DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang has ticked off the Federal Territories Islamic Religious Council (MAIWP) today after its lawyer raised questions about the Federal Constitution’s validity under Islamic law.

He also urged the government to explain whether it is still committed to the constitution’s position as the supreme law in Malaysia.

“The prime minister and the cabinet cannot plead ignorance to such a ‘monumental’ attack on the constitution, especially as it is presented as made with the approval of a cabinet minister.

“Any lawyer can argue any interpretation of the constitution as to undermine its core principles, but it is a different matter if such a contention is presented in the Federal Court in the name of the government or cabinet or any part thereof […]

“Can Najib Abdul Razak explain why it is happening under his watch as prime minister?” Lim ( photo ) said in a statement today.

He pointed out that cabinet minister Jamil Khir Baharom is also MAIWP’s chairperson, while its ex-officio members include attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail.

Point on fundamental liberty

Earlier today, several media outlets reported that among the arguments set to be heard in the Federal Court on Aug 13 is that some clauses of the constitution cannot be applied to Islamic laws, put forth by MAIWP.

“That provisions of Islamic enactments should not be tested on the fundamental liberty clauses of the Federal Constitution, that point has been raised by us.

“Because of that, the respondents and the attorney-general's chambers want to study that and come out with a considered submission on that," MAIWP’s lawyer Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla was quoted as saying by the Malay Mail Online .

He reportedly said this to journalists today after the court adjourned its hearing to allow the new argument to be presented fully.

The "liberty clauses" refer to Part II of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees fundamental liberties such as the right to life, equality before the law, freedom of speech and of religion, and others.

The Federal Court hearing in question pertains to lawyer Victoria Jayaseele Martin’s ( photo ) lawsuit against MAIWP and its rule prohibiting non-Muslim lawyers from practicing in the Syariah courts.

Among the plaintiff’s arguments were that the prohibition violates Article 8(1), Article 8(2) and Article 5, and Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution, and therefore null and void.

These provisions include those that provide for equality before the law and non-discrimination on basis of religion, the right of an arrested person to consult a legal practitioner of his choice, and freedom of speech and association.

Victoria reportedly holds a master’s degree in comparative law from the International Islamic University of Malaysia.