PETALING JAYA: The Federal Constitution’s supremacy must be defended, and any attempt to replace it with another legal framework in the name of expanding syariah law must be rejected, say advocates of moderation.
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia chairman Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Yunus said it is inaccurate to describe current Malaysian laws as “colonial-era” laws.
“Since Independence, our Parliament and state legislatures have amended these laws to keep pace with our political, social and economic development, so they are now ‘Malaysian’ laws.
“To remove the current laws and replace them with syariah law is impractical, as it would entail overhauling the existing legal system, which the majority of citizens are already content with.
“Doing so would also be contrary to the philosophy that underlies our Constitution and against the intention of our forefathers who fought for our Independence and envisaged Malaysia as a secular nation,” Mohd Hishamudin said, citing the 1957 Constitutional Proposals, which stated that recognising Islam as the religion of the Federation would not affect Malaya’s position as a secular state.
Former Council of Churches Malaysia general secretary Rev Dr Hermen Shastri said syariah law already has its constitutionally defined place within Malaysia’s legal system and should not be used to undermine other laws.
“Syariah operates within the constitutional framework of Malaysia; it does not stand above the Constitution.
“If constitutional laws are to be changed, they must be changed through the constitutional process – not by declaring one political interpretation of religious law superior to the nation’s supreme law.”
He said instead of seeking to replace one legal system with another, Malaysia must continue to preserve a constitutional order in which Islam is respected.
The comments came after PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang called for the abolition of several current laws he described as “colonial-era” laws, arguing that they obstruct the unfettered implementation of syariah law.
Former MP Tawfik Ismail described Hadi’s call as presumptuous, saying it encroached on a role belonging to the Malay Rulers in matters concerning Islam.
“Just because his party carries the name of Islam, it does not confer upon it the right to speak for all Muslims in the country.
“By not explaining why replacing his presumed ‘colonial-era’ laws with syariah law is necessary for all Malaysians, Hadi is doing Islam a disservice and increasing Islamophobia,” he said.
Advocate Anas Zubedy said Hadi can only seek changes through Malaysia’s established constitutional processes.
“The very constitutional system that Hadi considers inadequate is also the system that gives him the legitimate pathway to achieve the changes he seeks.
“Our Constitution is akin to a hybrid one that has been carefully developed around the realities of Malaysia since Independence, and will continue to evolve to accommodate civil law, Islamic law and indigenous customary laws,” he said.
Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism deputy president Sardar Jagir Singh said placing Islam above the Federal Constitution would not only undermine Malaysia’s founding principles but also tear apart the country’s core values.
“We must remember that our constitutional laws are not colonial laws but a Constitution agreed to by Malaysians represented by Umno, MCA and MIC, along with key compromises and moderation.
“Hadi’s statement that Islam should be above the Constitution goes against the founding principles of Independence, tears at the basic structure of the Constitution, and is clearly unconstitutional.”
