LETTER | It is a pity that the nation is mired again by the agony of a parent in regard to the unilateral religious conversion of children.

What is more difficult to comprehend is when there are contradictory aspects of human-made laws that tend to be interpreted from different angles.

The landmark judgement by the Federal Court that it is unconstitutional to unilaterally convert children to another religion seems to be rejected at the state level and this leads to another antagonistic and confrontational approach, where parties compete in a win-lose context in courts that would make an impact on the country’s inter-ethnic and religious harmony.

Religion and its exclusive dominance over the Malaysian polity where competing parties want to project an image of protecting and safeguarding religion, there is a tendency to shape justice within an ethnoreligious framework, rather than adhering to universal laws that have their roots in natural law.

Natural law is a theory in ethics and philosophy that says that human beings possess intrinsic values that govern their reasoning and behaviour. Natural law maintains that these rules of right and wrong are inherent in people and are not created by society or court judges.

Aristotle (384–322 BCE) is considered by many to be the father of natural law - argued that what is “just by nature” is not always the same as what is “just by law”.

Aristotle believed that there is a natural justice that is valid everywhere with the same force; that this natural justice is positive and does not exist by "people thinking this or that".

St Thomas Aquinas (1224/25–1274 CE) argued that natural law and religion were inextricably connected. He believed that natural law "participates" in the divine "eternal" law.

Aquinas thought eternal law to be that rational plan by which all creation is ordered, and natural law is the way that human beings participate in the eternal law. He further posited that the fundamental principle of natural law is that we should do good and avoid evil.

Ideally, when interpreting constitutional laws, judicial bodies should base them on their sense of natural law. This is what the Federal Court of Malaysia did in the Indira Gandhi case when it declared the unilateral religious conversion of children without the mutual consent of both parents is unconstitutional.

There is a saying that do unto others what you want them to do for you. One wonders what Perlis mufti’s response would be if such unilateral religious conversion of children happens in countries where Islam is the religion of the minority.

Will he relent if the religion of the majority of the particular country converts Muslim children unilaterally? This is where natural law that is inherent in human conscience comes into play.

Therefore, the Association for Community and Dialogue (Acid) urges the government to adhere to natural law in solving the problem related to the unilateral religious conversion of children.

Natural law is the way forward since it addresses the underlying needs of justice of all communities.

RONALD BENJAMIN is secretary of Association for Community and Dialogue (Acid).

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.