1. World Wide Religious News （http://www.wwrn.org）
(1)"Ex-teacher still a Muslim, rules court"
by Sean Augustin （"New Straits Times", 18 February 2008）
Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia - A former religious teacher was yesterday found guilty of having proclaimed herself an apostate to avoid action being taken against her under syariah.
In finding 57-year-old Kamariah Ali guilty, the Syariah High Court here ruled that she was still a Muslim. This was because her earlier application at the Syariah High Court in Kelantan to leave the religion had been rejected.
Kamariah is a follower of Kamal Ariffin a.k.a Ayah Pin, whose teachings were considered to be deviant. In passing judgment, judge Mohamad Abdullah said based on fiq (Islamic practices), a person is a Muslim until proven that he or she had left the religion but in Kamariah's case, there was no solid evidence to cast doubts on the prosecution's case. Kamariah was charged under Section 7 of the Syariah Criminal Offence Enactment (Takzir) (Terengganu 2001) with declaring herself an apostate to avoid action being taken against her at the Syariah lower court in Besut.
She had been arrested together with 58 other followers of the Ayah Pin sect on July 21, 2005.
They were all charged under Section 10 of the Syariah Criminal Offence Enactment (Takzir) (Terengganu 2001) with not adhering to the state fatwa which had ruled Ayah Pin's teachings as deviant.
Mohamad said although Kamariah claimed she had left the religion in 1998, she was still teaching at an Islamic institution in 2000. Furthermore, her declaration of leaving Islam was done in front of a commissioner of oaths instead of at the Syariah court. Mohamad said he did not want to punish her as he would rather see her return to Islam.
"I want to give you a chance and hope you will have a change of heart and the sentence will then be based on the progress that you have made. I have seen some changes, but I still have some doubts."
Prosecutor Mustafar Hamzah, however, pressed for a deterrent sentence in view of the seriousness of the offence which could affect public order and the faith of Malaysian Muslims. He said the defence could not argue that Kamariah had been influenced by others when declaring herself an apostate. Mustafar said as an Al-Azhar University graduate, she was knowledgeable in religious matters and should not have committed such an act, adding that Kamariah had not shown any sign of remorse or repentance.
Later, after a stand down for about 30 minutes, Mohamad allowed Kamariah, who was represented by Sa'adiah Din, to plead for leniency. At this point, Kamariah said she wished to repent.
Mohamad advised her that apart from repenting, she should never again follow the teachings of Ayah Pin or that of other deviant groups.
"I hope you not only realise your mistake but promise never to repeat it. Although, as you said earlier, your faith is between you and God, this particular case affects society. It is up to you to prove your sincerity."
Earlier, Kamariah had put up a defiant front, arguing with the judge on the concept of freedom of religion. She had also refused to utter the syahadah (proclamation of faith).
Muhamad fixed March 3 for sentencing.
Disclaimer: WWRN does not endorse or adhere to views or opinions expressed in the articles posted. This is purely an information site, to inform interested parties of religious trends.
(2)"Islam and the apostasy debate"
by Roger Hardy (BBC, 18 February 2008)
London, UK - Leaving Islam can be fraught with difficulty. Despite the well-known Quranic injunction "There is no compulsion in religion", issues of religious freedom have persisted into the 21st Century.
A recent report by the New York-based Human Rights Watch (co-authored with the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights) throws a spotlight on problems in Egypt. Suppose a Christian woman converts to Islam, for example when she marries a Muslim man, but later wants to convert back. Joe Stork of Human Rights Watch relates what happened in one case.
"We had one woman telling us how, when she converted to Islam, it was 'Just hold on, when you've finished your coffee your documents will be ready'. "But in trying to convert back to Christianity, she's had to go to court - she's been completely frustrated in those efforts."
The problem was aggravated when the Egyptian state computerised identity documents over a decade ago. Christians seeking to re-convert encountered bureaucratic hassle in getting their ID cards changed. Another issue arose from the fact that the state officially recognises only three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism.
This put the small Bahai community in an obvious difficulty. Human-rights groups have welcomed two recent court cases as steps in the right direction.
In one, Bahais were allowed to leave blank the entry for religion on their ID cards. In the other, a group of Christians seeking to re-convert were told the state should acknowledge their change of status on their identity documents.
