Administration of Muslim Law (Amendment) Bill

Order for Second Reading read.

The Minister for Communications and Information and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim): Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time".

Madam, next year will be the 50th anniversary of the commencement of the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). First drafted by our Republic's first Attorney-General, the late Prof Ahmad Ibrahim, AMLA has been regularly reviewed to ensure that it remains robust and continues to serve the needs of our local Muslim community. With AMLA, we saw the establishment of three public agencies − the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS), the Registry of Muslim Marriages (ROMM) and the Syariah Court − dedicated to implement and administer the provisions of the Act. They have been central to our community ever since.

Madam, AMLA was last amended in 2008 to strengthen these key institutions, as well as to improve the quality of life for the Muslim community in Singapore. Since then, we have continued to engage community leaders, Muslim law practitioners and the general community on how to keep the Act current and effective.

Earlier this year, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and its partner agencies hosted public consultations on the proposed amendments to the Act. Madam, I am glad that we have received broad support for our proposals. We also benefited from a number of valuable ideas and suggestions, which we have incorporated into the Bill.

I would, therefore, like to take this opportunity to record my heartfelt thanks for the strong support from our Muslim community. We are united in our common goal to facilitate and improve the socio-religious life of the people and I can say with confidence that this Bill before us today is one by the community, for the community.

Madam, we seek to amend the AMLA in three broad areas: first, to strengthen Muslim families; second, to reinforce Muslim institutions; and, finally, to enhance the management of Muslim assets. Allow me to describe the key features of the Bill.

A strong marriage is the foundation for a strong family. When couples have strong relationships, they can better support each other and provide a loving and supportive home for their children. It has been encouraging to see good results of the work done thus far. Marriage numbers are on the rise while minor marriages − that is, marriages where at least one party was below 21 years of age at the time of marriage − have been in steady decline. Divorce rates, meanwhile, have remained relatively stable.

While these are positive trends, the fact remains that minor marriages are more vulnerable. For example, in the case of Muslim marriages involving younger grooms, the recent marriage cohorts have experienced one-and-a-half times the divorce rate compared to older grooms.

It is against this background that I move to introduce two measures.

First, new section 94A introduces mandatory participation in a marriage preparation programme for prescribed groups. We will mandate in subsidiary legislation that minor couples do so first. They will attend a pre-marriage programme approved by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), which aims to raise couples' awareness of the issues on marriage and to highlight available post-marriage support programmes and resources. A minor couple must complete the programme together before the application for marriage is made.

The specialised programme for minor couples comprises two components. One, premarital consultations to help them better understand, clarify and address any concerns that they and their families may have about the marriage. Two, marriage education workshops for the minor couples to learn essential skills and knowledge to build a stable marriage and family. Parents' involvement in premarital consultations, as well as parent education workshops to discuss their important supportive roles to the couple, are highly encouraged. MSF will regularly review the programme to ensure that it remains relevant and useful to couples.

Second, under the new section 94B, parental consent will be required for a minor marriage, before the couple can make an application for solemnisation. Currently, only the consent of the wali, the lawful guardian for the marriage of a Muslim woman, is required. Going forward, consent of the parents or the guardians of the party who is a minor will also be required. There will be a list of the appropriate persons from whom consent must be sought in the various permutations, in the new Fourth Schedule. This move, Madam, thus reinforces the importance of parents' or guardians' support in a minor marriage as their guidance, especially in the crucial initial years of the marriage, is critical to help younger couples build strong marriage foundations for a lifetime.

It must be noted that this consent is separate from the role of the wali in a marriage contract and does not supersede the wali's approval. Once the parents' or guardians' consent is given, the application to solemnise the marriage may be made.

There may be instances where the consent of the appropriate person cannot be obtained because he or she is absent, inaccessible or under any severe disability or refuses to do so. Upon application by the couple, the Kadi, the person empowered to consider marriage applications and solemnise marriages, or his deputy, the Naib Kadi, must take due steps to satisfy himself that the consent of the person may be dispensed with. Importantly, if the appropriate person refuses to give consent, the Kadi or Naib Kadi must first give that person an opportunity to show cause as to why his or her consent should not be dispensed with. The Kadi or Naib Kadi then has the responsibility of deciding if there are good grounds to proceed with the marriage.

Mdm Speaker, while we can do our best to strengthen marriages and families, not all marriages last the distance. Divorce rates are relatively stable, but we must guard against any rise in divorces. The Syariah Court's case records indicate that about 64% of its cases in the past five years involved at least one child of the marriage under 21 years old, with more than 85% of these involving at least one child aged under 14 years old.

This Bill seeks to do two things to help.

First, to require parties to attend a prescribed activity before commencement of divorce proceedings. The new section 46A will primarily allow the Syariah Court to ensure that couples who seek a divorce first attend its flagship Marriage Counselling Programme (MCP), to see if the marriage can be saved. Since the Syariah Court's introduction of the Programme as an administrative requirement in 2004, over 33,000 couples have been counselled and almost half of these marriages have been saved. So, I am pleased to note that the non-attendance rate for MCP has only been about 10%. The reasons for such non-attendance range from either parties being overseas, to no longer wanting to pursue a divorce. If the couple chooses to proceed with divorce, the Programme will be a platform for couples to discuss care and living arrangements for their children. Counsellors will be on hand to refer parties to specific programmes and services to address their other social needs, such as financial assistance or education support for their school-going children.

Next, new sections 43A and 43B seek to enable the Syariah Court to refer parties for further counselling or a family support programme at any stage of their divorce proceedings. Where there is an issue of child custody or welfare, the Syariah Court may, where necessary, order a registered medical practitioner, psychologist, counsellor, social worker or mental health professional to examine and assess the child of the parties. The assessment will be treated as expert evidence. Another option available to the Court is to appoint a child representative, where necessary, to represent the interests of a child. Providing multiple expert but neutral layers will better protect the interests of the child amidst the divorce proceedings.

Madam, allow me now to move on to three proposals to strengthen our community's key institutions. For most local Muslim marriages thus far, we are accustomed to have the Kadi or Naib Kadi present to witness the solemnisation ceremony by a wali. But a small number have had their marriage solemnised by their wali without the Kadi or Naib Kadi being present, before requesting that ROMM register the marriage. During public consultations, there were serious discussions about the importance of better protecting parties to the marriage. The validity of the marriage will be impacted if the wrong wali has been appointed. The consequences are even more severe if there are children involved. There is also no protection for parties of an invalid solemnisation if there is a transfer of assets or monies, or if one party is entering the marriage unwillingly.

Having considered this matter carefully, we seek to amend section 95 of the Act. Couples who wish their marriage to be solemnised by a wali must seek written consent from the Kadi or Naib Kadi, who must be present as a witness at the solemnisation. In so doing, the Kadi or Naib Kadi can verify that the appropriate wali has been invited to solemnise the marriage. The Kadi or Naib Kadi can also direct the couple to go through the required processes set out in AMLA, where appropriate, such as the new requirements for minor marriages, as earlier mentioned. Couples who refuse to comply will not be able to register their marriage.

Next, for divorces, a new section 46B will allow, and therein encourage, men to apply as plaintiffs without first uttering the talak. The talak is generally perceived to be final in effecting a divorce, once the Syariah Court clarifies and adjudges that it is valid. However, it should not and must not, be seen as a quick and convenient solution. With this amendment, a husband who applies for divorce before uttering the talak can seek help with his marital woes and the Court may try to save the marriage by directing the couple to attend counselling. At the very least, the couple can have a safe space to discuss their post-divorce care arrangements for their children. Allow me to stress, Mdm Speaker, that this proposal does not affect the Muslim man's right to pronounce the talak if he still chooses to do so.

Mdm Speaker, in Islam, a divorce is permitted as a way out of an odious companionship which can no longer achieve the objectives of marriage. However, the talak should not and cannot be taken lightly and must only be uttered when all avenues to save the marriage have been exhausted. This, Madam, accords with Islamic teachings that divorcing couples still have an obligation to treat each other fairly. We hope that Muslim husbands do not utter the talak frivolously and that couples seek appropriate help when they face marital woes.

Madam, we have seen the Syariah Court's roles widen beyond settling divorces amicably and delivering just outcomes, with its "child-centric" approach and added focus on counselling. It is thus best that the Court's resources are always used optimally, for the benefit of Muslims in Singapore. It would not be right for our Syariah Court to be used by those with few or no links to Singapore.

The third proposal, therefore, is to specify through section 35 of AMLA that at least one of the parties making an application at the Syariah Court must be domiciled or habitually residing in Singapore. This is for a period of at least three continuous years immediately preceding any application or before the commencement of any proceedings. For Members' benefit, this provision is already present in the Women's Charter and we are following the same parameters.

Finally, Madam, allow me to outline a number of amendments to enhance the management of our Muslim assets, most notably our wakafs, or Muslim endowments, and our Mosque Building and MENDAKI Fund (MBMF).

In 2017, MUIS disbursed $3.1 million of the revenue generated from our wakafs to various beneficiaries, such as mosques, madrasahs and Muslim organisations. This amount is close to 3% more, or about $90,000, compared to the previous year. Of the total disbursement, more than $1.52 million was channelled to 27 mosques to help fund upgrading projects and to support mosque programmes. All these are a result of MUIS' management of the wakafs, which include careful planning to ensure maximisation of wakaf returns and attracting good tenants for wakaf properties.

So, we must continue to ensure that the wakafs are well-managed so as to maximise their potential. MUIS takes this responsibility very seriously and works closely with the trustees and those appointed to manage the wakaf, better known as mutawallis.

To enable MUIS to better safeguard against the mismanagement of wakafs, we will amend section 58 of AMLA to expand the grounds on which a trustee or mutawalli can be removed. This is to provide greater clarity and transparency, as well as to allow for more timely interventions to uphold the good governance of wakafs. Current provisions enable MUIS to do so when it appears that the wakaf has been mismanaged, or if there have been no trustees appointed. However, for these conditions to be met, the wakaf might already be in jeopardy.

The Bill, therefore, stipulates that a trustee or mutawalli can also be removed if convicted of any offence under section 64(11) of AMLA, which, among others, is committed when a mutawalli fails to furnish information or particulars as required by MUIS, or fails to allow MUIS' inspection of wakaf properties, accounts and records. Additionally, if the trustee or mutawalli has failed to comply with further rules related to wakaf, or terms or conditions imposed by MUIS as part of the appointment, he or she can also be removed.

