Tag: MUIS

  • MUIS Asatizahs Must Step Up And Guide Community, Stop Remaining Silent

    MUIS Asatizahs Must Step Up And Guide Community, Stop Remaining Silent

    Minister Masagos’ comments are of concern.

    Firstly, saying that raising issues like the tudung would ‘easily lead us to open old wounds that can instigate riots’ , to our minds, smacks of fear-mongering. What evidence is there that a rational look at the tudong issue would lead to riots? In fact, many Singaporeans regardless of race or religion do support the wearing of tudung by our nurses and those in uniformed services.

    Secondly, merely stating that religion needs to be practiced based on context can be misleading without proper elucidation on the issue. For instance, what if someone were to say the command to fast came about during the Medina stage of the prophetic struggle. We now live in the Meccan stage, esp in SG. So fasting is not obligatory on me. Also the order for salat came in the late Meccan stage. We are very much in the era of Nation states. The khilafah will not be established anytime soon. Therefore why should I pray?

    We ask the asatizahs in MUIS to comment on this.

    If salat and saum is not something that would be applicable to the KPI in MUIS, then perhaps the next example would.

    In context of Islamic history, zakat is paid to the khilafah. There is no khilafah for almost a century. Why then should we give out zakat?

    We really ask the asatizahs in MUIS to guide us.

    Wallahualam.

     

    Source: Singapore Muslims for an Independent MUIS

  • Masagos Zulkifli: Religion Must Be Practised Based On Local Context

    Masagos Zulkifli: Religion Must Be Practised Based On Local Context

    Religion must be practised in context and Muslim scholars here understand how certain religious teachings should be taught in Singapore’s context, said Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli.

    In an exclusive interview with Malay-language current affairs programme Bicara, Mr Masagos discussed the threat of terrorism in Singapore as well as the danger of preachers who impart divisive teachings. Mr Masagos was speaking in response to Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam’s recent speech on the issue of terrorism and security of Singapore.

    Q: Minister Shanmugam’s speech on the issue of terrorism and security of Singapore – among other things – also raised the issue of the Muslim community growing somewhat more distant from the others, which is viewed as one of the threats to Singapore. As former Second Minister of State for Home Affairs, can you help to clarify what does the Government mean by this?

    Masagos Zulkifli: If we examine the speech, we know that Minister Shanmugam recognises that the Singapore Muslim community is a model community that we can be proud of. This is an important context of the speech, that he recognises the Malay/Muslim community has been able to live together with other communities through thick and thin without causing any conflicts, though they may arise from time to time. This is an important context which we have to bear in mind of the speech.

    But today, there are new external threats, especially the Islamic State ideology that has influenced many of our young people – through social media – to do one or two things. First, to join them to form an Islamic State in Syria, Iraq, and if they are not able to go there, then they can cause mischief or perform some killings to create troubles by doing whatever they can in their respective countries.

    So, we are concerned, in case Singaporeans do not understand about these new threats which may influence some people easily. They might be influenced to undertake violent acts without understanding that we have been able to live with each other in harmony.

    If you look at the threats in the last two years, they have become bigger over time. In the past, it was only radical ideology that the radicals wanted to spread to their friends, whether through social media and so on. Today we see a situation where acts of violence are becoming more common in cities – like the Paris attacks, and more recently, the attack on our neighbours in Jakarta. And we should not rule out the possibility that it could happen here.

    We have already arrested several young men who had been influenced and wanted to go to Syria or Iraq to join the fight with Islamic State, but they obviously wanted to conduct acts of violence including on our Prime Minister and the President. This shows that radical ideology has been able to sow the seeds of violence that can be used to manipulate a minority in the community to conduct the acts of violence which can undermine the harmony in our country.

    Q: Speaking of the “seeds of violence”, the Government has also picked up on some young Muslims who now think it is wrong to greet others by saying “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Deepavali”, as they consider it un-Islamic. We are also told there are also those who believe that it is wrong to recite the National Pledge or sing the National Anthem. Surely these are just symptoms of a problem. What is the larger problem here?

