Tuesday, July 1, 2008

The 'body snatchers' strike again

On June 25, 2008, mee seller S Selvam, 48, from Ayer Itam, Penang applied for an injunction in the high court to prevent the Penang Islamic Religious Affairs Department (Jaipp) and the Perak Islamic Religious Affairs Department (Jaip) from claiming the remains of his step-brother B Elangesvaran for burial.

According to the statement, Elangesvaran, who was married with two children, had committed suicide by hanging himself at a premises in Jalan Siakap, Bagan Serai, Perak on June 22.

His body was sent for a post-mortem at the Parit Buntar Hospital which issued a permit for burial.

However, when the family came to claim the body, the hospital staff informed them that the body could not be handed over to the plaintiff because Elangesvaran had converted to Islam at Jaipp and his body would instead be released to Jaip for burial as a Muslim.

Selvam then contacted Jaip for clarification and proof that Elangesvaran had converted to Islam but one Ustaz Kassuri Mazlan could not show any official document which carried the deceased's signature or thumb print to prove his conversion.

Selvam said he was only given a letter purportedly scribbled on by his late step-brother but there was no signature or thumb print on it to show that Elangesvaran had converted to Islam.

Selvam filed through lawyer RSN. Rayer the summons for the injunction, to prevent the Penang Islamic Religious Affairs Department (Jaipp) and Perak Islamic Religious Affairs Department (Jaip) from claiming the remains of his step-brother B. Elangesvaran for burial.

For those who do not know, B Elangesvaran full name is Elangeswaran Benedict.

I find this episode strange indeed and it almost always happens at the hospital morgue.

About two years back, someone told me of a relative who converted to Islam several years back, but when he died they cremated him according to Hindu rites. The family had their way and no one from any Islamic religious department came looking, perhaps because they did not know. He died at home.

Then there are urban legends like the story of a religious department seizing the body of a Sikh and burying him according to Muslim rites but angry Sikh relatives dug up the grave and cremated the body according to Sikh rites. Well, I suppose nothing could be done by the religious authorities after that.

Which brings us to the issue of dying, the post-mortem at hospitals, the morgue which is supposed to release the body to the next of kin, the issuing of a death certificate and notifing the police.

However, it seems that they notified the religious department also otherwise how did they come to know? Is it in the standard operating procedure to notify the state religious department? If so by whose authority ?

An explanation from the Parit Buntar hospital should be forthcoming. I strongly urge opposition MPs to question the ministry of health in parliament.

In a similar case last year involving one A.Rayappan, the hospital similarly withheld his body from the next-of-kin. Obviously, the hospital informed the state religious department unless the state religious department would have us believe that they have a representative stationed at the hospital to screen all bodies for their religious status.

The lawyer representing the family of the late Rayappan, A Sivanesan, said his case focused on getting the government hospital to honour its obligations to its client and return his body to his next-of-kin. Hospital authorities could not be reached for comment.

He was also quoted as saying, ‘It's known as corpse-snatching. You don't bother about the man when he is alive. When he dies you come and snatch the body’.

Now back to the issue of proof. A scribbled note - more so without a signature - cannot be a binding document. I urge that proof of conversion be nothing less than a statutory declaration duly endorsed by a commissioner for oaths.

In my opinion, the family of the deceased should be given priority to handle the burial - not third parties or religious authorities unless the deceased left clear instructions as to the funeral rites he or she would prefer in event of their demise.

This is the only fair rule I can think off. As it is the family who are grieving, withholding the body only rubs salt into the wound.

If these incidents are allowed to continue, it will just anger non-Muslims and present Islam in a bad light. Just because some misguided persons are overzealous about dress codes for women, segregating sexes in public and snatching bodies, they present Islam as unjust, and prevent many a potential convert from delving into the wondrous wisdom of the Al-Quran.

Many a time some learned Muslim person tells me, ‘Vijay don't misunderstand, that is not what Islam is about’. My answer to them would be, ‘Don't tell me, tell that to your misguided Muslim brothers’.

In December 2007, opposition leader Lim Kit Siang called on Gerakan and MIC leaders to propose at the cabinet meeting that Article 121 (1A) of the Constitution be amended in view of the controversies relating to the burial of Muslim converts.

He said the cabinet should be bold enough to consider an amendment to rectify the injustices which were never intended to be created by parliament when the constitutional amendment was enacted in 1988.

Article 121(1A) states that the high courts and inferior courts shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of the syariah courts.

This goes against the spirit of the federal constitution that says we all enjoy equal protection under the law.

No comments: