Mr Speaker, Sir, I will confine my remarks to Part 2 of the Bill, which provides for the Singapore College of Islamic Studies.
I support the purpose of Part 2. The new section 3(2)(da) gives MUIS the function of overseeing tertiary religious education at the college "for the purpose of developing Islamic teachers who are suitably qualified and trained to guide the Muslim community in Singapore". That is a worthy aim, and a college that trains such teachers here deserves a sound legal framework.
But Part 2 does more than recognise the college. It allows community funds to be paid to it, it gives MUIS power to direct its religious teaching, and it gives the Minister control of its board and its spending. Because those powers are wide, this House should be clear about how they will be used. I will make six points, each with a request for the Minister.
Mr Speaker, in Malay.
Pertama: Dana masyarakat di bawah Seksyen 73D
Tuan, perkara pertama saya adalah mengenai pembiayaan.
Seksyen baharu 73D(1) membenarkan MUIS untuk membiayai kolej tersebut daripada empat sumber¹: iaitu General Endowment Fund, zakat dan fitrah, wang yang dikumpul untuk tujuan kebajikan, serta Dana Pembinaan Masjid dan Mendaki (MBMF). Rang Undang-Undang ini tidak menetapkan sebarang had terhadap jumlah tersebut. Ia juga tidak menyatakan sama ada MUIS perlu mendapatkan nasihat agama sebelum membuat pembayaran ini.
Tindakan untuk membenarkan pembayaran ini dibuat tanpa perlu bersandarkan "peruntukan lain dalam Akta ini" adalah sesuatu yang signifikan. Akta yang sedia ada sebelum pindaan ini mengenakan syarat-syarat bagi setiap satu daripada empat sumber tersebut. Tiga daripadanya amat ketara.
Pertama, zakat. Seksyen 68(4) Akta ini memerlukan zakat dan fitrah diuruskan "mengikut hukum syarak".² Seksyen 73D(1) akan membenarkan zakat dibayar kepada kolej tersebut mengetepikan keperluan berkenaan. Saya tidak bermaksud bahawa melatih guru-guru agama berada di luar skop penggunaan zakat yang sewajarnya. Namun, para pembayar zakat tentu ingin tahu sama ada keperluan dalam Seksyen 68(4) Akta tersebut masih digunakan.
Kedua, Dana Pembinaan Masjid dan Mendaki. Seksyen 77(1)(c) sememangnya telah membenarkan Dana tersebut digunakan untuk membiayai pendidikan agama, tertakluk kepada arahan Menteri.³ Bagaimanapun, Seksyen 78(9) dan (10) memperuntukkan bahawa sumbangan tambahan sukarela, serta sumbangan yang tidak dapat dikesan kepada mana-mana individu, disifatkan sebagai dana untuk pembinaan masjid.⁴ Langkah mengetepikan syarat ini dalam Seksyen 73D akan membolehkan wang tersebut dibayar kepada kolej, sedangkan ianya diberikan khusus untuk masjid.
Ketiga, kutipan kebajikan. Di bawah Seksyen 71, wang boleh dikumpul di bawah lesen untuk tujuan tertentu, mengikut syarat-syarat yang ditetapkan oleh MUIS.⁵ Seksyen 73D(1) akan membolehkan wang sedemikian dibayar kepada kolej, tidak kira apa jua tujuan asal wang itu disumbangkan.
Saya akui bahawa terdapat kawalan-kawalan yang tersedia. Di bawah Seksyen 73D(3), kolej hanya boleh membelanjakan wang ini bagi tujuan yang dibenarkan oleh Menteri. Di bawah Seksyen 73I(3), kolej wajib menerbitkan ringkasan penyata kewangannya. Di bawah Jadual Pertama Akta ini, akaun yang telah diaudit bagi General Endowment Fund dan Dana Pembinaan Masjid dan Mendaki akan dibentangkan di Dewan ini.⁶ Namun, tiada apa-apa dalam Rang Undang-Undang atau Akta ini yang mewajibkan akaun-akaun tersebut untuk menunjukkan, sebagai butiran berasingan, jumlah yang dibayar kepada kolej daripada setiap dana. Malah, akaun zakat dan fitrah langsung tidak terkandung dalam Jadual Pertama, melainkan jika Menteri memilih untuk menyatakannya.⁷
Saya mempunyai empat permintaan. Pertama, adakah Menteri akan mengesahkan bahawa zakat dan fitrah yang dibayar di bawah Seksyen 73D akan tetap digunakan mengikut hukum syarak? Kedua, adakah beliau akan mengesahkan bahawa sumbangan yang disifatkan untuk pembinaan masjid di bawah Seksyen 78(9) dan (10), serta wang kebajikan yang dikumpul untuk tujuan tertentu, tidak akan dibayar kepada kolej? Ketiga, adakah MUIS akan menerbitkan jumlah yang dibayar kepada kolej di bawah Seksyen 73D(1) pada setiap tahun, dengan menunjukkan pecahan berasingan bagi setiap sumber? Keempat, adakah terdapat had tertinggi, atau pencetus semakan semula, bagi pembayaran daripada zakat dan fitrah serta daripada Dana Pembinaan Masjid dan Mendaki?
