“That has become a tactic of the converting spouse to bypass the civil high court by saying that they have converted in a Shariah court.”

Speaking to FMT, Gan said the contention between the two different courts has always been an issue among divorcing couples.

“Though it happens every now and then, the Shariah court has no jurisdiction to unilaterally convert the children. The tussle between the civil court and the Shariah court has been an issue that must be resolved by the federal court or through legislative clarification.”

He said that if a marriage was registered under the civil law, then the custody of the children had to be resolved by the civil court, as the children were the product of a civil marriage.

“But, there are some parties who want to bypass this and go to the Shariah court.

“If this was allowed to take place, it will create a vacuum, where one of the unconverted spouses who sees himself /herself as an aggrieved party of a civil marriage, and who has a genuine grievance, is left without a remedy or is compelled to go to the Shariah court to seek a remedy.”

However, the Shariah court has no jurisdiction over a non-Muslim according to the federal constitution.

Gan said that this would result in an inconsistency of an administration of justice, where existing laws can be bypassed merely by going to a different court.

“Such injustice shouldn’t have taken place in this country just because the converted spouse decides to embrace a different faith.”

Gan, who is also MCA’s Shariah Laws and Policy Implementation Task Force chairman, has previous experience as a lawyer in such cases.

He was commenting on a recent court case involving a woman who secretly converted her children to Islam after her husband filed for divorce last month.