Promoting an understanding of Islam that recognises the principles of
justice, equality, freedom, and dignity within a democratic nation state

 Utusan Malaysia - Undang-undang tidak seragam punca kes cerai tidak selesai
webmaster On Saturday 07 January 2006 | Read/Post Comment: 0
 Bolehkah Kaedah Muafakat Digunakan?
e107 On Friday 06 January 2006 | Read/Post Comment: 0
 BARAZA! 1 - Trends in Islamic Family Law Reform
webmaster On Saturday 31 December 2005 | Read/Post Comment: 0
Nasib Wanita Tidak Terbela Rang Undang-Undang Keluarga Islam Beri Lebih Kesempatan Kepada Lelaki (30 December 2005)
email to someone printer friendly

Nasib Wanita Tidak Terbela Rang Undang-Undang Keluarga Islam Beri Lebih Kesempatan Kepada Lelaki

30 December 2005



Merujuk kepada apa yang dikatakan oleh Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Dr Abdullah Md Zin, ddalam Berita Harian pada Rabu 28 Disember 2005, Sisters in Islam ingin menjelaskan bahawa Rang Undang-Undang tersebut mempunyai banyak kelemahan dan ketidaksempurnaan. Terdapat undang-undang keluarga Islam di negara lain yang memberi lebih hak kepada pihak isteri. Misalnya di Iran, isteri yang diceraikan berhak menuntut ujrah mithl atau upah kerja daripada suaminya untuk segala kerja rumah yang telah dilakukan oleh isteri selama tempoh perkahwinan mereka.



Di dalam undang-undang kita pula, walaupun isteri diberi hak menuntut harta sepencarian daripada suami apabila berlaku perceraian atau apabila suami berpoligami, hak yang sama juga diberi kepada suami yang boleh menuntut harta sepencarian daripada isteri. Bahasa yang digunakan (“mana-mana pihak”) tidak membezakan tuntutan harta sepencarian sama ada oleh isteri atau oleh suami. Ini amat tidak adil kerana pihak yang boleh berpoligami adalah suami. Ia memberi kesempatan kepada suami yang hendak berpoligami untuk mengugut isteri sedia ada yang hendak menuntut harta sepencarian bahawa suami juga akan menuntut harta sepencarian. Ini amat tidak adil dan melanggar perintah dalam al-Qur’an yang melarang perkahwinan poligami jika dikhuatri membawa ketidakadilan kepada pihak isteri. Memanglah tidak adil jika isteri mengahwini pihak suami semasa suami itu tidak berharta, dan setelah bertungkus-lumus bersama suaminya, apabila suami menjadi kaya, dia mengahwini perempuan lain pula. Jika isteri boleh menuntut harta sepencarian daripada suaminya, ini boleh mengurangkan ketidakadilan. Tetapi amatlah tidak adil jika terdapat kemungkinan bahawa suami juga boleh menuntut harta sepencarian daripada isteri, atau supaya rumah kelamin mereka dijual bagi membantu menyara isteri barunya.



Tuntutan suami untuk harta sepencarian, sama ada semasa perceraian atau poligami, dipermudahkan lagi dengan peruntukan baru seksyen 107A yang membolehkan suami mendapat perintah mahkamah untuk menghalang isteri atau bekas isteri daripada melupuskan hartanya. Peruntukan ini telah mengakibatkan kes Puan Zaidah …. di Negeri Johor di mana pihak suami berjaya mendapat perintah Mahkamah membekukan akaun-akaun simpanan isteri atas alasan tuntutan harta sepencarian. Isteri malang ini menghadapi kesusahan menanggung diri dan anak-anaknya kerana dia hanya seorang surirumah dan akaun simpanan itulah satu-satunya punca pendapatannya. Suaminya yang memperolehi pendapatan lebih dari RM30,000 sebulan tidak memberikan nafkah isteri selama prosiding perceraian berlangsung, dan juga tidak memberi nafkah yang mencukupi untuk anak-anak.



