KUALA LUMPUR (March 20): Following the 2018 landmark decision that declared a single parent unilateral conversion to Islam is unlawful in the case of her three children, kindergarten teacher M Indira Gandhi, along with 13 others, have filed an originating summons (OS) to seek to nullify the state legislations of eight states that allowed it.
Indira Gandhi filed the application on March 3, through her solicitors from Messrs Raj and Sach.
In the OS, Indira along with the 13 others that included non-governmental organisation Pertubuhan Hindu Agamam Ani Malaysia and members of Indira Gandhi Action team, have named Perlis, Malacca, Kedah, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Perak, Johor and Federal Territory as defendants in the legal action.
They say that these state governments are still practicing unilateral conversion of minors into the Islamic faith via the relevant state enactments.
The 14 plaintiff or applicants list the state enactments as:
- Section 117 of the Perlis Administration of Islam 2006 Enactment;
- Section 80 of the Kedah Administration of Islam 2008 Enactment;
- Section 105 of the Malacca Administration of Islam 2002 Enactment;
- Section 117 of the Negeri Sembilan Administration of Islam Enactment 2003;
- Section 103 of the Pahang Administration of Islam 1991 Enactment;
- Section 106 of the Perak Administration of Islam 2004 Enactment;
- Section 117 of the of the Johor Administration of Islam 2003 Enactment; and
- Section 95 of the Federal Territory Administration of Islam 1993 Act.
They claimed that the state enactments had breached Article 12 (4) of the Federal Constitution, wherein 12 stipulates there should be no discrimination of a person based on religion, race, descent and place of birth; and sub section (4) stipulates that the religion of person under the age of 18 shall be decided by the parent or guardian.
In 2018, the Federal Court in the Indira Gandhi case defined the word parent under Article 12 (4) to include both parents’ permission is needed to determine the fate of their children’s conversion. (The Federal Court ruled that the word “parent” in Article 12 (4) means father and mother, and not father or mother.)
They plaintiffs claimed that the enactments leading to unilateral conversion of minors is unconstitutional, and has led to violation of their and every non-Muslim citizens rights in the country.
They further said that the civil court has jurisdiction to hear the matter pursuant to Article 121 of the Federal Constitution, wherein it has jurisdiction to review the actions of public authorities and interpretation of the relevant state and federal legislations, as well as the Constitution.
Indira Gandhi and the others further cited that Article 75 of the Constitution stipulates that if any state law is inconsistent with the federal law, the federal law shall prevail. They further allege that the state enactments are in breach of Article 12 (4) of the Constitution and hence, should be declared null and void.
A case management was held on Monday (March 20) before High Court senior assistant registrar Mohd Hafizul Awang.