THE Federal Court today ruled that the unilateral conversion of M. Indira Gandhi’s three children to Islam is null and void.

The apex court’s five-man bench, comprising Court of Appeal president Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum, Zainun Ali, Abu Samah Nordin and Ramly Ali, delivered the landmark judgment. 

Zainun, who read out a summary of the judgment, said the conversion will also need the consent of both parents.

“Consent of both parents must be sought. The article should not be construed literally… (It) requires the consent of both parents.

“The constitutional word ‘parent’ is a case of being lost in translation, both parents have equal rights.”

Judge Zainun said the bench’s unanimous decision addressed the issue of whether the civil High Court had exclusive jurisdiction to review the Registrar of Muallaf (Muslim converts) and held that it did. 

The Registrar is a statutory body with powers set out under the Administration of the Religion of Islam (Perak) Enactment 2004.

“After having discussed the structure of the constitution, it is evident that the two courts (shariah and civil) operate on different footing altogether. 

“Power to review rests solely with the civil courts. Jurisdiction to review actions of public authorities lies solely with civil courts,” she said.

Zainun said the appellant, being non-Muslim and unable to appear in the Shariah Court, was not able to have her application heard.

“In conclusion, the High Court has the jurisdiction. The children were not present (at their conversion) and the conditions were not fulfilled. So the Registrar (of Muallaf) has no power. 

“The conclusion is both parents must give consent before conversion can be issued (and) the Registrar of Muallaf has no jurisdiction to issue certificates of conversion. Conversion is void and must be aside,” she said.

Judges not swayed by own religion

Zainun read from a summary of the judges’ decision as the full written judgement is 99 pages long.

“The issue of religious conversion is a controversial issue, where the discussion is in the public domain.

“We would like to state here, as judges, we are not swayed by our own religious sentiment. We judges cannot help being Malay, Chinese or Indian. (We have) tried not to be identified with any particular religion,” she said.

Today’s apex court ruling overturned an appellate court 2-1 majority decision on December 30, 2015, to reinstate the conversion certificates of her three children, which had been nullified by the Ipoh High Court.

The appellate court had ruled that the civil high court did not have jurisdiction to decide on the validity of the children’s conversion, which it said came under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Shariah Court.

The children, two girls and a boy now aged 20, 19 and 9, were converted to Islam by their father, Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, 47, formerly known as K. Pathmanathan, in April 2009 without Indira’s consent, following Riduan’s conversion to Islam.

The children were then aged 12 and 11 years, and 11 months.

In an immediate reaction, Indira’s lawyer M. Kulasegaran said the landmark decision had given a firm ruling that civil courts can hear matters when wrong decisions are made by the Shariah Court. 

“This is for a lot of people whose conversions have taken place wrongly, to come to the civil court to have it done. 

“The most important is the parent. But now it must be (both) the father and mother. 

“Justice Lee Soon Seng had said many years ago in Ipoh that the consent of boths parents was needed for a conversion. 

“For nine years we went through this. This is the ultimate decision that was given today,”

Kulasegaran, who is also Ipoh Barat MP, took Parliament to task for not having “the backbone” to introduce the promised legislation to give both parents the right to decide a child’s conversion

“Today, surprisingly, the Federal Court has made the decision which the elected representatives of this country failed (to do),” he said. 

He was referring to Putrajaya’s move to withdraw a bill to amend the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act last August, after years of lobbying by civil society.

The bill contained an amendment requiring the marriage where a spouse had converted, to be dissolved in a civil court.

Another amendment that was deemed controversial requiring the child to remain in “the religion of the parties to the marriage prior to the conversion” was not included. – January 29, 2018.