May 2008


Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands

Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928


Press Release


No. 2008/10

23 May 2008

Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge


The Court finds that Singapore has sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh; that

Malaysia has sovereignty over Middle Rocks; and that sovereignty over South Ledge

belongs to the State in the territorial waters of which it is located

THE HAGUE, 23 May 2008. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), principal judicial

organ of the United Nations, today rendered its Judgment in the case concerning Sovereignty over

Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore).

In its Judgment, which is final, binding and without appeal, the Court

. finds by twelve votes to four that sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh belongs to

the Republic of Singapore;

. finds by fifteen votes to one that sovereignty over Middle Rocks belongs to Malaysia;

. finds by fifteen votes to one that sovereignty over South Ledge belongs to the State in the

territorial waters of which it is located.

Reasoning of the Court

The Court first explains that the dispute between Malaysia and Singapore concerns

sovereignty over three maritime features in the Straits of Singapore: Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu

Puteh (a granite island on which Horsburgh lighthouse stands), Middle Rocks (consisting of some

rocks that are permanently above water) and South Ledge (a low-tide elevation).

Having described the historical background of the case, the Court notes that the dispute as to

sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh crystallized on 14 February 1980, when

Singapore protested against the publication in 1979 by Malaysia of a map depicting the island as

lying within Malaysia’s territorial waters. It further observes that the dispute as to sovereignty over Middle Rocks and South Ledge crystallized on 6 February 1993, when Singapore referred to the two features in the context of its claim to Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh during bilateral


. Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh

Malaysia contends that it has an original title to Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh (dating back

from the time of its predecessor, the Sultanate of Johor) and that it continues to hold this title, while

Singapore claims that the island was terra nullius in the mid-1800s when the United Kingdom (its

predecessor) took lawful possession of the island in order to construct a lighthouse.

– 2 –

Having reviewed the evidence submitted by the Parties, the Court finds that the territorial

domain of the Sultanate of Johor did cover in principle all the islands and islets within the Straits ofSingapore and did thus include Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh. It establishes that this possessionof the islands by the Sultanate was never challenged by any other Power in the region; and that it therefore satisfies the condition of “continuous and peaceful display of territorial sovereignty”.The Court thus concludes that the Sultanate of Johor had original title to Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh. It adds that this ancient title is confirmed by the nature and degree of the Sultan of Johor’s authority exercised over the Orang Laut (“the people of the sea”, who inhabited or visited the islands in the Straits of Singapore, including Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh and made this maritime area their habitat).

The Court then looks at whether this title was affected by developments in the period

between 1824 and the 1840s. In March 1824, the colonial Powers in the region, the United

Kingdom and the Netherlands, signed a Treaty which had the practical effect of broadly

establishing the spheres of influence of the two Powers in the East Indies. As a consequence, one

part of the Sultanate of Johor (under Sultan Hussein) fell within the British sphere of influence

while the other (under Sultan Abdul Rahman, Sultan Hussein’s brother) fell within a Dutch sphereof influence. In August 1824, Sultan Hussein ceded the island of Singapore, together with itsadjacent seas, straits, and islets to the extent of 10 geographical miles from the coast of Singapore to the English East India Company in the so-called Crawfurd Treaty. Finally, in a letter of 25 June 1825, Sultan Abdul Rahman “donated” certain territories, which were already within the British sphere of influence, to his brother, thereby confirming the division of the “old” Sultanate of Johor. After careful consideration of the legal effects of these developments, the Court finds that none of them brought any change to the original title.

The Court turns next to the legal status of Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh after the 1840s to

determine whether Malaysia and its predecessor retained sovereignty over the island. It observes

that in order to do so, it needs to assess the relevant facts, consisting mainly of the conduct of the

Parties (and of their predecessors) during the period under review.

The Court examines the events surrounding the selection process of the site of the lighthouse

and the construction of the latter, as well as the conduct of the Parties’ predecessors between 1852 and 1952 (in particular with respect to the British and Singapore legislation relating to Horsburgh lighthouse and in the context of the Straits lights system; constitutional developments of Singapore and Malaysia; and Johor regulation of fisheries in the 1860s), but is unable to draw any conclusions for the purposes of the case.