Secondly, to safeguard MUIS' statutory responsibility to administer all wakafs vested in it, the amended section 58 also states that any appointment of a new trustee to a wakaf will be void unless MUIS' prior approval in writing has been obtained. This is important because MUIS has to ensure that the individuals appointed as trustees are qualified to manage the wakaf. In some instances, MUIS saw disputes arise when trustees made unilateral appointments among themselves. Such trustee disputes, if left unchecked or unresolved, may adversely affect the management and upkeep of the wakaf.

For avoidance of doubt, the amended section 58 also specifies that a Court must not entertain or proceed with any proceedings relating to the appointment or removal of wakaf trustees and mutawallis. It is for parties to work with MUIS to address and resolve such matters. This is consistent with a High Court decision last year that the High Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over wakafs and that the power to remove or to appoint trustees lies solely with MUIS, as provided for by AMLA.

MUIS has established a wakaf dispute resolution framework to help address any wakaf issues or disputes that may arise. On written application to MUIS, disputing parties can undergo a mediation process conducted by a MUIS-appointed Wakaf Dispute Resolution Committee, comprising parties with legal, Syariah, and/or counselling backgrounds. Should a settlement agreement not be achieved out of this mediation process, an inquiry process will be launched and the Committee will put up a recommendation to the MUIS Council for consideration.

Madam, we do not wish for our trustees and mutawallis to be distracted by disputes, but if these cannot be avoided, I do urge all of them to seek mediation early through this Committee. We are here to help because we share the same goal, to support and help our community.

Thirdly, new section 61 seeks to allow MUIS to direct a portion of the income of the wakaf towards a sinking fund, primarily for the upkeep and development of the wakaf. For example, the sinking fund could be tapped on for carrying out building repairs or installation works, as well as the purchase of any property or asset to benefit the wakaf. This was something that many trustees and mutawallis have asked for. They see this measure as an important, long-term financial planning move for the continued viability and sustainability of the wakaf. It has been observed that many of the trust deeds of older wakafs do not specifically address the long-term upkeep of the wakaf, including that of the creation of a sinking fund to maintain it for the long run. Often, without sufficient reserves or savings set aside, the wakaf properties will fall into disrepair.

Mdm Speaker, I would like to assure Members and stakeholders that MUIS is well aware that the income and revenue levels across all wakafs vary. We do not want this sinking fund to become a burden to the wakafs. Hence, the proportion of income to be directed to the sinking fund will be decided in close consultation with the trustees and mutawallis, with their wakafs' resources and needs of their beneficiaries being topmost considerations. I would also like to stress, Madam, that MUIS cannot be expected to tap on community funds to save those wakaf properties that have fallen into disrepair, especially where such predicaments could easily have been avoided with some financial discipline.

Last but not least, Madam, allow me now to explain the need to better clarify the use of the MBMF in the Act, as currently covered in section 77 of AMLA. For our mosques, we want to specify that the MBMF can be tapped on for the purchase of new or additional land or property for existing and future mosques. It is already specified in AMLA that the MBMF can be used, and I quote, "for the purpose of building mosques in Singapore and for purposes connected therewith". Naturally, this should include the purchase or lease of land, but we see the need to make it clear and transparent in the Act.

Madam, as we enhance the "hardware" or the physical infrastructures of our mosques, we also need to ensure that the "software" of our religious life is strengthened. Our full-time madrasahs are one of the key pillars for this, as they train our next generation of religious teachers, or asatizahs, to guide our community. With more funding sources, such as the MBMF, the Dana Madrasah, or Madrasah Fund, Wakaf Ilmu and other grants from MUIS, our madrasahs are less preoccupied with fundraising. They have instead been able to improve the quality of education provided and concentrate more on teaching their students well. So, on this note, this Bill also specifies that the MBMF can be tapped on for building or maintenance works of any religious education premises or facilities, to ensure that our full-time madrasahs are sufficiently resourced to provide conducive learning spaces for their students.

Madam, to conclude, at the core of every review of the Act has been the impetus to uplift and strengthen our Muslim community and better facilitate its socio-religious life. The amendments we are proposing today seek to better protect Muslim families because they are the very building blocks of a strong and resilient community. We want to reinforce our institutions so that they are effective in serving our community. And we want to enhance the management of our assets so that the community continues to benefit from them and prosper. So, let us stay united in our commitment and resolve to develop a community of excellence, confident of its place in Singapore. And I hope the House will join me in supporting these efforts. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.20 pm

Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mdm Speaker, as shared by Minister Yaacob, the AMLA amendment Bill covers three broad areas covering steps taken to reinforce Muslim institutions, enhance the management of Muslim assets and strengthening Muslim families. In general, I am supportive of these amendments but would like to seek greater clarity in some areas.

On reinforcing Muslim institutions, the new amendment will allow men to apply for divorce as plaintiffs without pronouncing the talak. My question is: will the Syariah Court still require the pronouncement of talak at any point of time to be in accordance with Islamic law in the finalisation of the divorce? If the Muslim man's right to pronounce the talak is recognised under the Act if he still chooses to do so, how does this discourage the frivolous pronouncements of talak outside the Syariah Court? How does the Act compel the husband to file the divorce at the Syariah Court if there is pronouncement of talak outside the Syariah Court?

Next, the proposed amendments also seek to strengthen the trustee management of wakaf. I support all these enhancements and would like to make some suggestions. Would the Ministry consider having term limits for the appointment of a mutawalli or having a process in place for a mutawalli to relinquish his position upon reaching a certain age limit? This is to ensure there is good governance and succession planning in the administration of the mosque. I also support the establishment of a separate sinking fund for wakafs. Given that this amendment is intended towards a reserve for the future upkeep and development of the wakaf, I feel it is important to set a minimum percentage of the wakaf's annual net income to ensure sufficient sinking funds are available to achieve the intended outcomes. While the Bill allows the amount to be determined by the majlis after consulting the mutawalli of the wakaf, I would like to know whether the majlis has the final say on the percentage should there be any disagreement.

I would also like to iterate my support for the amendments to AMLA with regard to marriage and divorce. In terms of marriage, I am in great support for greater responsibility to be placed in involving parents for children being married under the age of 21. Marriage is a significant commitment with life-long impact on a person's life. Hence, parents and guardians should be empowered to play a more active role in such big decisions involving their children. The pre-marriage counselling sessions can also go a long way in ensuring that young couples making this huge transition in their lives can do so in a better informed manner, particularly with regard to financial matters affecting the household which, as I understand, becomes a major cause of friction in several troubled marriages.

On amendments in the Bill related to divorce, I welcome the move to adopt a more "child-centric" approach. I have come across cases during my Meet-the-People sessions where children are affected when the Court orders the matrimonial home of the couple to be sold. The proposed amendment will allow the Syariah Court, amongst others, to propose care and living arrangements for any child of the marriage, based on the child's interests, when there are couples intending to initiate divorce proceedings. I would like to propose that AMLA could be enhanced further to offer greater protection to the children of couples seeking divorce. This could include making sure that the children have a proper home before the matrimonial home can be sold. Madam, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In this day and age where it is practically impossible to control the flow of information, this has a significant impact on one's perception and interpretation of religious matters.

In our own Muslim community, it has led to some degree of polarisation when different segments insist on their approach or interpretation of Islam as the only one that is correct.

Complicating the matter further are the various extremist threats which are linked to religion. I would like to ask why there are no amendments in this Bill that include steps that can be taken to monitor or regulate the Muslim religious landscape in Singapore.

(In English): Madam, in conclusion, I believe that the amendments represent a right step forward in ensuring that the Muslim community can be clearer on means available to them, in a manner appropriate for the current context we see today. I believe that with continued cooperation and constant learning, Muslim bodies and scholars, together with understandings of practices in their countries can help us make balanced decisions in line with the Muslim faith.

3.25 pm

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Madam, I will deliver my speech in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The AMLA amendment Bill, being tabled is aimed at reinforcing Muslim institutions, enhancing the management of the Muslim community's assets and strengthening Muslim families by fine-tuning and improving the current processes and laws so that it corresponds to changing circumstances and is more up-to-date. I believe that the changes made are intended to provide more benefits for the good of the Muslim community in Singapore. I support this intent wholeheartedly.

I would like to touch on a few things contained in this amendment Bill. I have a few questions that require clarifications and I would also like to put forth a few suggestions.

First, I would like to touch on clause 23 that introduces section 94(A) which requires any couple that fall within a certain classification to compulsorily attend and complete a marriage preparation course or programme before the couple can apply to a Kadi or Naib Kadi for the solemnisation of their marriage. I understand this is meant for couples who are under the age of 21 years old. It is a good and much welcomed measure so that young couples will be more informed about marital issues in order to be well prepared spiritually, mentally and psychologically before they enter marriage.

I would like to suggest that this requirement be not only mandated for couples who are under the age of 21 years old, but for marriage preparation courses or programmes to be mandated for every couple who wish to build a stable marriage.

Madam, I used to serve as a marriage course counsellor for two years and also conducted counselling for referral cases from the Syariah Court under the MCP programme for four years. In that period of time, I had the opportunity to interact with many couples who attended marriage preparation courses, as well as married couples who were facing marital challenges. Based on my experience, I believe that a marriage preparation course is necessary. I believe that professionals and asatizahs who are involved in these two initiatives will wholeheartedly agree with my views.

It is important that every individual who wishes to get married is equipped with knowledge that will help their effort to build a harmonious and strong marriage. We all know that, for Muslim couples, marriage is an act of religious devotion and it is akin to building a mosque.

If we want to perform our prayers, we must know the essential steps, the requirements, as well as things that could nullify and taint the prayers. We must also seek knowledge on ways to refine our prayers and improve our concentration during prayers. The same goes for marriages – every couple must seek knowledge to ensure that their marriage is strong and stable. We have to recognise that marriage is an act of religious devotion and Muslim couples need to be equipped with knowledge to perform this act of religious devotion.

In relation to marriage preparation courses, I would like to suggest that the content of such courses focuses more on religious and spiritual aspects because, as I have said earlier, the fact remains that marriage is an act of religious devotion. When I was initially assigned as the educator for the marriage preparation programme "Bersama Mu" "With You" organised by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports in 2006, I attended a discussion session about the "Bersama Mu" programme before it was officially launched. During that session, amongst the feedback received from the professionals and the asatizahs was the absence or lack of spiritual and religious values in the course syllabus. However, after the discussion, the syllabus was improved by including the feedback that was received.

