Federal Court Verdict in Indira Gandhi Case: Implication and Solution

(Keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan dalam Kes Indira Gandhi: Implikasi Dan Solusi)

  • Mohammad Hariz Shah Mohammad Hazim Shah Jabatan Syariah dan Undang-undang, Akademi Pengajian Islam, Universiti Malaya
  • Ahmad Hidayat Buang Jabatan Syariah dan Undang-undang, Akademi Pengajian Islam, Universiti Malaya

Abstract

This article discusses the verdict of the Indira Gandhi case at the Federal Court and the jurisdictional conflict vis-à-vis Civil and Sharia Courts in matters pertaining to the dissolution of marriage in Section 51 of Act 164 and the determination of the religion of a child. This article aims to find a solution in the event of legal disputes between the aforementioned courts. The methods used in this study are library research and comparative analysis. Comparisons between the Subashini, Fatimah Tan and Nyonya Tahir cases are made, as well as comparisons regarding the definition of the term "parent" in the Federal Constitution and the Act/Enactments of the Administration of Islamic Law. Recent developments of Section 51 of Act 164 are also discussed. The finding indicates that the word "parent" has various meanings. The outcome of this study suggests that this case might imply a "binding precedent" in determining the religion of a child in the future, thus putting the Sharia Court's jurisdiction of judicial review in question.


Keywords: Administration of Islamic Law, jurisdictional conflict, Ahmad Ibrahim, Section 51, Act 1964

References

Abdul Monir Yaacob. (2016). Mahkamah Syariah. Abdul Monir Yaacob (Ed.), Perkembangan pentadbiran undang-undang Islam di Malaysia. (hlm. 244-245). Universiti Islam Malaysia.

Ahmad Hidayat Buang. (2018). Apa yang tinggal lagi kepada mahkamah syariah: Ulasan Kes Indira Gandhi A.P. Mutho V. Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Perak & Ors and Other Appeals [2018] 1 MLJ 545. Journal of Shariah Law Research,3(2), 235-240.

Ahmad Ibrahim. (1989). The amendment of Article 121 of the Federal Constitution: Its effect on Administration of Islamic Law dlm. 2 MLJ xvii.

Ahmad Ibrahim & Ahilemah Joned. (1992). Sistem Undang-undang di Malaysia. (hlm. 116). Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Ahmad Mohamed Ibrahim. (1997) Ke arah Islamisasi undang-undang di Malaysia Ahmad Mohamed Ibrahim (Ed.), Pentadbiran undang-undang Islam di Malaysia. (hlm. 53). Institut Kefahaman Islam Malaysia (IKIM).

Akta Membaharui Undang-undang (Perkahwinan dan Perceraian) 1976

Akta Pentadbiran Undang-undang Islam (Wilayah-wilayah Persekutuan) 1993

Arahan Amalan

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Perlis) 2006

Enakmen Pentadbiran Undang-undang Islam (Kedah Darul Aman) 2008

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Negeri Pulau Pinang) 2004

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Perak) 2004

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Negeri Selangor) 2003

Enakmen Pentadbiran Undang-undang Islam (Pahang) 1991

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Negeri Sembilan) 2003

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Negeri Melaka) 2002

Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Negeri Johor) 2003

Enakmen Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Istiadat Melayu Kelantan 1994

Enakmen Pentadbiran Hal Ehwal Agama Islam (Terengganu) 2001

Enakmen Pentadbiran Undang-undang Islam (Sabah) 1992

Farid Sufian Shuaib. (21-22 Ogos 2007). Ahmad Ibrahim dan pemantapan mahkamah syariah pasca merdeka. Kertas Kerja Prosiding Seminar Ahmad Ibrahim: Pemikiran dan Sumbangan Ilmiah. (hlm. 440). Hilton Petaling Jaya.

Farid Sufian Shuaib. (2010). Jurisdictional conflict dlm. Farid Sufian Shuaib, Tajul Aris Ahmad Bustami & Mohd Hisham Mohd Kamal (Eds.), Administration of Islamic law in Malaysia: Text and material. (hlm. 172). Edisi Kedua. LexisNexis Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.

Farid Sufian Shuaib. (2003). Jurisdiction over non-Muslims and artificial persons. Farid Sufian Shuaib (Ed.), Powers and jurisdiction of Syariah Courts in Malaysia. Malayan Law Journal, 86-87.

Indira Gandhi a/p Mutho v Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Perak & Ors and other appeals [2018] 1 MLJ 545

Kementerian Dalam Negeri. (26 Ogos 2016). Pindaan akta membaharui Undang-Undang (Perkahwinan Dan Perceraian) 1976 [Akta 164]. Diakses pada 13 Mac 2019 daripada http://www.moha.gov.my/index.php/ms/kenyataan-media-kdn/2916-pindaan-akta-membaharui-undang-undang-perkahwinan-dan-perceraian-1976-akta-164

Lim, W. J., & Abraham, A. T. H. (2018). Indira Gandhi a/p Mutho v Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Perak & Ors and other appeals [2018] 1 MLJ 545 - From conflict of jurisdictions to reaffirmation of constitutional supremacy. Journal of Malaysian and Comparative Law, 45 (1), 74.

Majlis Agama Islam Pulau Pinang lwn. Siti Fatimah Tan binti Abdullah [2009] 27/2 JH 185

Mohamed Azam, M. A. Pindaan Akta Memperbaharui Undang-undang (Perkahwinan dan Perceraian) 1976 (Akta 164) (Pindaan 2017) dan implikasinya terhadap bidang kuasa mahkamah syariah. Diambil daripada https://iais.org.my/attach/2017/29AUG2017/DrMohamedAzam.pdf. pada 11 September 2020.

Mohamed Azam, Mohamed Adil. (2018). Kemelut hak jagaan anak pasangan berlainan agama. Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil (Ed.). Pelaksanaan undang-undang Islam di Malaysia: Khayalan Atau Realiti? (hlm. 149). ILHAM Books.

Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil. (2017). Perkara 121(1A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan bidang kuasa Mahkamah Syariah di Malaysia: Isu dan cabaran. Abdul Monir Yaacob & Nurul 'Uyun Haji Zainal (Eds.), Artikel 121(1A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan: Sejauh manakah artikel ini menyelesaikan konflik antara mahkamah syariah dengan mahkamah sivil. (hlm. 189). Universiti Islam Malaysia.

Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil. (2018). Pindaan Akta 164 (2017) dan implikasinya terhadap bidang kuasa Mahkamah Syariah. Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil (Ed.), Pelaksanaan undang-undang Islam di Malaysia: Khayalan atau realiti? (hlm. 162). ILHAM Books.

Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil. & Rafeah, S. (2014). Penentuan agama dan hak penjagaan kanak-kanak menurut undang-undang Islam. (hlm. 21). Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (JAKIM)..

Najibah Mohd Zin. (2017). Conflict of jurisdiction between Civil and Shariah Court; Dichotamy and harmonisation. Abdul Monir Yaacob & Nurul 'Uyun Haji Zainal (Eds.), Artikel 121(1A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan: Sejauh manakah artikel ini menyelesaikan konflik antara Mahkamah Syariah dengan Mahkamah Sivil. (hlm. 65). Universiti Islam Malaysia.

Najibah Mohd Zin. ( 2007). Undang-undang keluarga (Islam). Jilid 14. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, hlm. 146.

Nedunchelian V Uthiradam v Nurshafiqah Mah Singai Annal & Ors [2005] 2 CLJ 306

Ordinan Majlis Islam Sarawak 2001

Perlembagaan Persekutuan

Permohonan Perisytiharan Status Agama Si Mati Nyonya binti Tahir. Permohonan Ex-Parte Majlis Agama Islam Negeri Sembilan Dan 2 Yang Lain (2006) 21/2 JH 221

Rafeah Saidon. (2018). Disputes Upon Conversion of One Spouse in a Civil Marriage to Islam: Issues on the Right of Custody in Malaysia. Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil & Mohammad Hashim Kamali (Eds.), Islamic Law in Malaysia: Issues, Developments and Challenges. The Malaysian Current Law Journal Sdn. Bhd., hlm. 181.

Shaad Saleem Faruqi, Reconciling Conflicting Interests dlm. The Star, 9 Januari 2008.

Subashini a/p Rajasingam v Saravanan a/l Thangathoray and other appeals [2008] 2 MLJ 147

Suwaid Tapah. (2008). Penulisan Teks Penghakiman Kes-kes Mal di Mahkamah Syariah. Ruzman Md. Noor (Ed.), Penulisan teks penghakiman di mahkamah syariah. Penerbit Universiti Malaya, hlm. 48.

Tamir Moustafa. (2013). Liberal Rights versus Islamic Law? The Construction of a Binary in Malaysian Politics. Law & Society Review, 47(4), 779.

Teoh Eng Huat lwn Kadhi Pasir Mas & Anor [1990] 2 MLJ 300

Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar & Nurhidayah Muhd Hashim. (2009). Kedudukan Kebajikan dan Hak Anak Bukan Islam Apabila Ibu atau Bapa Memeluk Islam: Pendekatan Perundangan Syariah dan Perlembagaan Malaysia. Shariah Law Reports, 3, 17.
Published
2021-07-05
How to Cite
MOHAMMAD HAZIM SHAH, Mohammad Hariz Shah; BUANG, Ahmad Hidayat. Federal Court Verdict in Indira Gandhi Case: Implication and Solution. Kanun: Jurnal Undang-undang Malaysia, [S.l.], v. 33, n. 2, p. 329-348, july 2021. ISSN 2682-8057. Available at: <http://jurnal.dbp.my/index.php/Kanun/article/view/8103>. Date accessed: 24 oct. 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.37052/kanun.33(2)no7.