DECEMBER 10 — I refer to Sisters in Islam (SIS) RUU Mufti: Empowering the government to dictate Muslim lives.
SIS asserts, among others, that “[w]hile previously, fatwas in the Federal Territories required Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA)’s assent under Section 34 of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 (Act 505), this safeguard has been repealed.”
Let’s look at the repealed Section 34 of the Act, which stipulated as follows:
(1) The Mufti shall, on the direction of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, and may, on his own initiative or on the request of any person made by letter addressed to the Mufti, make and publish in the Gazette, a fatwa or ruling on any unsettled or controversial question of or relating to Islamic Law.
(2) No statement made by the Mufti shall be taken to be a fatwa unless and until it is published in the Gazette pursuant to subsection (1).
(3) Upon publication in the Gazette, a fatwa shall be binding on every Muslim resident in the Federal Territories as a dictate of his religion it shall be his religious duty to abide by and uphold the fatwa, unless he is permitted by Islamic Law to depart from the fatwa in matters of personal observance, belief, or opinion.
(4) A fatwa shall be recognized by all Courts in the Federal Territories as authoritative of all matters laid down therein.
Unless arguably the Mufti makes a fatwa on the direction of the YDPA, nothing in the provision above required the YDPA to assent to a fatwa made by the Mufti on his own initiative or on the request of any person made by letter addressed to the Mufti.
Alarmingly, SIS compares Section 34 with “the new Section 11 (sic) of the Mufti Bill 2024” which the group says as failing “to clarify whether a fatwa must be gazetted before it becomes binding and legally recognised, further eroding transparency and accountability”.
With due respect, SIS should have compared Section 34 with Clause 10 of the Mufti Bill. Section 34 is on Fatwa while Clause 10 is on Procedure of issuing fatwa. The comparison can be seen below:
| Section 34 Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 | Clause 10 Mufti (Federal Territories) Bill 2024 |
| (1) The Mufti shall, on the direction of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, and may, on his own initiative or on the request of any person made by letter addressed to the Mufti, make and publish in the Gazette, a fatwa or ruling on any unsettled or controversial question of or relating to Islamic Law.
(2) No statement made by the Mufti shall be taken to be a fatwa unless and until it is published in the Gazette pursuant to subsection (1).
(3) Upon publication in the Gazette, a fatwa shall be binding on every Muslim resident in the Federal Territories as a dictate of his religion it shall be his religious duty to abide by and uphold the fatwa, unless he is permitted by Islamic Law to depart from the fatwa in matters of personal observance, belief, or opinion. | (1) Mufti may, before making and issuing any fatwa — (2) If the Mufti finds that a fatwa needs to be issued pertaining to the issue or question, the Mufti shall direct a meeting of the Fatwa Committee to be summoned for the purpose of discussing the proposed fatwa.
(3) After the proposed fatwa is approved by the Fatwa Committee, the Mufti shall make a recommendation to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for his assent for the publication of the fatwa in the Gazette. |
If SIS asserts that Act 505 served as “the legislative framework for the administration of Islamic law in the Federal Territories”, which would be the better framework: Section 34 or Clause 10 above?
As I wrote in Mufti (FT) Bill reenacts existing law, Clause 10 of the Mufti Bill reenacts existing law — that is, Section 34 of Act 505. It reenacts for the better, I would humbly submit.
Read the Mufti Bill clause by clause. Don’t be selective.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
