COMMENT The Negri Sembilan government's proposal to require a non-Muslim spouse to dissolve his civil law marriage before converting to Islam is a welcome move.

Much anguish, pain and unhappiness is caused when one party converts without dissolving his civil law marriage according to law. Civil law and Islamic laws are different, and painful results have been created.

The cases of R Subashini, S Shyamala, M Indira Gandhi and S Deepa (right) are good examples. The spouses who do not convert to Islam are left in the lurch by the spouse who converts.

The children of civil law marriages of the parent who converts can be put into the Islamic system by the converting parent without the agreement of the other parent.

After they died, Sarjan Moorthy's and Chandran Dharmadass' bodies were forcefully taken away by Islamic authorities because they converted to Islam at some time in their lives for some reason without the knowledge of their families.

They lived their lives as Hindus and professed Hinduism after they had converted. No one in the family suspected that they had converted to Islam at some time previously.

The widows of such persons are left weeping when Islamic authorities use force to take away the bodies. There are many cases where non-Muslims convert to Islam for some reason, but are unable to lawfully revert to their former religion later on.

Caught under the law

There are also many cases where individuals who do not profess Islam at all have Muslim names in their identity cards. Their fathers may have been Muslims, but they are raised by the mother who professes and practises some other faith, or are raised from childhood by some other relative professing and practising another religion.

The child grows up into an adult who neither professes, nor practises Islam. These individuals do not want to practise or profess Islam, but they are caught under the law. They suffer much distress.

These people cannot marry a non-Muslim under the law. They suffer as a result. Even if they marry in some traditional manner without registering their marriage, the authorities in hospitals insist that the child born to them must have a Muslim name. Such children have legal disabilities.

They are forced to attend Islamic studies classes in school although their parents do not profess or practise Islam. When such children grow up, they cannot marry a non-Muslim. It is a cycle of suffering.

Article 11 of the federal constitution provides that every person has the right to profess and practise his religion.

However, Article 11 does not provide any freedom for a person who is considered a Muslim by state Islamic enactments - by reason of his birth or any other reason - to change his religion or practise any other religion.

It seems that the syariah courts do not have power to consider such people who are born to one Muslim parent, but who do not profess or practise Islam, to be regarded as non-Muslim.

Our laws need to be urgently reviewed. Not just in Negri Sembilan only, but in all the states of Malaysia.

The attorney-general has already been holding on to the much needed amendments to the Family Laws affecting non-Muslim families. Everyone must be happy under our laws. Innocent people must not be made to suffer.


A VAITHILINGAM is former president of the Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taosim (MCCBCHST).