Some sober reflections: Read “Persecution and Destruction of Eastern Christianity Under Islam” found in my other blog – Krisis Praxis LINK

It is only right that we share the joys of the Arab citizens when they overthrew their dictators. I am not sure however that the outcome will be freedom and democratic equality for all Arab citizens. It is too early to share the optimism evident in the Western media. I am only too aware that “revolution devours its own children.”

Political observers used to worry about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. But the popularity and electoral success of the Salafist Party with an even more extreme and intolerant ideology winning up to 29% in the second round of the recent Elections can only give rise to a sense of foreboding for the Coptic Christian minority in Egypt.

There are more incidents of violent attacks on churches and burning of Christian homes. In April 2011, over 10,000 demonstrators, mostly Salafists, protested in the southern province of Qena against the appointment of a new governor, Emad Mikhail, who is a Christian (the previous governor, Magdy Ayoub, was also Christian). There were threats to bar Mikhail from the province and even to kill him. The Salafists complained that a Coptic governor will not implement Islamic Law and declared since Qena was an “Islamic Emirate” that they will never be ruled by a Christian governor.

The naivety of the Western media reminds me how Stalin cynically described the Western left wing journalists who trumpeted the dawn of new humanity following the Marxist revolution as “useful idiots”. In contrast, Coptic Christians who suffered centuries of oppression under their Muslim masters wonder if the so-called “Arab Spring” is really a “spring-cleaning”, a religious cleansing of Christianity in Arab lands. The signs are that the “Arab Spring” will prove to be a dreadful “Christian Winter”

Such a requirement is a violation of the right to peaceful assembly that is guaranteed by the Federal Constitution? Re: Article 10, 1(b), “all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms.”

This is a triple blow from the authorities to our Constitutional fundamental liberties. First, our right to peaceful assembly is restricted, that is, it may be exercised only at the arbitrary pleasure of the police. Second, the restriction is extended even to religious gathering. Third, to add salt to injury, the restriction is imposed on a religious festival that in essence expresses peace and goodwill to all men.

Sure, some ‘overzealous’ police may refer to the recently passed so-called Peaceful Assembly Bill (2011) which in effect is an “Anti-Assembly Bill” to justify their action. But can Christmas caroling be anything other than peaceful?  Somehow the authorities missed the constant refrain found in many carols, “Peace on earth, good will to men”.

Indeed, the message of peace, goodwill and joy of Christmas is universally endorsed round the world. Likewise, Christmas is now celebrated not only by Christians but by all Malaysian citizens of good will.

Maybe what Christians need to do is not to apply for a permit but simply and in all genuineness invite representatives from the local authorities (wakil rakyat) to join them. Hopefully, the authorities/police will catch the spirit of peace and joy that extends good will to all men.

May peace and good will be honored this coming Christmas – without requiring a police permit.

——————————–

‘Tis the Season to be Jolly, With a Police Permit
By Debra Chong
Malaysia Insider December 09, 2011 LINK

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 9 — Around this time for the past 30 years, Catholic church groups nationwide will bring out their song sheets, check their musical instruments and tune their voices to sing in harmony as they ready to go a-carolling.

And get a police permit.

Because carolling is done in public and requires moving from one spot to another.

As Christmas approaches, parish priests or their church youth leaders seek a police permit to effectively visit their fellow church members and belt out “Joy to the World”, “Silent Night, Holy Night” and even “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer”.

For what is essentially a simple gathering to get into the spirit of the season and celebrate the birthday of their religion’s founder, carolling organisers are required to submit their full names as per their MyKad, identity card numbers, the details of their total participants, the dates, time and general areas of their visits.

Parish priests in Klang were alarmed to receive a memo from a district police officer this past week telling them to send in a list detailing the full names and contact information of the home owners they planned to visit this carolling season.

They are also required to inform Bukit Aman and the National Security Council, said an alarmed Rev Father Michael Chua, who told The Malaysian Insider he received the news from the parish priests of the Church of Our Lady of Lourdes and the Church of the Holy Redeemer earlier this week.

The irregular condition imposed by the district police officer is casting the spotlight on a recently-passed law to provide for peaceful assemblies that many groups, including the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, the Malaysian Bar and various religious groups, say is more restrictive and regressive then the existing law it is to replace.

“Normally, we get the permits to go carolling without too many conditions imposed,” said Rev Father Lawrence Andrew, who heads the Church of St Anne near Port Klang.

“This is something new. It seems they are now trying to regulate worship,” he added, voice tinged with concern.

He said he had yet to apply for a permit and would not wait for the outcome of the two churches’ application before deciding his next move.

Rev Thomas Phillips, who leads the Mar Thoma church here and whose followers of the Syrian branch of Christianity also apply for carolling permits yearly, said he would be alarmed if the police imposed such conditions on him.

“Why do they want to know the details of all the heads of households for? That’s so tedious,” he said, adding that the carolling groups have moved around from the city to Petaling Jaya, Shah Alam and Klang, visiting three to four houses in the areas on average per day without issue.

“We do not apply for police permits before organising Christmas parties in the various homes of our church members.

“They’re private functions after all, so there’s no need to do so. We eat and chat just like in any ordinary party, except that we sing Christmas carols on this occasion,” an evangelical Christian from Petaling Jaya, who wished to be known only as Ms Boo, told The Malaysian Insider.

Klang appears to have a high density of Christians with the three Catholic churches there catering to an estimated 10,000 followers, Lawrence said.

Malaysia, which forged diplomatic ties with the Vatican earlier this year, has nearly a million Catholics out of its 28 million total population.

Religious groups all over the country have raised a furore after the Dewan Rakyat passed the controversial Peaceful Assembly Bill, which bans “assemblies in motion” otherwise known as street demonstrations, two weeks ago.

In their various media statements, the country’s religious leaders demanded an explanation from Putrajaya over the lack of public consultation on the Bill, which was passed on the ruling Barisan Nasional’s (BN) vote alone after the opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact staged a walkout.

Lawrence, who is also the editor of the national weekly Catholic paper The Herald, related that police permits for carollers came into being after the controversial Ops Lalang exercise in 1987, when the authorities cracked down on dissenters, including opposition leaders and social activists.

He said there was a lot of concern because the law had been amended to define that a gathering of five or more persons required a permit from the police, under section 27 of the existing Police Act.

Catholic Malaysians, who make up the single biggest denomination of Christians in the country, told The Malaysian Insider the police usually respond promptly and issue the required permits without imposing too many conditions.

Former Catholic church youth leaders said the police usually advise carollers to wrap up their visits by midnight so as not to disturb the neighbours who do not profess their faith, and to make sure there are no Muslims onboard their chartered buses in granting the permits.

Sometimes, the police impose on carollers a 2km distance between the house they will be performing and the neighbourhood mosque or surau, which the ex-youth leaders say is nearly impossible to adhere to in a country where over 60 per cent of the population is Muslim.

According to Chua, who is an ecclesiastical assistant in charge of ecumenical and inter-religious affairs in the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur’s office, churches had previously only needed to name the area they are visiting in their permits and only if they had chartered a bus for carollers and not if they travel in cars.

The priest said he was checking with other parish priests in the Klang Valley and outstation over the permit issue, but found the additional condition peculiar to the two Klang churches.

“It could be an over-enthusiastic police officer,” he told The Malaysian Insider earlier this week, before sending a church representative to meet with the police to clarify the irregular request.

Some two hours later, he texted back to say: “They didn’t impose any further conditions. Matter settled after meeting.”

Attempts to get further information were rebuffed.

But Lawrence believes the police officer in question was likely confused about the existing law and the new law as to the provisions for processions and assemblies.

“What pertains to religious assemblies and processions? We don’t really know. Is going carolling considered an assembly? What if it happens in hotels and shopping malls?” Lawrence asked.

“We don’t know. The definition is too vague and religious leaders were not consulted,” he said.

He added that as a result, neither the police nor religious leaders know what to make of the situation.

Thomas said it would be a big problem if the police tried to restrict street assemblies from happening as he weighed in on the civil groups’ demand for Putrajaya to consult the public before enforcing the new assembly law.

He noted that it was not just Christians who held religious parades but the Hindu and Buddhist communities too, and noted further they were tourist draws.

**This article also appeared:

Malaysiakini 12 Oct 2011 LINK and Malaysia Insider 12 Oct 2011 LINK

The Christian community has waited with anticipation for DYMM Sultan of Selangor, to come out with a statement that will help resolve the inter-religious crisis sparked off by the JAIS raid on DUMC on 3 August, 2011.

We welcome the Sultan’s wish that religious harmony should continue in the state and his decree that there be no prosecution against any of the parties involved.

However, the Sultan’s statement does raise a few issues of serious concern for the non-Muslim community as there are views expressed therein that suggest that the Sultan may not have been properly informed by his advisers.