Madam, for the "Cinta Abadi" or "Love Forever" programme, the feedback that I received about the course content was that it did not contain or lacked religious and spiritual values. I would like to ask the Minister, is this true? If it is true, I hope that the Minister can clarify why this is so.

The next matter that I would like to touch on is the enhancement or provision of more powers to the Majlis or MUIS in the administration of Muslim institutions and assets. As mentioned earlier in my speech, I concur that changing situations and circumstances may sometimes require administrative powers to be enhanced.

Madam, here are some of the changes contained in this amendment Bill relating to the enhancement of the Majlis' powers in the administration of Muslim assets and institutions.

Clause 16 amends section 58 to enhance the powers of the Majlis to administer any wakaf or nazar am.

Clause 17 inserts a few new sections − 61(3), (4), (5) and (6). These newly introduced sections touch on enhanced powers given to the Majlis on the issue of financial control and administration of the wakaf and nazar am.

Clause 18 amends section 74 to further enhance the powers of MUIS in the administration of every mosque in Singapore. Clause 18(a) replaces section 74(3) with the new sections 74 (3A) and (3B) that will, among other things, give additional powers to the Majlis to remove, and to appoint a mutawalli in place of, or in addition to, a trustee of a mosque appointed under a written instrument.

Madam, I would like to touch on and give suggestions relating to clause 16(c) which introduces section 58(7), where it provides that a Court must not intervene or proceed with any proceedings relating to the appointment or removal of, (a) a trustee of a wakaf or nazar am appointed under an instrument of law; and (b) a mutawali appointed by the Majlis. As stated in this Bill, section 58(7) was introduced in accordance with a High Court case, that is, Mohamed Shariff Valibhoy and others vs Arif Valibhoy (2016).

Among the reasons given in support of the introduction of this section 58 (7) are that, and I quote, in English:

(In English): "Parliament could not have intended for the trustee of a wakaf to have recourse to the Court upon enactment of AMLA because: one, concurrent jurisdiction over the trustee by the Majlis and the Court may lead to inconsistent decisions being issued by the Majlis and the Court on the same issue and different standards and different laws being applied by the Majlis and the Court; two, AMLA vested title to wakaf property administrative control over a wakaf solely in the Majlis; and three, section 63 limits the jurisdiction of the Court to issues that are directed to the Court by the Majlis."

(In Malay): Madam, I understand the reason behind the intended changes. However, I feel that it is better that the Court option is still made available, so that those who wish to present their case in Court can still do so. Nonetheless, I would like to suggest that proceedings relating to wakaf and nazar be referred to and decided by the Syariah Court and not the civil Courts. By referring it to the Syariah Court, this will overcome the issue of different jurisdiction and values between the Majlis and civil Courts that may be contradictory. I feel that the Syariah Court's jurisdiction needs to be widened to include proceedings relating to the issues of wakaf and nazar.

Madam, this Bill mostly deals with the enhancements of the powers of the Majlis, as stated in the clauses mentioned earlier. It aims to reinforce institutions and improve the management of Muslim assets. I would like to once again state that I support this aim. However, I do feel some unease with efforts to give the Majlis, as an administrative entity, too much control or full control in the administration of Muslim assets and institutions.

I would like to seek clarifications from the Minister so that I will no longer feel uneasy. Can the Minister clarify, if anyone among those being administered feel unhappy and would like to contest the decision taken by the Majlis on a particular matter, what are the available channels to do so? For instance, if there is a trustee or mutawalli whose appointment was removed by the Majlis but felt that the Majlis' decision was excessive and unfair, what action can this individual take?

Madam, power is something that is entrusted to those who are given a responsibility in order to do their job more manageably, productively and effectively. At the same time, it is also true that power can be abused by anyone, whether they are the administrator or they are being administered, for whatever reasons. It is like a double-edged sword. In order to produce a community of excellence that is able and is respected, justice is one of the main pillars or thrusts. The laws created are meant to provide benefits to everyone and not only for certain people.

I would like to share the story of an Islamic Caliph, that is, Sayidina Ali. He upheld and, more importantly, exemplified justice as a leader and an administrator. While performing his duties as a Caliph, an incident happened where he found his lost armour in the possession of one of his people who was a Jew. He was sure that the armour was his. Although he was a leader at that time, he did not use his position to force the armour to be returned to him. In fact, he used the judicial system to settle the matter. To make a long story short, the judge decided in favour of the Jewish man with the justification that Sayidina Ali did not provide concrete evidence that the armour was his. The Jewish man was truly impressed with the nature of justice portrayed by Sayidina Ali, to the point that the Jewish man admitted that the armour was not his, but that he had found it. The Jewish man returned the armour to Sayidina Ali but was rejected because Sayidina Ali said that the justice system has ascertained and proved that he was not the owner of the armour and he must respect the judge's decision. This incident caused the Jewish man to become impressed with the values of justice of an Islamic leader.

Madam, before I end my speech, I would like to share a pantun that we should all reflect on, especially for me.

The island of Temasek was peaceful and tranquil,

Its name was changed to Singapura,

Act justly while in this world,

For we will eventually answer to our Creator.

3.37 pm

Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mdm Speaker, please allow me to thank the Minister for the introduction of this amendment Bill.

While I am not a Muslim myself, I wish, as an outsider and a friend of the community, to express my support for the Bill as it highlights three important traits of the Singapore Muslim community that I have come to admire and respect.

First, the united spirit of the Muslim community. The Singapore Muslim community has been contributing to MBMF since its inception as the Mosque Building Fund in 1975.

The contributions of the community have given rise to beautiful new and upgraded mosques, which add to our vibrant, multi-religious landscape, including the new Masjid Yusof Ishak, as well as the An Nur and Al-Khair Mosque, which serves the residents of Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC.

While these mosques primarily serve the socio-religious needs of the Singapore Muslim community, they have also been active players in inter-faith initiatives. These include inviting other faith groups to the mosque to learn more about Islam, or just coming together to build bonds over an Iftar meal during the fasting month of Ramadan. As an example, Al-Khair Mosque in Chua Chu Kang will be hosting the IRCC Appointment Ceremony this Saturday. Masjid An Nur in Marsiling also hosted a networking tea for community leaders on the morning of Hari Raya Puasa itself.

I also note that our full-time madrasahs have also endeavoured to produce wise, grounded and competent asatizahs, or religious teachers, who are able to guide fellow Muslims in a diverse, multi-racial and multi-religious country, such as Singapore.

We have seen leaders of the community, such as the Mufti, condemn extremist violence in other parts of the world and state firmly that these actions do not reflect the values of peace and understanding in Islam.

The Religious Rehabilitation Group (RRG) has also done excellent work in advising the community to be discerning about what they read online and to seek counselling early for their friends or loved ones who may be exposed to extremist views.

All these efforts are particularly important, especially when there are preachers out there who seek to de-stabilise societies with their problematic exclusivist and extremist views as well as skewed doctrines and ideology.

We are fortunate, therefore, to have an asatizah fraternity who appreciate Singapore's unique context and believe in the importance of preserving our social harmony.

The amendments to the Bill which clarify the use of the MBMF for mosque building and religious education should thus be supported.

I also congratulate the community for reaping the fruits of their contributions over the years to MBMF.

Second, the progressiveness of the Muslim community. I note that AMLA was amended in 2008 to raise the minimum age for marriage from 16 to 18 years of age.

The amendments in the Bill today provide for more measures to better support minor couples, including requiring parental consent to the marriage and mandatory participation in a marriage preparation programme.

We also see an increased child-centric approach in various proposals to enhance guidance for divorcing couples, which is important not just for the Muslim community but for all marriages in Singapore. The efforts will also lead towards the further strengthening of the institution of marriage.

These efforts show that the community is progressive and realistic in its challenges, and how it has always been keen to strengthen itself. It is this progressiveness and desire to improve that have seen so many positive trends on the social front, as were highlighted by the Minister earlier.

Third, to encapsulate the unity and progressiveness of the community is its resilience. All communities in Singapore have their unique challenges as well as issues.

The Muslim community has never backed down from those challenges. It has always been able to dig deep to find innovative solutions to challenges. The creation of MBMF is just one of these, but so, too, are the various proposals in the Bill before us today. Where necessary, the community has also been more than willing to work closely with the Government to support.

I recall that MCCY and MUIS introduced subsidiary legislation, the Administration of Muslim Law (Muslim Religious Schools) Rules, that came into force in January this year. The Rules seek to strengthen the religious sector through better regulation of Islamic education centres and providers, as well as to provide a guide of conduct of the religious teachers, through a Code of Ethics for asatizahs.

All these are intended to strengthen the resilience of the community against the threats of extremism. The Muslim community has always worked closely with the Government and the rest of the communities in Singapore to address some of these challenges. It has been a partnership, not an adversarial or combative one.

The Government must and will continue to stand ready to help, as it does for other communities as well. And for all communities in Singapore, regardless of race or religion, we should all stay united as Singaporeans.

Mdm Speaker, to conclude, I wish to commend the Muslim community for partnering the Government closely to address its challenges and to ask the Government to continue to stand ready to assist the community, as it does for all other communities.

I reiterate my support for the proposals in this amendment Bill, which reflect a Singapore Muslim community that is open to diversity, progressive, modern and confident of its place in Singapore.

3.44 pm

Mr Azmoon Ahmad (Nominated Member): Mdm Speaker and all present in the House today, good afternoon, especially to the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs.

Singapore is a nation of multi-racial and religious beliefs. Her citizens enjoy a high standard of living with peace and stability since more than 50 years ago. The harmonious relations amongst the various races and ethnic groups which we enjoy is not at all by chance, but a deliberate effort and action amongst all, together with the Government, in forging understanding, tolerance and acceptance on the differences with regard to religion and practices which are deemed as sensitive.

As a secular state, Singapore allows its citizens to make their choice of religious beliefs and practices freely and openly. Muslims are assured, through the formation of AMLA, whose purpose is to supplement and harmonise the enactment of laws for Muslims with respect to Syariah and secular laws. Mdm Speaker, please allow me to deliver the bulk of my speech in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to wish a good afternoon to the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs and also to all parliamentary colleagues who are present.

