Eusoff Chin J:

The main issues to be determined by this Court are:

(i) whether the deceased, who was a Buddhist, was properly converted to Islam in 1973;

(ii) whether the deceased, Lee Siew Kee at the time of his death, was or was not professing the Muslim religion;

(iii) if he had been properly converted to Islam, whether he had renounced the religion of Islam before he died.

The Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan, Kuala Lumpur (1st defendant) (hereinafter referred to as Majlis) alleged that the deceased was a Muslim at the time of his death. The Majlis produced a certified copy of an application form entitled "Borang Permohonan Memeluk Ugama Islam" submitted by the deceased, dated 24 December 1973. The deceased was then 37 years old.

At the lower portion of this Form appears the following:

Untuk Digunakan Oleh Pegawai Yang Mengislamkan

1. Syarat-syarat memeluk ugama Islam, nasihat berkenaan dengan Islam serta doa diberi oleh: Hj. Muhammad Adam K.C. Chao

2. Di Islamkan oleh: Hj. Muhammad Adam K.C. Chao

3. Saksi-saksi: (1) Hj. Ibrahim Yap K/P No: 2652269 t.t.

(2) Hj. Hashim Chin K/P. No: 2983398 t.t.

4. Nama Islam: Redza Lee

5. Tarikh diislamkan: ...

T.T.

Pangkat Pegawai Yang Mengislamkan

Encik Karpal Singh for the plaintiff submitted that there was no date showing when this Islamisation took place, or where this ceremony was performed. It is noted that "Pangkat Orang Yang Mengislamkan" at the last line in the Borang, is also not stated. Encik Karpal Singh submitted that s. 146 of the Administration of the Muslim Law Enactment 1952 (the Enactment) applicable at the time of conversion states:

146. No person shall be converted to the Muslim religion otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Enactment or any rules made thereunder.

Section 148 of the Enactment states:

148. Any Muslim who converts any person to the Muslim religion shall forthwith report such conversion to the majlis with all necessary particulars.

The only rule relating to conversion to Islam is r. 10 of the Administration of Muslim Law Rules 1953, (Selangor) and it states:

10. All "pegawai mesjid" shall keep a record of the particulars of all conversions to Islam in their respective "kariah" and shall forward such particulars to the Majlis for registration as soon as the formalities of such conversions are completed.

`Pegawai mesjid' has been defined under s. 2 of the Enactment to mean: "the nazir, imam, khatib, and bilal of a mosque, if any, for the time being" and `kariah' and `kariah mesjid' mean "the area prescribed by the Majlis in accordance with s. 114 of this Enactment within which a mosque is situated."

It would therefore appear that when the Borang is used for the purpose of conversion, the "pangkat pegawai yang mengislamkan" refers to a "pegawai mesjid" or an official of the Majlis.

From the application form submitted by the deceased, I find that the conversion ceremony has to be done by a `pegawai' - see the portion of the form quoted above. But the affidavits of Dato' Mohd. Aini b. Taib and Haji Arifin b. Haron for the Majlis do not disclose whether Hj. Muhamad Adam K.C. Chao was in fact a `pegawai' at the time he was alleged to have converted the deceased to Islam. Since r. 10 refers to `pegawai mesjid' there must be evidence to show that the person who solemnised the conversion must be either a pegawai mesjid or a pegawai Majlis authorised to perform that function. It is true that it appears from s. 147 of the Enactment that any Muslim may solemnise the conversion of any person to Islam, but where a prescribed form is used for that purpose, as is here shown, it is necessary that the evidence must be produced to the Court stating that the person solemnising the conversion is a `pegawai'.

It is also the requirement of s. 148 of the Enactment that a Muslim who converts a person to Islam shall forthwith report such conversion to the majlis, with all the necessary particulars. `Forthwith' has been held by the Supreme Court t