Institute of Islamic Understanding (Ikim) said that Tuesday's report in the Star headlined "Proposal to prosecute non-muslims for khalwat" is entirely erroneous.
According to an Ikim statement dated April 3, the seminar it organised in collaboration with the Syariah Judiciary Department was intended to review existing syariah laws and to propose solutions to problems pertaining the syariah system in Malaysia.
Ikim said the news report was not right as no proposal to prosecute non-muslims for khalwat, be it under the syariah or civil court, was ever made.
“The article in the Star which reports that the seminar had proposed that non-Muslims caught committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly but in the civil courts, is entirely erroneous,” said Ikim director-general Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas in the statement.
“No such proposal was made, and therefore if what is reported in the Star as being comments allegedly made by Syariah Court of Appeal Judge (Mohd Asri Abdullah), are also in error,” he added.
"If indeed the learned judge made those statements, we strongly advise that it would behove the judge to be more circumspect in future," he said.
He added that Ikim held that non-Muslims cannot fundamentally be charged under any provision in Islamic law by virtue of the fact that they do not profess the religion of Islam.
“In addition, to my knowledge, there is no such provision in the civil courts to charge a person for khalwat, and therefore it would be premature to assume that non-Muslims can also be subjected to the charge of khalwat in the civil courts,” he said.
"I am disappointed with the article highlighting comments made by Mohd Asri Abdullah which emphasized the banal, when in reality the more important substantive proposals concerning laws protecting the rights of divorced women and their rights to maintenance were ignore," said Syed Ali.
Syed Ali also disagreed with the Star article on a proposal "for the establishment of a rehabilitation centre for those convicted of offences related to morals and faith such as prostitution and effeminate men".
"To my knowledge, I have never interpreted being effeminate as an offence," he said.
SIS opposes "moral policing"
Meanwhile, in a statement yesterday, Sisters in Islam (SIS) reiterated its strong objection to the current practice of moral policing by the state, saying it contravened certain Quranic verses.
"The practice of barging into people's houses and bedrooms, in particular, clearly violates an individual's right to privacy and human dignity protected by the Quran."
SIS said that khalwat raids were never carried out during the prophet Muhammad's lifetime and it was reported that the second Caliph Sayidina Umar was rebuked for barging into a suspect's residence.
"Such practice is also not the norm in many Muslim countries," it added.
"The zealousness of religious officials in 'promoting good and preventing evil' has often led to public outrage because those arrested, especially women, were shamed and humiliated."
Source: Malaysiakini.com
P/S: Brian Fong, here is the answer to your query and the statement is made by our most respected Muslim Philosopher Professor Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas who is also the D-G of IKIM.
According to an Ikim statement dated April 3, the seminar it organised in collaboration with the Syariah Judiciary Department was intended to review existing syariah laws and to propose solutions to problems pertaining the syariah system in Malaysia.
Ikim said the news report was not right as no proposal to prosecute non-muslims for khalwat, be it under the syariah or civil court, was ever made.
“The article in the Star which reports that the seminar had proposed that non-Muslims caught committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly but in the civil courts, is entirely erroneous,” said Ikim director-general Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas in the statement.
“No such proposal was made, and therefore if what is reported in the Star as being comments allegedly made by Syariah Court of Appeal Judge (Mohd Asri Abdullah), are also in error,” he added.
"If indeed the learned judge made those statements, we strongly advise that it would behove the judge to be more circumspect in future," he said.
He added that Ikim held that non-Muslims cannot fundamentally be charged under any provision in Islamic law by virtue of the fact that they do not profess the religion of Islam.
“In addition, to my knowledge, there is no such provision in the civil courts to charge a person for khalwat, and therefore it would be premature to assume that non-Muslims can also be subjected to the charge of khalwat in the civil courts,” he said.
"I am disappointed with the article highlighting comments made by Mohd Asri Abdullah which emphasized the banal, when in reality the more important substantive proposals concerning laws protecting the rights of divorced women and their rights to maintenance were ignore," said Syed Ali.
Syed Ali also disagreed with the Star article on a proposal "for the establishment of a rehabilitation centre for those convicted of offences related to morals and faith such as prostitution and effeminate men".
"To my knowledge, I have never interpreted being effeminate as an offence," he said.
SIS opposes "moral policing"
Meanwhile, in a statement yesterday, Sisters in Islam (SIS) reiterated its strong objection to the current practice of moral policing by the state, saying it contravened certain Quranic verses.
"The practice of barging into people's houses and bedrooms, in particular, clearly violates an individual's right to privacy and human dignity protected by the Quran."
SIS said that khalwat raids were never carried out during the prophet Muhammad's lifetime and it was reported that the second Caliph Sayidina Umar was rebuked for barging into a suspect's residence.
"Such practice is also not the norm in many Muslim countries," it added.
"The zealousness of religious officials in 'promoting good and preventing evil' has often led to public outrage because those arrested, especially women, were shamed and humiliated."
Source: Malaysiakini.com
P/S: Brian Fong, here is the answer to your query and the statement is made by our most respected Muslim Philosopher Professor Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas who is also the D-G of IKIM.
6 comments:
In fact, the Khalwat detecting are immoral in origin. Peeping on people private life by using tax payer resources, and breaking the law of invade citizen privacy.
So doing the unlawful and unmoral to make the Khalwat law are "lawful" under Shariah? I bet IKim has use many spin to interpret the Quran to make the law sounds.
Sisters in Islam (SIS) know the fact. But Dr Syed refuse to learn.
As blogger KTEMOC has say it, Dr Syed even get the Buddhism facts wrong. I think Dr Syed is just an UMNO politikus.
IKIM needs help.
its about time and turn IKIM appoints Dato Seri Samy Vellu as its Advisor.
case close.
the Minister that heads IKIM is a no clean man, let alone a religious scholar.
Samy Vellu fits the job better!
If what Dr Syed maintained is true that the Star mis-reported, to the extent of mis-quoting a syariah court judge - why didn't Ikim ask for a public apology from the Star?
Until that Syariah Court dude take action against the Star for mis-quoting him (like sue the Star or something) I tend to believe he must have put his foot in his mouth.
So my view of him being a non progressive dude stands
Did anybody has a video or voice recording of the alleged comment at the seminar. Star published that article, they should have that recording to backup their claim. Otherwise that "Syariah Court of Appeal Judge" should sue Star for it.
Why always blame News media for mis-quote??
In fact, why did the "respected Muslim Philosopher Professor" make the clarification and not that "Syariah Court of Appeal Judge"??
Lawsuits seem to be the in thing among Pakatan Rakyat people.
"Unless the IKIM guy sues The Star for an apology I will continue to uphold my bigoted view that the other side is always wrong."
Do you know how much lawyers cost and how long legal cases take? Maybe the IKIM director is just being prudent in not wanting to spend duit rakyat unnecessarily.
Yet if he does follow the "learned advice" and take it to court, one can already agak what the Eternally Self-Righteous crowd's response in these comment sections is going to be. "Aiyoo, itu macam simple pun mau masuk court aa? Kasi habis duit rakyat saja ini bodo punya orang Islam."
Moo_t,
I don't agree with you. Maybe, you have not observed Dr Syed's ideology and thoughts. I hope to post some of his articles for your consideration and review.
Ling Ling Chatt,
You are a great joker.
Agnos & Yan,
Ya, Ikim could seek an apology; but what's the point? Anyway, It was reported that the Appeal Court Judge did speak about it and Ikim had come out in the open to rebut him.
Ruhayat,
I tend to agree with you. It is not to the interest of anyone to seek litigation all the time. Corrective statements are sufficient.
Post a Comment