Our country is a multiracial and multi-religious nation whose people have enjoyed a peaceful existence for over 50 years. The stability and racial harmony that we all experience throughout the years did not appear and happen by chance. Instead, it is the result of a unified effort and understanding among all Singaporeans, as well as a Government that is attentive to matters concerning religion which can be quite complex and sensitive.

As a secular nation, Singapore allows its people to choose their own faith and practise it. In addition, Muslim Singaporeans here are especially safeguarded with the establishment of AMLA that enables a part of the Syariah law to be administered, together with secular law, as much as possible.

Mdm Speaker, I welcome the proposed amendments to AMLA, especially since much has changed in our country and it has been a while since it was last amended. For instance, issues like housing policies have changed several times to the point that it affects family unity and social problems like divorce have become more prevalent, and we should use all of these as a basis to constantly review the Act and its relevance to our daily lives.

Overall, the proposed amendments being tabled are quite encouraging and timely. However, there are certain aspects that raised my doubts and concern. Therefore, I would like to touch on them and elaborate further.

Firstly, the amendment to section 35. The amendment to the Act under section 35 touches on divorce matters and aims to introduce requirements based on the period of residence. This is reasonable and should be supported. With this amendment, divorce can take place for Muslim couples who have resided in Singapore for at least three years. Hence, foreign Muslim couples who cannot fulfil this requirement are automatically not allowed to choose Singapore as the centre for their divorce. This amendment strengthens certain requirements and manages the issue of divorce from the perspective of foreign couples.

Second, the amendment relating to section 46B. The amendment to the Act under section 46B touches on divorce matters which will allow a man to apply to the Syariah Court for the divorce process to commence after pronouncing the talak to his wife. This is reasonable. Such actions will make the situation clearer and complete the divorce process. Although divorce is discouraged and undesirable, this kind of responsible action should be supported.

However, not all divorce cases can be managed in a mature manner and end with a fair and equitable outcome. In fact, based on studies and feedback that I have obtained from Malay/Muslim social organisations, there are many divorce cases that end with the wives losing out.

Statistical information from random studies conducted by a VWO showed that, generally, men are the main cause of the problem of divorce within our community. Is this amendment sufficient and able to solve the problem that I mentioned? I do not think so.

What we should emphasise is that men should act fairly and responsibly when divorce and its subsequent processes commence. From the moment the talak is pronounced, men should be mandated as the party that commences the divorce and its subsequent processes until its completion.

The failure of men to comply with and fulfil this requirement can result in the Syariah Court taking appropriate action.

I, therefore, call for some groups and authorities, like MUIS, to study this matter more carefully. I appeal to all those involved to pay close attention to this matter so that women and children who are affected can be protected and undergo this unfortunate process fairly.

Madam, I will now touch on the third part, amendment to section 95. The amendment to the Act under section 95 touches on matters regarding marriage by a wali who should be approved by a Kadi from MUIS, which includes the biological father of the bride. I would like to voice my unhappiness that this amendment also includes and is imposed on the biological father of the bride.

I agree and can understand why this amendment is proposed, especially if the wali involved is not the biological father of the bride. On the other hand, imposing similar requirements on the biological father is not only viewed as illogical, but it can be considered as a violation of a father's rights in the marriage of his daughter. Hence, I appeal that this amendment be given further consideration.

Amendment to section 58. The amendment to the Act under section 58 touches on the issue of wakaf management, which allows MUIS to manage disputes that may occur. Previously, disputes involving wakaf were usually referred to the High Court, but, now, it will only be referred to MUIS' office. Because the issue of wakaf is usually related to Syariah law, it is more appropriate for this matter to be administered by an authority like MUIS. This proposal hopes to resolve disputes in wakaf management quickly. Therefore, I think that this is a good move and positive development. I am confident that this will lead to a more proper and effective management of wakaf.

The amendment to section 74 touches on the appointment of a mutawalli for wakaf management, which needs to be approved by the authorities. One difficulty faced regarding wakaf management is that it is a personal issue. Hence, how much should the authority be involved in this matter? If the appointed mutawalli is unable to perform the duty and role that should be played, should the authorities intervene and resolve it? Should a mutawalli be subject to specific requirements so that they are aware of their role and duty? What is a mutawalli expected to do when they take on this role?

The proposed amendments to section 74 are complex. Without these amendments, the problem of wakaf mismanagement by a mutawalli who is unqualified and irresponsible will probably continue. It may even be more prevalent in the future if this issue is not managed immediately.

On the other hand, the enforcement of this proposed amendment can be viewed as an intrusion into a private matter regarding wakaf management. Hence, how can we resolve this issue that appears simple, but is actually complex?

I feel that the best solution to this matter is through education. Each mutawalli should be trained and taught about the responsibility and role that they should play. Any failure on their part to deliver what is expected of them should result in intervention by the authorities.

The final point that I would like to highlight is about hibah in connection with HDB flats. There was a case in the High Court dated 11 July 2017 which featured someone who should have inherited an HDB flat in accordance with a hibah agreement, but was rejected by HDB on the basis that the agreement using hibah cannot be accepted by HDB and it contravenes HDB's rules. This clearly showed that hibah in connection with HDB flats is still not accepted. I would like to suggest that an amendment should immediately be made to AMLA and that synchronisation with HDB rules should be done, so that this issue of hibah in connection with HDB flats can be resolved.

I hope that the concerns that I have shared can be resolved. I also hope that the proposed amendments can help local Muslim Singaporeans overcome the problems that we are facing.

(In English): The amendments to AMLA are timely and are seen to be taking the path in the right direction. I just hope that we could do this more regularly, at smaller intervals, as we need to be in sync with the changes in national policies. With this, I support the Bill.

3.58 pm

Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Madam, AMLA provides Muslims with the option to have their personal and family affairs governed by Islamic law. Throughout the years, as our Muslim community evolved and our own Syariah law jurisprudence developed, various amendments have been made to AMLA. There are also increasing numbers of Singaporean Muslims who are living or working overseas, thus bringing forth new considerations for the Act.

Syariah law has always existed alongside other normative systems. The adoption and implementation of Syariah law in countries with Muslim minority communities has always been an active topic of discussion and debate.

Firstly, let me touch on family and child matters. On section 43A and B, can we be updated on how good the compliance rate is with counselling that has been implemented and conducted thus far? What are some of the more pressing reasons for defaulters and how are we able to work with the couples involved to reduce the rate in future cases, especially as we are making certain practices compulsory with this new amendment? Studying and understanding these reasons will be able to help us strategise so that our counsellors and community can anticipate the potential issues and address them in planning future interventions.

On the new section 46A, can the Minister update us on what are the criteria required in the submission of the "parenting plan"? How is this going to be executed and how will they assist couples who are in the process of divorce?

Pertaining to the Appeals Board, what and who are the composition of this board and based on what criteria are the members selected? The procedures and processes highlighted are a necessity and help keep checks and balances in couples considering divorce. However, how do we ensure that the timeline for these processes and waiting times are within certain set limits and KPIs as, very often, we hear of issues and feedback pertaining to the long waiting and processing times which may drag on for months and, in some cases, even years? Perhaps, setting an average timeline or a range of timelines would be useful because the families tend to suffer during this waiting period. Despite being time consuming, I do feel that this counselling is important as it can be the point where couples are made to realise the potential for reconciliation, thus saving their marriages and families.

Next, on wakaf issues. Pertaining to the sinking funds, are there certain set limits and criteria for this? There is mention of a "case-by-case" basis in the Bill, but are there other criteria which will be utilised and adopted with the new amended Act? Can the Minister also outline what the Dispute Resolution Framework for wakaf issues consist of and what it is going to entail.

With the passing of the amendment Bill, I feel it would be an opportune time for MUIS and the community to embark on a public education discourse amongst the existing mutawallis, as well as the responsibilities of wakaf management, so that we can be as professional as possible in its execution.

Next, on MBMF. With the new increased rate payable per month, can we get an update on the expanded use of the funds? The Minister has elaborated earlier, but I would like to still enquire: are there specific guidelines which need to be adhered to with is new amendment? Can the Minister also elaborate on the "education component" of MBMF and what exactly it can be used for because there was mention of a Wakaf Ilmu and the Madrasah Fund? But is it just going to be utilised for educational infrastructure or also eligible for educational programmes and software which involve education and teaching?

On the Code of Ethics for asatizah, a list of guides and characteristics is given in the Annex to this Bill. Can I ask the Minister how these assessments are going to be conducted and carried out? Are they going to be on an ad hoc basis, through their supervisors, mentors or feedback from the congregation, their students and peers, or are there formal appraisal processes that are going to be put in place? This is timely and it is important for us to understand as these issues need to be treated with greater transparency, especially in today's climate and the numerous challenges in the Muslim world.

Section 46B also mentions an update on the payment of prescribed fees for the divorce to be registered. How much are these fees? Is there going to be any change? And I feel it should not be so low that the parties involved do not feel any pinch at all. Madam, in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] AMLA was tabled in Parliament in 1966 by Mr Othman Wok and Prof Ahmad Ibrahim. It provides guidance and acts as a point of reference for Muslims in Singapore in the management of their affairs, as well as their family matters. These issues include zakat, wakaf, family, faraidh and others.

On the issue and principle of faraidh, due to the differences between Shi'ite and Sunni Muslims regarding inheritance matters, misunderstandings and confusion sometimes occur. Can the Minister clarify whether certain requests had to be done by some parties, and how it was done? Are there any legal processes that should be followed by these parties and where can comprehensive advice be obtained on this matter, apart from visiting MUIS' website?

Can the Minister also clarify about the usage of wasiyyah, who should obtain it and from where?

For those who have adopted children or family members who have converted to Islam, what are the steps that they should take regarding this issue of faraidh? What about Muslims whose parents are non-Muslims?

On strengthening Muslim families in Singapore, regarding marriage preparation courses, apart from minor couples, can every couple who want to marry undergo this course, because it has many benefits as well as resource sharing that these couples can use in their marriage? This is especially so for those who are married more than once or marry more than one wife.

So far, how many people in Singapore have married more than one wife within the past five years? Is there a particular trend that can be observed among such marriages and what is the divorce rate for such couples?

What about those who went through a divorce and then remarried? What are the measures taken to monitor the condition of the new marriages? What is being done about the issue of men who remarried but are unable to pay for the maintenance of their ex-wives and children? This problem is still apparent and a burden in our community and it is one of the most visible problems in Singapore.

