Does the Federal Constitution grant equal status to Shariah and civil courts?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Federal Constitution Recognises Both Shariah and Civil Courts as Competent Courts

The Federal Constitution acknowledges both Shariah and civil courts as competent judicial bodies, with neither being subordinate to the other. Federal Court judge Datuk Abu Bakar Jais articulated in his judgment that the Shariah Court operates as a competent court under the supreme law of the land, and its pronouncements are entitled to significant respect and should be binding. This perspective challenges the notion that Shariah Courts are inherently inferior and thus subject to review by civil courts.
Shariah Court Decisions Are Binding and Not Subject to Civil Court Review

There is no legal precedent or authority that permits a civil court to review and subsequently overturn a decision rendered by a Shariah Court. Once a Shariah Court has adjudicated a case and issued a decision, the matter cannot be relitigated in the civil courts. This principle was underscored in a Federal Court ruling where an appeal by a woman seeking to nullify her status as a Muslim was dismissed, with two out of three judges upholding the Shariah Court's jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction Over Apostasy Cases Rests with the Shariah Court

The Shariah Court possesses the inherent jurisdiction to adjudicate cases pertaining to apostasy or renunciation of faith. Justice Abu Bakar Jais stated that it would be inappropriate and unjust to undermine the Shariah Court's authority by transferring such jurisdiction to civil courts. The case in question involved a woman who had sought a declaration from the Shariah High Court that she was no longer a Muslim, a matter that falls within the purview of the Shariah Court's established powers.
Dissenting Opinion on Validity of Conversion

While the majority decision affirmed the Shariah Court's jurisdiction, a dissenting opinion from Justice Mary Lim Thiam Suan highlighted a different perspective on the validity of conversion. Justice Lim contended that the woman's conversion to Islam was invalid because she had never formally recited the affirmation of faith. This viewpoint suggests that the procedural requirements for conversion are paramount, irrespective of subsequent practice or upbringing.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Does the Federal Constitution grant equal status to Shariah and civil courts?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends