Fascists...
PUTRAJAYA, Oct 9 — Accused of curtailing freedom of expression, lawyer for the Selangor state government argued today in court that it enacted a Shariah law to ban religious publications considered as against Islam, to protect the sanctity of the faith.
The Selangor lawyer also argued that Islamic law in Malaysia should stay distinct from the Federal Constitution and other rights enshrined in it, after the appellants contended that the scope of Section 16 of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Selangor) Enactment 1995 intrudes on Putrajaya’s authority.
Local publishing house ZI Publications Sdn Bhd and its director, Ezra Zaid, had contended that matters of publication falls under the Federal List according to the Constitution’s Ninth Schedule, and is already covered by the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) 1984, a federal law made in Parliament.
They further argued that the law contravenes Article 10 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right of freedom of speech and expression to each citizen.
“The legislature of the state has the power to enact laws to protect the sanctity of Islam,” argued Ahmad Fuad Othman, an assistant legal adviser of the respondent, the Selangor state government.
“Section 16 might be draconian in the sense of it limiting the freedom of expression, but that is not its intention.”
Section 16(1) criminalises any Muslim who “prints, publishes, produces, records, or disseminates in any manner any book or document or any other form of record containing anything which is contrary to Islamic Law”, or “has in his possession any such book, document or other form of record for sale or for the purpose of otherwise disseminating it”.
If found guilty under Section 16(1), the offender faces a fine not exceeding RM3,000 or two years’ prison, or both.
In addition, Section 16(2) of the same law empowers the state Shariah Court to order any book, document or other form of record to be “forfeited and destroyed”, even when nobody is convicted under Section 16(1).
Selangor and the two interveners -- the Malaysian government and Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) -- however argued that Selangor has the rights to make such laws under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
Senior Federal Counsel Suzana Atan said the matters on the precepts of Islam falls under the State List under the Ninth Schedule, which included Section 16 as it governs offences against the Islamic law.
Mais’ lawyer Mubashir Mansor also claimed that Putrajaya has no right to make laws governing Islamic matters, and as such the PPPA cannot cover the same scope as Section 16.
However, the appellants’ lawyer, Malik Imtiaz, retorted by saying that any laws made the state must not encroach into the Federal List, or else the state can possess extra powers to enact laws which are under the jurisdiction of Putrajaya.
“I argue it is very dangerous that one can just call something a precept offence, and it can then just legislate anything,” said Malik, who appeared together with his co-counsel Nizam Bashir.
The five-man bench today was headed by the President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif.
It also included Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin; and Federal Court judges Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Embong, Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop, and Tan Sri Hasan Lah.
The court reserved its judgment to another date that has yet to be fixed.
The court battle began nearly two years ago on May 29, 2012, when the publisher's office was raided by officers from Selangor's Islamic Religious Department (Jais), who confiscated 180 copies of “Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta”, the Malay translation of a book titled “Allah, Freedom and Love” by Canadian author Irshad Manji, under Section 16 of the Selangor religious law.
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/m...eeded-to-protect-sanctity-of-islam-court-told
PUTRAJAYA, Oct 9 — Accused of curtailing freedom of expression, lawyer for the Selangor state government argued today in court that it enacted a Shariah law to ban religious publications considered as against Islam, to protect the sanctity of the faith.
The Selangor lawyer also argued that Islamic law in Malaysia should stay distinct from the Federal Constitution and other rights enshrined in it, after the appellants contended that the scope of Section 16 of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Selangor) Enactment 1995 intrudes on Putrajaya’s authority.
Local publishing house ZI Publications Sdn Bhd and its director, Ezra Zaid, had contended that matters of publication falls under the Federal List according to the Constitution’s Ninth Schedule, and is already covered by the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) 1984, a federal law made in Parliament.
They further argued that the law contravenes Article 10 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right of freedom of speech and expression to each citizen.
“The legislature of the state has the power to enact laws to protect the sanctity of Islam,” argued Ahmad Fuad Othman, an assistant legal adviser of the respondent, the Selangor state government.
“Section 16 might be draconian in the sense of it limiting the freedom of expression, but that is not its intention.”
Section 16(1) criminalises any Muslim who “prints, publishes, produces, records, or disseminates in any manner any book or document or any other form of record containing anything which is contrary to Islamic Law”, or “has in his possession any such book, document or other form of record for sale or for the purpose of otherwise disseminating it”.
If found guilty under Section 16(1), the offender faces a fine not exceeding RM3,000 or two years’ prison, or both.
In addition, Section 16(2) of the same law empowers the state Shariah Court to order any book, document or other form of record to be “forfeited and destroyed”, even when nobody is convicted under Section 16(1).
Selangor and the two interveners -- the Malaysian government and Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) -- however argued that Selangor has the rights to make such laws under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
Senior Federal Counsel Suzana Atan said the matters on the precepts of Islam falls under the State List under the Ninth Schedule, which included Section 16 as it governs offences against the Islamic law.
Mais’ lawyer Mubashir Mansor also claimed that Putrajaya has no right to make laws governing Islamic matters, and as such the PPPA cannot cover the same scope as Section 16.
However, the appellants’ lawyer, Malik Imtiaz, retorted by saying that any laws made the state must not encroach into the Federal List, or else the state can possess extra powers to enact laws which are under the jurisdiction of Putrajaya.
“I argue it is very dangerous that one can just call something a precept offence, and it can then just legislate anything,” said Malik, who appeared together with his co-counsel Nizam Bashir.
The five-man bench today was headed by the President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif.
It also included Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin; and Federal Court judges Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Embong, Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop, and Tan Sri Hasan Lah.
The court reserved its judgment to another date that has yet to be fixed.
The court battle began nearly two years ago on May 29, 2012, when the publisher's office was raided by officers from Selangor's Islamic Religious Department (Jais), who confiscated 180 copies of “Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta”, the Malay translation of a book titled “Allah, Freedom and Love” by Canadian author Irshad Manji, under Section 16 of the Selangor religious law.
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/m...eeded-to-protect-sanctity-of-islam-court-told