The Court notes that in a letter written on 12 June 1953 to the British Adviser to the Sultan

of Johor, the Colonial Secretary of Singapore asked for information about the status of Pedra

Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh in the context of determining the boundaries of the “Colony’s territorial

waters”. In a letter dated 21 September 1953, the Acting State Secretary of Johor replied that the

“Johore Government [did] not claim ownership” of the island. The Court considers that this

correspondence and its interpretation are of central importance “for determining the developing

understanding of the two Parties about sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh” and finds that the Johor’s reply shows that as of 1953 Johor understood that it did not have sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh.

The Court finally examines the conduct of the Parties after 1953 with respect to the island.

Having reviewed all arguments submitted to it, it finds that certain acts, inter alia the investigation of shipwrecks by Singapore within the island’s territorial waters and the permission granted or not granted by Singapore to Malaysian officials to survey the waters surrounding the island, may be seen as conduct à titre de souverain. The Court also considers that some weight can be given to the conduct of the Parties in support of Singapore’s claim (i.e., the absence of reaction from Malaysia to the flying of the Singapore ensign on the island, the installation by Singapore of military communications equipment on the island in 1977, and the proposed reclamation plans by Singapore to extend the island, as well as a few specific publications and maps).

The Court concludes, especially by reference to the conduct of Singapore and its

predecessors à titre de souverain, taken together with the conduct of Malaysia and its predecessors including their failure to respond to the conduct of Singapore and its predecessors, that by 1980 (when the dispute crystallized) sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh had passed to Singapore. The Court thus concludes that sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh belongs to Singapore.

. Sovereignty over Middle Rocks and South Ledge

Malaysia claims that the two maritime features have always been under Johor/Malaysian

sovereignty while Singapore’s position is that sovereignty over the features goes together with

sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh. With respect to Middle Rocks, the Court observes that the particular circumstances which led it to find that sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh rests with Singapore clearly do not apply to Middle Rocks. It therefore finds that original title to Middle Rocks should remain with Malaysia as the successor to the Sultanate of Johor.

As for South Ledge, the Court notes that this low-tide elevation falls within the apparently

overlapping territorial waters generated by Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh and by Middle Rocks.

Recalling that it has not been mandated by the Parties to draw the line of delimitation with respect

to their territorial waters in the area, the Court concludes that sovereignty over South Ledge

belongs to the State in the territorial waters of which it is located.

Composition of the Court

The Court was composed as follows: Vice-President Al-Khasawneh, Acting President in the

case; Judges Ranjeva, Shi, Koroma, Parra-Aranguren, Buergenthal, Owada, Simma, Tomka,

Abraham, Keith, Sepúlveda-Amor, Bennouna, Skotnikov; Judges ad hoc Dugard, Sreenivasa Rao;

Registrar Couvreur.

Judge Ranjeva appends a declaration to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Parra-Aranguren

appends a separate opinion to the Judgment of the Court; Judges Simma and Abraham append a

joint dissenting opinion to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Bennouna appends a declaration to

the Judgment of the Court; Judge ad hoc Dugard appends a dissenting opinion to the Judgment of

the Court; Judge ad hoc Sreenivasa Rao appends a separate opinion to the Judgment of the Court.


A summary of the Judgment appears in the document “Summary No. 2008/1”, to which summaries of the declarations and opinions are annexed. In addition, this press release, the summary and the full text of the Judgment can be found on the Court’s website (

under “Press Room” and “Cases”.


Information Department:

Mrs. Laurence Blairon, Secretary of the Court, Head of Department (+31 (0)70 302 2336)

Messrs. Boris Heim and Maxime Schouppe, Information Officers (+31 (0)70 302 2337)

Ms Joanne Moore, Associate Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2394)


Oleh ahmadhadeed

Siapa kata Singapura sudah cukup kenyang dengan Pulau batu Putih. Di dalam satu wawancara President Singapura masih MERASA SEDIH kerana tidak dapat memiliki Middle Rock dan juga South Ledge. Ini jauh sekali andaian ramai Singapura sensitif kepada kesedihan rakyat johor kehilangan tanah pusaka mereka kepada Singapura. Dari sejarah, Singapura pun di bawah Johore sebelum kerajaan Johor memberinya kepada British.

