Latest news with #SistersInIslam
Malay Mail
01-08-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Mais welcomes SIS Forum (Malaysia)'s move to drop ‘Islam' from name
SHAH ALAM, Aug 1 — The Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) has welcomed the decision by SIS Forum (Malaysia) to drop the word 'Islam' from the name 'Sisters In Islam', which the non-profit organisation had previously used. Mais chairman Datuk Salehuddin Saidin described the move as appropriate and a reflection of the organisation's willingness to respect the decree of the Sultan of Selangor, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah, who is the Head of Islam in the state. Following the decision, Mais has advised all parties to refrain from using the name 'Sisters In Islam' when referring to the organisation in any future statements or publications. Salehuddin said the Sultan had also reminded SIS Forum (Malaysia), along with other companies, organisations and entities, to respect the position of Islam as the religion of the federation and the state, and to consult state religious authorities on matters relating to Islam. 'His Royal Highness also advised SIS Forum (Malaysia) and all parties to exercise greater caution when issuing statements or publications related to Islam. 'This is to ensure that any message conveyed to the public does not conflict with the true teachings of Islam, in accordance with the beliefs and practices of Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah,' he said in a statement yesterday. He added that the Sultan, through Mais, had expressed hope that SIS Forum (Malaysia) would continue its efforts to raise awareness on women's rights and Islamic family law in accordance with authentic Islamic teachings. 'As an organisation with influence in society, SIS Forum (Malaysia) should also focus on fostering unity among the community in support of national harmony,' he said. Earlier, the media reported that SIS Forum (Malaysia), during an extraordinary general meeting on July 11, had decided to remove the word 'Islam' from its name, in line with the Sultan's earlier decree. The organisation now operates under its registered name, SIS Forum (Malaysia). — Bernama
Malay Mail
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Simplified: Why SIS won its Selangor fatwa challenge at Federal Court in 3-1 ruling
KUALA LUMPUR, June 24 — The Federal Court last Thursday in a 3-1 decision ruled that Selangor's 2014 fatwa could not be used against SIS Forum (Malaysia) as it is a company, which means the fatwa no longer labels it as 'sesat' or deviant from Islamic teachings. Want to know why and how the Federal Court came to this decision? Read on for a quick summary: But first, how does the Federal Court decision impact SIS? Selangor's 2014 fatwa said: SIS Forum (Malaysia) and any individual, organisation, institution with 'liberalism and religious pluralism' beliefs are 'deviant' from Islamic teachings; any publication with liberalism and religious pluralism elements should be banned and can be seized; the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) should block social sites that go against Islamic teachings and Islamic law; any individual who holds on to liberalism and religious pluralism beliefs should repent and return to Islam. Muslim women's rights group Sisters in Islam (SIS) operates through the company SIS Forum (Malaysia). Because of Selangor's fatwa, SIS was at risk of having its publications seized and its social media accounts blocked. Now, the Federal Court has decided that the Selangor fatwa does not apply to companies such as SIS Forum, and that the state-issued fatwa also cannot direct federal agencies to block social media accounts. The Federal Court made this decision through its majority ruling by three judges, while one judge disagreed. Here's a simplified summary which highlights some of the main points in the full 40-page majority judgment: Look, it's not about religion, but about the Federal Constitution and administrative law Although the SIS Forum court case involves a fatwa, the Federal Court said it was not making any decisions about Islamic beliefs, Islamic law or the religion. For example, the Federal Court made no comments on whether the Selangor fatwa was correct according to Islamic law, such as whether or not 'liberalism and religious pluralism beliefs are deviant from Islamic teachings'. Lawyers representing the Selangor fatwa council and Selangor Islamic religious council (Mais) hold a press conference at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya on June 29, 2025. — Picture by Choo Choy May . The Federal Court said this was because that phrase is an Islamic law matter, and that it would come under the jurisdiction of the Selangor fatwa committee and the Shariah courts. Instead, the Federal Court was looking at whether Selangor had acted within its powers under the Federal Constitution when it issued the fatwa. The three key points from the Federal Court's majority 1. Only the civil courts have powers to decide on Federal Constitution and judicial review SIS Forum's constitutional challenge was filed in the civil courts, and both the High Court and Court of Appeal previously said the Shariah courts should decide the case. After analysing the Federal Constitution's Article 121 and 121(1A) and based on a long list of past Federal Court decisions, the Federal Court made it clear that: only the civil courts can interpret the Federal Constitution's provisions and all laws (including state laws); the civil courts are the one with judicial review powers So the Federal Court was saying it could decide on this court 2. Can a company be treated as a 'person professing the religion of Islam'? The Federal Court said no. It said only individuals are able to 'profess' the religion of Islam, as companies cannot do things such as fasting in the Ramadan month or performing the Muslims' holy pilgrimage (hajj). Previously, the Federal Court had in two other cases in 1998 and 2022 also decided that companies cannot or are incapable of professing a religion. Why is this important? This is because the Federal Constitution gives states like Selangor the power to make laws on 'persons professing the religion of Islam'. That is why the Federal Court said Selangor's 2014 fatwa is only valid when it refers to individuals, and another part of the fatwa — which labelled SIS Forum, organisations and institutions as deviant — is invalid. 