Historical Legal Perspective

The Supreme Court's (SC) judgement in the case of Che Omar Che Soh v. PP (1988 - later referred to as Che Omar) is considered a landmark case concerning the interpretation of the status of Islam as enshrined in Article 3 of the Constitution of Malaysia. At the time, the SC was the highest court in the country's judicial system.

Certain figures from among academics, politicians and the legal fraternity have argued that this case laid to rest the question surrounding the law of the land, that is secular law. Any attempt to change this law is unconstitutional and therefore void.

Article 3(1) proclaims that "Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation". Some people interpret this Article wide enough to mean that ‘Islam' encompasses all aspects of human life, while some others narrowly construe it to refer only to certain aspects.

The counsel for Che Omar sought to prove the first interpretation, arguing that (i) since Islam does not provide any ‘qisas' or ‘hudud' punishment for the trafficking of dangerous drugs and firearms offences, and (ii) that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land; therefore (iii) a mandatory death sentence for those offences is against Islam, and therefore, unconstitutional and void.

The apex court then had to decide on the possible meaning relative to the term ‘Islam' in the said Article 3. If the meaning is confined only to acts related to rituals and ceremonies, then the argument does not hold any weight.

But if ‘Islam' is an all-embracing reality and constitutes a comprehensive system of life beyond the ritualistic or ceremonial aspects, to include jurisprudence and moral standards, then the argument raised by the counsel had wide implications in the sense that every law has to be tested according to that yardstick.

To make it clear, any legal provision that runs counter to the abovementioned second interpretation, if deemed correct, such a provision must be considered unconstitutional and void. To put it in legal language, any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with the Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.

In Che Omar, it was held that the term ‘Islam' in Article 3 meant such acts as relating to the ritual and ceremonial only. Salleh Abas L.P, leading the five-member bench observed that "If it had been otherwise, there would have been another provision in the Constitution which would have the effect that any law contrary to the injunction of Islam will be void. Far from making such [a] provision, Article 162, on the other hand, purposely preserves the continuity of secular law prior to the Constitution."

Not rejecting the fact that Islam is "a complete way of life covering all fields of human activities, ... private or public, legal, political, economic, social, cultural, moral or judicial", Salleh Abas however explained that this was not the meaning intended by the framers of the Constitution.

The learned judge concluded that the real intention of these framers was this: Islamic law was to be understood in an isolated manner, confined just to the law of marriage, divorce and inheritance only. He put the responsibility of relegating the scope of Islam, i.e. Islamic law to the British colonialists following their rule of the land.

I wish to disagree with his judgment. There was no sufficient evidence given by the learned judge to show that was truly and precisely the intention of those framers. Assuming that these legal experts knew the history of the country centuries prior to the coming of the British, they would not have said that the application of Islamic law was limited to personal and family matters only.

To collaborate the above, in the case of Ramah v. Laton (1926), the Court of Appeal, presided by two English judges, acknowledged and held that Islamic Law "is not foreign but local law, it is the law of the land". That statement would not have been made if the learned judges were ignorant of the history of this part of the world.

The late Prof. Ahmad Ibrahim, a well known legal figure, argued for decades that Islamic law is the fundamental law of the country. R.J. Wilkinson, an English historian of this Malay archipelago stated that there can be no doubt that Muslim law would have become the law of Malaya had not British law stepped in to check it.

Another point of contention in the judgment of Che Omar was the term ‘secular law' in the Court's expression that "Article 162, on the other hand, purposely preserves the continuity of secular law prior to the Constitution."

If one goes through all seven subsections of Article 162, one will discover that the actual term used is ‘existing law', not ‘secular law'. In fact, the term ‘secular' is not mentioned even once in the Constitution. It does not appear anywhere in the document. The learned Salleh Abas, therefore, was obviously mistaken.

The Article states, for example, that "... the existing law shall, ... , continue in force on and after Merdeka Day, ...". Now, what does this ‘existing law' mean?

Islamic law was one of the existing laws practiced before, during and after Independence, even before, during and after the British rule. Historical documents indicate that Islamic law was substantively applied in this country's legal system long before British occupation, and it has been applied not just for ritual and ceremonial purposes.

The Terengganu Inscription dating back to the 13^th century, and the Undang-undang Melaka in the 15^th century, for example, provided provisions concerning punishments for the crimes of adultery, liquor consumption and theft.

This reflects that Islamic law had gained firm legal footing for centuries. The judgement in the case of Ramah v Laton, the arguments presented by Ahmad Ibrahim, and the statement made by R.J. Wilkinson simply reaffirm this undeniable historical fact.

It is amazing to learn that certain segments of our society are utterly against the idea of recognizing and acknowledging Islamic law as the law of the land and of general applicability to all. Some have simply ignored the legal effects and influence of the judgement in the case of Ramah v. Laton, preferring to just highlight that of Che Omar.

The general public, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, are under the jaundiced perception that Islamic law is strictly meant for the Muslims. This is not the case in all situations as non-Muslims could also seek justice from the Syariah courts during the reign of various Muslim rulers. In the past, the non-Muslims were afforded the justice they sought on many occasions. If this has happened in history, it can still take place today as well as in the future.

Our esteemed Constitution, various other Acts of Parliament and state enactments, contribute to the confusion by categorically putting forth some legal restrictions concerning the application of Islamic law towards non-Muslims.

In reality, under certain circumstances, non-Muslims can and must be allowed to stand either as witnesses or even parties to certain litigations. In this way, I believe, the misunderstanding and prejudices concerning Islam in general, and Islamic law and the Syariah courts in particular, may be controlled and gradually reduced, if not eliminated.

By Dr. Wan Azhar bin Wan Ahmad
(Fellow Kanan)
The Star, 17 March 2009

Hari Kraf Kebangsaan 19 Mac 2009

Sempena 'Bulan Jualan Mega Negara', Kompleks Kraf Kuala Lumpur mengadakan pameran dan jualan pelbagai kraftangan tempatan. Jangan lepaskan peluang berkunjung ke sana untuk mendapatkan keris, wau, ukiran kayu, pelbagai hasil pertukangan dll.

Kompleks Kraf Kuala Lumpur
Seksyen 63, Jalan Conlay,
50450 Kuala Lumpur.19 Mac 2009 pukul 10.00 pagi

Sila telefon 03-21627459 untuk keterangan lanjut. Hayatilah keindahan barangan kraf dan hiasi kediaman anda dengan sesuatu yang unik dan menakjubkan!!Jangan lupa catatkan dalam diari kita...

Masanya telah tiba - Bangunlah Engkau

Keris - Engkau lambang Melayu sejagat

Atas keinsafan, kesedaran dan tanggungjawab, dunia persilatan wajib dibela kerana ia melambangkan maruah dan martabat bangsa dan negara. Ia memainkan peranan sebagai penyambung perjuangan amanah budaya nenek moyang agar bangsa terus dihurmati. Seni silat adalah bagai tiang seri sebuah rumah Melayu. Ia berdiri penegap payung untuk sebuah balai. Berdiri seorang wira Melayu lengkap berpakaian dan bersenjata, menceritakan asal-usul dan niat. Tangan mengangkat sebelum langkah dibawa untuk menunjuk gerak. Semua bercerita hingga nafas ditudung.

Tidak ramai guru guru silat dapat bertahan, hingga lenyap gerak gerak jurus lama. Namun selagi ungkapan Takkan Melayu Hilang Di Dunia terus bergema, langkah pejuang, gerak penerus dan bunga luahan menyampai rasa hati, perlu terus dipelihara. Niatkan bersilat kerana riadah dan memelihara hak warisan.
Dan tidak lengkap seri pakaian didalam dunia persilatan tanpa dihias dengan budaya perkerisannya. Menangani keris harus lengkap dengan tata karma dan adat peradapannya.

Keris yang asalnya dari perkataan kekeratan "Ke" dan "aris" yang bermakna tenang, lambat atau halus adalah kelompok senjata tikam yang merupakan lambang kekuatan para hulubalang Melayu serta kerajaan-kerajaan purbakala di zaman dahulu. Kini ianya menjadi lambang kebangaan orang-orang Melayu serta kepulauan sekitarnya. Jika diteliti sejarah purbakala, terdapat unsur-unsur alam semulajadi seperti tanah, batu, pasir, tembaga besi, emas, perak, berlian, batu permata serta batu delima yang menghiasi serta memperkukuhkan bentuk keris. Senjata diakhir akhir ini di cipta dengan begitu ringkas dan mudah dengan menggunakanl alat-alat tertentu. Sebagai perbandingan kita dapati seni pertukangan senjata dahulu terutamanya keris dihasilkan melalui tangan-tangan manusia serta unsur-unsur tradisional lain dengan penuh ketelitian ritual dan peradaban.

Mereka ini dikenali sebagai Empu yang menjalankan aktiviti pertukangan keris ini di dalam lingkungan istana. Jelas, ianya merupakan suatu kerjaya yang dikagumi suatu masa dahulu. Keris-keris ini kemudiannya disepuh dengan pelbagai air yang didapati dari unsur-unsur semulajadi yang suci seperti air hujan, air yang tersimpan di masjid dan air dari tujuh kuala. Upacara sepuhan ini juga dilakukan pada hari-hari yang yang terpilih.
Tidak hairanlah, unsur-unsur suci ini menjadikan senjata keris sebagai alat persenjataan yang di muliakan, semangat yang kuat, peribadi yang tinggi...

Petikan khas drp laman - www.silat.tv (dibawah PERGURUAN SENI SILAT SENDENG HAJI HAMID UK)

Marilah kita sama-sama miliki sebilah keris untuk sebuah rumah (satu rumah, satu keris) sebagai tanda adat budaya Melayu dan tanda kenangan turun temurun kita - Rajamenangis

Darihal Susur Galur

Kami di RajaMenangis sangatlah bertuah kerana telah dirujuk dalam beberapa kemusykilan berkaitan dengan susur-galur, salasilah, hak adat, hak takhta dan sebagainya (Di Kepulauan Melayu serantau), yang mana butirannya telah diminta dirahsiakan. Kami menghormati kepercayaan terhadap peranan kami yang tidak memihak kepada sesiapa, sepanjang kajian dan siasatan yang kami usahakan.


Pengalaman ini bukan sahaja tertakluk kepada sejarah, tetapi kepada
- fakta salasilah
- bukti lisan
- ulasan orang-orang yang berkaitan
- bukti sejarah
- bukti adat
- bukti amalan orang tua-tua
- bukti kepercayaan orang Melayu
- bukti barang kebesaran, dan alat warisan
- undang-undang sivil dan adat

Dimana Undang-Undang Inggeris tiada dapat menetapkan antara hak dan batil, dan mendalami rasa-hak seseorang yang mengalir dalamnya aura daulat, maka disitulah RajaMenangis menunggu...