Adakah pemberian itu tidak kekal saperti HONG KONG , itu hendaklah di kaji balik. Hong Kong kembali ke tangan Republic Cina apabila habis tempoh nya. Isu sempadan baru juga akan menjadi satu lagi kes punca pertingkaian. Adakah sempadan baru singapura 20 nm mengikut undang undang antarabangsa akan sampai kepantai Johor. Bertambah kompleks lagi ialah middle rock berada di selatan Batu Putih dan kalau Malaysia turut sama mendesak 20 nm , maka berlaku pertindihan sempadan yang mungkin mengakibatkan konfliks. Soal keras kepala singapura berkaitan hak mereka 20 nm di sebut oleh MFA atau ministry of foreign affair Singapore.

Kita mesti ingat Singapura bukan berseorang dalam sebarang krisis kerana Singapura adalah kawan baik USA dan israel. Mereka mempunyai kawan yang lebih dari cukup untuk menguatkuasakan apa yang mereka mahu namun kita masih memberi statement berkaitan nelayan johor boleh menangkap ikan . Bila berlaku kematian di Kem khidmat negara, semua meraung marah kerana meletakkan anak mereka dalam bahaya. Sedar kah mereka , rakyat America telah berperang di Vietnam pada umur tingkatan enam dan mereka tidak pernah merungut apabila di kerah tenaga untuk mempertahankan sempadan atau kepentingan negara, Walau bagaimanapun banyak dasar luar America adalah menceroboh hak asasi manusia dan jahat , namun semangat patriotik mereka secara sistematik merupakan kekuatan mereka.

Berikut adalah statement Goh Singapore PM yang tak pernah kenyang dengan habuan percuma dari Malaysia semenjak tertubuh Singapura.

It was Mr Goh – then prime minister of Singapore – and former Malaysian prime minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamed, who had decided to bring the Pedra Branca dispute to third party arbitration, back in 1994. However, Mr Goh expressed disappointment that Singapore was not awarded the Middle Rocks as he had thought the judgement would be all or nothing since the rocky outcrops are so close to one another. Describing the ICJ decision as having a ‘hint of Solomon’, he said it is perhaps the best outcome for both sides. Responding to queries on the implications of the ICJ’s decision regarding Singapore’s entitlement to territorial maritime zones around Pedra Branca, an MFA spokesman said that the court was not asked to determine such questions of maritime space or boundary delimitation.

Berikut adalah statement MFA Singapura berkaitan kemungkinan akan jadi krisis sempadan

However, Singapore’s rights and interests on these matters will be pursued in accordance with international law. A 1980 press statement from MFA had said that Singapore has an Exclusive Economic Zone and a territorial sea limit that extends up to a maximum of 12 nautical miles. This is consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982. Singapore’s foreign ministry said the precise coordinates of Singapore’s territorial sea and Exclusive Economic Zone will be announced at an appropriate time. Should the limits of its territorial sea or Exclusive Economic Zone overlap with claims of neighbouring countries, Singapore will negotiate with those countries with a view to arrive at agreed delimitations, in accordance with international law.

Another island, another lighthouse operated by Singapore – will the government lose Pulau Pisang the way it


embarrassingly lost Pulau Batu Puteh to its southern neighbour?

Pontian parliamentarian Ahmad Maslan from the ruling Barisan Nasional said in a statement that the government should now act swiftly to protect the sovereignty of Pulau Pisang, situated about 15km off the Johor coastline in the Straits of Malacca.

pulau pisang light house 260508In 1900, Sultan Ibrahim of Johor handed the island to the British colonial administration based in Singapore.

A 16-metre lighthouse was built on the highest peak of the island and has been managed by the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA).

Pas Youth chief Khairul Faizi Ahmad Kamil, in a separate statement, urged Malaysia to meet with Singapore to determine ownership over the island.

He pointed out that:

• The Marine Department of Malaysia does not list the Pulau Pisang lighthouse as one of the 14 lighthouses managed by the government.

• Data from the University of North Carolina states that the lighthouse is owned and managed by Singapore.

• The Lighthouse Depot website recognises Singapore’s authority in managing the island, so long as the lighthouse is in operation, even though the island is located in Malaysian territory.