    Masagos Zulkifli: The Malay/Muslim community has all along been guided by our local scholars. Despite the various problems that arise from time to time, we can solve them by taking into account the interest of our society, our religion and at the same time, we can build a developed country together with other people.

    Now we begin to see influences that can come to our country through social media and so on, and this has been widespread in our society. If we look at some of the features of these influences which are disturbing, among those is the belief that we should create a situation or environment which is so pure and perfect, resembling utopia. And this is something imposed on us to implement it hastily.

    For example, if in the past we can have a meal together with others without thinking of what to eat, now some of us begin to isolate ourselves – they do not want to eat with other people because they do not eat halal food. But, thank God, through the guidance of our local scholars, we know that this is not right.

    Similarly, on the issue of the threats of radical ideologies that have come through social media and have influenced some of our young people, we need our local scholars to address them so that the young people know what to accept and what to reject.

    Q: How effective are our local religious scholars in tackling negative foreign influences?

    Masagos Zulkifli: We are fortunate that we are able to produce our own scholars through our local madrasahs. This is important. If they come from foreign countries, even from Mecca or Medina, they may also carry contexts or cultures that may not be suitable for the life and needs of the Muslims here.

    Religion must also have its contexts and many of our scholars from the local madrasahs and guided by other local ulamas, they understand better how certain religious teachings should be taught in our context.

    Among other things: How we highly value the harmony with other people, how we have to respect the rights of others who have their own practices and how we should tolerate the religious practices of others and do not see them as something that should be banished. This is the context most suitable to us, which is now being threatened by views coming from places that are now being fought by Islamic State.

    BANNING OF FOREIGN PREACHERS

    Q: Recently, the Singapore Government also firmly stated that it would ban foreign missionaries, who are intolerant to the situation here, from preaching in this country. Is there a particular trend that the Government is worried about, concerning foreign preachers gaining attention in Singapore?

    Masagos Zulkifli: Actually, this is a long-standing practice and does not only apply to Muslim preachers. It applies to all religions and anyone who comes to Singapore and rakes up issues concerning language, religion or race which can cause unhappiness among the different races and lead to racial unrest. We have been able to eradicate and prevent all this.

    So, if anyone who says wonderful things while in Singapore, things that are appropriate to our religion, but in their own country or through social media, they say things that can sow the seeds of terrorism or intolerance towards other religions, including forbidding “Merry Christmas” greetings and so on without taking into account its context, without taking into account the teachings of our religious scholars that allows it, and they reject our religious scholars – this is very dangerous.

    If we cannot trust our own religious scholars, who else can we trust? We have to rely on our religious scholars, we must trust our religious scholars who understand the context of living as a minority in Singapore so that we can continue with our right to practice our religion, as a Malay, as a Muslim.

    Q: We would like to get a full clarification from you as a Cabinet Minister. Lately, we have been seeing a lot of discussion on the Internet that Mufti Menk of Zimbabwe, for instance, has been banned in Singapore because of – among others – his opinion that Muslims should not wish others “Merry Christmas” and so on, and such attitudes are quite contrary to the spirit of religious and racial harmony in Singapore and because of that, he is not allowed to preach in this country. What is your response? 

    Masagos Zulkifli: We have the guidance of our local religious scholars who allow and even encourage us to develop the spirit of harmony and be compassionate to other communities. In fact, when we wish others “Merry Christmas”, we know that we are not Christians and will not become Christians by saying “Merry Christmas”.

    So, this is important and we do not need opinions which are not only contrary to what we uphold but can also create a situation that is not harmonious. As I have said earlier, the ban on foreign speakers is not just applicable to Muslims. This applies to all, whether they are Christians or Buddhists and so on.

    We recognise that the Government wants to create a harmonious, peaceful environment for everyone. Anyone who threatens it, whether they are in this country or overseas, we will stop it.

    THE TUDUNG ISSUE

    Q: What is your response to calls by two Malay Members of Parliament in recent Parliamentary debates for bigger spaces on the discussion of identity and religion, including the wearing of the tudung, and whether the Government can be more flexible on the issue?