First, the statement suggests that “the actions of JAIS were correct and did not breach any laws enforceable in Selangor,” as they “are in line with the jurisdiction provided under Syariah Criminal Procedure (State of Selangor) Enactment (2003), Syariah Criminal (State of Selangor) Enactment, 1995 and the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment of 1988” (herein referred to as the “Selangor Enactment”)

With all due respect, I beg to differ from this interpretation of the State Enactments. In the first place, the jurisdiction granted by Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution was to permit the state to control or restrict the propagation of religion among people professing to be Muslims. This must be read in the context of the Article itself which fundamentally provides for every person the freedom to profess, practice and propagate his religion. Such power to control or restrict propagation cannot be understood as absolutely prohibiting any conduct or activity on the excuse of some unspecified complaint that they are for the purposes of propagation of religion. Such power cannot be taken as licence for officials to intrude or trespass into a function conducted within the premises of what is clearly a non-Muslim religious institution (in the present case a Christian institution) without legal authority

There is no legal provision under the Propagation Enactment that allows JAIS officials to intrude into the premises of DUMC, much less carry out a raid. From my reading of the Selangor Enactment (1988), the closest possible justification that can be offered by JAIS are sections 12 and 13 which specify that “an authorised officer may investigate the commission of any offence under this Enactment and may arrest without warrant any person suspected of having committed any such offence.”

He may also apply for warrants of arrest from a Magistrate to require the attendance of witnesses. There is however, simply no unilateral power to carry out an entry and search under the Propagation Enactment or for that matter even to apply for a search warrant. If the officer responsible for the raid intends to conduct an entry and search he must base his power from some legal source. JAIS officers appear to have acted under Syariah Enactment which however does NOT apply to non-Muslims and cannot be imported into the Propagation Enactment.

While superficially this provision seems to grant disturbing power to this “authorised officer”, the enforcement must be consistent with the more fundamental provisions under Part II of the Federal Constitution relating to fundamental liberties and the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593) relating to search and arrest which presumes that a search warrant should have been sought as a matter of course, and that the warrant is granted only upon reasonable suspicion that a seizable offence has been committed at the DUMC premises. The requirement of a search warrant is a fundamental recognition of the right to privacy within one’s own domain and space.

More importantly, given the sensitivity of inter-religious relations and the sanctity of religious places of worship, such a warrant should be granted only by a magistrate or judge from the Civil Court and only upon firm and clear grounds.

The fact remains that JAIS carried out the raid with disregard for established provisions and procedure of law – the leader of the JAIS party failed to present relevant identity documents to confirm he was indeed “an authorized officer”, specify the offence(s) or suspected offence(s) relating to propagation under the Selangor Enactment that was alleged to have been committed and that he had obtained a search warrant from a Magistrate or the High Court, especially when a church was the target of the raid. For these reasons, it may be argued contrary to the Sultan’s statement, that prima facie, JAIS had not acted lawfully within the bounds of law when it raided DUMC.

Second, it should be noted that the statement claims “there were attempts to subvert the faith and belief of Muslims but that the evidence obtained would be insufficient for further legal actions to be taken.” The plural word “attempts” suggests Christians at DUMC were guilty of subverting Islam not only on 3 August 2011, but that they were repeatedly committing the alleged offence. This is a most unfair and misleading accusation that imputes guilt to DUMC without offering any evidence that could be verified or refuted.

It may be noted that the English version of the Sultan’s statement uses stronger words than the official Bahasa version – it translates the word “memesongkan (distort, deviate) fahaman dan kepercayaan fahaman orang Islam” with the word “subvert the faith and belief of Muslims”

The statement unwittingly exposes the feeble foundations of its accusations when it concedes that there was insufficient evidence obtained for further legal action. In simple terms, this must means that JAIS had FAILED to make a prima facie case against DUMC. I may add that despite the attempt to hide behind the legal term of “insufficient evidence”, the reality is that there was simply NO evidence of subversion of the Islamic faith. Beating a hasty retreat from the threat of prosecuting DUMC was the best option left for JAIS.

Third, it is alarming that the statement describes the activities of DUMC as subversion of the Islamic faith. This charge is injurious to the integrity of Christians with regard to their profession and practice of faith.

Regarding integrity of profession of the Christian faith: Christians at DUMC have never pretended to be teaching any religion other than Christianity. DUMC is, after all, a church. Christians have every right to uphold their beliefs and practice their faith and while doing so, should not be judged as subverting or deviating /Memesongkan fahaman Islamic beliefs on account of the doctrinal differences between the two religions. Following the logic of JAIS, Christians could equally have charged Muslims for subverting the Christian faith when Muslims preach a faith different from Christians.

Regarding practice of faith: Christians are well known for their social work that flows from their belief in the love of God for the poor and needy. As the Bible says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained from the world” (James 1:27).  Hence, the press statement from DUMC says, “DUMC conducts all its activities to serve the community and for the welfare of all Malaysians regardless of creed, race or religion.”

It is therefore alarming when JAIS casts aspersions against the charity work done by Christians and claims that Christians are subverting Islamic beliefs on account of their good works. It may well be the case that some needy Muslims have availed themselves to the good services offered by DUMC, and DUMC obviously cannot turn them away simply because they happen to be Muslims. DUMC may well be charged for promoting religious disharmony if it makes religion a factor before anyone can receive welfare. On the other hand, Christians may well be advised to stop their work  that may incline a Muslim to view the Christian faith favourably since this would incur the wrath of JAIS officials.  At best, the Sultan’s statement can be misconstrued by mischievous parties and exploited to misrepresent the altruistic intention of Christians; at worst, it maligns the welfare work of Christians.

Therefore, we welcome the announcement made by the Mentri Besar of Selangor, Abdul Khalid Ibrahim, that the Selangor government will set up a special committee to fine-tune the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) followed by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) in handling attempts to proselytise Muslims.

We hope the committee will come up with recommendations that will 1) ensure JAIS fully understands and observes the bounds of its authority, that is, that it has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims, and 2) any investigation of non-Muslims leading to intervention by the Islamic authorities should follow a proper procedure and law, including obtaining a search warrant granted by senior judicial officials from a religiously neutral institution such as a Magistrate or a High Court judge.

Otherwise, the government ends up surreptitiously investing illegitimate and excessive authority to Islamic officials over non-Muslims. The consequences will be abuse of power, and insensitive and provocative actions against non-Muslim believers as seen in the case of the JAIS raid of DUMC.

We do well to listen respectfully and sympathetically to the appeal from the victim of religious abuse, in this case DUMC, when it says in its media statement, “We sincerely ask that all religious communities and places of worship be treated with utmost respect and not be intruded upon.”

Dr. Ng Kam Weng

Kairos Research Centre

12 October 2011

——————————————————

Statement from DYMN Sultan of Selangor

PRESS STATEMENT

D.Y.M.M. SULTAN SHARAFUDDIN DIRIS SHAH

SULTAN OF SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN

We, the Head of the Religion of Islam in the State of Selangor, take great concern over the actions by the Enforcement Division of the Selangor Department of the Religion of Islam (JAIS) which carried out a search at the Thanksgiving Dinner event which was held at Hall 3, Dream Centre Complex, Section 13, Petaling Jaya on 3 August 2011.

We hope that the people of Selangor regardless of race and religion do not misconstrue and dispute the actions of JAIS before knowing exactly the true facts of the actions taken.

As the State Department responsible for the enforcement of Islamic Laws in the State, JAIS has the heavy task of ensuring that the Religion of Islam in Selangor is always protected and given prestige, in line with its position as the Religion of the State of Selangor under Article XLVII of the Laws of the Constitution of Selangor, 1959, as well as the religion of the Federation under Clause (1) Article 3 of the Federal Constitution.

JAIS has submitted to Us the full report of the search carried out at the Dream Centre Complex, Section 13, Petaling Jaya as well as the subsequent actions taken by JAIS. We have thoroughly read in detail the said report and We are satisfied that the actions of JAIS were correct and did not breach any laws enforceable in Selangor.

The actions of JAIS are in line with the jurisdiction provided under Syariah Criminal Procedure (State of Selangor) Enactment, 2003, Syariah Criminal (State of Selangor) Enactment, 1995 and Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment, 1988.

The Religion of Islam as practiced in Selangor is one of tolerance. Muslims are always encouraged to respect the believers of other religions. However, persons or parties cannot take the opportunity to spread other religions to Muslims. This is in line with Clause (1) and (4) Article 11 of the Federal Constitution and Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment, 1988, which prohibits the spread of other religions to Muslims.

Article XLVII of the Laws of the Constitution of Selangor 1959, Clause (1) Article 3 and Clause (1) Article 11 of the Federal Constitution have given the freedom to believers of other religions to practice their beliefs in peace and harmony. This freedom has been practised  in harmony in this State. We wish that this harmony, which has existed for a long time, will continue to exist. Protect your rights and religion and do not attempt to subvert the belief and faith of Muslims.

Based on the investigations by JAIS, there is evidence that there were attempts to subvert the faith and belief of Muslims but that the evidence obtained would be insufficient for further legal actions to be taken. Therefore, after carefully deliberating the report by JAIS and after obtaining advice from religious authorities and legal experts, We are in agreement that there would be no prosecution against any parties.