3. Directing federal bodies to take action goes beyond a state's powers Based on Malaysia's two federal laws (the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) and the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA)), it is the federal authorities that have the power to control publications. The Federal Court said the Selangor fatwa had clearly ordered the seizure of publications and also instructed federal body MCMC to take action on social media platforms. But Selangor had gone beyond the state's powers, as it was intruding into federal law and federal powers with such orders in the fatwa. The Federal Court confirmed Selangor does not have the power to include directives or orders — to the federal government's agencies — when the state makes fatwas. The Federal Court declared that these parts of the Selangor fatwa had gone against the two federal laws (PPPA and CMA). Sisters in Islam and its supporters celebrate after the Federal Court's decision at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, on June 20, 2025. — Picture by Choo Choy May Conclusion In other words, the Federal Court said only these two parts of the Selangor fatwa are still valid: Any individual who holds on to liberalism and religious pluralism beliefs are deviant from Islamic teachings, Any individual who holds on to liberalism and religious pluralism beliefs should repent and return to Islam. Read the full majority judgment here. What the dissenting Federal Court judge said The minority judgment's main point was that the Shariah courts are the ones that have the power to decide on the validity of a fatwa, and not the civil courts. The dissenting judge also gave his view that a fatwa can still be binding on companies especially in the SIS Forum case, and also said that the Shariah court should decide issues such as whether the Selangor fatwa had breached the two federal laws. Read the full minority judgment here. Recommended reading: •'Deviant' or not? Sisters in Islam awaits Federal Court verdict today on Selangor fatwa • Federal Court declares Selangor fatwa partially invalid, no more 'sesat' or deviant label for SIS
Malay Mail
22-06-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Sisters in Islam should be regarded as Muslim by common reputation and subject to fatwa — Hafiz Hassan
JUNE 22 — By definition, a Muslim is not limited to someone who professes the religion of Islam. To profess is to affirm one's faith in a religion. According to the majority decision of the Federal Court in the Sisters in Islam Forum case, only a natural person can profess a religion. However, by definition, a person includes a body of persons, whether corporate or unincorporated. Even if we accept the majority view that only a natural person can profess, there are five other categories under which a person may be considered a Muslim: (a) a person either or both of whose parents were Muslims at the time of the person's birth; (b) a person whose upbringing was conducted on the basis that they were a Muslim; (c) a person who has converted to Islam in accordance with the requirements of section 85; (d) a person who is commonly reputed to be a Muslim; or (e) a person who has stated, in circumstances where they were legally bound to tell the truth, that they were a Muslim, whether the statement was verbal or written. Lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar giving a press conference after the Sisters in Islam's Federal Court decision on the appeal against 'deviant' fatwa at Palace of Justice, Putrajaya. Jun 19, 2025. — Picture by Choo Choy May Since a person includes a corporate body, that body is considered a Muslim if it is commonly reputed to be so — as in the case of Sisters in Islam. I respectfully agree with the single dissenting judge that the name Sisters in Islam clearly reflects its identity. By definition, Sisters in Islam should be regarded as Muslim by common reputation and therefore subject to fatwa. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Free Malaysia Today
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Free Malaysia Today
Lower courts must follow apex court precedents, says CJ
Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat elaborated on the Federal Court's 40-page judgment which held that a fatwa could not be imposed on an organisation like Sisters in Islam as such entities cannot 'profess' a religion. PUTRAJAYA : Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat has reminded judges in the lower courts that they must adhere to legal precedents set by the Federal Court unless overruled by a subsequent decision from the same court. 