By Dr WAN AZHAR WAN AHMAD
Senior Fellow/Director,
Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science
Abstract
One of the fundamental teachings of Islam is that non-Muslims are guaranteed freedom to practise their religions and customs without any restriction as long as non-Muslims reciprocate by not being insensitive to the Muslim community. The Constitution, too, categorically restricts Islamic laws to Muslims.
IMPOSING Islamic law on non-Muslims? Answer: A big ‘NO’. It should not have been an issue and was utterly misconceived in the first place.
All the hue and cry surrounding it, I believe, was due to the misrepresentations made by Muslims as well as non-Muslims which created confusion in both communities, and which lead to a considerable refusal by the non-Muslims to listen and understand more.
The combination of this cause and effect situation has created substantial islamophobia.
One of the fundamental teachings of Islam is that non-Muslims are guaranteed freedom to practice their religions and customs without any restriction as long as the non-Muslims reciprocate by not being insensitive to the Muslim community.
Many Quranic verses and Prophetic traditions, as translated into state policies by various Muslim governments over the centuries, bear witness to this fact.
Islamic laws were never imposed on the non-Muslims unless they themselves, freely and by their own will choose to be adjudicated according to Islamic law.
If there exists any interference or oppression by Muslims on non-Muslims, it does not originate from the teachings of Islam, but rather from the “dark side” or confusion of Muslim themselves.
This is most likely due to their ignorance of their own religion, personal motives, socio-political interests or all three.
The position of Islam vis-à-vis non-Muslims is clear as far as doctrine is concerned.
During the time of Prophet Muhammad, it happened several times that when non-Muslims were caught committing offences with Muslims as their cohorts, the former were adjudicated according to their own laws, be they religious or customary.
Conversely, there were also occasions where non-Muslims would willingly submit to Islamic law in settling their disputes with Muslims.
The most famous case is perhaps one between the fourth caliph, Ali b. Abi Talib and a Jew over a saddle. Ali failed to produce sufficient evidence, and the case was decided in favour of the Jew.
In the case of Malaysia, the 9th Schedule of the Federal Constitution, consolidated by numerous other Acts of Parliament and state enactments, simply affirm the above said basic doctrine of Islam, that in general Islamic laws are not applicable to non-Muslims.
The Constitution not only categorically restricts Islamic Law to Muslims, but also places it under the jurisdiction of state assemblies. Due to these states having limited resources, this consequently deprives the Syariah judicial system of a better infrastructure, reliable human capital management and related facilities/amenities.
The impact of the Constitution is far-reaching. It allows two different legal and judicial systems to run parallel with each other: civil and Syariah.
[...]
Justice means to put things in their right and proper places. In a situation involving a non-Muslim offender who does not profess the religion of Islam, justice in this context would be to not subject him/her to Islamic law.
A more appropriate measure would be to refer him/her to other laws in accordance with his/her religion or custom, if indeed any such law exists.
As alluded the situation may be different if he freely agrees or is willing to be adjudicated according to the Syariah court. But the current legal practice of this country is primarily shaped by the Constitution; and therefore to subject a non-Muslim to Islamic law is unrealistic, until and unless certain constitutional provisions are amended.
[...]
When Islamic law specifies certain punishments for certain immoral actions, its primary aim is to preserve good conduct, the natural order, justice, peace and tranquillity for the individual self and consequently for society at large. This objective is in fact shared by many value systems, be they religious or ethical in nature.
[...]
Read the whole article here: TheStar : Islamic laws and non-Muslims
***
IMPOSING Islamic law on non-Muslims? Answer: A big ‘NO’. It should not have been an issue and was utterly misconceived in the first place.
All the hue and cry surrounding it, I believe, was due to the misrepresentations made by Muslims as well as non-Muslims which created confusion in both communities, and which lead to a considerable refusal by the non-Muslims to listen and understand more.
The combination of this cause and effect situation has created substantial islamophobia.
One of the fundamental teachings of Islam is that non-Muslims are guaranteed freedom to practice their religions and customs without any restriction as long as the non-Muslims reciprocate by not being insensitive to the Muslim community.
Many Quranic verses and Prophetic traditions, as translated into state policies by various Muslim governments over the centuries, bear witness to this fact.
Islamic laws were never imposed on the non-Muslims unless they themselves, freely and by their own will choose to be adjudicated according to Islamic law.
If there exists any interference or oppression by Muslims on non-Muslims, it does not originate from the teachings of Islam, but rather from the “dark side” or confusion of Muslim themselves.
This is most likely due to their ignorance of their own religion, personal motives, socio-political interests or all three.
The position of Islam vis-à-vis non-Muslims is clear as far as doctrine is concerned.
During the time of Prophet Muhammad, it happened several times that when non-Muslims were caught committing offences with Muslims as their cohorts, the former were adjudicated according to their own laws, be they religious or customary.
Conversely, there were also occasions where non-Muslims would willingly submit to Islamic law in settling their disputes with Muslims.
The most famous case is perhaps one between the fourth caliph, Ali b. Abi Talib and a Jew over a saddle. Ali failed to produce sufficient evidence, and the case was decided in favour of the Jew.
In the case of Malaysia, the 9th Schedule of the Federal Constitution, consolidated by numerous other Acts of Parliament and state enactments, simply affirm the above said basic doctrine of Islam, that in general Islamic laws are not applicable to non-Muslims.
The Constitution not only categorically restricts Islamic Law to Muslims, but also places it under the jurisdiction of state assemblies. Due to these states having limited resources, this consequently deprives the Syariah judicial system of a better infrastructure, reliable human capital management and related facilities/amenities.
The impact of the Constitution is far-reaching. It allows two different legal and judicial systems to run parallel with each other: civil and Syariah.
[...]
Justice means to put things in their right and proper places. In a situation involving a non-Muslim offender who does not profess the religion of Islam, justice in this context would be to not subject him/her to Islamic law.
A more appropriate measure would be to refer him/her to other laws in accordance with his/her religion or custom, if indeed any such law exists.
As alluded the situation may be different if he freely agrees or is willing to be adjudicated according to the Syariah court. But the current legal practice of this country is primarily shaped by the Constitution; and therefore to subject a non-Muslim to Islamic law is unrealistic, until and unless certain constitutional provisions are amended.
[...]
When Islamic law specifies certain punishments for certain immoral actions, its primary aim is to preserve good conduct, the natural order, justice, peace and tranquillity for the individual self and consequently for society at large. This objective is in fact shared by many value systems, be they religious or ethical in nature.
[...]
Read the whole article here: TheStar : Islamic laws and non-Muslims
***
4 comments:
Everybody is repeating the same statement - Non-Muslims are guaranteed freedom to practice their religions and customs and are not subjected to Islamic law.
I believe most people already understand that.
But a lot of us would like to understand how Islam or Islamic law in our country deals with khalwat between Muslim and non-Muslim or when a husband or wife embraces Islam leaving the spouse outside Islam and how to distribute assets when a Muslim leaving his/her poor non-Muslim parents/siblings.
I've yet to see a credible article talking about dealing with these complications.
Mr,
The article did discuss about the issue of khalwat in relation to Muslims and non-Muslims but I did not post the whole article. There is a link to the article and you can read about it.
why do they always give hundreds of years old examples. don't they have more current ones that are more relevant to our time?
msleepyhead,
The religion is about 2,000 years and citations are naturally made on the early days. This is similar to Christians who cites Paul, Peter and earlier days.
Post a Comment