Even so, We command that JAIS provide counselling to Muslims who were involved in the said Dinner, to restore their belief and faith in the Religion of Islam. We also command JAIS to carry out preaching to Muslims in a more regular and organised manner so that their belief and faith towards Islam is protected and enhanced.

We hope that after this, any and all activities being carried out or which are going to be carried out for the purposes of spreading other religions to Muslims in Selangor must be ceased immediately and no further activities or anything similar to them are carried out in the future.

We, the Head of the Religion of Islam in the State of Selangor, is gravely concerned and extremely offended by the attempts of certain parties to weaken the faith and belief of Muslims in the State of Selangor. We command that Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (MAIS) and JAIS always conduct thorough observations and to take necessary actions without hesitation in line with the jurisdiction allowed under the law.

We also wish to take this opportunity to thank all parties who were concerned with this issue and to those who have given their cooperation and undivided support to JAIS.

H.R.H. Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah Alhaj
The Sultan of Selangor

——————————————————–

Statement in Bahasa Malaysia

KENYATAAN AKHBAR
D.Y.M.M. SULTAN SHARAFUDDIN IDRIS SHAH ALHAJ
SULTAN SELANGOR

Beta selaku Ketua Agama Islam Negeri Selangor amat mengambil berat   di atas tindakan yang dilakukan oleh Bahagian Penguatkuasan, Jabatan Agama Islam, Selangor (JAIS) yang telah menjalankan pemeriksaan ke atas majlis ‘Thanksgiving Dinner’ yang diadakan di Dewan 3, Kompleks Dream Centre, Seksyen 13, Petaling Jaya pada 3 Ogos 2011 yang lalu.
Beta amat berharap agar rakyat Negeri Selangor tanpa mengira bangsa dan agama tidak menyalahanggap dan mempertikaikan tindakan JAIS tersebut sebelum mengetahui dengan jelas fakta sebenar mengenai tindakan yang telah diambil oleh pihak JAIS.

Sebagai sebuah Jabatan Kerajaan Negeri yang bertanggungjawab menguatkuasakan undang-undang Islam dalam Negeri ini, JAIS mempunyai tugas yang berat untuk memastikan Agama Islam dalam Negeri Selangor ini sentiasa dipelihara dan dimartabatkan selaras dengan kedudukan Agama Islam sebagai agama Negeri Selangor di bawah Perkara XLVII Undang-Undang Tubuh Kerajaan Selangor, 1959 dan juga agama Persekutuan di bawah Fasal (1) Perkara 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
Pihak JAIS telah menyembahkan kepada Beta laporan penuh mengenai pemeriksaan yang telah dijalankan di kompleks Dream Centre, Seksyen 13, Petaling Jaya tersebut dan juga tindakan susulan yang telah diambil oleh JAIS.  Beta sendiri telah meneliti laporan tersebut dengan terperinci dan Beta berpuas hati bahawa tindakan JAIS tersebut adalah betul dan tidak menyalahi mana-mana undang-undang yang berkuat kuasa di Negeri Selangor ini.
Tindakan JAIS tersebut adalah selaras dengan bidang kuasa yang diperuntukkan di bawah Enakmen Tatacara Jenayah Syariah (Negeri Selangor) 2003, Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Negeri Selangor) 1995 dan Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam (Kawalan Perkembangan di Kalangan Orang Islam) Negeri Selangor, 1988.

Agama Islam yang diamalkan dalam Negeri Selangor ini adalah sebuah agama yang penuh toleransi. Penganut agama Islam sentiasa dipupuk agar menghormati penganut-penganut agama lain. Walaupun begitu, mana-mana pihak tidak boleh mengambil kesempatan untuk cuba mengembangkan ajaran agama lain kepada penganut Agama Islam. Ini adalah selaras dengan Fasal (1) dan (4) Perkara 11 Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam (Kawalan Perkembangan di Kalangan Orang Islam) Negeri Selangor, 1988  yang tidak membenarkan pengembangan ajaran agama lain kepada penganut Agama Islam.
Perkara XLVII Undang-Undang Tubuh, Kerajaan Selangor 1959, Fasal (1) Perkara 3 dan Fasal (1) Perkara 11 Perlembagaan Persekutuan telah memberikan hak kebebasan beragama kepada penganut agama lain untuk mengamalkan ajaran agama mereka masing-masing dengan aman dan harmoni. Hak kebebasan tersebut telah pun berjalan dengan penuh harmoni dalam Negeri ini. Beta amat berharap keharmonian tersebut yang telah wujud sekian lama terus dikekalkan.  Peliharalah hak dan agama masing-masing dan jangan sekali-kali cuba mempengaruhi dan memesongkan fahaman dan kepercayaan orang Islam terhadap agama Islam.

Merujuk kepada siasatan pihak JAIS, terdapat keterangan bahawa ada cubaan untuk memesongkan kepercayaan dan aqidah umat Islam. Tetapi keterangan yang diperolehi tidak mencukupi untuk tindakan undang-undang diambil. Oleh itu setelah meneliti dengan secara mendalam laporan oleh pihak JAIS dan setelah mendapat nasihat dari pakar-pakar agama dan undang-undang, Beta bersetuju tiada pendakwaan terhadap mana-mana pihak.
Walau bagaimanapun Beta menitahkan JAIS memberikan kaunseling kepada orang Islam yang terlibat dalam majlis tersebut supaya aqidah dan kepercayaan mereka terhadap Agama Islam dapat dipulihkan. Beta juga menitahkan JAIS supaya menjalankan aktiviti dakwah terhadap orang Islam dengan lebih kerap dan tersusun supaya aqidah dan kepercayaan mereka terhadap Agama Islam dapat dipelihara dan dipertingkatkan.
Beta amat berharap selepas daripada ini, apa-apa kegiatan dan aktiviti yang sedang berjalan atau yang akan berjalan bagi tujuan mengembangkan ajaran agama lain kepada penganut Agama Islam dalam Negeri Selangor ini hendaklah dihentikan segera dan tiada kegiatan dan aktiviti yang serupa dijalankan di masa hadapan.

Sesungguhnya Beta selaku Ketua Agama Islam Negeri Selangor ini amat mengambil berat dan berasa amat tersinggung dengan usaha-usaha pihak tertentu yang cuba untuk melemahkan kepercayaan dan aqidah orang Islam dalam Negeri Selangor ini. Beta menitahkan Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (MAIS) dan JAIS supaya sentiasa mengadakan pemantauan rapi dan mengambil tindakan sewajarnya tanpa perlu teragak-agak lagi selaras dengan bidang kuasa yang diperuntukkan di bawah undang-undang.
Beta juga ingin mengambil kesempatan ini untuk mengucapkan terima kasih kepada semua pihak yang telah mengambil berat berkaitan isu ini dan yang telah memberikan kerjasama dan sokongan yang tidak berbelah bahagi kepada JAIS.

D.Y.M.M. Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah Alhaj
Sultan Selangor

The war drums beat ominously. The platoons are quickly mobilized for attack. The commanders are confident that their target will be hit and destroyed given numerous artillery salvos. I am not talking about shock and awe in the Iraq war. I am talking about how JAIS and UMNO activists have carefully orchestrated their recent attacks on the Malaysian church after their illegal raid of DUMC.

It is easy to be confused, especially when JAIS and UMNO activists deliberately cloud the issues with wild claims, hoping that their illegal transgression of a church will be overlooked and the innocent victim (DUMC) will somehow appear guilty, if accused repeatedly. It does not matter that till now JAIS has failed to produce any credible evidence to support the raid. JAIS seems to operate on the basis that people will end up believing lies so long as they are repeated enough in the media.

AN UNDENIABLE VIOLATION OF A HOLY PLACE
But how does one sift out the truth from the lies? First we stress the undeniable facts:

A group of 20-30 members from JAIS and the police raided the premises of DUMC where there was a thanksgiving dinner held by Harapan Community in appreciation of people who have supported their community service. This raid was undeniably an illegal act since the officials were unable to produce a search warrant.

In effect, the JAIS violated the sanctity of the house of God. The raid is not only illegal; it is an almost unforgivable sin. Any Muslim should know this and would shrink in horror and be tempted to retaliate should officials from another religion violate their mosques.

JAIS initially defended the raid by claiming that they are empowered to act on grounds of suspicious activities. But even if we go by the requirements of the Penal Code, such a raid must be backed by reasonable suspicion, that is, there must be prima facie evidence to justify the raid. Till today, JAIS has failed to offer the slightest modicum of evidence that can be accepted as ‘reasonable suspicion’, much less be accepted as prima facie evidence.

JAIS backpedaled from its claim to have the authority to raid DUMC and now describes its act as an ‘inspection’ – a definite sign that it realizes (but not admitting publicly) that the raid was illegal.

BUT what gives JAIS the authority to inspect DUMC or any church for that matter?  The supreme law of the land, the Federal Constitution specifies that Shariah has no jurisdiction over non- Muslims. JAIS officials accompanied by the police or not, have no business to interfere with what is going on inside the church – especially, when there is not the slightest reasonable suspicion.

To repeat, JAIS violated the sanctity of the sanctuary of another religion. The raid is not only illegal; it is an almost unforgivable sin.

