(In Malay)

Therefore it is Father for the Christians, for the Hindus, it is Uncle. Both priests looked into the direction of the Muslim Imam. So he said in reply, "We are close to our God too. We only need to climb the tower or minaret and call His name five times a day."

I hope that the smiles on our faces in the House today would also infect those outside of this Parliament till the wave of tolerance is felt by our society. God willing, the universal society as well.

Sir, every morning the sun rises. Every afternoon it sets. It is so simple. But in between the rising and setting of the sun, many things happen. Good or bad. We should work towards the good. Towards peace.

Let us make our country a peaceful one, Darussalam, the Land of Peace.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I find the anecdote given by Encik Sidek just now very fascinating. I am still smiling, hoping that we would not only be close to God but also close to each other here.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to speak on this Bill. I rise in support of the Amendment Bill.

We all know that Singapore is a secular state. But as I have said before, unlike secular states in the West, and even in the Muslim majority Turkey, ours is quite unique. I call ours "secularism with a soul".

The way we handled the Administration of Muslim Law Act (or AMLA) and its current amendments in the House today, bear testimony to that feeling. This says a lot about the tolerance and the understanding that exist in our multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore today.

Yes, all the Members of the Select Committee are Muslims, but it was chaired by Mr Speaker, a non-Muslim, in his capacity as the Speaker of Parliament. I do not know how Mr Speaker feels about Islam or about the Muslims, but I admire his tolerance and understanding of the issue at hand. I am confident, however, that the Select Committee sessions that we went through must have allowed Mr Speaker to better understand how the Muslims in Singapore feel about AMLA and to appreciate their aspirations.

I admire, in fact, the patience of Mr Speaker. With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I cite one example. After a long session and serious debate about the controversial issue of allowing the Civil Courts to hear ancillary matters on divorce, the representatives of the Young Women Muslim Association, persisted with their arguments, refusing to relent. The Chairman of the Select Committee intervened, reminding gently that they were repeating the same points. The President of the YWMA, Ms Fatimah Azimullah, persisted and argued further. Then the Chairman, Mr Speaker, interjected and assured them that they had made their point and that they would be given the last word. And despite that, another member, Ms Sakina Yusof Kagda, insisted on adding a few more "last words" to reinforce their concerns and to clear their conscience. The Chairman, Mr Speaker, then heard them patiently, still giving them the last word.

Similarly, Sir, I hope this exercise would also give the opportunity to all Singaporeans, particularly non-Muslims, to better appreciate what AMLA is about and what it means to Singapore Muslims and to our multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore.

Equally important, I trust this exercise will also allow Muslim Singaporeans to better understand the position of Islam and Muslims in secular and multi-religious Singapore.

The Muslims have their own Syariah Court and family and personal law of inheritance. They also have the Muslim Religious Council (or MUIS) as a statutory board to regulate matters of religious life, including the haj, endowment or wakaf, halal food and mosques. But the Muslims know and accept that they are still an integral part of our multi-racial Singapore. The Muslims know that they are different in some ways but they also realise that they cannot completely live in a system within a system divorced from mainstream Singapore.

There is always the need to remind ourselves about the bigger picture while we tackle the specific needs of the Muslim community, in this case the AMLA amendments. This was also achieved in the deliberations of the oral evidence, including during the sessions with the Association of Religious Teachers (Pergas), Jamiyah, Ms Noor Aisha Abdul Rahman, and a few others. The written representations, to my mind, generally also reflected a considerable level of maturity about the issues dealt with.

Sir, I am glad to note that this Select Committee had attracted 31 representations. During the last Select Committee on AMLA hearing in 1966, there were 18 submissions, and that too after its closing date for submissions was extended three times.

Thanks to the quality of the representations and the positive approach taken by the Committee, many amendments have subsequently been made to the earlier amendments and presented by the Minister for Community Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, Mr Abdullah Tarmugi, just now. This again, Sir, speaks well of the system and the openness therein.

