Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Answer to Lina Joy's Case

Below is the answer to question #1 of Lina Joy's case that had been raised up by Prof. Stan for discussion on Thursday so please gives me some comments on this answer, I will be happy to get comments from you all my classmates.

According to what I have learned about the UDHR and ICCPR, I think UDHR stood a better chance of affording a broader effective protection to the right to freedom of religion than ICCPR in dealing such a case as lina joy. Especially, according to ARTICLE 18 of UDHR, I think the Malaysian government cannot establish a legitimate interest to deny Lina Joy a change of her identity, why I can say like this? Because I and my classmate have already analyzed on the differences between the word CHANGE in ARTICLE 18 of UDHR(mean HAVE, GIVE UP, and GET), but in ARTICLE 18 of ICCPR have only words HAVE or ADOPT(ADOPT is same as GET); which mean that it already omitted the word GIVE UP, and the reason it developed a little different from UDHR because ICCPR think that most Muslim countries don't really satisfy with UDHR as Muslim's national law stated that people who GIVE UP their religion are called APOSTASY; which are known as a highest crime punishable by death. Therefore, ICCPR in order to make their convenant become useful, ICCPR need to omit the word GIVE UP to make more attractive to those Muslim's countries; who are the UN member, obey and interested in signing and ratifying their law. In short, I can say that in dealing with the case of Lina Joy, the Malaysian government will likely to invoke on the ARTICLE 18 of ICCPR.

Thanks in advances for spending your time to read and give comments on it.


John Se said...

Hi Seka,

I have a quick went thru all our classmate answering to the 3 questions which asked by prof. Any one has the same idea Malaysian Governemtn had done wrong to contradict to UDHR OR ICCPR it was correct. Anyway, I don't like to argue, dispute or controvercail at all - this my type of person,yet, I like to challenge and looking for new thing. Anyway, if you look closely to Malaysain Constitutional law CITIZENSHIP, IMPACT AND FUNCTIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, LIMITATIONS OF FUNDAMENTALRITHS and RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES. From all titel I have stated above are surely related with RELIGION.

As you well know, Malaysain have not signed and agreed with UDHR at all - that is the critical issues, thus, they will do base on their constitutional law. The fundatmental right in Malaysia has addressed that"The federal constitution provides for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The provisions protect basic fuddamental right including RELIGION. From my the best of my understanding, the protect only Muslim region not other. They don't say Lina Joy have right to covert from Muslim to Christainity. I think they are correct not to grant Lina Joy to be Christainity. Based on Malaysian Religion Community "Freedom of religion is guaranteed by the constitutional, ALTHOUGH it declares ISLAM to be the official religion of th country.

As far as I know and I talked on one of my workmate, she worked with me. She said the same thing, it is very hard to covert Muslim other religion,if they keep doing so, they will stay with trouble,but, they can do and change any thing they want if they are away from those Muslim country.

All in all, they are complete violated both UDHR and ICCPR but they do follow their Constitution. Again, I am hardly and likely to say so but I want to challeng.

moen savoeun said...

Hi my friend!

Between UDHR and ICCPR of the article 18, which one gives big gap of human rights in religious believe? To me I think that Lina, according to the article 18 of ICCPR, she can take Crist to practice because since she was born, she practice and believe in Muslim. She no need to give up because she does not have one.

Stan Starygin said...

Seka -

I do agree that the protection of the right to freedom of religion under the UDHR is much broader than the same under the ICCPR. My question here is why would either apply to Malaysia?


moen savoeun said...

I'm not for sure, but in Class Prof. said Malay never sign to accept. I'm not which one. It perhaps ICCPR that Malayian did not sign.

Seka said...

I'm not sure about that too but I got some comment from John SE said that Malaysia didin't sign UDHR that why it can not apply to Malaysia, but did it sign in ICCPR? If Malaysia not sign ICCPR, why? because Malaysia is un member right so it need to sign ICCPR.

moen savoeun said...

My Friend!

It is not confuse. I would like to raise both ICCPR and UDHR in art. 18 to support my argument. Lina has right, in both article 18, to change her ID without denying from the government.