Before marriage, it is mandatory for teenage couples to obtain permission from their parents. This is stated in the Act. What if they are orphans and have no other relatives? Are there any exceptions made for them?

It is essential for us to understand how we can plan strategic measures to prevent adverse trends and manage high-risk marriages within our community together.

Madam, AMLA provides direction for our Muslim community when making decisions in our daily lives. It is important. The proposed changes in this Bill are in line with Islamic tenets and move with the times. Let us put them in practice as best as we can together.

(In English): The amendments must also be viewed in a balanced fashion, I feel. Firstly, it should be upholding our Islamic principles and practices. Secondly, it is also important for us to know that the day-to-day family and community life of Muslims in a multi-racial community is important. This balance is important. The equilibrium, Madam, is critical. I support the Bill.

4.07 pm

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mdm Speaker, for this opportunity to speak on the AMLA amendment Bill. It is very timely for AMLA to be amended as it was last amended almost nine years ago.

It is also very timely that in this rather historic Parliament sitting, probably Mdm Speaker's last as the Speaker of Parliament, that we are debating AMLA − a Bill that Mdm Speaker has spoken on before in this House as a parliamentarian during the last debate on the AMLA amendments in November 2008.

In Mdm Speaker's speech then, Madam spoke passionately about her support for the expanded use of the MBMF and the need to use part of the funds in helping dysfunctional or complex families in the community, beyond the traditional use of the funds in financing religious-related infrastructural developments for the community.

Thank you, Madam, for your passion and commitment to helping our community through this House. You have been an inspiration.

For this round of amendments to AMLA, I would like to speak on three areas: the use of the Mosque Building and MENDAKI Fund, or MBMF, Muslim marriages and the welfare of the child. Madam, please allow me to continue in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I support the amendments to AMLA. I also support the provision to use MBMF, as stated in clause 19 to amend section 77. I agree with this provision which enables MBMF monies to be used for mosque maintenance works and educational facilities in these mosques, as well as in full-time madrasahs. However, I would also like to ask the Minister whether MBMF can also be used to procure land to build mosques and, if so, is there a prescribed limit, in percentage terms, to use the MBMF monies for this purpose.

At the same time, I would also like to suggest that the funds for the MENDAKI component also be provisioned to organise and run job skills courses for, firstly, women, in order to help them return to work; secondly, those who are looking for jobs, and also, thirdly, those who are seeking a second chance, like ex-inmates and ex-drug offenders.

I believe that MENDAKI has already been proven successful in helping to improve the educational levels and academic achievements among our children in Primary, Secondary and post-Secondary schools.

Now, with the national movement SkillsFuture, I think MENDAKI should play a larger role to help our community prepare itself to navigate an economy that is more challenging and volatile.

I also support the enactment of section 94, whereby those under the age of 21 must participate in a marriage preparation course and must also obtain consent from their mother, father or an appropriate and legal guardian or wali, before they can register their marriage with a Naib Kadi or Kadi.

The amendments to section 95 are apt. I have previously interacted with women who married their husbands as the second, third or fourth wife without registering their marriage with ROMM and the marriage was solemnised by their own father or relative. This is because their husband's first wife did not agree for the husband to marry again. Hence, this marriage is unregistered and there is no marriage certificate.

The choice to become a second or third wife is a personal matter that is permissible in Islam. But I am concerned with the subsequent impact on the children who are born of this second or third wife.

Without any marriage registration and without a birth certificate, the child who is born will be similar to an illegitimate child, without a father. This will complicate processes like, first, getting an HDB flat for the mother and her child; second, registering the birth of that child and receiving related benefits like the Baby Bonus; third, matters relating to inheritance in the future; and fourth, when the child eventually gets married after he/she is old enough.

I hope that with the amendments to section 95 and with the requirement for the presence of a Naib Kadi or Kadi in the solemnisation of the marriage, proper consideration will be made by the woman who wishes to get married as the second, third or fourth wife. With that, Mdm Speaker, please allow me to continue my speech in English.

(In English): Madam, I support the addition of section 46B, where the intent is to provide another layer of possible intervention in the application for a divorce. I agree that the application for divorce should not be made too easy or be allowed to be done frivolously.

In a marriage, there are bound to be disagreements or arguments and, sometimes, decisions can be made irrationally during such disagreements and in the heat of anger. There are too many instances where a married couple seeks divorce in the heat of anger and, because of egotism, they refuse to swallow their pride and retract that application for divorce, without sufficiently thinking through the effect of their break-up on their future and, more importantly, on their children, if they have any.

The addition of sections 43A and 43B is also timely. More than anything, the well-being of the child involved and affected by the divorce should be paramount. Requiring the parents and child to attend the family support programme is important, so that the child is able to understand what is happening and what will happen upon the divorce of the parents.

I would also hope that through such family support programme, the parents who are seeking divorce will reconsider their decision and are able to see the effect their divorce may have on their child. If divorce is inevitable, I hope the parents seeking divorce will be able to part amicably and provide adequate support and time towards their child, post-divorce.

I agree to empowering the Syariah Court to, I quote, "appoint, in any proceedings involving the custody or welfare of a child, a registered medical practitioner, psychologist, counsellor, social worker, or mental health professional to examine and assess the child for the purposes of preparing expert evidence for use" in Court proceedings.

I feel that it is also useful to consider including the child's teachers or edu-carers who see and observe the child's social interactions and personal growth on a regular basis, among this group of professionals tasked to assess the child's mental, emotional and social well-being. All in all, I support the amendments proposed to AMLA.

4.14 pm

Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, I would like to first declare that I am a lawyer practising in the Syariah Court and that in my past appointment as Deputy Registrar of the Syariah Court, I was involved in some of the discussions relating to the amendment of AMLA.

The genesis of AMLA could be traced back to the time when Singapore was a British colony. During that period, there was an acknowledgement that whilst English law was to apply in Singapore, it needed to be appropriately modified to respect the religious beliefs and customs of the local inhabitants. The enactment of the 1880 Mahomedan Muslim Ordinance reflected the official legislative recognition of the status of Muslim personal law. This ordinance was replaced by the Muslim Ordinance and, subsequently, evolved into AMLA we see today.

I believe this historical perspective is relevant as it provides an insight as to why Muslims in Singapore are governed by a separate law in respect of certain matters like marriage and divorce. The evolution of AMLA is, therefore, of great historical significance and, to me, personally, it reflects the beauty of the Singapore Story that embraces and respects the identity of the Malay/Muslim community.

The proposed further developments of AMLA tabled today which are intended to: one, reinforce existing Muslim institutions; two, enhance the management of Muslim assets, and three, strengthen Muslim families, are, therefore, greatly welcomed.

Based on my observations of issues that I have come across in the course of my practice and my discussions with other lawyers, I would like to highlight two areas to be reviewed and included as amendments to AMLA.

One issue relates to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court. I welcome the amendment to section 35 to require either party to a marriage to be domiciled in Singapore or habitually resident in Singapore for a period of at least three years before the Syariah Court has jurisdiction to hear matters. It is indeed important for there to be a connecting factor before the Syariah Court exercises its jurisdiction.

I would like to ask the Minister to consider amending the provision on jurisdiction further to grant powers to the Syariah Court to hear ancillary matters when a divorce had been registered overseas. Currently, in such situations where a divorce was granted by a court of competent jurisdiction overseas, the Syariah Court can make an order on nafkah iddah and mutaah, which are entitlements to the Muslim wife, but not an order on the division of matrimonial assets. Parties would typically have to go to the civil Court, the High Court, to obtain the appropriate orders. I note that there had been developments in this matter as the Court of Appeal in the case of TMO vs TMP had found that there is no lacuna in the law and that chapter 4A of the Women's Charter, which empowers the High Court to order financial relief upon divorce granted by competent courts overseas, can apply to Muslims. This decision is helpful in clarifying and confirming that parties involved in a Muslim divorce overseas have some recourse.

I believe though there is much value in resolving the root of the problem through legislation. In particular, it will allow for one Court − the Syariah Court − to deal holistically with all the ancillary matters, including nafkah iddah and mutaah. I understand the Muslim Law Practice Committee of the Law Society had put up their recommendations and had made an extensive argument in respect of this matter. I hope that these recommendations will be reviewed and appropriate amendments to AMLA be made.

The other issue which I would like to highlight relates to inheritance distribution in accordance to faraid principles. The underlying spirit or rationale behind the faraid principles is actually one of fairness. The ones who get a larger share are the ones who are supposed to care for the more vulnerable beneficiaries within the family. However, in practice, often what is seen, is an assertion of rights and entitlement to the share of inheritance, without an appreciation of the duties and obligations towards the other beneficiaries. Currently, the Syariah Court issues the Inheritance Certificate upon the provision of a statutory declaration. No determination or adjudication of rights, entitlements and obligations is done at the Syariah Court. If there is a dispute, the matter can be brought to the civil Courts.

There is some dissatisfaction on the ground in respect of the current state of affairs, especially by those affected by the strict compliance of the principles and who do not seek the appropriate legal recourse. I feel that there is also a lack of knowledge and understanding of the nuances of Islamic principles on this matter. I appreciate that there is no simple solution. There may be several approaches to take and each comes with it, different challenges.

One possible approach may be to grant powers to the Syariah Court or create a separate tribunal to oversee the issues relating to the inheritance distribution, including issues relating to the Muslim will, nuzriah, hibah and enforcement of the beneficiaries' duties. That would require appropriate manpower allocation and expertise. I note that, currently, the civil Courts, applying Muslim law, has jurisdiction to deal with matters involving a Muslim estate. I also note the legal position that the determination of rights and interests is subject to the general law in Singapore. There are, perhaps, other approaches in looking at provisions to allow Muslim dependants to claim against the estate or setting out detailed provisions in AMLA in relation to nuzriah or hibah.

I appreciate the complexity of the situation but there is a real need to address these concerns. I, therefore, urge that these matters be reviewed and an appropriate resolution be put forth.

In this regard, I wish to add that fellow lawyers, in particular those who sit on the Muslim Law Practice Committee, have expressed their desire to continue to be involved in discussions with the Syariah Court and MUIS to work on further developments of Muslim law in Singapore. I hope the appropriate division in the Ministry will follow up with them so that more ideas can be generated through discourse and possible collaboration. Mdm Speaker, please allow me to continue with the rest of my speech in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] AMLA is an important piece of legislation in the administration of various aspects of life for the Muslim community in Singapore. If we look at the history and development of AMLA, we can see the beauty and uniqueness of the Singapore Story, in which the welfare of the Malay/Muslim community is given attention.