• MPA has indicated that Singapore is still managing the lighthouse.

pulau pisang 260508Suggesting the bilateral talks should be held to enable Malaysia to take over management of the lighthouse, Khairul also said development and management activities should be established to mark Malaysian authority over the island.

In addition, the government should ascertain that no agreement was ever made to hand the island to Singapore.

“The government should act quickly resolve this situation so that the rakyat will not have the nightmare of twice losing an island,” added Khairul.

Last Friday, the International Court of Justice ended a 28-year dispute over Pulau Batu Puteh by ruling that Singapore has jurisdiction over the island, which it calls Pedra Branca.


pulau pisang 260508

JOHOR BARU: There is no danger of losing Pulau Pisang to Singapore as Malaysia clearly has sovereignty over the island.

Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman said that this was despite Singapore operating a lighthouse on the 154ha island.

He said the ownership of the island was based on a treaty between Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Abu Bakar and the British in 1900, which clearly stated that Malaysia had sovereignty over the island.

“Our land office records show that Pulau Pisang belongs to Johor,” he said.

Abdul Ghani was responding to a suggestion made by Pontian MP Ahmad Maslan that the Government should conduct a study on taking over the operation of the lighthouse.

Ahmad said Pulau Pisang might suffer a similar fate as Batu Puteh where the International Court of Justice ruled in favour of Singapore.

Abdul Ghani said the lighthouse, which guided ships into the Singapore Straits, was manned by four Singaporean guards.

“The guards are relieved by another team once a fortnight and are required to report to the marine department, Customs and immigration in Kukup every time they arrive and depart from the island,” he said.

He added that Malaysians were allowed to enter the island but were prohibited from entering the lighthouse.

Abdul Ghani said there were also 82 farmers who tend to orchards on the island.

“They are only given permission to work on the land but are not granted ownership of the land,” he said.

The island is about 12km from Pontian Kechil and 5km from Benut.

Meanwhile, Johor PAS officials lodged a police report against former foreign minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, Abdul Ghani and Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, accusing them of causing Malaysia to lose Batu Puteh.

Johor Baru (South) OCPD Asst Comm Zainuddin Yaakob confirmed that the report had been received.

Perak Puteri Umno chief Dr Wan Norashikin Wan Noordin, meanwhile, said Malaysia must take the necessary steps to ensure she irrefutably owned all her islands and territories.

She said the steps were crucial in view of the recent decision on Batu Puteh.

DAP chairman Karpal Singh said the Malaysian Government was “foolhardy to have placed the case before ICJ” without the necessary evidence.

He was referring to Malaysian ambassador-at-large Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Mohamad’s statement that he could not locate a letter sent by a British governor in Butterworth to the Johor Temenggong seeking permission to build the Horsburgh Lighthouse on Batu Puteh.

Abdul Kadir led the Malaysian team to The Hague.

“Discovery of the letter now or in future cannot restore Malaysia’s sovereignty over Batu Puteh,” he said.

Name: Pulau Pisang Light

Also known as: Banana Island Light

Nearest Town or City:
Pontian Kechil, Johor, Malaysia

Location: Island in the Strait of Malacca.

Managing Organization:
Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore

The island is in Malaysian territory, but under an agreement signed in 1900 with the Sultan of Johor, the Government of the Straits Settlements was granted the right in perpetuity to the plot of land on which the lighthouse stands and to the roadway leading to it, as long as the Straits Settlements operated the lighthouse. Today, that responsibility falls to the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore. The access of Singaporean workers to the lighthouse has been a subject of contention in recent years.

Tower Height: 53

Height of Focal Plane: 493

Characteristic and Range: White flash every 10 seconds, visible for 20 nautical miles.

Description of Tower: White, circular metal tower.

This light is operational

Date Established: 1914

Date Present Tower Built: 1914

Current Use: Active aid to navigation.

KUALA LUMPUR 26 Mei – Kerajaan hari ini menetapkan semua stesen minyak di sempadan Thailand dan Singapura, dilarang sama sekali menjual petrol dan diesel kepada kenderaan asing berkuat kuasa Jumaat ini.

Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri dan Hal Ehwal Pengguna, Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad berkata, perkara itu diputuskan dalam mesyuarat Jawatankuasa Menangani Inflasi yang dipengerusikan oleh Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, di Parlimen hari ini.

