On 7 November 2014, the Court of Appeal decided that Muslim transgenders (originally men) have the right to wear women’s attire or pose as women in public. A panel of three judges headed by Datuk Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus held that Section 66 of the Shariah Criminal Enactment 1992 (Negeri Sembilan) which prohibits men from wearing women’s dress or act like women in public places, is null and void. In addition to discriminating the appellants (the transgenders) pursuant to Article 8 (2) of the Constitution, the court ruled that Section 66 was depriving them of their personal liberty in accordance with Article 5 (1); freedom of expression in accordance with Article 10; equality before the law in accordance with Article 8 (1) and right to move freely in accordance with Article 9 (2). Obviously, the liberals and human rights groups were very happy and welcomed the court’s decision.
This court ruling, despite being in contradiction to Islam, is not surprising. The secular nature of this state, which separates religion from life, requires that the judges make their decision based on man-made-laws and they justified the verdict without Islam ever being considered. A transgender is a person appearing or attempting to be a member of the opposite sex, either as a trans-sexual or habitual cross-dresser, or both. Islam strictly prohibits transgender. In many narrations, Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم cursed men who acts like women and this filthiness shall have to be punished by way of ta’zeer. Among them,
«لَعَنَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْمُخَنَّثِينَ مِنْ الرِّجَالِ وَالْمُتَرَجِّلاَتِ مِنْ النِّسَاءِ»
“Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم cursed the men who act like women and women who act like men” [Narrated by Bukhari].
Despite the cordiality of liberal groups, others express anger and dissatisfaction with the court’s decision. This anger is well-understood, but it is unfortunate that the focus of the dissatisfaction is based only on the “decision” but disregards the institution of law itself and the system behind it. The decision was based on the principles of freedom enshrined in the Malaysian Federal Constitution created by the Kuffar colonialists that was chaired by Lord Reid prior to Malaysian independence. Under the Constitution, Malaysia practices a dualistic legal system and this decision is a clear proof that the civil court reigns supreme over the Shariah court, hence, a civil court judge may not only invalidate the decision of the Shariah court, but also the Laws of Allah سبحانه وتعالى!! This is the interpretation of the judges of the Court of Appeal in respect to the meaning of freedom within the Constitution which implies that there must also be freedom to transgress the orders of Allah’s سبحانه وتعالى!
The Malaysian government pretends that it opposes liberalism, while at the same time it strongly holds on to democracy whose backbone is liberalism! Indeed, liberalism and democracy bear nothing but evil. The court’s recognition of the transgenders’ rights is merely a small piece of systemic blemish emerging out of this corrupt system. Thus, there is no other way to the right path except by eliminating this Western-made-system and replace it with Allah’s system under the shade of the Islamic State (Khilafah) that will drive human beings to the guided truth and their true nature, away from all evil and wickedness.
Abdul Hakim Othman
Head of the Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir in Malaysia
Friday, 21st Muharam 1436 AH
14/11/2014 CE
Ref: HTM/PR/106/14