    Masagos Zulkifli: I have two comments. Firstly, religion, language and race are very sensitive matters. We may feel that the time is right for us to discuss it among ourselves or with the other races. But it can also easily lead us to open old wounds that can instigate riots, and we do not want this to happen.

    Just look at what happened to our neighbour. Our neighbouring country (Malaysia) saw the Bersih demonstration being held as a protest against an issue. But incidentally, due to the presence of many Chinese, it nearly ignited a racial problem over there because of those images. Therefore, when a rather sensitive matter is being debated openly, those who are speaking, as well as those who are listening, may not be rational. If emotions have been rattled, people can do something unthinkable.

    Secondly, we should also see that – as I have said earlier – religious matters belong in the domain of scholars. These scholars not only possess deep knowledge, but they also practise and impart religion wisely. This happens in all religions. When we teach our children, we know that there are certain levels that are suitable for their age, suitable for their level of maturity and it will not be forced upon them. The same goes for religion – we need to do things gradually, and in any religious issue, religious scholars know the best solutions.

    I think that some people like to interfere in such matters, especially if they can politicise it. This will turn a particular issue into something more complicated than what it was initially.

    Q: What are your thoughts on MP Zaqy Mohamad’s call to see the wearing of tudung as part of a new normal, and whether the Government can re-look its approach on religious issues within the context of this new normal?

    Masagos Zulkifli: In any social change within society that happens to a particular community, we must be careful because it not only impacts that community, but also society’s perception of that community.

    This happens not only for the tudung issue, but we can also look at how the Government views the gay issue, for instance, or sexual relations between people of the same gender. The Government also did not budge on this matter. If we begin to budge, we know that there are groups who still cannot recognise the consequences of having the freedom to do whatever they want, just like the other religions.

    Therefore, we should not just be concerned with what we want. We should also know that every community wants its rights to be met. But, we also know that in Singapore – as mentioned by DPM Teo Chee Hean – we have remained as a harmonious society not because every community is given its rights, but because each community has sacrificed something that is very precious to them for the sake of that harmony, and this is something that we truly hold dear.

    Hence, I hope that in all these matters, we must be wise, we must think long and hard, we must go with those who are learned in these matters. What is the religious issue, its impact on religion, its social impact, its impact on society and so on? Think it over carefully because when we solve an issue, and if the issue is a complicated one, we must tread lightly.

    Q: So are there any developments in the discussion about the tudung, religion or race?

    Masagos Zulkifli: All matters pertaining to any religion are often discussed in the Cabinet and we do look at ways to lead society to be more open, more accepting – but we are careful in doing this.

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • High Court: Courts Have No Jurisdiction Over Muslim Matters, MUIS Appropriate Authority To Seek Judicial Assistance

    High Court: Courts Have No Jurisdiction Over Muslim Matters, MUIS Appropriate Authority To Seek Judicial Assistance

    The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) is the only body that oversees all Muslim matters, including the administration of Muslim charitable trusts, and the courts are in no position to interfere unless MUIS deems it appropriate to seek judicial assistance, the High Court has found.

    In striking out an application by trustees of the Valibhoy Charitable Trust to replace a fellow trustee who had allegedly “deliberately refused to discharge his duty”, Judicial Commissioner (JC) Kannan Ramesh found that the courts have no jurisdiction over such trusts, also known as “wakafs”, under the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA).

    LEGAL AUTHORITY OF MUIS COMES FROM ‘SPECIAL POSITION OF MALAYS’

    First enacted in November 1960 and most recently amended in April 1999, the AMLA is meant to protect the Islamic religion by establishing a Muslim body to deal with the administration of Muslim law and the regulation of Muslim religious affairs in Singapore. MUIS was established as a statutory board in 1968.

    The legislative intent, said JC Kannan in a written judgment dated Jan 29, corresponds with the Republic’s Constitution, which sets out that the Government is to “recognise the special position of the Malays” and protect, support and promote their religious, political, economic and cultural interests, among others.