Katanya, larangan itu membabitkan semua stesen minyak yang terletak dalam lingkungan 30 hingga 50 kilometer di sempadan Malaysia-Thailand membabitkan Perlis, Kedah, utara Perak dan Kelantan.

“Ia turut membabitkan beberapa daerah di Johor termasuk di Kulai dan Johor Bahru,” katanya kepada pemberita selepas mesyuarat itu di Parlimen di sini hari ini.

Shahrir berkata, arahan bertulis mengenai larangan mengikut Akta Kawalan Bekalan 1961 itu akan dikeluarkan kepada kira-kira 200 hingga 300 pemilik stesen minyak di kawasan yang telah dikenal pasti dalam masa terdekat ini.

Oleh itu kata beliau, pihaknya akan menempatkan pegawai di stesen berkenaan bagi memantau keadaan dan mengambil tindakan tegas terhadap pemilik yang ingkar.

Menurutnya, jika sabit kesalahan, mengikut akta berkenaan, syarikat terbabit boleh dikenakan denda sehingga RM250,000 atau tiga tahun penjara atau kedua-duanya, manakala individu RM100,000.

Usaha itu katanya, bagi mencegah kenderaan dari negara jiran yang terlalu banyak datang membeli petrol dan diesel subsidi di stesen-stesen minyak di sempadan.

“Saya membawa perkara ini kepada jawatankuasa inflasi dan dipersetujui,” katanya.

Beliau berkata, larangan itu akan dilaksanakan hingga pihaknya dapat menentukan sistem pengurusan subsidi yang sesuai untuk mengawal penjualan atau pembelian secara optimistik.

Katanya, usaha itu adalah langkah tegas kerajaan untuk mengurangkan ketirisan dan kebocoran subsidi supaya ia dinikmati rakyat negara ini yang berpendapatan rendah.

Bagaimanapun, bagi para pelawat atau pelancong yang datang ke negara ini katanya, mereka boleh membeli bahan api itu di stesen-stesen di luar dari kawasan larangan tersebut.

“Kenderaan asing kena datang (ke Malaysia) dengan tangki penuh, cukup hendak balik (negara mereka), tetapi kalau hendak datang melawat selepas lebih 50 kilometer, mereka boleh beli dari stesen di luar kawasan sempadan ini.

“Kalau beli di kawasan sempadan ini, kita akan suruh mereka balik dan pegawai kami akan memantau keadaan ini,” katanya.

Sementara itu, ketika mengulas cadangan Gabungan Persatuan Pengguna Malaysia (FOMCA) supaya pemberian subsidi petrol dilakukan mengikut kuasa kapasiti enjin kereta, Shahrir berkata, pihaknya turut mengambil kira cadangan itu dan sedang mengkaji mekanisme yang sesuai.

Antaranya, kata beliau, ia membabitkan latar belakang pemilik kenderaan bagi mengenal pasti mereka layak menerima subsidi berkenaan.

Utusan Online

subhanallah…. sekadar yang boleh disaksikan oleh pancaindera kurniaan ALLAH..

isu murtad Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim) menegaskan bahawa sudah tiba masanya untuk dicari suatu formula yang disepakati mengenai hukum syarak dan tatacara mengenai murtad atau permohonan keluar dari agama Islam di Malaysia.Usaha ke arah itu, tegas presidennya, Yusri Mohamad, menuntut suatu proses “ijtihad kolektif” yang melibatkan ahli-ahli fatwa dan pakar-pakar perundangan dalam bidang yang terbabit. “Adalah wajar pandangan semua pihak yang berkaitan dan berminat, termasuk yang bukan Islam, turut didengari dan diambil kira,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.”Akhirnya, memandangkan ini adalah isu hukum-hakam, (maka) para ahli fatwalah yang akan merumuskan keputusan terakhir dan cadangan peruntukan undang-undang yang sesuai,” tambahnya

Yusri berkata, keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Pulau Pinang dalam kes Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah adalah sangat penting serta perlu disoroti dengan saksama dari pelbagai sudut agar sikap yang setepatnya dapat diambil terhadap perkembangan terkini berkaitan isu murtad di negara ini.Sebenarnya, tegas beliau, ia bukanlah kes pertama seumpamanya di Malaysia, seperti yang dinyatakan oleh sesetengah laporan media. “Abim dimaklumkan bahawa memang sudah ada sebelum ini beberapa kes melibatkan saudara baru yang telah memohon dan mendapat kebenaran mahkamah syariah untuk keluar dari agama Islam. Cuma kes-kes lain sebelum ini tidak mendapat liputan meluas,” tegasnya.

