With these, the Syariah Court will be able to dispense justice to the community effectively and speedily. My Ministry will also be looking separately at administrative measures, procedures and manpower needs to enhance the efficiency of the Court to dovetail the Committee's recommendations.

Incorporating the Women's Charter Principles for Disposition or Division of Matrimonial Property on Divorce

Sir, the Bill provides that the Syariah Court shall apply principles in section 112 of the Women's Charter relating to the disposition or division of matrimonial property on divorce provided that they are consistent with Syariah law. Several representors felt that the Syariah Court should not be bound by the Women's Charter despite the qualification or to explicitly mention in AMLA of the application of Women's Charter principles, as they may suggest that the Syariah law lacks such principles. To correct any misperception, the Select Committee recommends incorporating into AMLA those principles from section 112 that are consistent with Syariah law, but without reference to the Women's Charter itself. Matters Pertaining to MUIS

Sir, let me now deal with matters pertaining to the Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS).

Wakafs

On the issue of wakafs, a representor suggested putting the onus to register wakafs on the trustees. Wakafs are properties that Muslims have dedicated under Syariah law. All wakafs, by law, are vested in MUIS. It follows, therefore, that they must be registered with MUIS. However, it is impossible for MUIS to know which properties have been so dedicated unless their trustees dutifully inform MUIS about them. In the past, MUIS has had to initiate court proceedings to recover wakaf properties disposed of by their trustees. The Select Committee agrees with the suggestion and recommends an amendment to make registration of wakafs mandatory to safeguard the properties from being disposed of indiscriminately. The registration will help prevent costly litigation and will protect the innocent buyer of a wakaf property. It will also enable MUIS to develop and enhance the value of the wakaf properties for the benefit of the community. MUIS will ensure that all trustees of wakafs have ample notice before registration is made mandatory. It will launch a public awareness drive to inform Muslims of the requirement. The trustees of existing wakafs will be given six months from the operation of the law to register. Trustees also have six months to register new wakaf properties.

Haj services

The Committee also agrees with a suggestion that persons acting as guides for pilgrims should be qualified religious teachers so that the pilgrims who go to the haj are properly advised on the performance of haj rites. This will be taken up in the Rules.

In conclusion, Sir, I would like to reiterate that the amendments to the Bill seek to resolve the ambiguity that existed until now between the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court and Civil Courts and to strengthen the Syariah Court. They do not diminish the status nor do they take away any jurisdiction of the Syariah Court. Muslims will continue to have access to the Civil Courts to settle their matrimonial disputes albeit with prior approval by the Syariah Court.

Sir, the law alone cannot move the institution forward. The Syariah Court will need the understanding, support and help of counsellors, lawyers, religious officials, community leaders and others, to enable it to become a court of choice for all Muslims.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.