Private member's bill on hudud unconstitutional, says Jagir Singh

PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) chairman Jagir Singh said the private bill "is clearly unconstitutional as it provides additional powers to the Syariah courts except those dealing with the death penalty.
"In this case, the Kelantanese state government has passed a Hudud Bill from which we know the offences include robbery, rape, murder and incest.
"These offences, although not mentioned in the Bill, are already stated in the State's Bill. Thus, the state has no power to impose these offences as it is already in the
Federal List and Penal Code. The state cannot legislate the Bill unless the Federal Constitution is amended first," he said.
He went on to remind lawmakers of the historical documents that lead to Malaysia's independence in 1957, stating that the country is to be a secular state and that "there is no mention of the Syariah law."
He added that the constitution was amended after 19 years in Sept 1976 which renamed the Muslim courts as Syariah courts.
He declined to comment on the top leaders' decision to step from their posts if the Bill is passed in Parliament.
Meanwhile, a former professor at the Universiti Malaya Law Faculty, Gurdial Singh Nijar said the point of the matter comes when the proposed new law violates the fundamental system of laws that existed and was bequeathed to, and accepted by the Rakyat on independence day.
"The litmus test would be whether hudud involves precepts that would overhaul the criminal justice system of laws as at Merdeka Day? If it is indeed contrasting to this established system then Article 4 of the Constitution renders it unconstitutional," he said.
He explained to theSun that Article 4 of the Constitution states categorically that any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void
"So although Parliament can make laws, the validity of any such law will be assessed by reference to the provisions of the Constitution. If there is any challenge, the court has a duty to determine whether the act passed by Parliament (say, creating hudud offences) is consistent with the Constitution. If it is not, then that law is unconstitutional and void," he said.