Bagaimanapun, katanya, perlu ditegaskan bahawa adanya kes-kes ini bukan bermakna persoalan tersebut dalam negara ini sudah jelas dan seragam.”Hakim Mahkamah Syariah yang memutuskan kes-kes ini telah membuat keputusan berdasarkan fakta kes masing-masing, dalam situasi peruntukan undang-undang berkaitan murtad masih belum jelas atau seragam di negeri-negeri.”Walaupun negeri-negeri mempunyai bidangkuasa tersendiri dalam hal-ehwal Islam, namun ada keperluan kepada suatu sikap perundangan atau fatwa yang sejelas mungkin dan seragam berkaitan permohonan keluar agama Islam di negara ini.

“Isu murtad di Malaysia sering menjadi tumpuan masyarakat dalam dan luar negara dan menjadi alasan sesetengah pihak untuk memberi gambaran negatif terhadap Islam dan umat Islam di Malaysia,” tambanya.
Menurutnya, kes Siti Fatimah adalah kesan pelbagai keputusan mahkamah sebelum ini, termasuk keputusan Mahkamah Sivil tertinggi di Malaysia, Mahkamah Persekutuan dalam kes Azlina Jailani atau Lina Joy, yang mempertegaskan bidangkuasa eksklusif kepada Mahkamah Syariah dalam kes-kes murtad dan seumpama dengannya. Justeru, katanya, kedudukan Mahkamah Syariah sebagai forum terbaik bagi menentukan status agama seseorang yang asalnya beragama Islam, tidak patut dipertikaikan lagi. “Terlepas dari soal betul-salahnya penghakiman dalam kes Siti Fatimah ini, ia membuktikan bahawa Mahkamah Syariah boleh dan mungkin membuat yang memihak kepada sentimen pihak bukan Islam. Adalah jelas tanggapan bahawa Mahkamah Syariah akan sentiasa berat sebelah terhadap pihak Islam adalah salah dan tersasar.

“Dengan latar tersebut, Abim merasa kesal dengan sikap Majlis Peguam Malaysia melalui naib pengerusinya, Ragunath Kesavan seperti yang dilaporkan oleh media, yang terus-menerus berkeras bahawa kes-kes seumpama ini sepatutnya ditangani oleh Mahkamah Sivil.”Semua pihak haruslah menghormati penghakiman dalam kes tersebut. Sudah tentu ini tidak menutup ruang untuk Majlis Agama Islam Pulau Pinang (MAIPP) memfailkan rayuan terhadap penghakiman tersebut untuk dipertimbangkan di peringkat yang lebih tinggi.”Sepintas lalu, nampaknya kedudukan isu tersebut tidaklah begitu mudah. Tidak semestinya faktor bahawa seseorang itu telah tidak mengamalkan amalan-amalan agama Islam, wajar menjadi faktor utama penentu status agama seseorang Islam,” tegas Yusri.

Bagaimanapun, tegasnya, ia mungkin sesuai dalam situasi yang melibatkan seseorang saudara baru yang keislamannya pada asalnya tidak jelas serta boleh dipertikaikan ketulenannya. Akhirnya, kata Yusri, pihak berkuasa agama perlu lebih bersungguh-sungguh dan cekap dalam memelihara kefahaman dan penghayatan agama saudara-saudara baru. “Walau apapun latar dan tujuan sebenar seseorang saudara baru itu memeluk Islam, pihak berkuasa agama berada dalam posisi yang strategik dan mempunyai kapasiti untuk menyempurnakan penghayatan Islam mereka.

“Abim turut kesal , jikalau benar, seperti gambaran yang disebut dalam penghakiman kes tersebut, bahawa dalam kes ini, pihak berkuasa agama negeri terbabit telah gagal mengambil langkah-langkah yang semaksima mungkin dalam memelihara hal-ehwal keagamaan para saudara baru,” katanya.

Sumber dipetik :

Next Page »