PUTRAJAYA, MALAYSIA: Islam is not about turban and beard, said the Federal Court in dismissing an appeal by three pupils who were expelled from school nine years ago for refusing to take off their 'serban' ('turban' in Malay Language).

The panel of three judges led by Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad was unanimous in their decision that not everything that Prophet Muhammad did - or the way he did it - is legally or religiously binding on Muslims, or even preferable and should be followed.

In the panel were also Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Steve Shim and Federal Court judge Justice Abdul Hamid Mohammad.

In his written judgment, Justice Abdul Hamid said that he accepted that Prophet Muhammad wore a turban but added that the Prophet also rode a camel, built his house and mosque with clay walls and roof of date palm leaves and brushed his teeth with the twig of a plant.

"Does that make riding a camel a more pious deed than travelling in an aeroplane?" he asked in the judgment read out by Federal Court deputy registrar Kamaruddin Kamsun.

"Is it preferable to build houses and mosques using the same materials use by the Prophet and the same architecture adopted by him during his time?"
In 1997, SK Serting Felda headmistress, Fatimah Sihi expelled Meor Atiqulrahman Ishak, then 13, and two other students - brothers Syed Abdullah Khaliq Aslamy Syed Ahmad Johari, then 11, and Syed Ahmad Syakur Dihya Syed Ahmad Johari, then 10 - for wearing turban to school.

On August 6, 1999, the High Court revoked the expulsion order, ruling that the headmistress had no power to expel the students for wearing the headgear.

On November 22, 2004, the Court of Appeal set aside the High Court ruling.

Justice Abdul Hamid said: "The question is whether the wearing of turban by boys of the age of the appellants is a practice of the religion of Islam?"

"The pagan Arabs wore turbans and kept beards. It was quite natural for the Prophet, born in the community and growing up to it, to do the same."

He added that other people living in the desert or semi-desert areas, such as the Afghans and Persians, also wear turbans.

"It is interesting to note that very few of our muftis and hardly any Syariah court judge wear the turban", he said.

Justice Abdul Hamid said the court could not ignore the education system that had helped boys and girls to grow up as Malaysians, and educationists should be given respect and credit when they formulate regulations for the general good of students and society.

Describing the father of the two brothers as 'arrogant', Justice Abdul Hamid said Syed Ahmad Johari Syed Mohamed wanted the three appellants to wear turban to school because the turban is the "family's emblem."

He said he could not accept the submission of the students' counsel Mohamed Hanipa Maidin that the school regulation violated the provisions of the Constitution.

Mohamed Hanipa had submitted that the appeal was related to the right to practice one's religion and that includes every religious practice that has some basis or has become part of the religion, whether mandatory or otherwise.

"To accept the learned counsel's argument would mean that anybody has a right to do anything, at any time and anywhere he considers to be a practice of his religion, no matter how trivial," said Justice Abdul Hamid.

Outside the courtroom, Syed Ahmad Johari said he was upset because the school regulations emerged only after his sons started wearing the turban.

"However, I respect this decisionof this court," he said.

Syed Ahmad Johari, a public school teacher, who wears a turban and also dons a 'jubah' (robe), said he would discuss with his lawyers the probability of taking this matter to the Syariah Court.

"Although it is a defeat for me, it is a victory for Islam because the issue has been brought to the highest court of the land (Malaysia). At least the public would be aware of it," said the 48-year-old father, who came to court together with his sons, all wearing turbans.

THE STAR, 13.07.2006 - FRONT PAGE