KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 25 - Saiful Bukhari Azlan's oath is valid and does not contravene Islamic law according to Federal Territory Mufti Datuk Wan Zahidi Wan Teh."An oath is valid as long as he swears in the name of Allah and says a qasam alphabet -- waw, ba and ta -- by uttering Walahi, Wabillahi, Watawallahi," he told reporters in his office at the Federal Territories Islamic Affairs Department today.
He said this was so as there were two kinds of oaths; one in the course of proceedings in a Syariah court and another outside of a trial, adding that the latter could be performed freely if one chose to do so to make a general statement.
He did, however, note that while Saiful's oath had no relation to the one taken in a Syariah court, "it is up to the court if they want to use it as evidence."
He also commented on the sacred position of hukum (Islamic law) when expressing his doubts over the credibility of Ramlang Porigi, the imam who had overseen Saiful's oath and had yesterday said the oath was invalid due to technicalities.
"Whoever makes a decision on hukum without making reference to credible sources of knowledge has a place in hell ready for him. This is because what you say will guide the public. When you talk about hukum, you are signing off on it on behalf of Allah.
"Where is his reference? I was informed he is only a low-ranking officer. What are his qualifications? As an imam, he may not be qualified to speak on matters of law and I have doubts that he can read scripture," the mufti said, adding that Ramlang's comments may confuse Muslims.
Seeking to assert his authority on the matter, he added that this was why he had a book of scripture in front of him throughout the press conference.
"When I write, I make references to the scripture. I don't dare to speak just from my memory alone."
He also added that Ramlang attended the swearing as a matter of procedure at the mosque, not because Islamic law required witnesses or an imam to conduct it. However, he did concur with Ramlang that it was not a sumpah muhabalah as it required the agreement of both parties.
According to Wan Zahidi, hukum did not require issues such as time, place, the need for a witness, the swearing on a Quran or the subject matter of the oath as conditions for taking an oath that is not part of Syariah proceedings.
He added, however, that one could add weight when swearing by doing any of the following: after the Asar prayers on Friday, in a mosque by the pulpit, with a holy book or the reading of the 77th verse from Surah Aal Imran.
"And using just one qasam alphabet is sufficient but Saiful chose to say all three out of his own confidence."
On this point he insisted that the similarities to the Christian act of swearing on the Bible was a non-issue.
"Similarities cannot be assumed to be an act of copying. For example, Christians say Amen and Muslims say Amin when praying."
Wan Zahidi also said that any Muslim could take an oath at the mosque as it was meant to be utilised by Muslims but stopped short of saying that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, whom Saiful accused of sodomy, should do likewise.
Instead, he said that the issue should not be politicised: "Religion is the domain of Allah and should not be used to forward any agenda but the truth."
kzso - for now the mufti of perlis, perak, ft have given their personal opinion. what about muftis from kedah, n. sembilan, johore, terengganu and kelantan? it's ok to get the personal opinion from muftis but it's much better to have an ijtima' ulama' so that the majlis fatwa can give a fatwa on this....
No comments:
Post a Comment