The amendments, no doubt, have strengthened both the Syariah Court and the Majlis Ugama Islam (MUIS). With these amendments, I am confident that the Muslim community will be able to stand tall, as far as the administration of the Muslim law is concerned.

I have no doubt too that the system is not perfect. Neither do I think there is presently a perfect system in the administration of Muslim law in countries where Muslims are a minority. Even in Muslim majority countries, systems differ.

If we were to look at Indonesia, Brunei and Malaysia, three of our ASEAN neighbours with Muslim majority, we will find different levels and shades of implementation of the Muslim law. If we were to compare the implementation of the administration of Muslim law in Singapore with that of the Philippines and Thailand, two other ASEAN countries with substantive Muslim minority population, I think we can be proud of our achievements.

Yes, there were concerns expressed on the question of AMLA proposing to allow the Civil Courts to hear ancillary matters on divorce. True, there are areas where the Civil Courts handling ancillary divorce matters could end up unIslamic in nature, but as explained by Minister Abdullah, they are marginal and there will be sufficient safeguards to avoid such pitfalls. Meanwhile, there is a lot more to gain when Muslim Singaporeans are allowed to benefit from vast state resources available from the Civil Courts.

In view of the sensitivity and the fear some may still have, despite the assurances, it is worthwhile for the Syariah Court and MUIS to closely monitor such ancillary divorce cases going to the Civil Courts so as to avoid such complications.

In conclusion, Sir, this recent exercise has shown what can be done to improve the Administration of Muslim Law in Singapore. Yes, many had wished it should have been done much earlier, but more important now, progress definitely has been made. I am optimistic that there will be more progress in the future. I support the Bill, Sir.

Mr Zulkifli Bin Baharudin (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill.

Let me, first, share my views on some of the principles and issues in this Bill.

(1) This is not just a Malay or Muslim Bill.

Sir, many in Singapore view this Bill as just another Malay or Muslim Bill. They do not appreciate the ramification of this Bill to the larger issue of race relations. I hope that Singaporeans can learn from the current regional situation that the rest of Singapore cannot be insulated from otherwise unrelated religious problems if ethnic communities in Singapore or, in the case, Malay-Muslim community feels that their fears and concerns are not adequately appreciated or understood by the majority of the Singapore population.

Therefore, this Bill is as much about Singapore as it is about Malay-Muslims in Singapore because the issues have wide implications on the relationship between ethnic minority and the State. This Bill is about managing the complexity of multi-racialism in Singapore.

(2) Potential conflicts exist.

Many Singaporeans may be unaware and ignorant of the fact that whenever a case involving matrimonial property and custody is being decided in court and given wide publicity in the press, there is great anxiety and apprehension amongst the Malay-Muslim population because of the concern that the decisions taken by the Civil Court may be in conflict with Islam. Many Muslims have the perception that there are wide differences between Muslim and civil laws although, in actual fact, there are only slight, if any, differences between Syariah and civil laws relating to the maintenance, custody and division of property on divorce.

In my view, Sir, and it is also shared by those who presented themselves at the Select Committee, the Civil Courts have been extremely fair and sensitive when dealing with cases that have implications on Islam. I must compliment our judges and journalists who have been very careful in dealing with these sensitive issues. I think they have done their jobs so successfully that a large section of our population today have become unaware of the potential conflicts and problems some of these cases may bring. Having said that, some of the Malay-Muslims still fear that when the crunch comes, and there is a conflict between the interpretation of the Civil and Syariah Courts, the Civil Court would never compromise its position in terms of justice and equity for the sake of any particular religion. While my friends in the predominantly Muslim neighbouring countries take comfort that should there be any conflicts between Islamic and civil laws, there will be enough political or judicial intervention to ensure that the reputation of Islam is not compromised. Some Malay-Muslims in Singapore are not similarly assured. As ethnic minorities, some feel inadequate in dictating or influencing the judicial process as can be done in some other predominantly Muslim countries and therefore are concerned that the Civil Court may not adequately consider Islamic interpretation when making its decisions.

(3) Participation and consensus.

I compliment the Minister for referring the Bill to the Select Committee for out of it has come numerous practical suggestions and recommendations that have resulted in further amendments to the Bill. Perhaps another less obvious but no less significant consequence is the fact that the process of participation by a large cross section of the community from professionals to Ulamas, social workers and community leaders have brought about a sense of collective ownership and a strong desire that the amendments represent a process that would bring the present status closer to the aspirations of the community. There is today a sense that each and every Malay-Muslim counts. That each has a role to play in strengthening the social institutions like the Syariah Court and overcoming the many problems that continue to beset the community. Whilst some may disagree with a number of specific provisions proposed in the amendments, what cannot be denied is that the Bill requires the moral support of all Malay-Muslims if we are to see solid and visible improvements.

I hope this sense of ownership can be translated into action, for example, volunteers and social workers to help the counselling process of those contemplating divorce, especially now that this process can be delegated to the community and lawyers and other professionals to help strengthen the Syariah Court that is extremely short of trained resources and lacks the experience in handling complex Muslim issues.

What is also not disputed is the fact that there is a strong desire in the community to develop the Syariah Court into a full-fledged Family Court when it has acquired sufficient experience in establishing the tradition and jurisprudence that would enable it to handle increasingly complex problems of our society. This is an issue that confronts many Muslim societies the world over. With good support from the community, I am confident that Singapore can develop a unique model of balancing Syariah and civil laws that can serve as an example to the multi-racial society the world over.

(4) Malay Paradox.

Fourthly, coming to terms with multi-racialism. Sir, there is also the view that the aspirations of the Malay-Muslims in Singapore to have an independent and full-fledged Syariah Court is a sign of Malay-Muslim fundamentalism in Singapore. Sir, this is an incorrect assessment. In my view, there exists a paradox in the Malay-Muslim community and in fact in the heart and soul of a Malay-Muslim Singaporean. As an individual, we are expected to reflect and demonstrate our evangelical spirit and be a role model to other Muslims. Malay-Muslim leaders, either in politics or in community, because of their privileged position and the influence that they may have on society, are also expected to be the protector, defender and crusader of Islam. This is especially so in Singapore where Malay-Muslims are ethnic minorities, where increasing complex social problems are seen as a result of the social ills of modernisation and westernisation and where Islam is considered as the only force that is capable of confronting this influence.

Yet, the dilemma is that Malay-Muslim leaders, by virtue of their position in society, must necessarily be more aware of the multi-racial dynamics of the Singapore society and therefore are constantly put under pressure to balance the secular and religious interest of the community without being unnecessarily compromising in dealing with this conflicting interest. Individually, Malay-Muslim Singaporeans are still looking and coming to terms with balancing the religious and secular values. Some are still searching to find the comfort zone where they can be completely Malay-Muslim and wholeheartedly and absolutely Singaporean in our multi-racial society.

(5) A society in transition.

Fifthly, historical perspective. Even during the empires of the Caliphate from AD 632 to 661, there were separate syariah and non-syariah jurisdiction. I quote from S.E. Finer on The History of Government from the Earliest Times:

'The caliphs set up syariah courts, conducted by trained specialists, the gadis, but because so much of syariah law was unsuited and unaccommodated to the running of the state, the caliphs had also established their own court whose principal duty had been to deal with complaints against and between their officials. It was an "administrative court" of complaints, the mazalim. To remedy the syariah courts' inadequacy for administering the empire, they attracted into these mazalim courts entire classes of business relating to statecraft. It was by these steps that the empire came to have one law - the syariah - but two separate jurisdictions: the syariah jurisdiction and the non-syariah jurisdiction, that is, the caliphal one, not unacceptable to the ulama who had always recognised that he had the right to define the jurisdiction of the syariah court. So, while the latter handled religious, family and most civil matters like police, taxation, criminal justice, and military affairs fell within the caliphal jurisdiction.'

Sir, even in modern Islamic history, we could see that one of the crucial issues defining the political future is the relationship of Islamic forces and democratic political systems. Competition, cooperation and conflict are amongst the most important dimensions of Muslim life.

From Malaysia to Morocco, Indonesia to India, societies are concerned with the compatibility of Islam and democracy and their respective roles in the political evolution of Muslim societies. While in some of these countries, revolution and reformation are characteristics of this process, we in Singapore can and should take a more evolutionary approach in managing this process.

Sir, I now come to some of the more specific provisions of the Bill. There were genuine concerns that allowing Civil Courts to hear ancillary matters on divorce may dilute the powers of the Syariah Court. I am, however, of the view that there now exist sufficient safeguards to ensure that Muslims, as a matter of choice, will go to the Syariah Court to resolve their disputes, that is, requiring parties to seek leave of the Syariah Court and provision for counselling even if there is mutual consent by both parties to go to the Civil Court to settle their disputes.

Sir, the Syariah Court is the people's court. Utlimately, the status and reputation of the Syariah Court depends on the support it gets from the community. While it may be possible to regulate and make it mandatory for people to go to Syariah Court, this alone may not necessarily ensure the good reputation of the Syariah Court. Besides, Malays have progressed so far that there are complex issues, for example, involving overseas properties and other assets that may be too complex for the Syariah Court alone to shoulder this responsibility. (6) Strengthening the Syariah Court.

I support the various initiatives to strengthen the Syariah Court to review the administrative measures, procedures and manpower needs and the call for Muslims to volunteer their services towards this cause. We can all agree on the ultimate goal of having a full-fledged Syariah Court but may differ on the pace and time it will take to achieve this. But we must be careful to ensure that our hopes and wishes are matched by the capacity and the capability of the Syariah Court to shoulder this responsibility.

(7) Future amendments to separate laws for AMLA and MUIS.

I would like to propose that we have separate laws for AMLA and MUIS to reflect the different roles and responsibilities of MUIS and the Syariah Court and to give these two matters more specific focus and attention.

Sir, in conclusion, with these amendments, we have, in my opinion, the necessary prerequisites to make the Syariah Court a great Muslim Family Court. More importantly, those seeking legal remedies can now expect better and prompt service because justice is also about efficiency and productivity.

This is certainly by no means the last amendment to the Bill. As we progress, we will need to amend AMLA periodically to keep pace with the progress and aspirations of the Malay-Muslim society. For now, Sir, only a solid endorsement by all concerned is the most appropriate support that we can give to this Bill.

Mr Shriniwas Rai: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Select Committee has received 31 proposals. The Committee has painstakingly examined all the proposals and has incorporated many of the proposals by the Members of this House as well as members of the public. This is very encouraging, Sir.

There have been representations both from individuals as well as Muslim organisations. This is encouraging. The Bill has benefited from the public representation. It is important that this legislation will reflect the social norm of our time. This House must be prepared to change laws which need to be amended, and AMLA is such a law.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there is one concern which I would like to share with this House. Other Bills which were committed to a Select Committee, the representation made by the Malay community was not very encouraging. May I urge the Malay community leaders that they should be forthcoming and air their views on national issues as well, not just on Muslim issues. The minority community should participate in activities from the grassroots level to the national level. Only in this way, can we build community bonding and multi-racialism.

Sir, my other NMP colleagues and I have received a letter from one Muslim group, and there have been some serious views expressed in the letter. I would like to assure the group that I have considered their views very carefully and I cannot support them. One of the proposals was that the AMLA's amendment would in fact contravene the Constitution which, I think, is not correct. No provision of the Constitution is being contravened and that proposition has no foundation at all. Therefore, I would like to assure the group that their view was represented in the Select Committee. The Select Committee had published and considered their view. Nevertheless, since they had written to the NMPs, we owe a duty to have this publicly aired.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we must bear in mind that not all proposals before any Select Committee can be accepted. Only proposals that are workable and within the legal framework can be accepted. Therefore, many representors may be wondering why their views have not been heard or accepted. The simple reason is that only views which will reflect the majority view and will be good for the Bill are accepted.

