Ada sesetengah kakitangan di Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara (JPN) enggan mendaftar nama bapa dalam surat beranak seseorang kanak-kanak yang lahir kurang enam bulan daripada tarikh perkahwinan ibu bapa.
Mereka mempercayai bayi tersebut tidak boleh dinasabkan kepada nama bapa.
JPN ialah sebuah badan kerajaan yang berciri sivil – yakni ia dipertanggungjawabkan untuk mendaftar butir-butir kelahiran kanak-kanak Malaysia yang pelbagai keturunan dan yang dimasukkan pelbagai agama.
Setahu saya JPN bukan sebuah agensi agama Islam.
Tindakan pegawai-pegawai JPN yang terbabit dalam hal ini menimbulkan tanda tanya dan harus dipersoal sama ada ia wajar atau tidak.
Sebenarnya lebih bagus jika diterimapakai sahaja cadangan supaya — “Just treat the birth certificates as a civil document not unlike a car registration card” (rujuk bawah).
Tak payah diikut-ikutkan Ustaz Ridhuan Tee yang mahukan anak Teoh Beng Hock dihukum sebagai “anak haram” (satu tindakan Ridhuan yang dikecam oleh sayap pemuda DAP).
Dan tak payah juga kita terikut-ikut sikap self-righteous Adun Teramat Alim yang merupakan ‘sepupu sepiring secawan’ (spiritual cousin) Ridhuan.
Tugas wakil rakyat ialah sebagai penggubal undang-undang (legislator/lawmaker). Jadi saya ingin tahu juga apa respons mereka kepada peraturan tak bertulis JPN tersebut.
Misalnya apa kata Adun Bukit Lanjan Elizabeth Wong (yang dulu pernah menyuarakan):
“I have done no wrong. I wish to state that I am not ashamed of my sexuality as a woman and as a single person. I have broken no law.”
Apa agaknya pula pendirian Hannah Yeoh yang pernah bertekak leher dengan JPN bersangkut dengan sijil lahir anak ‘Bangsa Malaysia’nya?
Dan apa pendirian Ahli Parlimen Teo Nie Ching?
Wakil-wakil perempuan Pakatan harus memaklumkan kepada khalayak ramai tentang pendirian mereka atas perkara ini.
Ataupun adakah mereka sudah berjanji kepada para pemilih Melayu-Islam bahawa DAP dan PKR akan menegakkan semua fatwa-fatwa yang dikeluarkan oleh kaum ulama?
*** *** ***
Saya telah menerima surat di bawah melalui e-mel dari Dr Yati yang meminta supaya ia disiarkan dan disebarkan.
By Dr Yati Hewett
As some one who has been delivering babies for the past 20 years I find the comments made by several parties that arose from the Sister’s In Islam seminar titled ‘What’s In A Name’ last Saturday (Feb 25) very disturbing.
It was quoted that 85,019 Muslim babies certificates do not have their fathers’ names (NST, 28 Feb 2012). Some of these babies, their fathers actually did the bunk.
But there are a lot of these babies or children are living with their married parents in a loving home. In their birth certificates are written ‘information not available’. This is a downright lie.
Their fathers had gone to the registration department but was not allowed to declare the births under Section 13 of Birth Registration Certificate Form JPN.LM01. Why can’t the National Registration Department write in the certificates something like ‘Items like such and such as required by Ruling so and so as stated in Circular No. such and such not provided.’
National Registration Department (NRD) cannot do so because there is no such circular. Everything is done by word of mouth. That is why some registration offices are more harsh or lenient than others.
Ever since this ruling came about 5 years ago, several parents wanted to sue. But they cannot put their hands on it. I am really happy that the President of the Bar Council said his organisation is initiating some form of legal remedy (The Star, 28 Feb 2012).
In today’s NST, Puan Jainisah Mohammad Noor says now Muslims can declare under Section 13 [Section 13 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 which provided for the father’s particulars to be entered into the register of births].
But numerous letters has been written to the papers on this matter over the years. Hasn’t the Home Minister been listening? What about the slogan ‘1Malaysia’ or ‘Masyarakat Penyayang’. Or is it lip service only? These 85,019 children deserve to know the answer.
I am beginning to wonder if today’s Islam is different from Islam during the Prophet’s time. The Perlis Mufti, Dr Juanda Jaya quoted that Prophet Muhammad was lenient and gave the rights of guardianship to the man who owns up the child in one case.
At the same seminar the Syariah chief judge from Terengganu Datuk Ismail Yahya said that the fatwa issued by the National Fatwa Council is a muzakarrah which is not law binding. (NST, 26 Feb 2112). This ruling is unjust.
Then the question now here is: Why must the NRD or the Home Minister follow the fatwa when there are ulamas who do not agree among themselves? Isn’t there someone at all who sees where this all will lead to?
I am also inclined to think that there are ulamas who lead their lives totally out of sync of modern society. Why the need to put bin or binti in the birth certificates? Have they been through airports where they have to fill embarkation and disembarkation forms? Don’t they know that computers cannot accept lengthy names?
Just treat the birth certificates as a civil document not unlike a car registration card. A lot of Muslim countries do not have bin or binti in their citizens names. Why do we have to be different?
When I deliver a baby, it gives me so much maternal feelings. All I care for is the baby have a mother and father to provide a lovely home. All I want is for the child to live and grow up in a healthy environment. This is a bit difficult whenever you take your child to the clinics or hospitals or schools when people start asking why the child has no father as implied in the birth certificate.
And when the chairman of Fatwa Council, Tan Sri Shukor Hassan starts talking about inheritance and marriage/akad nikah of the child being not valid, I really got blown away. (NST, 27 Feb 2012).
These people come from the low socio economic group. What is there to inherit? Why talk about marriage when you don’t know whether whether the child would grow up into an adult?
And he also said there is no shame involved. With due respect , Tan Sri should come down to earth. I also hope the Royal Council should be more selective when choosing people to sit in the Fatwa Council in future.
Finally, I would like to suggest the director-general of NRD herself and the Home Minister himself should come out and discuss these issues before the figure touches 200,000.
I am appealing to the maternal feelings of the present director-general. She inherited this ruling from the previous director- general. I believe she can make the difference.