Cj No Basis In Islam To Deprive Indira Of Her Children

---

The top judge cited the M Indira Gandhi case and judicial challenges on state and federal law overlap as examples in which there were widespread misconceptions leading to attacks on both the judiciary and her faith.
In a sharing session yesterday, Tengku Maimun (above) said many held distorted views about Islam.
“I have mentioned this to many people. Generally, the public perception of Islam among Malaysians is sometimes distorted. We sometimes don’t see things from the proper perspective.
“When we speak about Islam, it is all about justice. It (the religion) does not teach us to look at the colour or the religion of someone. Social justice is paramount in Islam,” she was quoted as saying by the New Straits Times.
Principle of justice
One case where issues arose was when Indira was seeking custody of her children who had been unilaterally converted by her ex-husband.
M Indira GandhiTengku Maimun said as the marriage was a civil one, any matters pertaining to the dissolution of that union must be resolved through civil court.
However, she said issues arose when the civil court granted Indira custody of her children, while the syariah court granted custody to her ex-husband Muhammad Ridhuan Abdullah.
Tengku Maimun said there was no basis or justification in Islam, as she understood it, to deprive a child of her mother or a mother of her child.
“(But) I was then questioned by an individual, who told me that when I decided on cases, I did not uphold Islamic principles or protect Islam.
“However, when I asked which principles of Islam we must uphold, I received no reply.
“My conclusion is that this has nothing to do with Islamic principles. It is a plain principle of justice that a mother should not be deprived of her children, and vice versa,” Tengku Maimun said.
Sole dissenter
Tengku Maimun was the sole dissenting judge when the Court of Appeal in 2014 quashed a mandamus order by the Ipoh High Court to compel the police to locate Indira’s children.
In 2016, a five-member Federal Court bench took Tengku Maimun’s position and overturned the Court of Appeal ruling.
Nik Elin Zurina Nik Abdul RashidAnother case the chief justice cited in her talk was Nik Elin Zurina Nik Abdul Rashid and Iki Putra Mubarrak which challenged the constitutionality of syariah criminal laws in Kelantan and Selangor.
Tengku Maimun said contrary to perception the cases were not about Islamic law, but rather legislative powers.
“People mistakenly thought these cases were about upholding syariah law. In reality, they were about the demarcation of legislative powers between the state and federal governments.
“It was really hurtful to have people question your faith, saying that you have not realised that your faith is now at stake.
“Hence, I think it is important, even in Islam, that if you do not understand something, you adhere to the concept of ‘tabayyun’, which is the principle of verifying and checking first before making any remarks,” she said.
This is the second time this month that Tengku Maimun - who is set to retire in July - has hit out at critics who accused her of being un-Islamic.
Earlier on Jan 8, she reminded such critics that “Allah is the sole judge”. - Mkini

---