Therefore, I truly welcome this amendment Bill which aims to continue reinforcing Islamic institutions, enhancing the management of Muslim assets and strengthening Muslim families − and, at once, enhancing the unity of the Muslim community in Singapore in general.

However, I continue to hope changes and improvements in AMLA and also in the management of Muslim organisations in Singapore like MUIS and the Syariah Court could help make the lives of those in the Muslim community in Singapore better.

I agree that this is not an easy task for those organisations, especially in the context of modern life and with the presence of a variety of opinions about any issue. This responsibility is best described by a Malay expression that advises us to handle delicate matters carefully and wisely to avoid making things worse.

Although it is hard, I think that we should possess the courage and wisdom to make certain decisions and take steps to prepare our community to face change and make improvements. There has to be continuous education about Islamic principles and their application in the world today. On this matter, MUIS and, in particular, the MUIS Academy, have made wonderful efforts and these should be continued.

The reality is that life for those in the Muslim community is becoming increasingly complex and our community needs comprehensive and progressive guidance. I hope that the effort to enhance Islamic education within our community will continue to be given due attention.

This amendment is certainly a positive step and it is hoped that the application of this legislation will continue to be observed and improvements are done consistently, so that it corresponds with the realities of life in today's society. Mdm Speaker, I support the amendments.

4.21 pm

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mdm Speaker, the amendments to AMLA are certainly timely and beneficial to the Muslim community. As society progresses, it is important to keep abreast with the times. That means that the conventional methods of managing things must be reviewed and updated for even religious organisations. So, I rise in support of the Bill. But I would like to raise questions on some areas which I feel we can enhance further.

MUIS has, over the years, contributed significantly to the welfare of the Muslim community with their policies and programmes. They have been presiding over the wakaf dispute resolutions and it is certainly a wise move to clarify and strengthen their responsibilities and powers with regard to this. No doubt, this will help to streamline the resolution process. For example, the new section 58(7), which is intended to be seen as a clarification to section 63 of AMLA which specifies that the Court is only brought in if the Majlis or MUIS finds "the meaning or effect of any instrument or declaration creating or affecting any wakaf or nazar is obscure or uncertain".

However, despite these changes, what happens if MUIS, one day, for example, becomes a potential litigant itself? Should there be a conflict of interest pertaining to MUIS, the prosecuted parties will certainly take issue with natural justice. Moreover, giving MUIS absolute responsibility could be seen as a move that denies the public transparency and access to wakaf issues.

In fair and responsible governance, it is wise not to grant any statutory board or organisation absolute authority, no matter how capable or reputable they have proven to be. It is also why the High Court, independent of the Government and other Statutory Boards in Singapore, is required to preside over legal matters.

Aside from highlighting MUIS' authority in the management of wakaf matters, it would also be prudent to look into improving and standardising the management of wakafs across the country. MUIS could help to develop rules and policies relevant to the enhanced management and governance of wakafs. The various proposals to enhance the management of wakafs are to be welcomed, as accountability helps ensure that the wakaf is maintained and developed well.

With clearer and better management policies, the frequency of conflicts would be reduced. I would also propose that the relevant parties in a dispute should be granted a more public channel to voice their grievances under the existing wakaf dispute resolutions framework. This will help to allay public concerns about transparency and accountability. In this case, can the Minister share if there has been any specific impetus that has created the need to specify further grounds for removal of a trustee or mutawalli? In addition, should disputing parties not agree with the Wakaf Dispute Resolution Committee and the eventual decision by the MUIS Council, would they have any other avenues for recourse?

On a related note – I think the Minister mentioned it – I echo sentiments from the community to dedicate more resources from MBMF towards supporting madrasahs. The Minister mentioned just now about section 77 specifying adequate resources in a more timely manner, for terrorist groups are abusing misinterpretations and misunderstanding towards religious texts to incite hatred and violence. Religion remains a fundamental aspect of the lives of many young Muslims and madrasahs play an important role in training asatizah, who are potential powerful influencers with regard to religion and education matters. So, section 77 is very timely. Mdm Speaker, let me speak in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As with all developed societies, divorce is on the rise and the same goes for Singapore. Muslim marriages are not immune to this phenomenon as well.

Ultimately, children are the ones hardest hit in divorces. It is, therefore, the right move to implement mandatory counselling or family support programmes for couples with children at any stage of their divorce. Engaging experts to assess and examine a child's well-being is a clear indication that the policy seeks to be child-centric.

But, while counselling and mediating sessions are good in theory, not all parties may be cooperative. I am pleased to note that an absence of one party at these counselling sessions will not result in a delay of the divorce proceedings. This is especially important when either party or children are at risk in cases of domestic violence. My concern, however, is that without both party's attendance and cooperation in a divorce case, it may be difficult to implement some support programmes. For example, a parent who has de facto care of the children may deny access to the other party, even if mutual support for the best interest of the children is recommended. Counselling only works if the relevant parties are willing to put their best efforts into it. For example, a marriage counselling session with just one attendee is unlikely to help the couple. Hence, I would like to ask whether there are consequences for non-compliance of an order to attend counselling.

In addition, I note that there is no distinction of categories of persons required to undergo counselling and mediation. I think a couple who has mutually and amicably decided to end their marriage due to personality conflicts, and a couple who is divorcing because one party has exhibited dangerous domestic violence tendencies, would require very different types of support for the involved parties and their children. My point is that different needs arise from varying circumstances and also the external amount of support they have access to, such as their family members. It would be more efficient to streamline the process by categorising, for instance, the types of conflicts and reasons for divorce and their possible needs before embarking on the counselling and support process.

Overseas divorces presided by a foreign Shariah court present another challenge as they could result in complex ancillary issues. In February this year, the Straits Times reported a case in which a man had divorced his wife in 2012 in the Johor Syariah Subordinate Court, allegedly without telling her. When the woman applied to the Singapore Syariah Court to divide their assets, the Court did not have jurisdiction to do so as it was not the Court that dissolved the marriage. Under Muslim law, it was only able to award her, against her former husband, an amount of maintenance and gift that was far less than the value of the assets that was up for division. The application for asset division was then brought up to the High Court, which also turned down the application.

This is a classic case whereby, if both the Singapore Syariah Court and High Court do not have jurisdiction, the husband can avoid having the matrimonial property rightfully divided. This puts women in Muslim marriages in a vulnerable position. The local Syariah Court should be empowered to make orders on ancillary issues pertaining to overseas divorces. I feel that it is important to do so.

Lastly, I support mandatory marriage counselling for all Muslim couples. In fact, I think marriage counselling is very important for all couples, regardless of their religion. Divorce rates are on the rise and marriage and family expectations are vastly different from those of earlier generations. Some advice from parents may be rendered obsolete due to the circumstances of the current generation. Moreover, Muslim marriages are a little different in the sense that laws pertaining to them are governed by the Syariah Court and the awareness may be lacking among some young Muslims.

The concern would be that mandatory marriage counselling may be deemed as coercive and it could be challenging to obtain their buy-in. Nevertheless, I believe it is still ideal to have it. Unfortunately, it is human nature to believe one does not require advice until they encounter a situation where they need help. Perhaps, offering incentives could help to increase interest.

4.30 pm

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, I stand in support of the Bill. I welcome these progressive and timely amendments to AMLA, especially in relation to the amendments that seek to offer greater protection to children and minors in attempting to address the growing rate of divorce amongst young Muslim couples.

The Family Justice Act 2014 provides for the appointment of child representatives in the Family Courts. The amendment sought to be introduced by the current Bill seeks to follow this approach in the Syariah Courts.

This is a timely change. Often, in disputes between parents, the children are put in a position where they are forced to take sides. This may not be in the best interest of the child. The child representative scheme provides a good support system to already available mechanisms to ensure that the child's best interest is foremost in mind.

The Family Justice Act 2014 as well as the proposed amendments sought to be introduced by the current Bill do not set out the precise roles of the child representatives.

In the context of the Family Justice Act, this is set out in the Family Justice Rules. Similarly, I trust that subsidiary legislation on the proposed amendments, if accepted, will deal with the roles of the child representative through similar subsidiary legislation. Can the Minister confirm if this is the case? I also want to add that it will be useful to learn from the experiences of the Family Court in this regard.

Next, under section 45(5) of the Family Justice Act 2014, the child representative has some measure of protection from legal suits. Clause 15(c) of the Bill similarly seeks to offer some protection to the child representative from legal proceedings in the carrying out of their work. This is provided that the conditions set out therein are satisfied.

However, the wording adopted for the conditions in the Family Justice Act 2014 and the proposed amendments in the current Bill differ.

In the case of section 45(5) of the Family Justice Act 2014, a child representative there receives protection as long as the act (a) was done in good faith and (b) did not involve any fraud or wilful misconduct on the part of the child representative.

However, in the case of the proposed amendments in the current Bill, clause 15(c) follows the language of the Family Justice Act 2014, but leaves out the words "on the part of the child representative" after the words "did not involve any fraud or wilful misconduct".

Some lawyers have raised this issue with me and wanted clarifications on whether there is a distinction to be drawn between the protection to be given to a child representative under the Family Justice Act 2014 and AMLA?

If no such distinction was intended, then the suggestion is that the wording of the Family Law Act 2014 be adopted. After all, there is much sense in lifting protection only where the fraud and misconduct are attributed to the child representative.

I should also mention that the same disparity in wording is also present in relation to the protection offered to medical practitioners, psychologists, social workers or mental health professionals in section 45(6) of the Family Justice Act 2014 and clause 15(c) of the current Bill. Again, may I propose that the wording in the Family Justice Act 2014 be adopted?

Next, similar to what fellow Member Saktiandi Supaat had mentioned earlier, sections 121A to 121G of the Women's Charter created jurisdiction for the Family Courts to deal with financial provisions consequential upon a divorce where the divorce was obtained overseas.

In at least one area, dealing with the division of matrimonial property in Singapore, there is no similar provision in AMLA or the amendments proposed under the current Bill.

In a recent case, the Syariah Courts have declined to exercise jurisdiction over such matters. In other words, where the divorce of a Muslim couple is finalised overseas, the Syariah Courts will not have jurisdiction to determine the division of matrimonial assets in Singapore. This becomes a problem when there is a divorce overseas and there are assets in Singapore which the overseas Court will not deal with.