FLIMSY EVIDENCE FOR CHARGE OF PROSELYTIZATION
JAIS’ violation is unjustifiable and would set a dangerous precedent if left unchallenged. Christians are naturally aggrieved (and MBBCHST publicly shares the same sentiments with a public statement) and have good reasons to demand an apology and receive an assurance that such acts will not be repeated.

This grievous issue must be kept in the forefront, especially now that JAIS is desperately trying to muddy the controversy by heaping a series of accusations about Christian proselytization and conversion of Muslims.

But the allegation of proselytization just won’t hold water:

First, JAIS has not linked, much less produced evidence to support allegations of proselytization in DUMC. If there is any allegation of proselytization, it is directed towards Harapan Community. DUMC is only the renter letting out its premises to a bona fide NGO. DUMC’s innocence and integrity is above reproach. In contrast, JAIS exceeded its bounds of authority.

Second, JAIS has failed to produce credible evidence to support the charge of proselytization by Harapan Community. It produced a scanned picture of a quiz on Islam and took offense that words like “Allahu Akbar” and “Alhamdullilah” were used at the dinner. But this evidence proves to be dubious upon a closer examination:

The quiz turns out to be an exercise to help people understand Islam better with questions like. “What does the word ‘Quran’ mean? How many sura are there in the Quran? What are the pillars of Islam?” It may be granted that JAIS may have (still disputable) grounds to charge Harapan community if the quiz was on Christianity, but it turns out that the quiz was on Islam. If anybody has reason to be offended, it is the Christian community, since apparently Islam was taught in church!

Likewise, what’s wrong with Christians using the words “Allahu Akbar” and “Alhamdullilah”? The phrases mean “God is great” and “Praise to God”. Malay speaking Christians who share strong historic links with Arabic Christians would feel as natural singing these phrases as when singing “Hallelujah”. As such, praise to God there certainly was, but proselytization, there surely wasn’t.

All in all, JAIS must be pretty desperate to clutch to these ‘evidence’ to support the alleged proselytization.

JAIS tries to buttress it case by making reference to Muslims who have converted to Christianity, but these cases have nothing to do with Harapan Community. But for the sake of argument, even if a Malay attending the thanksgiving dinner eventually declares he is a Christian, JAIS cannot simply jump to the conclusion that Harapan Community was guilty of proselytization. It could be the case, that this Malay became a Christian on his own initiative (given easy access to teaching of Christianity in the internet) or that he was influenced while studying overseas.

JAIS may implicate Harapan Community of proselytization only if it produces evidence that directly links the social services of Harapan Community to proselytization. So far, JAIS is unable to produce any evidence. A fortiori, it is even less able to associate DUMC with questionable allegations of proselytization.

To conclude and to recapitulate to the main issue, JAIS has no justifiable grounds to raid and violate the sanctity of a church (DUMC).

QUESTIONABLE PROCESS OF INVESTIGATION
That JAIS has failed to produce credible evidence does not mean it will not keep trying. But the longer it takes for JAIS to produce such ‘evidence’, the less credible the ‘evidence’ will turn out to be.

Naturally, JAIS has been unrelenting in wanting to haul up the twelve Malays who were at the dinner for further questioning. These Malays were first required to report for ‘counseling’ which would imply they were guilty of an (unproven) offence. When queried by the lawyer representing the twelve, JAIS replied that they were called to give statements (which should mean the twelve are innocent until proven guilty).

The lawyer representing the twelve sought the following clarifications before advising his clients to report to JAIS, that is, what legal provisions enable Jais to issue the Notice Orders requiring their clients to present themselves;
•    The offence or details of the offence Jais is investigating;
•    The offenders, if any, who were being investigated by Jais;
•    The real purpose requiring their client’s attendance before Jais, whether to attend ‘pre-counselling sessions’ as offenders or merely to assist Jais in its investigations, if any.

As far as I know, JAIS has so far not answered these questions. There is now a new threat that the twelve will be arrested if they fail to turn up for questioning, as this would amount to an insult to Islam. This new threat is most disturbing when one notes a parallel phenomenon related to the charge of blasphemy to justify all manner of abuse of power by Islamic officials in Pakistan and some Middle Eastern countries. Submitting to JAIS’ threat would initiate a new trend that allows “blasphemy” and “insult” to cover a multitude of power abuse.

One can only surmise how the twelve will be questioned by JAIS and in the light of JAIS’ questionable behavior so far, people can only be skeptical of any ‘evidence and ‘confession’ that may eventually be extracted from the twelve.

PAS THE REAL TARGET OF JAIS’ RAID
One final observation:

First, it bears repeating that the real issue in this controversy is not about the alleged proselytization of Muslims by Harapan Community; it is the unprecedented act of violation of the sanctity of a Church (DUMC).

JAIS would have succeeded if it manages to deflect attention from this primary issue with its machinations of charges of proselytization and insult to Islam.

Even then, despite the importance of remaining focused on the raid of DUMC, it should be noted that the main target of this present exercise by JAIS (or whatever UMNO puppet master behind it) is not Harapan Community or DUMC. The real target is PAS.

UMNO officials and Malay supremacists like PEMBELA think they have found the right tactic to regain support from the Malay electorate. By seizing on the bogeyman of ‘conversion’ and ‘proselytization, it would catch PAS wrong-footed, put the Menteri Besar of Selangor on the defensive and if possible seriously damage Pakatan Rakyat.

If PAS fails to side with JAIS and condemns the alleged conversions, it will be accused of abandoning its role as the defender of Islam. UMNO then offers itself as the only genuine defender of Islam. If PAS publicly sides with JAIS it will lose its hard earned support from the non-Muslim electorate. Either way, PAS will be gored by the horns of dilemma set by UMNO.

Without a doubt, Islam is exploited by politicians to gain political power. It doesn’t matter if Harapan Community and DUMC happen to be convenient tools in the struggle between UMNO and PAS. They are just dispensable collateral damage.

This article also appeared in Malaysia Insider on 15 Aug 2011 LINK

The Christian Federation of Malaysia is deeply shocked and appalled at the raid by the officers of the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) and the police conducted on the premises of the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) on the evening of 3rd August 2011.
The dinner function organised by Harapan Komuniti, a community development NGO, is an annual thanksgiving celebration to commemorate its efforts on its numerous community projects for the benefit of Malaysians.

It is ironic that such a celebratory gathering of volunteers, leaders, supporters and members of the community should be disrupted by the high-handed and repugnant actions of the state religious enforcement officers.

This arbitrary action of the JAIS and the police officers is an affront to the values of mutual respect and harmony which should be accorded to every person, regardless of religious, cultural or ethnic background in Malaysia.

We also wish to question the legality of the raid and the subsequent interrogation and harassment of the guests present at the dinner as to whether the officers were acting within their legal jurisdiction.

Christians are shocked and saddened at this deplorable action. In recent times, we have witnessed an increase in incidences where Christians have been singled out and targeted with unjustified accusations and prejudice from various groups as well as certain mainline media who have made inflammatory statements against the spirit of 1Malaysia.

We call upon the relevant authorities, including His Royal Highness the Sultan of Selangor, to conduct a thorough investigation over this unjustified raid.

We also call upon the government and all Malaysians to work together to build a truly cohesive and harmonious society based on mutual respect, dialogue and understanding.

In this holy month of Ramadan, we Christians wish to extend our heartfelt greetings and felicitation to our Muslim friends.

Yours sincerely,
Bishop Datuk Ng Moon Hing
Chairman and the Executive Committee,
Christian Federation of Malaysia

Press Statement from Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC)

First, the police brazenly violated the limits of their authority when they barged into DUMC premises without a warrant. Perhaps in their minds no search warrant is needed to scrounge around rubbish bins. If only that was all they did (and even this would require a search warrant) – they were blatantly intimidating the guests at the dinner.

Second, the religious officials from the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) exploited the blunt tool of the state (police) to muscle their way into the church premises and  arrogantly flaunted their power to harass the dinner guests. They claimed to be acting in response to a complaint (even though they failed to produce the alleged complaint letter). But, even if there were such a complaint, they should have contacted the leaders of the church and the matters would have been resolved amicably. However, they chose the path of offense and raided the church. Perhaps these officials still live in medieval times when Islamic officials may abuse non-Muslim subjects (the inferior dhimmis) at their whims and fancies. At the least, one has to judge these officials as having violated human decency when they wantonly insulted the Christian community.

Of course, nothing is strictly religious in Malaysia. It is common knowledge that Muslim politicians often cynically exploit Islamic institutions for their political ends. There are speculations about the real agenda of the political puppet masters behind this raid. Could the raid be one of the maneuvers of the power struggle within UMNO between the PM and his challengers? There can only be tantalizing answers.

Question 1: Who authorized the raid?
If  it was PM Najib: So much for his recent statement that Malaysians must move from tolerance to mutual respect.
If not PM Najib: then his challengers have seized an opportunity to embarrass him.
Caution: But then it can also be the usual good cop/bad cop sandiwara/drama by the government.