'These precedents are binding, and failure to follow them is an affront to the administration of our justice system,' she said in a majority judgment delivered yesterday. The judgment held that a fatwa could not be imposed on an organisation like Sisters in Islam (SIS) as such entities cannot 'profess' a religion. Women's rights group SIS yesterday succeeded in its appeal to the Federal Court to quash a 2014 fatwa issued against it by the Selangor religious authorities. SIS had sought to quash a 2014 fatwa by the Selangor Islamic religious council (Mais) that it had deviated from the teachings of Islam by purportedly subscribing to 'liberalism' and 'religious pluralism'. In allowing SIS's appeal, Tengku Maimun said, the majority accepted the appellants' argument that the Court of Appeal had failed to apply the principle of stare decisis by wrongly attempting to distinguish the case from an earlier decision in SIS Forum (1) without any sound legal basis. Three years ago, a nine-member Federal Court bench led by Tengku Maimun unanimously ruled that it was unconstitutional for the Selangor legislative assembly to grant judicial review powers to the state's shariah high court. In that ruling, the bench also reaffirmed a 1998 apex court decision (Kesultanan Pahang v Sathask Realty Sdn Bhd) which held that corporations cannot profess a religion. 'Consistent with our guidance to the lower courts, we are fully inclined to uphold stare decisis and to follow the precedent established in SIS Forum (1) and Kesultanan Pahang,' she said in the 40-page judgment. Two years ago, the Court of Appeal dismissed SIS's challenge to the fatwa, which claimed that the women's group espoused liberalism and religious pluralism and had deviated from Islamic teachings. In a 2-1 decision, the appellate court concluded that the legal principle established in SIS Forum (1) was merely obiter dicta – a passing judicial remark not binding as precedent. However, Tengku Maimun refuted this, saying that the Federal Court's reasoning in SIS Forum (1) was not obiter dicta, but formed a core part of the court's legal reasoning. The court had held that Section 66A of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 was unconstitutional. She further noted that the earlier nine-member bench had ruled that shariah courts cannot conceptually exercise judicial review over artificial persons, such as corporate entities, even if they identify with Islam. Tengku Maimun, Court of Appeal president Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Justice Nallini Pathmanathan formed the majority in yesterday's ruling while Justice Abu Bakar Jais dissented. SIS, a company limited by guarantee and incorporated under the Companies Act 1965, argued that the fatwa was unconstitutional and could not be applied to a corporate entity governed by civil law.
Malay Mail
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Fatwa can't bind SIS Forum as a company, says chief justice; case focused on administrative powers, not Islamic tenets
PUTRAJAYA, June 21 — The appeal by Sisters in Islam (SIS) Forum (Malaysia) does not concern the substantive beliefs in the religion of Islam, its mandates or doctrines relating to the Islamic faith but relates to the exercise of legal powers by certain state authorities, says the Federal Court in its judgment. Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said the challenge only concerned the review of the Selangor State Fatwa Committee, the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (MAIS) and the Selangor government's exercise of certain powers under the law, which is distinct from the substance and contents of their decisions. 'While it concerns a certain fatwa (religious edict), the case has neither to do with the substantive beliefs held in the religion of Islam nor does it have anything to do with the administration of the substantive aspects of the religion of Islam,' she said in the 40-page majority judgment. The top judge said in all civilised democracies with independent judiciaries, it is routine for the executive's decisions to be subjected to judicial review and in most cases, the subject matter of the exercise of discretion in the plaint is not the main issue rather the manner in which the decision was made. On Thursday, the Federal Court bench, in a 3-1 majority ruling, held that the 2014 fatwa issued by the Selangor State Fatwa Committee and gazetted by the Selangor state government is valid, but only insofar as it applies to individuals, not companies. The court ruled that a fatwa cannot be imposed on an organisation like SIS Forum as it is not capable of professing a religion. The ruling partially allowed the appeal by SIS Forum and its co-founder Zainah Mahfoozah Anwar to quash the 2014 fatwa, which had declared the group as deviating from Islamic teachings. In the written judgment released on the judiciary's website, Justice Tengku Maimun explained that the Selangor state government and the religious bodies are part of the executive branch and are empowered by the Federal Constitution and laws passed by the Selangor State Legislative Assembly (SLA). 'The fact that they deal with matters pertaining to Islamic faith, dogma and doctrine — are beside the point and these matters are, in any event, not within our purview (of the Civil Court),' she said. Justice Tengku Maimun said that under Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, the Shariah Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over matters within their scope. However, if the Shariah Courts act beyond their jurisdiction, they remain subject to judicial review by the Superior Courts. She reiterated that SIS Forum's legal challenge did not question the contents of the fatwa but the way it affected them. This, she said, involved constitutional importance and administrative law, which is for the Superior Courts to determine. The Chief Justice also reminded all judges that judgments of the Federal Court, unless overruled by a later decision of the same court, are binding and failure to abide by them is an affront to the administration of the justice system. In the judgment, Tengku Maimun also said a fatwa, once gazetted, carries the force of law and is not mere suggestion, and it is binding on all Muslims in the state and the Shariah Courts. — Bernama