This issue came up before the Singapore Courts in TMO vs TMO [2017] SGCA 14. In TMO, the husband applied for and obtained a divorce in the Johore courts. This was done, apparently, without the knowledge of the wife. The wife, having discovered this, later applied to the Singapore Syariah Courts for ancillary relief.

The Syariah Court granted certain relief as it found that it had the requisite jurisdiction. However, it refused to exercise jurisdiction over the division of matrimonial assets on the basis that the divorce was not concluded in the Syariah Court in Singapore.

Ultimately, the issue relating to the division of the matrimonial assets would fall to the Family Courts who had jurisdiction to deal with the same, but would not apply Muslim law in determining the division.

This oddity that would follow is that all other issues would be dealt with in accordance with Muslim law, save for the issue of division of matrimonial property. While the decision in TMO means that such a Muslim couple is not without recourse, the recourse provided may not be satisfactory from that couple's point of view.

Can I propose that further amendments be introduced, specifically granting the Syariah Court jurisdiction in such cases?

Madam, overall, the amendments that have been proposed in the Bill seeks to learn from the positive aspects introduced in other legislation. This is done while still having due regard to the beliefs and practices of our Muslim brothers and sisters.

To this end, and the comments notwithstanding, Madam, this Bill can only improve the lives and interests of the Muslim community in Singapore and I stand in support of it.

Mdm Speaker: Minister Yaacob.

4.35 pm

Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Madam, allow me to thank Members who have risen to support this Bill. Their endorsement of our proposals to amend the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) is, indeed, crucial. Let me now address some of the points and queries raised.

Madam, I am heartened to see the strong support for marriage preparation programmes for minor couples. Strong families are the foundation of a resilient nation. But many of us would know, building a strong family requires constant effort, good communication and mutual understanding. These are but some of the important practices that our marriage preparation programmes seek to promote and encourage among couples.

During the public consultations, there were also calls from the community for the marriage preparation programmes to be made mandatory for other couples, a point raised also by Mr Faisal Manap. Marriage education programmes tailored for different groups are already available, but we are making it mandatory for minor couples for now as they represent the group that most requires support. This is similar to the approach adopted for minor marriages under the Women's Charter.

We have several approved private partners onboard offering the Cinta Abadi marriage preparation programme for Muslim first marriages and this makes the programme accessible and convenient for all couples to attend. In fact, when we developed the Cinta Abadi programme, it was developed in consultation with MUIS, Syariah Court, Registry of Muslim Marriages and other community partners and they were based on the values of the religion and touches on the pillars of marriage in Islam.

For remarriages, a point raised by Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef, there is a dedicated marriage preparation and enrichment programme for the couple and programmes for their children to help them adjust. For couples who need more support, counselling, and even referral to relevant social assistance schemes and services are provided. Ultimately, it is about helping couples prepare for marriage and educating those who may not be aware of the importance and availability of such support.

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, Madam, the Government will continue to study the landscape to assess if more needs to be done to support our couples. So, we will start with minor couples and we will study further as to whether to extend it to other couples.

Madam, I also would like to address a point raised by Mr Azmoon concerning the need to seek consent from the Kadi or the Naib Kadi if the couple wants the wali to solemnise their marriage. I would like to assure him that this does not take away the wali's right to solemnise the marriage. Rather, Madam, it seeks to ensure that the valid wali has been appointed to solemnise the marriage and once this is clear, the wali can proceed to solemnise the marriage.

Madam, there was also strong support for the proposals to better support divorcing couples. To answer Mr Zainal Sapari's query, the family support programmes available for divorcing couples are aimed at ensuring the best interests of children of divorcing parties. I will highlight three key areas.

First, for couples with children below 21 years old living in a HDB flat, the Syariah Court will refer these cases to HDB for the couple to make informed and sustainable decisions on housing post-divorce.

Second, the Syariah Court refers parents who have at least one child aged between six and 15 years old to PPIS As-Salaam Family Support Centre to participate in PPIS' "Children-in-Between" programme when necessary. The As-Salaam Support Centre is one of the four Divorce Support Specialist Agencies supported by MSF. This programme equips parents with co-parenting skills to help reduce parental conflicts and thus minimise the impact of divorce on children. The programme also seeks to help the affected children build coping skills to deal with their parents' divorce.

Third, divorcing Muslim couples with children up to 21 years old are also required to attend a free two-hour post-divorce consultation session before the collection of their divorce certificates. This one-time consultation session provided at the Syariah Court is known as "Parenting PACT", and is conducted by PPIS. The session provides further resources and guidance on cooperative co-parenting skills and self-care strategies. It also provides information about the community support resources available post-divorce.

It is hoped that these programmes will give the strongest support possible to couples and their children in these difficult times. They also complement the parenting plans that couples with children up to 21 years old may be required to submit, which essentially are post-divorce co-parenting and care arrangement plans.

Madam, there were concerns as to whether such provisions for family support programmes or counselling would unnecessarily prolong divorce proceedings. Let me emphasise that counselling goes beyond reconciliation and saving marriages. Counselling provides the safe space to discuss the implications of divorce and enables parties to receive proper guidance on self-care and post-divorce arrangements for the children of the marriage. As regards the timelines post-counselling, if the parties are amicable and come to an agreement on the divorce and ancillary matters, their case can be completed within three to six months. However, there are typically 30% of cases that are either acrimonious in nature or more complex with multi-faceted issues. For such cases, it is only to be expected that their divorce proceedings will take a longer time.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat was concerned about parties in a divorce being non-cooperative. If one party deliberately tries to stall proceedings, the Court has the option to order a stay in proceedings until the defaulting party attends the prescribed activity, or even order costs to be paid to the other party. The conduct of parties often gives the Court insights into the parents' relationship with their child and, if there is a clear disinterest or lack of cooperation, such conduct could be relevant for the Court in its subsequent deliberations on custody and access orders. I would also like to assure Members that there is a "triage" system in place to determine the level of urgency that cases are accorded − irreconcilable divorce cases with a risk of domestic violence, for instance, will be expedited for the safety of the victim.

Madam, I will now move on to jurisdiction on divorce. Ms Rahayu Mahzam, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Louis Ng spoke of a Singaporean lady who obtained a divorce in Johor but faced difficulties in settling her divorce ancillary matters in Singapore. I believe they were referring to the case of TMO vs TMP (2016), which was brought to the Court of Appeal. The Court eventually allowed the appeal for the wife to seek financial relief at the High Court, on the basis that chapter 4A of Part X of the Women's Charter can apply to Muslims where necessary. More importantly, the Court of Appeal confirmed that there is no lacuna in the law. The High Court retains residual jurisdiction over matters which do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court.

Therefore, parties to a foreign Muslim divorce are not stranded, as they can proceed to the civil Courts to claim financial relief, including an order for the division of matrimonial assets. As was done in this case, the Syariah Court will continue to make orders related to both nafkah iddah, which is the maintenance during the period which the divorced woman is forbidden by Muslim law to remarry, and mutaah, the consolatory gift upon divorce.

We will, therefore, continue to keep to current practices and laws. In some ways, we ensure parity in approach, in that, if Singaporean parties had their marriage dissolved outside Singapore, there is a common forum in Singapore which is empowered to hear and determine parties' claims for other ancillary relief. Such cases may often be more complex as well. So, we will continue to monitor this situation and engage relevant agencies and stakeholders closely, including MinLaw and the Muslim Law Practice Committee of the Law Society of Singapore, or MLPC, with a view to better rationalise our processes and systems in future if necessary.

Madam, let me now address Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef's and Mr Saktiandi Supaat's comments on the management of our wakafs. First and foremost, there was no specific case that prompted these amendments. But allow me to reiterate some key points. By virtue of AMLA, it has always been MUIS' responsibility to administer all wakafs. Trustee management is critical to the management of the wakaf, because the accountability that comes with trusteeship helps ensure that the wakaf is maintained and developed well. Disputes related to trusteeship can be complicated, messy and potentially long-drawn. In the medium to long-term, the management of the wakaf can be adversely affected.

It is, therefore, MUIS' priority, in the interest of all wakaf beneficiaries, to ensure our wakafs are run well, so that they can generate the maximum returns and are sustainable in the long run. The effort to introduce a Wakaf Dispute Resolution Committee was an innovative but necessary approach by MUIS, to ensure that there are neutral individuals with the necessary expertise to help mediate disputes. So, to answer Mr Faisal Manap, we do have a scheme to resolve wakaf disputes outside of the civil Courts and this is through the Wakaf Dispute Resolution Committee appointed by MUIS.

We do not want the wakaf's resources to be drained by unnecessary legal fees. This Committee is thus an expedient and prudent option, specially made available for our trustees and mutawallis who we value greatly for their contributions to the community.

Madam, MUIS will continue to engage the trustees and mutawallis to ensure that they are all aware of this platform, as well as their respective roles and responsibilities. Disputing parties who do not agree with the manner in which the MUIS Council reached its eventual decision can resort to judicial review by the Courts in appropriate circumstances. But we would advise against this and would rather all parties come together for an amicable resolution.

Let me stress again, Madam, that AMLA has long provided for MUIS to administer all wakafs.

These amendments are intended to add greater transparency and clarity to MUIS' powers, such as in the grounds for removal, for the benefit of trustees and mutawallis. I wish to stress that these amendments on wakaf management should not be misinterpreted as an effort to give MUIS unfettered powers.

They also help provide more self-sufficient avenues for the wakafs, through contributions to a sinking fund for the maintenance and upkeep of the wakaf.

We must laud the noble efforts and farsightedness of our community's early philanthropists in establishing the wakafs. We must also commend the good work of all the trustees and mutawallis who have looked after the wakafs well ever since. So, we will continue to respect the traditions and objectives of the very trust deeds that gave life to these wakafs. They are as much a part of our history as they are important community institutions of today.

Mdm Speaker, allow me to now address some of the comments on the Mosque Building and MENDAKI Fund (MBMF). The regular contributions from the community to MBMF over the years have made possible the building of new mosques and the upgrading of existing ones. Maarof Mosque and Yusof Ishak Mosque are our newest mosques built with MBMF resources, with another in Tampines North set to be our 27th MBMF mosque. Since 2009, MUIS has leveraged on MBMF to add over 23,200 prayer spaces, build more religious class facilities and introduced more elderly-friendly and disabled-friendly features. In the past year alone, we have seen six mosques upgraded, such as Al Muttaqin in Ang Mo Kio, Al-Khair mosque in Choa Chu Kang and, just recently, the Haji Muhammad Salleh mosque at Palmer Road in Shenton Way.