Regardless of the real truth, we can only judged the present government by its actions (and not just its soothing words). In this regard, we hold the present government (PM +and his challengers) culpable of an offensive action.

Question 2: What is the real agenda of the authorities?
Relations between the government and the Christian community have been going downhill – following a serious of contentious issues that include the Allah Controversy, seizure of the Al-kitab, court disputes over some conversions etc. Naturally, these harassment have heightened the social-political consciousness/political activism among Christians. Perhaps some government officials see it fitting to initiate a high profile raid on a church to remind Christians to remain compliant and stay in the good books of the ruling political masters of the land.

Finally, given the paranoia that is pervasive among Islamic officials, it must have been galling for them to see some Muslims attending an official function in a church (even though it was organized as a 1Malaysia event). Judging by the frequent warnings from JAIS, it would seem that there are many weak Muslims who are easily influenced by Christians and would convert out of Islam no sooner than one says, “Peace be…” Weak and unstable followers must be guarded (or rather, controlled) and the audacious Christians put in their place.

——————————————————–
Multi-racial dinner at church disrupted by Jais
Malaysiakini 4 Aug 2011 LINK
Officers from the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) last night trespassed into a church compound in Petaling Jaya and disrupted a multiracial thanksgiving dinner.

According to Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) senior pastor Daniel Ho, a group of between 20 to 30 Jais and police officers, uniformed and plainclothes, entered the premises without a warrant.

“They entered the hall where the dinner was taking place, and started taking videos and photographs,” said Ho in a statement today.

“When asked by the organisers why they were there, a Jais (official) replied that they received a complaint, but was unable to produce a copy (of the complaint) when asked,” he added.

Ho claimed that Jais officers took down details of the Muslim guests before leaving the premises with the police.

According to him, the dinner was held by non-profit organisation Harapan Komuniti at the Dream Centre, an activity complex within the DUMC compound.

The occasion was to commemorate the NGO’s efforts on numerous community projects, including with women and children, and victims of HIV/AIDS and natural disasters.

“Harapan Komuniti is a community-based NGO that brings love, hope and peace to the poor, needy and marginalised, regardless of race, language, religion or status.

“The dinner was a multiracial celebratory gathering of volunteers, leaders, supporters and members of the community who have benefited from the NGO’s work,” Ho explained.

DUMC and Community Excel Services, which had rented Dream Center, said they were highly disappointed with the actions of Jais and police officers who had entered and searched a private property without a warrant.

“They have subjected all guests at the Thanksgiving Dinner to undue harassment,” said Ho, stressing the dinner’s aim of appreciating and commemorating Harapan Komuniti’s efforts to help Malaysians of all walks of life.”

Ho called on all Malaysians not to condone this breach of freedom of assembly and association as provided by Article 10 of the federal constitution, “but to live in mutual trust and love, to promote peace, harmony and unity in the true spirit of 1Malaysia”.

According to DUMC members who posted about the incident on micro-blogging website Twitter, Jais officers ransacked the garbage bins of the church.

Last Friday, Dream Centre hosted an electoral reform forum organised by the Association for the Promotion of Human Rights (Proham), featuring Bersih 2.0 chief Ambiga Sreenevasan and Election Commission deputy chairperson Wan Ahmad Wan Omar.

————————————-

Raided church wants action against Jais for trespass, harassment
By Debra Chong 4 Aug 2011
MalaysiaInsider LINK

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 4 — The Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) has called on all Malaysians to lend support and object to what it called the authorities’ breach of their constitutional right to assemble freely, after it was raided by Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) officials and the police last night.

In a statement today, DUMC’s senior pastor Daniel Ho related how a group of 20 to 30 of Selangor’s religious police had entered its rented premises at the Dream Centre in Petaling Jaya late last night without a warrant and intimidated invited guests, including Muslims, at its private dinner celebration.

“They have subjected all guests at the Thanksgiving Dinner to undue harassment,” he said, noting that not all the enforcement group were in uniform and had failed to produce a copy of the complaint when asked for the reason for the raid.

Ho stressed that the dinner was non-religious in nature but held to celebrate the work of non-profit organisation Harapan Komuniti in helping women, children, HIV/AIDS sufferers and victims of natural disasters.

“We call on all Malaysians not to condone this breach of freedom of assembly and association as provided by provided Article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, but to live in mutual trust and love, to promote peace, harmony and unity in the true spirit of 1 Malaysia,” he said.

The pastor told The Malaysian Insider last night that the thanksgiving dinner organised by Harapan Komuniti was attended by between 100 and 120 guests of all races.

“This is a dinner for people to come in the 1 Malaysia spirit,” Ho said, adding they were mainly Christian although he admitted there were “there were about 15 or so Malays.”

Last night’s raid in the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) state came after Malaysia sealed formal ties with the Vatican last month, seen as a high point in religious relations where Muslims are the majority.

Religious tensions heightened two years ago when the Home Ministry barred Christians from referring to their god as “Allah” in a Catholic newspaper.

In 2009, the High Court allowed the church to use the word, but the case is pending a Home Ministry appeal of the decision.

Several churches across the country fell victim to arson attempts in January last year following the ruling.

Christians, who form 9.2 per cent of Malaysia’s 28.3 million-strong population, were further outraged when the Home Ministry seized 35,100 Malay-language bibles.

The bibles were later released ahead of the Sarawak state election in April on condition that copies in Peninsular Malaysia be marked with a cross and the words “Christian publication”.

————————————————–

Written by Pak Sako Friday, 13 May 2011

I respond to Professor Abdul Aziz Bari’s view regarding Islam and the Federal Constitution.

He gives his opinions on why the Federal Constitution and the Federation of Malaysia are not secular. I comment on his opinions.

I show why our Constitution and the Federation is secular, even whilst it acknowledges and appreciates the social and historic context of Islam in modern Malaysia.

1. Does the Constitution fit the definition of secular?

Professor Aziz does not define ‘Islamic’ or ‘secular’. Yet in his calculation the Constitution “may not be Islamic” but is “certainly not secular”.

It is difficult to envisage a carefully drafted constitution containing indeterminate definitions on a basic character such as a state being secular or theocratic. Professor Aziz should know that deliberate account was taken of Islam in the drafting of the Constitution by the Reid Commission.

It therefore cannot be a willy-nilly ‘neither this nor that’, of the Federation of Malaysia being left constitutionally ‘neither Islamic nor secular’. It must be one or the other, whether rigorously defined or imbued in spirit. The Federation cannot be schizophrenic.

The ‘neither-this-nor-that’ condition is also improbable from the conceptual standpoint.

Consider a working definition of a secular constitution, or a constitution that defines a secular state. Such a constitution would be judged against these requirements: it (i) guarantees individual and corporate freedom of religion, (ii) deals with the individual as a citizen irrespective of his religion, and (iii) is not connected or defined by a religion nor does it sanction the state to promote or interfere with religion (based on D.E. Smith, 1963, ‘What is a secular state?’, pp. 3-22 in India as a Secular State, Princeton, Princeton University Press).

The Federal Constitution of Malaysia easily passes the first two tests. For the third, the answer is less clear. Islam features in 9 out of the 181 Articles in the Constitution (namely, Article 3, 11, 12, 34, 42, 76, 97, 150 and 160) but religious principles do not define and are not assigned for administrating the state. Where there are rules pertaining to the religious affairs of Muslims, a separation principle is apparent (in Article 97, zakat and other religious payments made by Muslims are to go into a fund separate from the Federal Consolidated Fund). The Constitution also clearly does not speak of promoting or interfering with any religion.

A score of 2½ out of 3 could therefore be given on this measure of secularity.

Even if we concentrate on the separation aspect of secularity alone, i.e., detachment from theocracy in terms of administration, democratic model and national laws (as opposed to personal laws), Malaysia is a secular country.

Professor Aziz’s assertion that the Constitution is definitely not secular does not hold water.

2. Article 3(1): Is it Islamic or secular?

The lawyer Syahredzan Johan showed that nowhere in Article 3(1) or elsewhere in the Constitution does it say that Islam is the “official religion” of the Federation.

Professor Aziz responds that the absence of the literal specification “official religion” or “state religion” in the Constitution is no sufficient condition for concluding that Malaysia is a secular state. This is fair.

Nevertheless, it can be argued that the absence of such an explicit indication tilts in favour of the secular argument, in that it negates the necessary theocratic condition for a state to be decidedly ‘not secular’.

To be considered a theocratic Islamic State the Federation should be properly and explicitly defined as such.

Syahredzan Johan argued that Malaysia is secular on grounds of it not being bound by the Quran or Islamic legal provisions. For an Islamic State, the supreme and guiding law of the land would be the Quran and the Sunnah.

Professor Aziz’s tentative “may not be Islamic” is here resolved. If by ‘Islamic’ he meant ‘Islamic State’, then this is not what the Federation is.

3. The spirit of the Constitution: Is it Islamic or secular?

Art Harun provides in his article some of the historical background necessary for ascertaining this. His piece should be read fully to appreciate the force of the argument. Here I paraphrase some key sentences and sources because they clarify so much:

• The Alliance (the precursor to Barisan National) submitted a memorandum to the Reid Commission responsible for drafting the Federal Constitution. On Islam, the memo says:

“The religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion, and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State.”