Mengenai perkara berkaitan, saya maklum bahawa Seksyen 73C(2) membenarkan kolej menjalankan fungsi-fungsi di luar pendidikan tinggi agama, dan Seksyen 73D(2)(b) membenarkannya menerima pembiayaan daripada sumber selain MUIS dan Pemerintah. Demi kemampanan jangka panjang kolej tersebut, adakah ia akan dibenarkan menjana pendapatannya sendiri melalui aktiviti seperti program pendidikan lanjutan, persidangan, penerbitan, dan pelaburan dananya sendiri?
Second: the board and academic independence
Sir, my second point is about who governs the college.
Under new section 73G, the SCIS Board consists of any number of directors the Minister appoints. The Minister may remove or replace any director at any time. The only procedural step is that he consults the Chief Executive of MUIS before appointing, removing or replacing anyone other than the Chief Executive. The Bill sets no criteria for appointment, no fixed terms, and no requirement that any director have qualifications in Islamic scholarship.
This power sits alongside others. Under section 73D(3), the college may spend MUIS and Government moneys only on objects the Minister allows. Under section 73H, his prior written consent is needed to admit or remove members of the company or to change its constitution, and anything done without that consent has no effect. Under section 73K, the Act prevails over the constitution. Taken together, the Minister controls the board, the money and the constitution.
The Bill says nothing about academic freedom or the independence of the college's teaching. The explanatory statement says MUIS directions are not meant to affect the college's day-to-day operations, but it is silent on whether the same restraint applies to the Minister's own powers under sections 73D, 73F, 73G and 73H.
In reply to parliamentary questions in February this year, the Ministry stated that non-Muslim members make up less than half of the Board of Governors and the Steering Committee, and that matters of faith and religious scholarship are led by the Mufti, supported by the SCIS Advisory Panel of Islamic scholars.⁸ I welcome those arrangements. But none of them is in the Bill. Section 73G would allow a future board to be constituted quite differently.
I ask the Minister for three assurances. First, that the college will have academic freedom in its teaching and research. Second, that boards appointed under section 73G will keep the safeguards the Ministry has described: non-Muslim members in the minority, and religious scholarship led by the Mufti and the Advisory Panel. I would also welcome clarity on what criteria will guide appointments and whether directors will serve fixed terms. Third, that section 73G will not be used to direct the curriculum.
Third: MUIS directions and appeals
Sir, my third point concerns MUIS's power to direct the college.
New section 73E(1) lets MUIS give directions concerning the college's tertiary religious education on four grounds. Two are specific: ensuring that Islamic teachers are fit and proper with satisfactory training and experience, and developing Islamic teachers. Two are broad. MUIS may act against teaching that is contrary to "the Muslim law or the conduct of Muslim religious affairs in Singapore". And it may act "in the public interest". Under section 73E(3), the college must comply.
I welcome section 73E(2), which keeps directions on staffing away from non-Islamic teachers and staff. But the grounds in section 73E(1)(b) and (d) are not defined, and the Bill gives no examples. The explanatory statement offers two: a direction to engage teachers recognised by MUIS, and safeguards against deviant teaching. Those are sensible, but they are not the limits of the power.
On appeals, clause 7 amends section 88G⁹ to allow the college to appeal to the Minister against a direction.
I ask the Minister two things. First, can he give the House examples of what directions under section 73E(1)(b) and (d) will cover, and what they will not? Second, will there be a published procedure for these appeals, with written reasons?
Fourth: teacher standards
Sir, my fourth point is brief. The explanatory statement gives, as an example of a direction, a requirement that the college engage local teachers recognised under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme. But the Bill does not require this. It only allows MUIS to direct it.