Apostasy - the abandonment of one's faith - is not just a problem in Egypt. In 2006 an Afghan Muslim who converted to Christianity was sentenced to death and fled to Italy. A new penal code that has been drafted in Iran would, if ratified, formalise the death penalty for apostasy.
The late Ayatollah Khomeini famously denounced the author Salman Rushdie as an apostate for his novel The Satanic Verses - and said he should be killed.
So what is the root of the problem? Why do some Muslim scholars favour such a severe penalty?
Abdal Hakim Murad, a lecturer at the faculty of divinity at Cambridge University, says Islamic law is extraordinarily diverse. "There's a few things on which everybody agrees - pray five times a day, fast in Ramadan - but, in terms of public law, on most issues there is no consensus."
So some scholars favour the death penalty; others say the punishment should be left to God on the day of judgement.
Dr Murad says he recently attended a conference of Muslim scholars from around the world - and only one took the hard-line view. The others said the death penalty should no longer be applied.
But, for now, the debate goes on - and individuals continue to suffer.
Disclaimer: WWRN does not endorse or adhere to views or opinions expressed in the articles posted. This is purely an information site, to inform interested parties of religious trends.
２．Common Ground News Service (CGNews) （http://www.commongroundnews.org.）
Reinventing shari'a, 8 February 2008
by Asim Siddiqui
London - The Archbishop of Canterbury is an immensely intelligent and thoughtful figure. His comments on 7 February were his contribution to the difficult issues surrounding community cohesion and how to quell the feeling of alienation among some quarters of British Muslim communities so they feel more a part of this country.
While the tabloids have gone haywire, it is important that we don't get carried away here. The difficulty with the term shari'a (Islamic principles of jurisprudence) is that it is such a broad notion which encapsulates both personal and public matters. It is also open to such varied interpretations. I would argue that the basic objectives of shari'a – protection of life, family, dignity, intellect and property – are all covered by British law. The fundamental purpose of shari'a is to achieve justice. This country is more just than most. So what more shari'a do people want?
The aspects of shari'a being considered by the Archbishop are restricted to matters of family and finance law, i.e., civil matters. No one is suggesting introducing the so-called Islamic penal code – so let's not waste time debating something most of us don't want to see in the Muslim world, let alone Britain.
As for family and finance law: let's deal with the latter first, the United Kingdom is already amending its finance laws to allow shari'a-compliant products such as halal (permissible according to Islamic principles) mortgages and Islamic bonds. Why? In part to attract the billions of petro-dollars floating in the cash-rich Gulf. That's a law driven by the commercial global realities to keep London as a premier financial capital; it's hardly the makings of Londonistan.
As for family law, there can be no consideration for it to be incorporated into UK law unless there has been extensive consultation with human rights groups, women's groups, civil liberties groups and other stakeholders over what exactly it is they feel needs to be incorporated. There is currently zero consensus on this issue, therefore its incorporation into statute is academic. There is also the important principle that we are all equal before one law.
It is perfectly fine for consenting Muslim adults to resolve their disputes according to Islamic law within the framework of UK civil law and provided that either party has recourse to it (as is currently the case). Wherever English law and "Islamic law" differ, "Islamic law" must give way.
The Archbishop is right to suggest ways to integrate alienated Muslims into the mainstream. Part of that is to educate more religiously and/or culturally assertive Muslims on what shari'a actually should mean in a modern context. This is the work for Muslim scholars to reinterpret practices considered by some to be "Islamic"; such as a woman witness' testimony being worth half that of a man's, men having up to four wives, custody of children transferring to the father, inheritance, etc. In each case, there are multiple interpretations.
It is for progressive Muslim scholars to ensure the more liberal and tolerant interpretations that are rooted in the Islamic tradition and part of Britain's libertarian heritage become dominant over time. That would do far more to aid Muslim integration than introducing a work in progress into statute.
・Asim Siddiqui is chairman and a founding trustee of the City Circle, a network of young British Muslim professionals, and member of the Iraq Commission and the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
This article is distributed by the Source: The Guardian, 8 February 2008, www.guardian.co.uk.
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
(End)