• Subsequently, the Reid Commission’s report which was published in February 1957 states the following on the position of Islam:

“We have considered the question whether there should be any statement in the Constitution to the effect that Islam should be the State religion. There was universal agreement that if any such provision were inserted it must be made clear that it would not in any way affect the civil rights of non-Muslims — ‘the religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State’.”“The majority of us think that it is best to leave the matter on this basis, looking to the fact that the Counsel for the Rulers said to us — ‘It is Their Highnesses’ considered view that it would not be desirable to insert some declaration such as has been suggested that the Muslim Faith or Islamic Faith be the established religion of the Federation.”

• Justice Hamid, a member of the Reid Commission from Pakistan, commented:

“It has been recommended by the Alliance that the Constitution should contain a provision declaring Islam to be the religion of the State. It was also recommended that it should be made clear in that provision that a declaration to the above effect will not impose any disability on non-Muslim citizens in professing, propagating and practising their religions, and will not prevent the State from being a secular State.

• The British Government White Paper of June 1957, containing the Constitutional Proposals for independent Malaya, states:

“There has been included in the Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practise his own religion and the right to propagate his religion, though this last right is subject to any restrictions imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.”

• In the case of Che Omar bin Che Soh v. Public Prosecutor in 1988, the Malaysian Supreme Court, which comprised of (among others) the Lord President Tun Salleh Abbas maintained that Malaysia is a secular country:

“It is the contention of Ramdas Tikamdass that because Islam is the religion of the Federation, the law passed by Parliament must be imbued with Islamic and religious principles… Needless to say that this submission, in our view, will be contrary to the constitutional and legal history of the Federation and also to the Civil Law Act which provides for the reception of English common law in this country.

However, we have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, secular law, where morality not accepted by the law is not enjoying the status of the law.”

4. What does Article 3(1) mean?

Professor Aziz opines that “the position of Islam as “the religion of the Federation” in Article 3(1) could be taken to mean that Islam is a national or constitutional ideology”. But this would be reading too much into it. Ideology is a strong word and a reading of the constitution does not justify such a proposition.

An alternative take on Article 3(1), one that is harmonious with the Reid Commission conclusions, is as follows. “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation” could be taken to mean that even though Islam is the socially dominant religious identity prevailing across the Federation, e.g., in terms of the number of its adherents and history (the first part of the Article), this should in no way impede the freedom to practice other religions in Malaysia (its second part).

This interpretation is operationally compatible with Professor L.A. Sheridan’s view of what he believes is the meaning of the first part of Article 3(1), that is, “insofar as federal business (such as ceremonial business) involves religious matters, that business is to be regulated in accordance with the religion of Islam”. This is common sense. It would be out of place, even to a non-Muslim Malaysian, if state ceremonial affairs where cultural symbolism is unavoidable (such as when a Malay Muslim ruler is present) were conducted according to another religion.

This matter of ceremony helps explain away what Professor Aziz supposes is a constitutional anomaly, namely, that a secular constitution would surely forbid the constitutional requirement that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong take the Islamic oath of “wallahi, wabillahi and watallahi”. A secular constitution that gives due respect to cultural significances in this way is not any less secular. Note how Thailand’s constitution is a secular one in spite of Section 8 of the constitution which states that the Thai “King is a Buddhist” (and the “defender of all faiths”). Note also that Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom, but the Scottish Parliament had declared Scotland a secular state even as it maintains a religious monarch.

5. Does Article 12(2) discredit the secular argument?

Professor Aziz goes on to suggest that the constitution cannot be secular since Article 12(2) “has allowed the authorities to use public funds for Islam”. He says so without explaining why this is not secular.

What Article 12(2) as a whole says is that while every religious group is free to create and operate “institutions for the education of children in its own religion”, it will be deemed legal (i.e., it shouldn’t be taken as illegal) if the Federation or a State chooses to create and operate Islamic institutions or incurs expenditure to provide assistance in Islamic instruction.

The first part of the Article is a statement of religious freedom that is not in conflict with secularity. The second part implies that it is of no harm (and it might in fact be socially fair) for the Federation or State to specially assist in the provision of such institutions for its Muslim citizens where necessary.

This could be understood in the context of historic economic conditions. A secular state aiding an economically disadvantaged religious group does not make it non-secular.

Professor Aziz has suggested that Article 12(2) “does not mean that the state is prevented from assisting other religions”. This case only underlines the kind of treatment that a secular state, by conceptual implication, would accord to religions.

6. Can a secular state have syariah courts?

Professor Aziz argues that “a secular state would not allow religious courts, such as the syariah courts”.

This is incorrect.

Nothing prevents a constitutional framework that is secular from accommodating religious courts to meet the needs of its citizens.

Hence syariah courts operate in constitutionally secular India. The United Kingdom, with its “mainly secular culture”, has Jewish courts that are in daily use. Secular Singapore has its own government-run syariah court.

7. Does a theocracy protect religious rights and freedoms better than a secularist system?

One of Professor Aziz’s points sidetracks from the debate at hand. He claims that “secularism is not necessarily the means to protect non-Muslims”, and “that countries professing secularism are somehow unable to guarantee the equality and protection of minorities”.

A brief response is in order.

In spite of the difficulties, many secular countries do earnestly strive to ensure equality and protection for different religious groups.

Their sincerity and effort might be better appreciated when the situation in some theocratic countries is considered.

There is institutionalised intolerance where minority religions are concerned in some places (the public practice of non-Muslim religions is outlawed in Saudi Arabia) and uneasy tolerance susceptible to violent conflict in others (murder and the burning of places of worship in Egypt).

On balance, religious freedoms and diversity fare better in secular countries than in theocratic ones.

8. Conclusion

Malaysia can be described as a constitutionally secular country with a state religion.

The Islamic aspects of the Constitution appreciate the cultural and historical context of the nation and its people. A healthy nation state cannot be begun on a blank slate. Its flavour should be acknowledged.

The implied secularity of the Federal Constitution does not at all mean that the state is valueless or unIslamic. The values that a secular, progressive state would commit to, such as justice, incorruptibility, compassion, reason, fairness and respect for diversity are all underlying values found in Islam and other belief systems.

Professor Abdul Aziz Bari’s narrow conception of ‘secular’ — a conception held also by some of the religious — refers to the Communist tradition motivated by hostility towards religion or God (anti-religion or anti-God). It might be inaccurate to label this ‘secular’. But this definition is favoured by some because it serves the interest of a certain religious ideology.

The kind of secular political system that we actually see in practice in the progressive world is different. Being secular is about striving to treat citizens equally regardless of religion and avoiding preferential treatment for a citizen from a particular religion or belief system over other religions or belief systems. The diversity of religions is accepted and may sometimes be celebrated.

The secular-versus-Islamic conflict surrounding our Federal Constitution is a mirage rather than there being any actual constitutional problem.

The reluctance and resistance towards accepting the secular nature of the Constitution is really due to the rise and influence of political Islam in the last 30 years.

This has become embodied in competitive party politics, a growing religious bureaucracy flexing its authority, and heightened feelings of religious exclusivity and religious supremacy in society.

In the interplay of the above-mentioned factors, certain Articles (e.g., Article 12(2)), state laws or by-laws could have been interpreted and practiced in a way that possibly exceed the content and spirit of the Constitution (e.g., the overreaching powers of the religious bureaucracy on at about 60% of the population and their influence on the instruments of governance). Points are scored in bucking against the secular spirit of the Federal Constitution. Fearful of losing support, politicians do not dare to publicly acknowledge the secular quality of the Constitution, much less speak in support of it.

Consider the length to which PAS goes. In declaring its position on Article 3(1), PAS has implied that all the federated states of Malaysia have Islam as their official religion because they belong to the Federation whose religion is Islam (rather than the other way around). PAS clutches at straws to justify an official religion status. PAS does not even bother that this goes against Sarawak and Sabah’s 20/18-point agreement that there shall be no state religion for these states!

Such precedents are dangerous. A multicultural country like Malaysia could do well to revert and properly adhere to the Federal Constitution as originally envisioned.

This is an inescapable responsibility for any government in power.

———————————————–

You may be interested to read  my small contribution to the debate as well as excerpts taken from the primary sources related to the formulation of the Federal Constitution in its historical context available from the following links:

1) The Reid Commission LINK

2) Social Contract and the Special Position of the Malays LINK
Some observations on the Historical Context

3) Social Contract (Part 1): Religion and Equal Citizenship LINK

4) Malaysia Social Contract (Part 2): Excerpts from Historical Documents LINK

——————————————————–

The Position of Islam in Our Constitution – Abdul Aziz Bari LINK

MAY 10 — I am a member of the Bar Council constitutional law committee but have a different point of view on the position of Islam under the Constitution.

Firstly, the correct way of interpreting and understanding the Constitution is by looking at the provision concerned as well as the entire structure. One should not apply literal and pedantic means alone.

