SOME of the most distressing stories of rights violations in Malaysia often happen right under our noses.

It never ceases to infuriate me as to how these events have come to be normalised and accepted with little grievance or resistance.

Take the issue of unilateral conversion, where a mother was separated from her children because of a difference of religion. Malaysia has largely failed women of such a plight miserably.

Even when there was a change in government in 2018, a paradigm shift did not occur in people’s minds, so issues and public policies involving race or religion were still deemed untouchable and beyond any reasonable debate.

This is also perhaps why aside from a vociferous minority rights activists and ethnic Indians, who are mostly victims of unilateral conversion, the public is largely silent.

Islam is weaved into our social and political discourse, which often becomes heated, controversial and might even lead to electoral disaster for political parties.

It is also not helped by the rise of Perikatan Nasional (PN) government, a coalition promoting Malay-Muslim unity, which has also further propelled the role of Islam in our society.

Yet, it is worth emphasising again that we have successfully argued against unilateral conversion – at least in our courts of law – and it is largely due to the persistence and tenacity of M. Indira Gandhi wanting to be reunited with her daughter.

In 2018, the apex court ruled that the unilateral conversion of Indira’s children was indeed unlawful, and that consent of both parents is needed for any religious conversion.

However, even judicial victories in Malaysia are sometimes not enough to defend Malaysians’ civic and political rights.

A ruling from the highest court does not necessarily mean that it would be enforced by the government.

Notwithstanding the landmark ruling and court order to return Indira’s daughter to her custody, the government has since failed to honour its obligations.

Even a civil lawsuit brought by Indira in 2020 against the police and the government has not been enough to shame them into action.

Bizarrely, the government appealed the suit in August 2021 – which could only mean forcing Indira and her family into another round of court battles – without concrete action by the government to help reunite the family.

Meanwhile, from Muda’s registration to the recent case of citizenship rights of children from foreign spouses, there is a changing dynamic where the courts are more active in exercising judicial discretion to either protect or even expand civic and political rights of Malaysians.

However, as I have mentioned previously, judicial victories from a human rights point of view could only be fully realised if the government is ready to enforce these rulings, rather than seeking to appeal to a higher court or simply feigning ignorance.

The scandal of unilateral conversion in Malaysia this week produced another victim with three children: Loh Siew Hong.

In fact, Loh’s grievance is not dissimilar to the tragedy that had befallen Indira, which would lead you to wonder whether Indira’s landmark court victory had changed anything at all.

Mother of twin daughters and a son, Loh has not seen her children for three years, despite winning sole custody of them last year.

It was only after numerous police reports and legal assistance that she was told that her three children were in the care of Perlis Social Welfare Department after being unilaterally converted to Islam in July 2020.

It is undoubtedly clear that Loh’s consent was not sought, which contravenes the Indira ruling.

That is why Perlis Mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin’s statement, when he defended the actions of Perlis Islamic department, should be challenged and rebutted.

Although it is true that the recently passed Perlis Islamic enactment allows for unilateral conversion, the law should be reviewed at the very least because of the Indira ruling.

The fact that the three children were dragged from Penang to Perlis reflects the authorities’ exploitation of the Perlis’ Islamic enactment.

That said, the whole practice of unilateral conversion should be challenged because there is still the controversy of whether the conversion can be decided by only one parent, both parents or perhaps allow for the child to decide.

At the end of the day, religion should be a private matter between God and the believer.  

The family was reunited, albeit briefly as the three children are still in the custody of Perlis Social Welfare Department

All eyes are now trained on the habeas corpus application, due to be heard tomorrow, that Loh has filed on the grounds that the children were taken away from her illegally.

However, the fact that a habeas corpus application is needed, despite a court ruling that the mother already has sole custody of her children, tells us how Malaysia has failed to uphold the most basic of family values.

Due to unilateral conversion, Loh is still not able to take care of her children after having ‘lost’ them for the past three years. – February 20, 2022.

* Kenneth Cheng has always been interested in the interplay between human rights and government but more importantly he is a father of two cats, Tangyuan and Toufu. When he is not attending to his feline matters, he is most likely reading books about politics and human rights or playing video games. He is a firm believer in the dictum “power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will”.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.