YOURSAY | ‘Let us see whether the police will act on the court’s decision.’

Yoursay: Is the long wait for justice finally over for Indira?

Unilateral conversion: ‘Court did what Parliament, cabinet were afraid to do’


David Dass: It took nine long years for justice to be done. In that time the mother suffered the loss of one of her children.

Despite obtaining a mandamus from the High Court, the police refused to enforce the order. Now the Federal Court has ruled definitely that the child must be restored to the mother.

Why was this such a difficult issue to resolve? Why were the police reluctant to comply with the order of the High Court? Why did no consequence follow the police refusal to comply with the order of the High Court?

Why did the government not act quickly and decisively on the matter? Why did Parliament not act? Was the mother’s agony not enough reason for any of the agencies of government to act?

Was it not clear to all that a minor child cannot be wrested from the bosom of his or her mother by an irresponsible father using the guise of conversion to Islam as a cover for his wrongful act?

Tholu: To M Indira Gandhi’s lawyer, Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran, I congratulate you on your extraordinary success, and I salute your unwavering persistence and commitment in fighting for the religious rights of Hindus, and setting right the wrongs committed by the insensitive and overpowering authorities and organisations.

You will go down in history as a man who singlehandedly fought for the promised rights of the non-Muslims in the Federal Constitution, a feat that even all the MPs in Parliament could not achieve, particularly the MPs from MIC.

Laws are made to regulate society so that every member lives in peace and harmony. Any law that is diametrical to this aim should only be seen, in modern times, as oppressive and dictatorial.

It would appear therefore that our government had tolerated such laws that have caused untold agony and misery to wives whose husbands had converted and unilaterally converted their underaged children as well.

On reflection, this protracted legal battle on unilateral conversion could have been solved by giving the word “parent” in the constitution both singular and plural definitions the moment the matter was brought to the courts.

But until now it appears that no one had the courage to do so.

Kangkung: The maximum punishment for kidnapping in this country is death, and the police were dragging their feet in the Indira Gandhi case.

How can the police continue to defy the courts by not arresting Indira’s ex-husband, K Pathmanathan @ Mohd Ridhuan Abdullah? If he was of a different faith, would the police continue to be silent? Is this a country with two sets of laws?

Apa Ini: Congratulations to our Federal Court judges. There’s hope yet. Maybe, just maybe, inspector-general of police Mohamad Fuzi Harun will now pick up the courage and bring the child back to his mother.

Anonymous 242641505703475: The court has spoken loud and clear. Justice has been served. Custody of children unilaterally converted must now be given to the mother.

All right-thinking Malaysians must applaud the apex court for giving a wise decision. Right has triumphed over wrong. Let Indira have her child back.

The IGP must now act quickly to get the child back to the mother, and serve a warrant of arrest of Mohd Ridhuan.

The mother has suffered a lot over nine years. The child has grown up. Let this episode be the last; no more unilateral conversion, please.

Shibboleth: People can judge according to their wits; the judges judged according to the law. We salute the Federal Court judges.

Raja Chulan: The judgment has not only corrected the wrong done on Indira and her children, but also answered matters pertaining the role and powers of the Syariah Court in relation to civil court.

This judgment has to a certain extent cleared the misconceptions and misrepresentations by vested parties in this country to portray that there exists a dual-track justice system in this country.

This judgment correctly reiterates the limitations of syariah laws and their courts. It also reaffirms that it is the civil courts alone that have the power to interpret or give guidance regarding the laws in this country.

Syariah laws and the attendant courts can only act in accordance with the powers allocated to it under the Federal Constitution, and that any doubt regarding this has to be referred back to the civil court for interpretation.

Syabas to the job well done by the brave and responsible judges.

Red Hero: MCA and MIC leaders like Ti Lian Ker, Dr S Subramaniam and Vel Paari, etc, should now quieten down, as their parties just stood by and watched the drama unfold, allowing Indira and many others to suffer for years. They are part of the ruling government and must be held accountable as well.

To the opposition, take this message strongly to the Indian masses and leverage on it for votes and for a new change for the Indian community.

Anonymous 2251681440225523: All those involved in this atrocity will face justice on earth. All religions emphasise compassion.

The religious bigots and their supporters, and those who had the power to right the wrongs but for reasons best known to them did not act, will pay for their deliberate sins.

Vijay47: I suppose the next chapter in this sad tale is the response from the ethno-nationalist groups like Perkasa, Isma, and the others who have strange ways of reflecting the sanctity of their religion.

Just not immediately, give them time to Google Translate the Federal Court’s judgment.

Anonymous_3e86: Will it end here? Or will the Syariah Court now override the decision and impose its own ruling?

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.