Mengikut Hukum Syara’, suami tidak mempunyai hak ke atas harta isterinya. Harta isteri adalah hartanya sendiri, manakala isteri berhak mendapat saraan nafkah daripada suaminya. Hak dan kewajipan yang berbeza mengenai harta dan nafkah ada kaitannya dengan pembahagian pusaka yang memberi bahagian yang lebih kepada lelaki daripada perempuan. Bahagian harta pusaka yang lebih kepada lelaki sebenarnya berhubung-kait dengan kewajipan kewangan yang dikenakan ke atas kaum lelaki. Ia juga boleh dikatakan berkaitan dengan soal harta sepencarian. Sumbangan kewangan pihak suami bagi belanja harian rumahtangga tidaklah boleh dianggap sebagai sumbangan kewangan terhadap harta yang diperolehi oleh isterinya, kerana memanglah kewajipan suami menyara nafkah isteri dan anak-anaknya. Tetapi sumbangan kewangan pihak isteri bagi belanja harian rumahtangga patutlah dianggap sebagai sumbangan kewangan terhadap harta yang diperolehi oleh suaminya, kerana bukanlah kewajipan isteri untuk menyara nafkah suami dan anak-anaknya. Apa yang dikatakan oleh Datuk Dr Abdullah Zin bahawa suami tidak boleh usik pendpatan isteri kerana ia manjadi hak mutlak isteri memanglah benar dari segi Hukum Syara’. Tetapi ia tidak benar dari segi peruntukan Rang Undang-Undang ini kerana terdapat seksyen yang membenarkan suami berbuat demikian. Oleh sebab itulah, kami menyeru agar penelitian semula dibuat kerana memang terdapat peruntukan dalam Rang Undang-Undang yang melanggar prinsip keadilan Islam yang sememangnya bertujuan melindungi kebajikan wanita dan kanak-kanak. Kemusykilan kami bukan sekadar mengenai tafsiran atau sikap “bias” yang dikhuatri terdapat pada hakim lelaki di mahkamah, tetapi juga melibatkan isi kandungan peruntukan Rang Undang-Undang itu sendiri yang tidak adil adil dan tidak membela nasib wanita.



Sisters in Islam


30 Disember, 2005
 Letter to Berita Harian: Responding to Datuk Dr Abdullah Md Zin Regarding the Recent IFL Amendments
e107 On Friday 30 December 2005 | Read/Post Comment: 0
Press Release: JAG Calls for New Muslim Family Law and Public Hearings (23 December 2005)
email to someone printer friendly


Press Release:

JAG Calls for new Muslim Family Law and Public Hearings

The Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG) calls for a new model Muslim Family Law based on the principles of justice and equality to deal with the realities of changing times and circumstances affecting Muslim men, women and the family institution in Malaysia today.

JAG therefore calls on Parliament to establish a Parliamentary Select Committee on Islamic Family Law (IFL) to get feedback from women on their experiences with the law and the shariah court system in their search for legal redress to family problems.

The patchwork attempt at amending the IFL since the 1990s has further discriminated against Muslim women, at a time when the Government is amending civil laws to recognise equal rights between men and women of other faiths. Since the 1980s our sisters of other faith have begun to enjoy equal rights in marriage and divorce, in guardianship of their children and in inheritance through a series of law reform.

But for Muslim women, law reform made divorce and polygamy easier for Muslim men. Men who are already priviledged in getting double the women’s share of inheritance because of their responsibility as the family provider is now enabled to claim a share of their wives’ matrimonial assets at the time of polygamy and divorce.

This continuting discrimination against Muslim women is unacceptable as it discriminates against some 30 percent of the population. The use of religion to justify this discrimination can no longer be tolerated as it denies Muslim women the right to enjoy their Constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination and to enjoy the universality of rights among all citizens that Malaysia has committed itself to in several UN conventions. Above all, it violates the principles of justice and equality upheld in the Qur’an.

Just as the 1976 Law Reform Marriages and Divorce Act governing citizens of other faith, was drafted only after a Parliamentary Select Committee held public hearings throughout the country, so should Muslims be enabled to participate democratically in the process of decision making on a law that governs their personal lives.