    Under the AMLA, MUIS is charged with the responsibility of dealing with the affairs of all Muslim religious trusts, including wakafs.

    In particular, the Act gives MUIS the authority to appoint and remove trustees. Should MUIS decide to remove a trustee, it must simultaneously appoint another one.

    According to the wakaf.sg website managed by MUIS, the religious body has regulatory oversight of wakafs, while other trustees play managerial roles, but will still have to seek approval for decisions such as the selling and buying of assets.

    The AMLA confers the courts’ power in relation to wakafs only when MUIS invokes the courts’ assistance. Even then, the courts can only deliberate on the meaning and effect of the declaration creating the wakaf.

    “Importantly, matters concerning the administration of the wakaf have been carefully removed from the equation,” said JC Kannan, adding that MUIS must be the only forum where trustees of a wakaf can direct their disputes.

    GRANTING COURTS POWER COULD CAUSE ‘INCONSISTENT DECISIONS’

    With the enactment of the AMLA, Parliament could not have intended for trustees of the wakaf, apart from MUIS, to have recourse to the courts, said JC Kannan, as that might lead to inconsistent decisions and different standards applied by MUIS and the courts.

    Giving the latter similar power would make “the recipe for an ideal cocktail for inconsistent decisions”, he said.

    “(MUIS’) power to remove trustees could effectively be bypassed, making the process a mockery of what Parliament clearly (intended) by enacting the provision,” he said, adding that it would also allow trustees to launch “backdoor challenges” to either MUIS’ or the courts’ decisions.

    “These situations would lead to a very uncomfortable paradigm where (MUIS) and the courts could render two conflicting decisions on the same issue, applying different statutory standards … It is amply clear to me that Parliament could not have intended such a paradigm,” he said.

    While the plaintiffs in the Valibhoy Charitable Trust’s case subsequently alleged that MUIS’ administration of the trust was unsatisfactory and that it had “stayed silent” when legal action was launched, JC Kannan noted that the plaintiffs had not raised these arguments in their initial affidavits.

    Instead, JC Kannan found that the plaintiffs had avoided going to MUIS, possibly with the view that they might obtain “a more favourable outcome” from the court.

    “As an aside, I must highlight that the court’s processes are not to be used to deliberately undermine the statutory authority afforded by Parliament to MUIS. That would be an abuse of process,” he said.

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • Yaacob Ibrahim: Informal Religious Groups Formed By Foreign Workers Should Work With Mosques, MUIS

    Yaacob Ibrahim: Informal Religious Groups Formed By Foreign Workers Should Work With Mosques, MUIS

    Informal religious groups formed by foreign workers here should step forward to engage with mosques and the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) so that they could better tap the resources available, said Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister-in-Charge of Muslim Affairs, yesterday.

    In light of the arrests of 27 radicalised Bangladeshi workers in Singapore, the spotlight has turned on radicalised teachings that could easily be spread through informal religious study groups conducted by the foreign workers themselves, as mosques here lack the resources and manpower to reach out to them.

    TODAY had earlier reported that mosques in the Little India and Bugis areas that are frequently visited by the foreign workers do not have religious classes that specifically catered to them.

    “We know that some of the foreign groups in Singapore do have their own members of their community who are actually guiding them,” said Dr Yaacob, who is also the Minister for Communications and Information.

    “The most important thing is that whoever is playing that role, please engage MUIS, because we want to make sure that whatever they are teaching is aligned with our teachings, with the way we practise Islam here in Singapore,” he said on the sidelines of a graduation ceremony for students from Egypt’s Al-Azhar University at the Muis Academy.

    Dr Yaacob said there is a need for some graduates to stand up and publicly rebut the radical ideologies which some members of the community may have. “(What) is needed (is) for someone to come out specifically to break down someone’s radical arguments and why they are wrong and (in) which areas they are wrong and then hope that they can also find the errors of the radical ideologies, not (only) from a religious perspective, but (also) from a humanistic sociological analysis,” he said.

    Meanwhile, speaking in Parliament yesterday, Associate Professor Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade GRC) asked if the Government is able to do more in terms of educational publicity in reaching out to religious groups which may not be formally organised.

    “Some of them may inadvertently not realise that they’re being taught some of (these) variants of the (religion),” she added.

    In response, Dr Yaacob said the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) — which was set up to enhance the standing of religious teachers here and serves as a reliable source of reference for the Singapore Muslim Community — is in place for religious teachers.

    He urged members of the community to refer to the list on the MUIS website to find the appropriate religious teachers for their classes.

    “So, we are not against informal groups … but the most important thing is they select the teachers from the ARS and if they can do that, I think it would be good.”

    Meanwhile, Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC) asked if there is a protocol or standard operating procedure for the approval of visit passes for overseas religious leaders.

    He cited a recent incident where a visit by a “particular preacher”, which he did not name, was denied by the authorities here.

    Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam said the protocol is “very straightforward and transparent”. For example, if the preacher’s teachings are “contrary to our values”, he will be denied entry to Singapore, Mr Shanmugam added.

    Dr Yaacob, speaking to the media at the Muis Academy, said he believes more could be done to integrate the foreign workers into the fabric of society here. “We must continue to engage the foreign community here to make sure the resources within the Malay-Muslim community are also available to them,” he said.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Mufti: Teachings That Promote ‘Exclusivity And Isolationism’ A Cause For Worry

    Mufti: Teachings That Promote ‘Exclusivity And Isolationism’ A Cause For Worry

    Teachings on the Internet that promote “exclusivity and isolationist” inclinations are a “serious cause for worry” because they can go as far as to deny the rights of others to exist, said the Mufti of Singapore, Dr Mohamed Fatris Bakaram.

    It is not unfounded for some to be sceptical about the role of religion in enriching the “common space” in society, if religion preaches isolation, said Dr Fatris, who was delivering a speech at the SRP Distinguished Lecture and Symposium today (Jan 20) on Islam and developing the common space.

    In extreme cases, Dr Fatris noted, isolationist tendencies with the potential to fragment societies are not limited to rejecting certain thoughts, cultural practices or beliefs, but go on to deny the right of others to exist. This has been the case with perpetrators of terrorist activities, who have “cloaked their crimes with twisted religious arguments”, he said, calling such beliefs “extremely dangerous and totally unacceptable.”

    Despite the existence of clear and constructive religious resources and narratives on the “common space”, these will be rejected by those who spread isolationist teachings. As such, it will not help to increase the number of “pro-common-space narratives”, said Dr Fatris.

    “We then end up with a meaningless debate and endlessly quibble over whose evidence is stronger, which will only lead to more confusion. The prejudicial approach of some groups will only bolster their resolve to reject the notion of a ‘common space’,” he said.

    Dr Fatris was speaking a day after Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam, outlining the threats of terrorism and radicalisation Singapore faces, said community leaders have to help lead the “fight for hearts and minds” for a united Singapore.

    A resource that could be tapped are religious institutions like mosques and madrasahs, which can promote deeper interfaith understanding and offering activities for others to participate in, said Dr Fatris.

    “In our respective institutions, we ought to foster a sense of bonding with other communities, to nurture respect and love for humanity and fellow citizens, to deepen what one may refer to as, the “emotional common space” between us. This ought to be a key component of our religious curricula,” he said.

    Speaking to the media after his speech, Dr Fatris noted interfaith dialogues have been going on for years, and while there is still some “sense of discomfort and lack of confidence among minorities” who question the need for interfaith dialogues, this attitude has changed over the years.

    “If we do not start now with a serious and constructive interfaith dialogue, I think it will be a waste for Singapore as a nation. It is something that is, for me, crucial for the next 50 years, that we have a deeper understanding of racial differences and religious diversity,” he said.

    He also said there must be eagerness and willingness to come together to discuss aspects of differences in faith, adding: “Socially, we are strong enough to embark on this.”

    The symposium was organised by the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com