IKIM denies proposal to penalize non-Muslims for Khalwat

Posted on April 3, 2008
Filed Under Religious-Ethnic Relations |

Below is a statement issued by the Director General of IKM in response to news reports about the “proposal” to penalize non-Muslims caught in khalwat with a Muslim. I had earlier written a blog entry, also responding to the news on the proposal based on news in The Star and Malaysiakini.

I would like to refer to the article on page 3 in the Tuesday, April 3 2008 edition of The STAR in which the headlines read “Proposal to prosecute non-Muslims for khalwat”. I feel it incumbent to clarify certain matters highlighted in the aforementioned article, the contents of which are contentious to say the least.

First of all, IKIM’s objectives for the 2 day seminar held in collaboration with the Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia (JKSM) was intended to review existing syariah laws to see if there were any laws that were redundant and also to propose a solution to some of the issues currently plaguing the syariah judiciary system in Malaysia.

The article in the STAR which reports that the seminar had proposed that non-Muslims caught committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly but in the civil courts, is entirely erroneous. No such proposal was made, and therefore if what is reported in the Star as being comments allegedly made by Syariah Court of Appeal Judge, are also in error.

Conversely, it is our opinion that non-Muslims cannot fundamentally be charged under any provision in Islamic law by virtue of the fact that they do not profess the religion of Islam. In addition, to my knowledge, there is no such provision in the civil courts to charge a person for khalwat, and therefore it would be premature to assume that non-Muslims can also be subjected to the charge of khalwat in the civil courts.

I am disappointed with the article highlighting comments allegedly made by Datuk Mohd. Asri Abdullah which emphasized the banal, when in reality the more important substantive proposals having to do with laws protecting the rights of divorced women and their rights to maintenance, were ignored.

Towards the end of the article, it also alleges that there was a proposal calling “for the establishment of a rehabilitation center for those convicted of offences related to morals and faith such as prostitution and effeminate men”. To my knowledge, I have never interpreted being effeminate as an offence. But more importantly this so called proposal as reflected in the article is not representative of the proposals made during the seminar at IKIM. If indeed the learned Syariah Court of Appeal Judge made those statements, we strongly advise that it would behoove the learned Judge to be more circumspect in future.

What do you think? Is this guy telling the truth or is he trying to cover his ass especially in view of such negative reactions from non-Muslim groups?

How about sharing with the public the proposals that were tabled at that Seminar so that we can see for ourselves whether or not the ‘proposal’ to penalize non-Muslims for khalwat was ever made?

Eh?

Sphere: Related Content

Comments

7 Responses to “IKIM denies proposal to penalize non-Muslims for Khalwat”

  1. Nyna's Hus on April 3rd, 2008 10:29 pm

    Puteri,

    Why dont you try taking this denial in a positive mood rather than spin in again to give the impression than Muslim as a bad society? At the end of the day, the mainstream newspaper has always trying to get something by sensanalising issues to show that non Muslim support to PKR, PAS etc in the last election will eat them at the end of the day and issue like this is like pisang goreng panas! All issues can sure be solved, now we have some basic foundation for Malay, Chinese, India etc and Muslim-NonMuslim that we all can form a goverment together peacefull, this is still in infancy state, give them a chance. To this IKIM guy, give him benefit of the doubt.

    I also think, the Wilder’s movie is also used by UMNO to get back Malay support and make Malay Muslim to think again of their support to non-muslim (DAP, PKR non muslim candidate). For me as a Muslim, Wilder hits me nothing and the movie is so funny. I am not religious myself but at least I know the phrase he quoted can not be intepretated on its own, every single phrase from Quran is linked to each other and Wilder did not consider this linkage. You can interpret anything, good or bad, if you take a sentence on its own but it you consider the whole Surah or Zujuk of AlQuran, they you know the whole meaning.

    Sorry i dont agree with your comment this time. But I agree that you try get the detail abt the workshop and put it for everyone view.

    Thank you.

    [reply this comment]

    Puteri reply on April 3, 2008:

    I would like to be positive with this denial but the person who told the media about the proposal was there at the seminar himself. So who is telling the truth?

    I don’t think this issue has anything to do with non-Muslim support of the opposition, because after all the people who made the proposal (if true) are those allied with the BN government.

    Actually, I was quite encouraged today after reading AB Sulaiman’s opinion on Malaysiakini, as well as Wan Saiful Wan Jan’s. These are Malay Muslims and they do not advocate an Islamic government. I was thinking that there should be more people like them in Malaysia, then issues like khalwat with non-Muslims etc would never arise. Let the practise of your faith be a private matter between you and your God. If we want to promote good values, let those values be universal ones, that most religions espouse.

