The statutory body’s counsel, Zainul Rizal Abu Bakar, confirmed with Malaysiakini that the intervener application was filed at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur last Thursday. On March 3, kindergarten teacher M Indira Gandhi and 13 other plaintiffs filed a civil court bid to strike down the unilateral conversion laws of eight states, including that of the Federal Territories.

According to a copy of the affidavit in support of the intervener application, MAIWP’s legal unit manager Wan Mohd Sanusi Mohd Noor said it seeks to intervene as the civil action is challenging the validity of Section 95 of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 (Act 505).  He contended that this is because the provision empowers MAIWP to administer and manage the issue of any individuals within the Federal Territories who wish to convert to Islam.

MAIWP contended that if the civil court denies its bid to intervene in the legal action, then the rights of every Muslim in the Federal Territories would be prejudiced via the jeopardising of the body’s authority in the issue of Islamic conversion.

“Any absence of the proposed intervener (MAIWP) in this action would also deny the rights of mothers and/or fathers who registered the Islamic conversion of their children and prejudice the children as Muslims. “If the proposed intervener’s application is rejected and/or denied, then it would give a negative effect and deny the rights as well as prejudice mothers and/or fathers who validly converted their children to Islam in accordance to the law and syarak laws,” MAIWP contended. 

In the event the civil court allows MAIWP to intervene in the legal action, then it would be granted the right to file responses against the civil action.

Besides MAIWP, the Badan Peguam Syarie Wilayah-Wilayah Persekutuan also filed its own application to intervene in the legal action last month.  When reached out by Malaysiakini, the plaintiffs’ counsel, Rajesh Nagarajan, confirmed that they were served copies of the Badan Peguam Syarie Wilayah-Wilayah Persekutuan’s intervener application. The lawyer added that they have yet to be served copies of MAIWP’s intervener bid.

Through the civil action, the 14 plaintiffs seek to rely on the landmark 2018 apex court ruling linked to the case of Indira’s Muslim convert ex-husband, who unilaterally converted their three children without her knowledge and consent. The legal action seeks a court declaration to nullify the unilateral conversion laws contained in the state enactments of the Federal Territories, as well as Perlis, Kedah, Malacca, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Perak, and Johor.

Besides Indira, 48, the other 13 plaintiffs are Malaysia Hindu Sangam, its former chairperson S Mohan, Indira Gandhi Action Team chairperson Arun Dorasamy, two alleged victims of unilateral conversion, and eight citizens from the states. The plaintiffs contended that the impugned state enactments are invalid for contravening Articles 12(4) and 75 of the Federal Constitution as well as the 2018 Federal Court ruling regarding unilateral conversion.

They listed the eight state enactments that allegedly contravened the Federal Court ruling over the phrase ‘ibu bapa’ of Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution, which the apex court interpreted as ‘ibu dan bapa’ (mother and father) for the purpose of consent for child religious conversions.

Robbed!! : But the problem is they married in a civil ceremony so they must be judged in a civil court. Why the person embraced Islam could be for several reasons, faith, enlightenment, Bussiness opportunities, spite the spouse and parents, trying take ownership of property etc.... must be established

Mano : The question remains " why unilateral conversion allowed when both parents were not Muslims when they birthed the child"???