In the meantime we urge that the existing 1984 Islamic Family Law remains in force and that this IFL Amendments Bill, 2005, not be gazetted and enforced. A precedent was set in 1994 when the Domestic Violence Act was not gazetted for two years to deal with objections from some of those in authority who believed that Muslim men have a right to beat their wives and that domestic violence was a family matter and therefore should come under the Islamic Family Law, and not under Federal criminal law.

Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG):
Sisters in Islam (SIS)
All Women’s Action Society (AWAM)
Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO)
Women’s Centre for Change Penang (WCC)
Women’s Development Collective (WDC)
MTUC – Women’s Section

23 December 2005

Email: sistersinislam@pd.jaring.my
Re: Suspend the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) (Amendment) Bill 2005 (23 December 2005)
email to someone printer friendly

Press statement by WAO
23 December 2005


Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO) as a member of JAG reiterates the call by Sisters In Islam to suspend the IFL for further review and scrutiny.

WAO would like to share our experience in dealing with Muslim women who seek counselling and advice from our social workers when they face matrimonial problems.

WAO statistics show that in 2004, 37% of the residents at the Refuge, and 26% of clients for telephone counseling were Muslim women. The majority of the women were experiencing problems related to polygamous husbands.

The threat of polygamy and a husband entering into a polygamous marriage can be a form of mental abuse, and in fact amounts to domestic violence. Women identify this experience as trauma making them feel powerless, unloved and abandoned. The women reveal that the fear of having to live in a polygamous marriage is used to control and coerce them in their marriage.

The amendments to the IFL has created a relaxation of the conditions for polygamy, where it is amended from the present ‘just and necessary’ to ‘just or necessary’, will make it much easier for men to be polygamous. This will put women in a more vulnerable situation, thus more open to abuse.

Furthermore the gender neutral language used in the section on matrimonial property will also enable the husband to obtain a court injunction to prevent the disposition of property by a wife or former wife. This will further compound the financial problems that many women are already facing.

A repeated problem faced by the women who seek our services is access to maintenance from their husbands. The lack of financial support to many of the women makes it very hard for them to raise their families.

The present IFL can be a threat to the peace and security of a family and more public education is needed to spell out the potential dangers and injustice this law poses to the rights of women and children in a Muslim family. While Malaysia can boast of many rights accorded to women, the 2005 amendments IFL signal a step back.


Women’s Aid Organisation

TEL: 03 79575636
JAG Calls for new Muslim Family Law and Public Hearings (23 December 2005)
email to someone printer friendly

Press Release

JAG Calls for new Muslim Family Law and Public Hearings

23 December 2005


The Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG) calls for a new model Muslim Family Law based on the principles of justice and equality to deal with the realities of changing times and circumstances affecting Muslim men, women and the family institution in Malaysia today.



JAG therefore calls on Parliament to establish a Parliamentary Select Committee on Islamic Family Law (IFL) to get feedback from women on their experiences with the law and the shariah court system in their search for legal redress to family problems.



The patchwork attempt at amending the IFL since the 1990s has further discriminated against Muslim women, at a time when the Government is amending civil laws to recognise equal rights between men and women of other faiths. Since the 1980s our sisters of other faith have begun to enjoy equal rights in marriage and divorce, in guardianship of their children and in inheritance through a series of law reform.



But for Muslim women, law reform made divorce and polygamy easier for Muslim men. Men who are already priviledged in getting double the women’s share of inheritance because of their responsibility as the family provider is now enabled to claim a share of their wives’ matrimonial assets at the time of polygamy and divorce.



This continuting discrimination against Muslim women is unacceptable as it discriminates against some 30 percent of the  population. The use of religion to justify this discrimination can no longer be tolerated as it denies Muslim women the right to enjoy their Constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination and to enjoy the universality of rights among all citizens that Malaysia has committed itself to in several UN conventions. Above all, it violates the principles of justice and equality upheld in the Qur’an.




Just as the 1976 Law Reform Marriages and Divorce Act governing citizens of other faith, was drafted only after a Parliamentary Select Committee held public hearings throughout  the country, so should Muslims be enabled to participate democratically in the process of decision making on a law  that governs their personal lives.



In the meantime we urge that the existing 1984 Islamic Family Law remains in force and that this IFL Amendments Bill, 2005, not be gazetted and enforced. A precedent was set in 1994 when the Domestic Violence Act was not gazetted for two years to deal with objections from some of those in authority who believed that Muslim men have a right to beat their wives and that domestic violence was a family matter and therefore should come under the Islamic Family Law, and not under Federal criminal law.



Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG):



Sisters in Islam (SIS)


All Women’s Action Society (AWAM)


Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO)


Women’s Centre for Change Penang (WCC)


Women’s Development Collective (WDC)


MTUC – Women’s Section

23 December 2005


Contact: Sharifah Mas’ad Azzahir , SIS Communications Officer.


Tel: 7960-6121. Email:sistersinislam@pd.org.my
Amendments to the Islamic Family Law Bill(Federal Territories), 2005 - Media Statement by All Women's Action Society (AWAM)
email to someone printer friendly

23 December 2005

In response to the Bill on the amendments to the Islamic Family Law, the All Women's Action Society (AWAM) wishes to voice its grave concerns on the substance of the amendments as well as the manner with which the Bill was passed. While AWAM acknowledges the need to reform the Islamic Family Law and welcomes the Government's efforts on this matter, the weaknesses in these amendments mean that they are a step back rather than forward in according justice to all. We are greatly alarmed by the amendment extending fasakh to men, who already have the right to talaq, while a woman's right to seek divorce remain unchanged. The loosening of conditions for polygamy, wherein a man now only has to prove that the polygamous marriage is necessary, will worsen rather than resolve the problem of irresponsible husbands taking on another wife despite being unable or unwilling to provide for their first wives and children.

Even superficially progressive amendments on the issue of matrimonial property have been shown to be extremely vulnerable to misuse. The use of gender neutral language does not always translate into gender equality in situations where there is already a sharp imbalance of power in reality. A woman's right to property has already been eroded by Section 107A, which enables a husband to obtain a court injunction to prevent the disposition of property by his wife or former wife. We are concerned that women who are faced with abusive treatment by their husbands will now stay silent, for fear of being dispossessed of their rightful property when obtaining divorce.

AWAM questions the need for the Bill to be rushed through Parliament, to the extent that Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, invoked the Whip to ensure that Barisan Nasional senators vote for the Bill. We have yet to hear a good rationale on why this must be so, as returning the Bill to Dewan Rakyat for further debate seems to be the most efficient method of addressing problems associated with this Bill. Namely: loopholes within the amendments which may lead to further injustice against women, and the lack of reasonable time in which to study the Bill in depth.

"That's our system" is no excuse for strong-arm tactics on any piece of legislation, let alone a Bill on which many reservations have been aired, not only by women's organisations but also by members of Dewan Negara. Even if the loopholes in the Bill will be closed in the future, how will it be of use to women who are adversely affected by these amendments before further changes could be made?

AWAM is of the opinion that the public must be involved in the process of creating laws of this nature. We all have a stake in this. The repercussions of this Bill touch every strata of society, including non-Muslims, who live side-by-side with Muslims as their friends, neighbours, co-workers, and even family. It is essential for the Government to be more responsive to the needs of the people, who should have been consulted in the first place. Unfortunately, it is only very recently that reservations over this Bill have become part of public discourse, too late for the people to make their voices heard before the Bill becomes law.

We urge the Government to immediately act on their word in rectifying the shortcomings of this Bill.

ALL WOMEN'S ACTION SOCIETY (AWAM)
 "Suspend the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) (Amendment) Bill 2005" - Media Statement by WAO
webmaster On Friday 23 December 2005 | Read/Post Comment: 0
Go to page   <<        >>  

Copyright | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Sitemap