Sir, the civil law and the syariah law are going to operate side by side. The Muslim community has a choice. I would like to assure the Muslim community that the civil jurisdiction does not take away the Muslim position. Whenever the law is being interpreted, the Muslim position is considered by the judges. Another aspect which I would like to share is this. We should strengthen the Syariah Court's position, as is being done in the Family Court. We should allow for more mediations and discussions to help people who are going through a dispute. In the past years, the Family Division of the Subordinate Court has done very well. I hope the Minister will take this point and advise the Syariah Court that it should treat legal dispute for hearing as a last resort. After all, we are an Asian society and the practice that has been followed in the Family Court is worthy of consideration. I would seriously urge the Minister to get his officials to look at it.

Sir, I am glad that some of the proposals have been accepted. I am also glad that we will have two Presidents, one of them would be senior, ad-hoc Presidents and a Registrar who will help in the administrative work. And I would suggest that we should have a Deputy Registrar, if necessary.

With this, Sir, I support the Bill.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to thank the Members who have expressed their widespread and strong support for the Bill.

Mr Sidek and Mr Zainul, in their own inimitable way, spoke at length of the need for tolerance, understanding and mutual respect in a society like ours, especially in areas where things spiritual - faith, religion, beliefs - come into contact with the secular, the need for accommodation and the need for reconciliation between these two spheres. I share this sentiment, Sir, and it is indeed in this spirit that the amendments to AMLA are being proposed. As suggested by Mr Zainul, the Syariah Court, MUIS, and certainly my Ministry, will monitor the progress of these amendments to ensure that if things need to be reviewed or improved upon, we would certainly do so.

Mr Zulkifli spoke about our multi-racial society. I can readily appreciate and emphathise with the Member's points on the sensitivities and the issues of concern in our society and the need to consider our multi-racial and multi-cultural context in anything we do. As for AMLA and MUIS to be treated separately, it is, I think, a separate issue and one which will have to be studied very closely, especially the implications of the separation. I agree with the Member on the need to monitor the progress of the amendments, and we would certainly do so.

Mr Rai supported the Bill too. I am aware of the complaint from the three persons whom Mr Rai mentioned and the trio's attempts at lobbying the NMPs to pursue their cause in this Parliament. I have checked the allegations and arguments with the relevant experts and they are of the view that these allegations and arguments are misconceived and without basis. As to mediation, whether it should be encouraged, I think the Member would be pleased to note that there is indeed a culture of mediation in the Syariah Court, and it is certainly an area which we will develop further.

The Bill has gone through extensive consultations, study and discussions by individuals, organisations and experts and among the Malay MPs and the institutions concerned. I accept that not everyone would accept every amendment to AMLA. Indeed, I think it is unreasonable for us to expect this. But I am, Sir, comforted by the fact that almost everyone agrees that, as a whole, the amendments serve to strengthen the Syariah Court and also MUIS, the two important institutions to Muslims here. I think this is how we should look at the Bill. Each amendment is like a piece of mosaic, each fitting into each other to be built into a very fine mural which no single piece of mosaic would be able to conjure, no matter how ugly or attractive that individual piece of mosaic is. I would like to commend the Muslim community to adopt this approach. We should also consider how the Bill will serve the needs of the community in the context of our multi-racial and multi-cultural environment, as has been expressed by various Members.

Ultimately, it is not the amendments alone that will make the Syariah Court stand tall and proud but also how it conducts itself after this. This depends on the quality of the principal officers, the efficiency of the staff, the effectiveness of the processes and the procedures adopted, and the adequacy of the resources, both manpower and physical. This, the Syariah Court and my Ministry would certainly look into and make improvements where necessary, and members of the community are welcome to make any suggestions on how we could improve the Syariah Court or MUIS further.

All said and done, Sir, the proof of the pudding will ultimately be in the eating and I hope the community would accept these changes with an open mind or, at least, give them and the Syariah Court a chance to prove themselves or, as mentioned by Mr Rai, give the Bill a chance to work. I am confident that, given time, experience and support from the community, the Syariah Court would emerge stronger, more effective and an institution worthy of the hopes, inspirations and the trust of the Muslim community in Singapore.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed.