ADMINISTRATION OF MUSLIM LAW (AMENDMENT) BILL

Debate resumed.

The Senior Minister of State for the Environment (Encik Sidek bin Saniff) (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, the decision to bring the AMLA amendment to a Select Committee is a decision that is correct and of great importance. It is obvious that the decision has given rise to three positive effects.

It gives society plenty of time and chance to analyse in detail, especially on the controversial aspect such as the concurrent jurisdiction and at the same time giving the Government a chance to explain any doubts or misconceptions that might exist, to gain consensus in many areas and to develop a deeper understanding towards other issues.

Its acceptance or approval in Parliament today gives rise to two significance:

(a) This amendment is more comprehensive and thus strengthens the powers of MUIS and the Syariah Court.

(b) Concurrent jurisdiction, God willing, will give rise to a feeling of responsibility and care in handling this sensitive issue. We hope that the appointment of a Senior President of Syariah Court, an ad hoc President and a Registrar, together with its powers, will make the society understand even deeper and thus accept this amendment and the issues associated with it. In fact, the cooperation between the Syariah Court and the civil court from today will make way for a new journey which will not only affect the Malay-Muslim community but also the society as a whole.

This will make a unique journey or pathway. This uniqueness is obvious because the decision involves two courts, ie, the Syariah and the civil courts which are based on two different backgrounds, one being religion and the other being secular.

We are fortunate that our secular system is not against religion, unlike in some socialist and communist states which regard religion as opium or drug that is detrimental to the state and its social system. In fact, our country is too sensitive with the concept of multi-racialism, multi-religions and multi-lingualism, that it has taken action to protect, preserve and safeguard these three aspects. The concept of multi-lingualism is embodied in the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act and the Inter-Religious Council, are some of the positive measures that were taken.

These measures are made possible because in a secularised system where there is no concept of after-life, there are still three sensitive factors that it stands by: Principles, Fact and Moral. Even though there are no "spiritual qualities" in a secular system, this system ensures that its moral aspect is applied. Sometimes differentiating between the wrong and the right goes in line with the spiritual demands, just as the importance of cleanliness, anti-corruption, misuse of power, theft, murder, abasement and the like.

There are also times when these go against the customs, culture and religion, when culture, some say religion, does not allow the burning of firecrackers, which would endanger our property and lives; especially so in the recent legalisation of football betting, to save society from fraud, the use of force and victimisation. Secularism at this juncture has to differentiate between the evil and the lesser evil.

I hope that the cooperation between the Syariah Court and the civil court would open a new phase that is positive and unique, when the two parties will respect each other - especially in Moral and Faith. As long as morality does not go against faith, I am sure that the journey or path of cooperation, however long it may be, will be a learning process that will bring benefit of mutuality in a multi-racial country. Let us say that a wrong decision has been made, correction must be made immediately, this could separate the wise from the foolish. Whichever is right hopefully could be refined, especially on the issue of child custody, joint income and divorce claims.

This is a heavy responsibility that we all must take. It is a vista that should be explored with care. Being cautious, mutual respect and tolerance itself have been shown by the Prophet Muhammad 14th Century ago till the birth of the Medinah Declaration in the 6th Century.

Muslim thinkers have made a conclusion that making this first Human Rights Declaration shows the universality of Islam. It involved the Muslims, Christians and Jews. Even though Medinah is under the rule of Islam, the declaration does not stress on Darus Islam (Land of Islam) but more on Darussalam (Land of Peace). I have asked Megawati who recently came to Singapore. I asked her when her father introduced the concept of pancasila, who among the Imams introduced this concept. She could not answer. She said perhaps pancasila existed before. She said that the concept of Darussalam (Land of Peace) and Darus Islam (Land of Islam) may not be understood by many. Even among the Muslims themselves, they are still vague about the concept.

The concept that was encompassed in the Medinah Declaration existed hundreds of years before the birth of the Magna Carta, which existed in the year 1215. This spirit, I believe, caused the bishop Nestoria to write to his friend and this letter is still being kept safely:

(In English)

'These Tayites (Arabs/Muslim) to whom God has accorded domination in our days, have also become our master; yet they do not combat at all the Christian religion. On the contrary, they even protect our faith, respect our priests and saints and make donations to our churches and our convents. They all inherited this and enjoyed freedom of conscience, justice and prosperity.'

(In Malay)

These factors too must have inspired Dutch orientalist Prof. Wensinck, a professor in Arab language, before the outbreak of the Second World War, made efforts to decipher the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (hadith) and he said:

(In English)

'.the idea of a concordance of the principal collections of hadith should be prepared with a view to facilitate reference work among the western scholars who were working on the different aspects of Islam.'

Wensinck died before World War II and his works were continued by Prof. Mensing. The book entitled "Concordance and Indices of Islamic Tradition" shows to the hadith recorded by Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidzi, Ibnu Majah, An-Nasai, Abu Daud, Musnad Ad-Darami, Muwatta' Imam Malik and Musnad Ahmad ibn Hambal. This book became one of the references for graduates pursuing their PhD.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

4.10 pm

The Senior Minister of State for the Environment (Encik Sidek bin Saniff) (In Malay): The sense of tolerance should be our inspiration when we enter the next millennium, the millennium of biotechnology. For instance, our cell, nucleus, chromosome, DNA and the ATGC (adenine, thymine, guanine, cytosine). The AMLA debate gives us the chance to strengthen the fabric of our society. Any multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-lingual state that ignores this fact will face paralysis, in fact, destruction. In 1991, Sahid Sahoman criticised the Prime Minister by using the word "religion". The opposition said that he should not be the leader of Muslims and Malays, because he is not a Muslim. How religion has been misused!

Mr Deputy Speaker, the following day, we had a press conference and the Prime Minister, when explaining to the press, he looked at me and I looked at him. Maybe it is because we have been together for so long. I think he knew that I wanted to say something. Usually, I would just listen and keep quiet. So he gave me the opportunity to speak. I said that what the opposition had done was wrong, because Islam is not so narrow. Islam divides non-Muslims into three categories. Firstly, harabi non-Muslims. No one has to be a Muslim to fight the oppressor. Secondly, dzimmi non-Muslims, the good ones. Our Prophet treated them well. Even the Muslims were envious by this treatment. The Prime Minister can perhaps belong to that category, or at least an ahdi non-Muslim that can become partner in, say, business. It is better if you trust the ahdi non-Muslims, rather than do business with Muslims who might be corrupt. So, the next day, gentlemanly, Sahid Sahoman apologised to our Prime Minister.

Gus Dur or A Rahman Wahid, in a television interview, has expressed his dislike to what had been happening in his country, Indonesia. He hoped that an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual respect will come into its re-existence. He has said that before, all pastors, priests and imams used to engage in healthy banter or humour even if they are from different religions.

He said that there are three religious leaders, Christian, Hindu and Muslim leaders. While they joked, they asked which one among them are the closest to God. The Christian priest said that it is Christianity "because we call God our Father."

The Hindu priest also claimed that they are also not far from God because they use Om. According to my Hindu friend, Lingam: