Friday, September 27, 2019

Appeal Court judge insulted Islam and Sultan

There was a decision made by the Court of Appeal yesterday against Selangor religious authorities in relation to the publication of Irshad Manji's book published by a company owned by Dato Zaid Ibrahim's son.

The Court of Appeal judge Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, who chaired a three member bench with other members, Hasnah Mohamed Hashim and Suraya Othman uttered an insulting words against Islam and indirectly, state sovereign, the Sultan of Selangor.

The report by FMT mentioned:
"The appeal is allowed in part,” Umi said, adding that the conduct of the state religious authorities would lead to the “law of jungle and rule by ulama”.
According to lawyers contacted, Judges have the discretion to make any comments in court. However, are they not bound by any form of ethical code for judges, or the least, decent common courtesy in their conduct in court?

Ulama is an integral part in Islamic practises, jurisprudence and spiritual guidance. To associate law of jungle with rule by ulama is an insult to Islam and disrespectful of the religion of the Federation as stated under Article 3 of the Federal Constitution.

The Malay rulers are constitutionally accorded the position as protector of Islam and Islamic institutions falls under the jurisdiction of the sovereign/ Judge Umi remark is considered as disrespectful of the Islamic authority of the Malay rulers..

Apparently, Umi is known among her contemporaries as half Chinese, "liberal" in her outlook, and indifference in the practises of the religion she claim to profess. However, her disoriented inclination does not give her the right to be rude and devoid of any common courtesy.

Before common law existed or any written documentation to govern any community of men, it was religion that guided law and order and its canonisation later develop communnities into state and subsequently civilisation.

Islam built civilisation with ulama and syariah law played a role in its development. It is something common law on its own are unable to do.

For someone late in her age, Umi's ignorance of history and prejudice against religion, particularly Islam is openly displayed. 

Umi's remark against Selangor religious authorities, which comes under jurisdiction of the sovereign, may be construed as being directed at the institution instead of the individuals, thus is considered a direct insult against the Sultan of Selangor.

If she care to recall, her appointment as judges came from the sovereign.

Her judgement is still not final and could be appealed further to the Federal Court. She does not have the final say on the matter and the legal discourse on her judgement will unravel the mistakes she made.

Such comment smarks of arrogance.

Maybe Umi need be remembered that Islamic aqeedah require one to believe in the after life. If she still has any inkling of belief in Islam or even other revealed religion, life on earth is temporal and merely a transition but it determine one's fate in the after life.

Her power as judge is indeed temporary and has no significance in that life after death.


Anonymous said...

ABITWall your comment may consider to be argued as contempt of court considering you question her judgement. Is her judgemental prerogative to put it. But then will the Legal eagle in JAIS and mufti comes to put the banner of Islamic justice. And they should fight to death. Kasi hentam lah.

Ibrahim Darus said...

Your assumption about the Learned Judge being 'half Chinese, liberal and indifferent to Islam' and also the perceived the ignorance about History and prejudice towards Islam by the Judge is merely your iil-cobceiced opinion.
The matter can still be heard by a higher authority and lawyers for the aggrieved parties can argue their cases in the court. So what's the problem ABITW ?

My Say