    As for the verses in the Koran quoted by Wilders, why blame Wilders? The people who committed those evil deeds used those verses that Wilders quoted to back their deeds . If anyone is quoting the Koran out of context then they should be the ones. Should Wilders be blamed for highlighting that fact? Listen to the cleric in the video. You can’t say he doesn’t know his Koran! And yet there he was with his sword screaming for the blood of the Jews and shouting Allahu Akbar with roars of approval from the people in the mosque!

    When non-Muslims see scenes like this, and all the threats against them, why should non-Muslims not be afraid?

    I’m not saying all Muslims are like that, but it doesn’t take many radical Muslims to cause a lot of damage.

    Thanks for visiting my blog and taking the time to comment.

  2. Nyna's Hus on April 4th, 2008 1:11 am

    Puteri,

    My pleasure visiting your blog, different opinion is good to stimulate our thinking, no offend please. I enjoy reading your article etc.

    Yes, it doesnt take many radical Muslims to cause a lot of damage but it also doesnt take a lot of people like Wilders to cause a lot of damage to many good Muslims.

    [reply this comment]

    Puteri reply on April 4, 2008:

    Nyna,

    Thanks again for your visit and comments. No, I am not offended in any way. I prefer clarity and debates and discussions bring that about. I don’t expect everyone to have the same opinion on everything.

    Geert Wilders is only exercising his right to free speech, a very treasured fundamental right in the West, and I cannot agree with those who say that free speech doesn’t mean the right to offend. To be or not to be offended is a personal decision. Take yourself for example, you did not feel as if you had to be offended by the film. And I know you are not the only one.

    A blog that I enjoy reading is danielpipes.org, and there you can find vigorous debates between Muslims and non-Muslims. Sure there are name callings but the point is, there are those who are willing to defend their beliefs, rightly or wrongly. I enjoy that.

  3. Ruhayat on April 6th, 2008 11:54 am

    1. Have you read what Daniel Pipes (and his supporters) have said and continues to say about Islam and what should be done to the Muslims? They are quite fundamentalist and authoritarian. And yet you abhor the (alleged) statement being made by the Syariah court judge. Weird.

    2. The “debates” instigated by Pipes’ bigoted and racist writings have been raging on his site for years without any sign of reconciliation, nor proof of progress ever been made. Each side is still vociferously sticking to its own bigoted views about the other. I fail to see what makes that enjoyable or even encouraging.

    If you want debates that move towards some kind of understanding or acceptance, then I suggest Daniel Pipes is the wrong kind of hero to look up to. But that’s just me.

    [reply this comment]

    Puteri reply on April 6, 2008:

    Funny you should mention Daniel Pipes! I find his blog quite instructive especially the rigorous debates that go on between the Muslim and non-Muslim readers. Why shouldn’t I enjoy reading the debates? People should be encouraged to defend their beliefs, rightly or wrongly. In Malaysia, debating religion, especially Islam, is too “sensitive”. Nobody is allowed to question Islam. But with the arrival of blogs, people are not that hesitant to question about Islam and the activities of the Islamists.

    In Indonesia, public debates between Muslims are Christians are not uncommon. In Malaysia? Too sensitive, sorry la.

    Daniel Pipes lives in a country that values freedom of speech, and he has the right to say what he wants. He is not a lawmaker and as such what he has to say is not going to affect any Muslim, except their thin skin and sensibilities. Whereas the syariah court judge is saying that there is a proposal to penalize non-Muslims caught in khalwat with a Muslim. The judge is not a lawmaker, but his rulings on cases can become precedents and as such become law.

    What non-Muslim worth his/her salt would not object to being penalized for being caught in khalwat with a Muslim?!

    There can only be understanding and acceptance when religion becomes a private matter, where nobody is trying to impose his or her brand of morality and religious beliefs on others, and anyone is free to choose his or her own religion and leave that religion without fear of death threats.

    douglas210 reply on April 8, 2008:

    Ruhayat,

    From your comments I see that you have never read or even looked at Daniel Pipe’s website. Dr. Pipes spent many years among the Arab people, learning their language and culture because he loves them as a people.

    A favorite saying of Dr. Pipes is, “Radical Islam is the problem, moderate Islam is the answer”. He is trying to get people to think and determine for themselves how to bring their culture into the 21st century instead of idealizing a distant and barbaric past.

    There is a campaign by Islamist radicals to smear Dr. Pipes as a “racist” (though I wonder how religion can be confused with race) and keep people from listening to what he has to say. Just because they say he is a bigot doesn’t mean he is one. Think (and read) for yourself. I wish more Muslims would.

    Cordially,

    Douglas ;-)

Leave a Reply




ss_blog_claim=1f23ed337eb47d3b7efe10d79a6b8238