The Bill also defines an "Islamic teacher" broadly: anyone who provides Islamic instruction in any subject to one or more students. That would seem to include visiting or short-term lecturers. The Ministry has said the college will partner Dar al-Ifta in Egypt, Al-Qarawiyyin in Morocco and the University of Jordan for its Islamic Studies pathway.¹⁰ Scholars from those institutions may well teach at the college.
I ask the Minister to confirm whether every Islamic teacher at the college will be required to be recognised by MUIS, and how that will be secured if it rests on a direction. I also ask him to clarify whether visiting lecturers from the college's partner institutions who fall within the definition of 'Islamic teacher'. Will they be required to hold recognition under the ARS, or whether MUIS will apply a separate vetting process for them.
Fifth: students
Sir, my fifth point is about the students.
Clause 33 exempts the college, its managers and its teachers from the Private Education Act.¹¹ Clause 6 provides that the college is not a Muslim religious school under section 86A.¹² The Bill does not say what legislative authority for students take the place of those regimes. In October last year, the Ministry said that course fees and student financial support were still being determined.¹³ That makes it all the more important to know what protections students will have once fees are set.
Under section 73F, the college must follow a quality assurance framework decided by the Minister and take part in reviews by external panels he commissions. That is welcome. But the Bill does not say whether the framework or the panels' findings will be published.
Section 73J applies the Societies Act¹⁴ to student bodies, which the explanatory statement says is to provide accountability for students' union funds. Students are therefore held to account for their funds. I would ask for equal clarity on how students themselves are protected, once they have enrolled and paid their fees.
I ask the Minister: what safeguards will apply to students in place of the Private Education Act? And will the quality framework and the external review reports be made public?
Sixth: a report back to this House
Sir, my last request ties the others together. Many of the powers in Part 2 are broad on their face. The explanatory statement tells us how some of them are expected to be used, but the text does not limit them in the same way.
I ask the Minister to commit, on the record today, to report to Parliament within two years of the college admitting its first batch of students. The report should cover the amounts paid to the college under section 73D(1) from each source, appointments and removals under section 73G, the number and grounds of directions issued under section 73E, and the outcome of any appeals under section 88G.
Closing
Mr Speaker, Part 2 gives the college a legal framework, and a clear purpose: to develop Islamic teachers qualified to guide our community. It also allows zakat, fitrah and the mosque fund to be spent on it, and places MUIS and the Minister in charge of its teaching, its board and its money.
This House should therefore be clear on three things: how community funds are used and reported, who decides what is taught, and how those decisions can be reviewed. I believe that none of my clarifications and requests would delay the establishment of the college. Instead, these are debates this House should have at this juncture to strengthen public confidence in it.
Sir, I support the Bill, and I look forward to the Minister's response.
Footnotes
- Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966 (AMLA), s 57 (General Endowment Fund), s 68 (zakat and fitrah), s 71 (charitable collection) and s 76 (Mosque Building and Mendaki Fund).
- AMLA s 68(4): "Subject to the provisions of this Act, any zakat or fitrah collected is to be disposed of by the Majlis in accordance with the Muslim law."
- AMLA s 77(1)(c): the Fund may be used "for the funding of religious education in Singapore, subject to such directions as the Minister may specify from time to time".
- AMLA s 78(9) (excess voluntary contributions deemed to be for building mosques unless the employee indicates otherwise) and s 78(10) (contributions not attributable to any individual deemed to be for building mosques).
- AMLA s 71(1) (collection under licence on terms MUIS thinks fit), s 71(2)(d) (sums to be applied in accordance with the licence) and s 71(3) (moneys may be applied for a specific purpose if MUIS directs, otherwise added to the General Endowment Fund).
- AMLA First Schedule, para 13 (annual report, audited financial statements and auditor's report presented to Parliament) and para 15 (Schedule applies to the General Endowment Fund and the Mosque Building and Mendaki Fund).
- AMLA First Schedule, para 15: "and any other accounts that the Minister may, by notification in the Gazette, specify".
- Reply by the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs to Parliamentary Question Nos. 1409 and 1410 by Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, "Role of governance committees of the Singapore College of Islamic Studies", MCCY, 12 February 2026.
- AMLA s 88G (appeal to the Minister against acts, orders, directions and decisions of MUIS).
- Reply by the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs to Parliamentary Question No. 470 by Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, "Singapore College of Islamic Studies", MCCY, 14 October 2025.
- Private Education Act 2009, s 45(1).
- AMLA s 86A (meaning of "Muslim religious school").
- Reply to Parliamentary Question No. 470, 14 October 2025 (see note 10).
- Societies Act 1966.
