Saiful's act WRONG, say ulama

Saiful's act WRONG, say ulama

19 Aug, 2008

Datuk Harussani Zakaria (left) says an accuser must present four witnesses; while Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin says what Mohd Saiful had uttered in the mosque was in accordance with the teachings of Islam but swearing on the Quran was not necessary.

Scholars have criticised Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's act of swearing on the Quran, saying that there are provisions in syariah to deal with such matters.

National Fatwa Council member Perak mufti Datuk Harussani Zakaria said there must be four witnesses present if you wanted to accuse a person of sodomy.

"What he has done is basically a contempt on his part. The accuser has no obligation to swear (on the Quran) unless the court permits it. And it should be done in the syariah courts and not a mosque.

"What he has done instead was to confirm that he was sodomised, that's all."

Harussani's views were echoed by Muslim Scholars' Association president Datuk Syeikh Abdul Halim Abd Kadir who also felt Mohd Saiful's act was wrong.

"You only swear on the Quran when the court reaches a dead end and the judge wants you to swear on the Quran to presume your innocence."

He said that Muslims were not required to swear on the Quran.

"Swearing on the Quran is mimicking the Christians."

In Kangar, Perlis mufti Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin said swearing on the Quran should be a voluntary act.

He said Mohd Saiful's act was incomplete as Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had not sworn against Mohd Saiful's allegation.

Asked if Mohd Saiful would need to swear again as there were disputes as to its procedure, Mohd Asri said he need not take the oath again.

"If there is any dispute, the disputing party should point out the right way to swear."

Mohd Asri said what Mohd Saiful had uttered in the mosque was in accordance with the teachings of Islam but swearing on the Quran was not necessary,