When we brought this proposal to the public for consultation, the reception was positive, but there were similar concerns to what was aired today. There was recognition that good development of our madrasah students is critical to filling our "hardware", our institutions, with our strong "software". But there were also concerns as to whether this use of MBMF may compromise allocations in other areas, such as our mosques. I would like to give my assurance that these uses will not compromise the existing building and maintenance plans we have for our mosques. MUIS will continue to ensure that MBMF is used judiciously and, to this end, will only approve necessary or useful works for our mosques and full-time madrasahs.

Madam, let me address two more points before I conclude my speech. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef and Ms Rahayu Mahzam raised two areas which were not included in this round of amendments to the Act. On Assoc Prof Fatimah and Ms Rahayu's query on having more amendments related to inheritance and nuzriah, allow me to state at the outset that my team and I recognise the need for a comprehensive review on these matters. I had said the same to the community leaders when I met them in March this year. More time is required to assess the changing landscape and study the implications of any such amendments to AMLA.

MUIS and MCCY are happy to work with our stakeholders, such as the Muslim Law Practice Committee of the Law Society of Singapore (MLPC) and the Muslim Financial Planning Association (MFPA), on this review to better serve the best interests of the community. In the meantime, members of the Muslim community are currently already able to make gifts during their lifetime or make nominations to benefit the parties that Assoc Prof Fatimah and Ms Rahayu mentioned, such as non-Muslim parents or adopted children, through their CPF and insurance policies or, separately, through a will.

Mdm Speaker, Assoc Prof Fatimah touched on the recent challenges in the Muslim world, which I take to mean on exclusivism and extremism. I would highlight that MCCY and MUIS recently introduced subsidiary legislation through AMLA (Muslim Religious Schools) Rules 2016, to better support the asatizah fraternity, as well as our Islamic education centres and providers. The Rules came into force on 1 January this year. Central to the Rules is the Code of Ethics, which all asatizah and Islamic education centres and providers are required to abide by.

The values within the Code are easily relatable to the wider community, such as recognising diverse opinions and schools of thought in Islam, not denigrating any racial or religious group and not advocating any idea that is likely to encourage extremism or violence. To answer Assoc Prof Fatimah's query, there are, indeed, processes in place to assess if an asatizah has breached the Code of Ethics. The Asatizah Recognition Board will assess the matter and will subsequently put up a recommendation to MUIS on the next course of action.

Another aspect of the Rules is that all individuals who wish to teach or preach Islam must be recognised under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS). Our asatizahs bear the heavy responsibility of providing the Singapore Muslim community with sound religious guidance amidst an increasingly diverse socio-religious landscape. They are also our leaders in preventing problematic ideologies and practices from taking root. The ARS thus seeks to raise the professionalism and quality of our asatizahs and ensure that they continue to be a key source of confidence for the community, one with strong professional qualifications and training to provide guidance on the practice of Islam in a modern, multi-religious and multi-racial society.

Madam, the battle against radical ideologies cannot be won by legislation alone. MUIS, together with its community partners, has been working closely and putting in much effort over the years to build the resilience of the Muslim community against threats and undesirable influences. These range from offering more customised religious education programmes and classes, to having outreach events and dialogues with parents and youths on complex, contemporary matters and providing counselling in "safe spaces" for those who require assistance or advice.

Madam, I would like to once again thank Members for their support of the Bill. They remind me of the equally warm reception we received during the public consultations, where many of our stakeholders and community leaders saw this review as a step in the right direction. It was heartening that, from the very start, people saw this as an opportunity to work with the Government to strengthen our community. Many, indeed, came with valuable ideas and suggestions − some we have incorporated in this round of amendments, while some others we will continue to study with our partners to find the best way forward. What remains important is that we must continue working together, for we will always be stronger when we are united. And it is this very spirit and confidence that will see us through, no matter what the challenges are, to an even brighter future. Madam, allow me to conclude in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, next year, we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the establishment of AMLA. This Act was drafted by Singapore's first Attorney-General, the late Prof Ahmad Ibrahim, to serve the socio-religious needs of the Muslim community in Singapore.

The last review on AMLA was done in 2008. Almost a decade later, it is important to update this Act so that it stays relevant. I am very grateful to the entire community for the support. Every suggestion is valuable and some of them have been included in the proposed amendments which are divided into three areas, namely, strengthening Muslim families, reinforcing Muslim institutions and enhancing the management of the Muslim community's assets.

Thanks to the determination and cooperation between families and community organisations, the marriage and divorce statistics of the community have shown improvement. Although the number of marriages has increased, marriages involving minor couples have decreased and the divorce rate has remained stable. However, marriages involving minor couples are still vulnerable to higher risks. Therefore, a compulsory marriage preparation programme will be introduced, starting with minor couples. Parents or guardians must give consent before the couple can register to be married. This aims to provide a solid foundation to such couples in their early years in order to pave the way towards a lasting marriage.

Mdm Speaker, we admit that, sometimes, marriages cannot be saved. Nonetheless, we must increase our efforts to prevent a rising trend of divorces. Therefore, the Syariah Court's jurisdiction will be expanded to ensure that couples who wish to divorce attend the Marriage Counselling Programme. The Syariah Court will also be given powers to appoint an expert who will represent the interests of a child whose parents are undergoing a divorce. This is important in order to ensure that the child's welfare is looked after in any divorce.

Mdm Speaker, in our efforts to reinforce Muslim institutions, I have tabled three amendments. First, couples who wish to register their marriage must obtain written consent from the Kadi or the Naib Kadi. The Kadi or Naib Kadi must also be present to witness the solemnisation of the marriage. This is to ensure that only the rightful wali is appointed so that the marriage is lawful in Islam. Second, a husband is allowed and encouraged to apply for divorce before uttering the talak. This will allow the Syariah Court to help save the marriage through counselling. We would like to stress that the utterance of talak is a last resort and should not be used frivolously. Third, in order to ensure that the Syariah Court's resources are used optimally, cases will be heard only if at least one party filing the application is habitually residing in Singapore for a period of at least three consecutive years.

Under section 58 in AMLA, MUIS is responsible for the administration of all wakaf properties in Singapore. In 2016, MUIS distributed over $3 million of revenue generated from wakaf properties to mosques, madrasahs and Muslim organisations. This is achieved due to careful planning by MUIS and close cooperation between the trustees and mutawalli or those appointed to manage the wakafs. In order to enhance capabilities in wakaf management, MUIS will be given powers to revoke the appointment of a wakaf trustee or administrator if there is any evidence of wrongdoing. This measure is important to ensure that the wakaf property is administered professionally and transparently. MUIS will also be given powers to direct that a portion of the wakaf's income be transferred to a sinking fund to upgrade and develop the wakaf property.

Finally, the amendment to MBMF aims to clarify that this fund can be used to purchase land in order to enlarge the current area of a mosque or to build a new mosque. This fund can also be used to build or conserve our full-time madrasahs so that they will have enough resources to provide a conducive learning environment for their students.

Mdm Speaker, each proposed amendment aims to strengthen the socio-religious life of the Muslim community in Singapore. Strong families form the pillar of a resilient society. Muslim institutions must be reinforced so that they can perform their responsibilities more effectively for the community. The management of the community's assets must always be enhanced in order to continue providing benefits to the community.

Here, I would like to reply to Mr Faisal Manap's pantun or poem.

Singapore is a nation with dignity,

Its people are wise and hardworking,

It is entrusted upon each of us,

To uphold justice as a shared responsibility.

I am grateful to everyone who was involved and who had contributed to every amendment to AMLA since the beginning. This includes representatives of Malay/Muslim organisations, professionals, members of the community and Members of this House who showed their concern, including Mdm Speaker. I am confident that Mdm Speaker will continue to give her strong support to our efforts to strengthen the Malay/Muslim community, in whatever capacity Madam may serve. I hope that we can continue to work together to support this noble endeavour to build a Muslim Community of Excellence in Singapore.

(In English): I would like to close my speech once again by thanking everyone from the Muslim community for their support, not just for today's review of AMLA, but for all the past reviews of the Act. And this includes Mdm Speaker, who was always there with her wise counsel and valuable contributions to our discussions on past AMLA Bills. It is, indeed, an admirable spirit and bond that our Muslim community share, united by a common purpose to do what is good and what is right for the people. I look forward, Madam, to your continued support in this endeavour, in whatever capacity you may be in in the future.

Mdm Speaker: Any clarifications?

4.58 pm

Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef: I seek clarification from the hon Member, Mr Faisal Manap, on the meaning of the last two statements of his pantun, which is interpreted as a short poetry.

As a Member of the Muslim community and a practising Muslim, I had a lot of discomfort listening to that pantun and I really want to understand the meaning behind it or the intended meaning. We know that the AMLA Bill has been put forth with amendments with a lot of work from MUIS, as well as MCCY, and the members of the Muslim community who have given feedback. Therefore, I would really like to understand a little bit deeper about the intended meaning and what is it exactly that the Member really has to say behind that pantun.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for seeking clarification. I believe that the pantun that I have mentioned is very straightforward and the meaning is already there, so I do not need to elaborate more. Thank you, Mdm Speaker.

Mr Zainal Sapari: Maybe the question by my colleague, Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef, was not clear enough. Perhaps, if I could rephrase her question. Is there anything in the amendment Bill which Mr Faisal Manap feels could lead to MUIS or the Syariah Court being unjust in their actions?

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I would like to ask the Member, can he point out in my speech, where did I mention anything about what he assumed it to be?

Mr Zainal Sapari: Madam, I am not referring to any part of Mr Faisal Manap's speech. But I think, in the pantun, it does say that we have to answer to the higher authority if we are unjust in this world. It is insinuating that there might be certain aspects in the Bill which could lead to MUIS or Syariah Court to make unjust decisions.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I stand firm that I did not say anything of that sort in my speech. And I believe my pantun is very clear that we are all accountable to our almighty creator.

Mr Zainal Sapari: Would Mr Faisal Manap then agree that the amendments made in the Bill are in the spirit of the Muslim community, acting in good faith of what is in the best for the community?

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I think I mentioned it clearly in my speech, twice, that I support the Bill wholeheartedly.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim.]

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.