Why the Court of Appeal judgement is wrong in law? Please refer to the picture of the photoshot of the judgement. This is one of the ground of judgement. Please note there are a few arguments on unconstitutionality and this is one of them. In this ground of judgement the court stated that section 66 of the State Islamic law is unconstitutional. The court stated that its against equality of the law afforded under article 8(1) of our constitution. Article 8(1) states: 8. (1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to theequal protection of the law. The court stated that the section 66 is unconstitutional because it is discriminatory and oppressive, and denied the appellants equal protection against the law. But this smacks against the reading of the whole article 8 (5). Article 8(5) states that: this Article [8] does not invalidate or prohibit— (a) any provision regulating personal law; This definition of personal law must be given the ordinary meaning of the word. It should not refer to Islamic Law only. It should refer to personal law of every Malaysians. Thus if certain sects of Christianity believes that the priest or deacons can only be male or the hindu priest be from a certain caste, this discrimination is permitted under our constitution. It therefore means that under personal laws it can discriminate. section 66 is part of the personal laws of the Muslims. But why does our constitution allow this? Because its part of our compromise. Let each religion resolves these issues themselves. Its not the parliament and judges to determine this. This is a fundamental concept of our constitution. Thats why its different from India or US for that matter. They dont have this exception.
Posted on: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 00:35:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015