Secondly, it is not quite right to say the Constitution is secular. For one thing, there is no provision to that effect in the constitutional document. It may not be Islamic but the Constitution is certainly not secular.

The reasons for this are:

(a) The position of Islam as “the religion of the Federation” as stated in Article 3(1) could be taken to mean that Islam is a national or constitutional ideology. It is just saying I am a Muslim or my religion is Islam.

There is no case law on this but Professor L.A. Sheridan, former law dean at Singapore University, once opined that one of the possible implications of Article 3(1) is that state functions such as the opening of Parliament must be conducted in an Islamic way. The law professor was making a comment in response to the Supreme Court decision in Che Omar bin Che Soh (1988) that was rather confusing.

(b) Even though the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is not the head of Islam for the entire federation, he is required by the Constitution to take the Islamic oath of “wallahi, wabillahi and watallahi” that is contained in the Federal Constitution. A secular constitution, like that of Turkey, would forbid this.

(c) The Constitution, through Article 12(2), has allowed the authorities to use public funds for Islam.

(d) A secular state would not allow religious courts, such as the syariah courts.

These are just some of the reasons why the Constitution and the state are not secular. There are too many other reasons to rebutt the argument put forward by En. Syahrezan this morning. Just look at the state constitutions and other laws, passed by Parliament and the state assemblies.

Thirdly, the mere fact that the Constitution does not say or specify “official religion” or “state religion” is not a good enough argument to bring about the conclusion that Malaysia is therefore a secular state.

Fourthly, having said that, it does not follow that the position of non-Muslims is thus in danger.

Their position has been protected by Article 3(1) which allows other religions to be practised in peace and harmony in the country. They are also protected by Article 11 which provides the right to religious freedom. In fact, one could say that Article 12(2) does not mean that the state is prevented from assisting other religions.

Fifthly, secularism is not necessarily the means to protect non-Muslims. There are countries that profess as such but they are somehow unable to guarantee the equality and the protection of minorities.

Just because I have a different point of view from Syahrezan on Article 3(1) does not mean that I am changing my mind on a non-Muslim and non-Malay becoming prime minister.

My view remains that a non-Muslim and non-Malay can be PM so long as he or she has what it takes under Article 43 of the Federal Constitution to become PM.

And I think having a non-Muslim and non-Malay PM who upholds the Constitution is better than a Malay Muslim PM who puts himself above the law. Or someone who amends it as he pleases, as seen during the Mahathir administration.

* Abdul Aziz Bari reads The Malaysian Insider.

————————————-

The NGO Muslim Organisation in Defence of Islam (Pembela) has blamed Christianity as one of the biggest contributing factor to their alleged decline of Islam in Malaysia.
“It is clear for all to see, of the aggressiveness and confrontational ways of Christians in bringing cases to court, their police reports all over the country and their press statements whether on the Allah or Al-Kitab issue.

“They all have something to do with their movement in spreading Christianity amongst the people,” said Pembela president Yusri Mohamad.

He was speaking to reporters after Pembela’s forum entitled ‘Islam Under Siege: What Can We Do?’.

Adding that Christians are on a mission to convert Muslims in the country, he said that it all starts with “confusing” Muslims by using Islamic terms.

“It is their strategy to confuse Muslims by using terms and phrases which the Muslims commonly use,” he said.

Pembela had previously stated that Islam was under “siege” particularly in relation to recent developments in Islam-Christian affairs.

At the forum attended by representatives of some 35 Muslim NGOs, the panelists repeatedly made references to Christianity, attributing it to one of the factors of why Islam is under “siege”.

A representative from the Malaysian Chinese Muslim Association Ann Wan Seng told the audience that there is a subtle movement by the Christians to lead Muslims into apostasy.

“It’s very subtle. It is like salt in your food. You can’t see it, the taste might not be strong, but you know it’s there. And it’s very effective,” he said.

He also claimed that Petaling Jaya in Selangor was the centre of this Christian activity, and that their “conversion” activities are becoming more open and bolder.

“If you go there, you can see that their leaflets and literature everywhere,” he said.

Take on harsher role
Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) president Zaid Kamarudin Abd Rahman also said that other threats to Islam include globalisation, liberalisation and pluralism.

“There are still Muslims who think that their religion is not under attack or under seige because their senses are already dulled by entertainment and other earthly pleasures…

“All Muslims must unite in defending Islam. If it is true that there is work to change the constitution to usurp the position of Islam by certain quarters, then we must react in equal measure,” he said in his presentation.

Islam-Christian relations have worsened recently, especially after the furore over incidents such as the usage of the word “Allah” that went up to the Federal Court, vandalism of churches and surau and releasing Bahasa Malaysia bibles into the country after being stuck in Port Klang and Kuching for months.

Police reports have been lodged by Christian and Muslim groups since then, each accusing each other of extremism or “challenging the position of Islam”.

Pembela urges probe into claims
Most recently, Utusan Malaysia front-paged a report quoting a pro-Umno blog claiming that the DAP in cahoots with Christian leaders in attempting to make Christianity the official religion of the country.

“This has to be investigated. If this is true, we have to be careful,” said Yusri.

Meanwhile, Yusri said that even if Pembela were to take a harsher role as urged by several of the participants in the forum, it will be within the confines of the law.

“We will voice out our demands clearer. We won’t ignore the laws of the country when fighting for our issue while insisting that “we’re not extremists.”

Malaysiakini 8 May 2011 LINK

Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Murphy Nicholas Pakiam, has slammed reports alleging a conspiracy to turn the country into a Christian state.

Describing the reports as “irresponsible, baseless and provocative”, Pakiam demanded that the authorities take action against what it said were quarters that seek to threaten the harmonious, multi-cultural and multi-religious make-up of the country.

A “thorough investigation” into the matter should be made to determine the source of these “insidious, provocative and malicious lies” and take action against those behind it, said Pakiam in a statement.

He was responding to the blog postings, on which an Utusan Malaysia report was based, accusing DAP of colluding with Christian pastors to make Christianity the country’s official religion so that a Christian can become prime minister.
‘We’ve never been treasonous, hateful’
Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi (left) was named in the blog postings as the DAP leader who attended the meeting and joined the prayer session with the pastors, who were reportedly attending a mega-ceramah at the Catholic Christian Centre in Penang on Saturday.

“On behalf of the Catholic Bishops of Malaysia, I would like to categorically refute the allegation that such a meeting had taken place or will take place in a Catholic venue in Penang,

“It is clear that this reporting is baseless and highly irresponsible as the reporters and editors of the above newspaper have not taken any reasonable steps whatsoever to verify the allegations made by anonymous bloggers.

“Furthermore, this report comes after the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF), one of the organizers of the above meeting, having refuted the claims of those bloggers and the same was carried on online media.

“The NECF has further clarified that this meeting only covered the topic of ethical leadership and had no treasonous agenda as alleged by the bloggers and news report,” said Pakiam.

Pakiam said Christian authorities teach the community to be God-fearing and law-abiding citizens and conscientious decision-makers “based on justice which is reflective of moral and divine laws.”

Even in the Al-Kitab issue over which the Christian Federation of Malaysia has been in dispute with the government, Church leaders had always reiterated their commitment and readiness “to dialogue and work together with the government” and all parties for a just and reasonable solution.

“It is clear that our position has never been treasonous nor have we advocated hatred, antagonism or animosity towards any religion or groups of persons,” said Pakiam.

“I continue to call upon all Catholics, Christians and all Malaysians to pray, dialogue and work together to strengthen national unity and harmony. May God bless our leaders with a firm vision and the courage and strength to uphold and realise it.”

‘Utusan playing with fire’
Lending his voice in support of Pakiam’s remarks, PAS Youth chief Nasrudin Hassan (right) also described the blog and Utusan reports over the alleged conspiracy as “irresponsible” and potentially destabilising.

“Other than potentially threatening the peace, such speculations are seen as a means of seeking cheap political publicity and (part of) continuous efforts to hide weaknesses and failure in protecting the sanctity of the (Islamic) religion,” said Nasrudin in a statement entitled ‘Utusan playing with fire’.

Nasrudin said it is a well-known fact that Islam is enshrined as the official religion of the federation, with Muslims making up the majority in Malaysia’s pluralistic population.

“For these reasons, Islam should not be in a position of being jeopardised and the Muslims would not allow Islam to be threatened,” he added.

If Islam is indeed perceived as getting weaker, said Nasruin, it was because of Umno’s failure to fulfil the mandate with which it had been entrusted to govern the nation, particularly in protecting religious practices and the people’s welfare.

“If Umno had taken care of (the practice of) Islam well and strengthened it, I believe and am convinced that such speculations (by Utusan) of moves to make Christianity the official religion of the nation would not have arisen.

“At the same time, Muslims would feel at peace and comfortable with practising their religion,” he added.

———————————-

Interfaith Chief Says Utusan Report Fans Religious Divide
By Debra Chong
Malaysia Insider 8 May 2011 LINK

KUALA LUMPUR, May 8 — Utusan Malaysia and Muslim groups are fanning a religious divide when they should raise reports of purported attempts at a Christian Malaysia with the Cabinet’s special faith panel, the national interfaith council chief has said.

Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) chief Reverend Thomas Philips said there was a special subcommittee to deal with such “sensitive” matters.

“We already have a Cabinet interfaith committee. They should raise it there. They are fanning this issue out of control. Why do they need to evoke the emotions of people?” he said to The Malaysian Insider, referring to the allegation, which was based entirely on blog postings by several pro-Umno bloggers and reported today by Malay-language paper, Utusan Malaysia.

Several Muslim organisations lodged police reports after reading a front-page article in the Umno-owned daily titled: “Malaysia, negara Kristian? (Malaysia, a Christian country?).

Philips said the special subcommittee was scheduled to meet next week but that the meeting has been postponed indefinitely.

The working committee on seeking an understanding on issues among adherents, under the Cabinet’s Special Committee to Promote Interreligious Understanding and Harmony, was among four subcommittees formed on December 2 last year.

It is jointly helmed by Datuk Mustapha Ma and Reverend Hermen Shastri, and it last met on March 17, though sources told The Malaysian Insider that there was no headway in talks on thorny issues as Muslim representatives had failed to turn up for the meeting.

The MCCBCHST president reaffirmed that the non-Muslim council has made it very clear that nobody was scheming to usurp Islam’s position as Malaysia’s official religion.

“We’ve already made it very clear that nobody is threatening Islam. Nobody can undermine Islam’s position as the official religion because it is in the Federal Constitution.

“We want to uphold the Federal Constitution and we will not do anything to change it and we accept the position of Islam,” Phillips said, repeating the MCCBCHST’s statement reported yesterday.

The Mar Thoma priest also told The Malaysian Insider the Cabinet faith panel was also scheduled to meet with ministers in charge of the committee, Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom and Tan Sri Koh Tsu Koon, next week, ostensibly to discuss the replacement for its Cabinet-appointed coordinator, Datuk Ilani Ishak, who died of cancer on February 24.

“But the May 12 meeting has been postponed,” he said, adding that no replacement date has been given.

“If it happens, it happens. What else can we do?” he said.

The heated religious rhetoric from before the April 16 Sarawak election appeared to have died down immediately after, only to flare up again this week as right-wing Malay groups sounded the alarm over the rising popularity of the Chinese-dominant DAP and accused Christians of laying Islam under siege.

The Muslim Organisations in Defence of Islam (Pembela), an umbrella coalition that had filed police reports over the allegations, accused Christians of scheming to draw more and more Muslims into Christianity, which is an illegal act in Malaysia.

Pembela president Dr Yusri Mohamad said the Christian community’s demands over the “Allah” issue as well as the Alkitab row prove that they want to convert Muslims to Christianity.

“We are dealing with aggressive, confrontational groups of Christians.

“Their demands over the Alkitab, kalimah Allah are connected to their attempts to spread Christianity … They are using this strategy to tame Muslims, by using terms that we are familiar with in our own religion,” Yusri said yesterday during a Pembela function here.

The syariah lawyer said these are direct attempts to “compromise the position of Islam” as the country’s official religion.

Utusan Malaysia reported from several blogs whose owners have accused the DAP of sedition in an alleged conspiracy with Christians to change the country’s highest law to put a Christian in place of a Muslim as prime minister.

To back up their allegation, the bloggers pointed to a grainy photograph showing what they described to be a secret pact between the DAP and pastors at a closed-door dinner party in a Penang hotel on Wednesday.

The dinner organisers – made up of the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF), Global Day of Prayer, Marketplace Penang and Penang Pastors Fellowship – have denied the claim as lies, and explained it was to honour several pastors from Sarawak who were in Penang for the Unashamedly Ethical marketplace conference held on Thursday.

“Such fellowship dinners are common amongst Christians and are part and parcel of the Christian custom of love and fellowship,” they said in a statement, which The Malaysian Insider had reported on Friday.

———————————–

Anwar Dubs Utusan Shameless ‘Umno Tabloid’ for Christian Malaysia Report LINK
By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal
Malaysia Insider May 07, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, May 7 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim accused Utusan Malaysia of lying and confusing the public in its report today claiming Christian leaders were conspiring with the DAP to abolish Islam as the country’s official religion in a bid to take over Putrajaya.

In a hard-hitting statement posted on his blog today, Anwar accused the Umno-owned daily of spreading lies and slander, raising concerns that such an article could create further confusion among Malaysians.

“Utusan has way over the line, they have sacrificed their responsibility as media practitioners to bow before their masters. It is a sad day for Malaysians who love peace and justice when they are being force-fed lies and slander,” the PKR de facto leader said.

“The issue of the official religion for the country has become the latest target for the country’s rulers, Utusan has shamelessly twisted facts to confuse people,” explained the opposition leader.

The Pakatan Rakyat (PR) defacto leader said the front page headline of Utusan today proved that the paper was nothing more than an “Umno tabloid” carrying out the orders of its bosses.

“It’s sad to see the newspaper founded by our forefathers who had fought for the country’s freedom chained and shackled by those in power today,” Anwar added.

Utusan had carried out a front-page article today titled “Malaysia, a Christian country?” (Malaysia, negara Kristian?), based entirely on blog postings by several pro-Umno bloggers.

The bloggers had charged the DAP of sedition for trying to change the country’s laws to enable a Christian to be prime minister, pointing to a grainy photograph showing what they described to be a secret pact between the DAP and pastors at a hotel in Penang on Wednesday.

The Federal Constitution does not expressly specify race or religious requirements for the position of prime minister. Article 43(2)(a) of the constitution states only that the Yang diPertuan Agong shall appoint as PM a member of parliament who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the Dewan Rakyat.

In a posting headlined “Agong under threat? DAP wants to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia?” blogger Marahku (marahku.blogspot.com) accused DAP of trying to amend the federal constitution to allow a Christian to become prime minister.

“The whole point of changing the official religion is to allow a Christian to become prime minister of this country,” the blogger said.

On bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com, the writer claimed to have received a message that the DAP’s Jeff Ooi had organised a dinner for pastors from Sarawak and overseas at the Red Rock Hotel on Jalan Macalister in Penang.

“Among the activities that night included the 35 pastors taking a group oath. They formed a circle and touched each other’s shoulder and vowed in English to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia and put a Christian Prime Minister in office,” the anonymous writer said in his blog under the headline “Making Christianity the official religion?”

He also pointed to the same grainy picture he posted at the top of his blog page, which he had captioned “Partying pastors or pastors doing the party do and vow to have a Christian as Malaysian Prime Minister”.

The blogger further alleged that the DAP had labelled the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition as an “anti-Christ agent” in the run-up to polls in Sarawak, showing the opposition party was “openly against BN on religious grounds and they are now making it their clarion call, their rabble rousing horn”.

The blogger said it was a seditious and religiously-divisive statement that was never investigated by the police “or at least they did not tell us about any investigations on the matter”.

He called on the authorities to investigate the allegations for sedition warning that if the authorities failed in their duty, the country may be “shattered again”.

The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF), together with partners Global Day of Prayer, Marketplace Penang and Penang Pastors Fellowship, said the claims against their community were lies and have already denied the bloggers’ allegations last night.

Similarly Ooi said the dinner had been organised by the Christian pastors, in recognition of the DAP team who had visited them while in Sarawak for the state election and that the prayer sessions — one before dinner and one at the end — was a usual part of their worship, and not a pledge as alleged.

In response today, Anwar reiterated PR’s commitment towards upholding Islam as the official religion of the country.

“It has been said before, even an official statement signed by all Pakatan leaders that Islam will still remain the country’s official country even if Pakatan Rakyat takes over federal power,” stressed Anwar.

Utusan Malaysia has been at the forefront of attacking PR leaders over various issues even as its owners Umno restarted moves to court PAS to BN.

It is understood its report today has prompted Malay rights group Perkasa to lodge a police complaint later this evening.

———————————

Additional reports from Utusan Malaysia LINK

Malaysia negara Kristian?

Oleh ROKIAH ABDULLAH dan MOHD. KHUZAIRI ISMAIL
pengarang@utusan.com.my

PULAU PINANG 6 Mei – Ahli Parlimen Jelutong, Jeff Ooi menafikan dakwaan kononnya beliau menganjurkan satu majlis pertemuan paderi dari seluruh negara yang didakwa turut membincangkan agenda menjadikan Kristian sebagai agama rasmi Persekutuan sekali gus melantik Perdana Menteri dalam kalangan penganut agama itu.

Menurut wakil rakyat DAP itu, beliau hanya menghadiri majlis kesyukuran yang diadakan secara tertutup untuk paderi-paderi tersebut di sebuah hotel di Jalan Macalister di sini sebagai tetamu.

Majlis pertemuan paderi-paderi berkenaan dan ikrar menjadikan Kristian sebagai agama rasmi Persekutuan didedahkan oleh dua laman blog hari ini iaitu ‘bigdog’ di http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/ menerusi entri bertajuk ‘Making Christianity the official religion? dan blog Marahku di http://marahku.blogspot.com.

Jeff yang ditanya mengenai ikrar itu mendakwa, ketika majlis berlangsung, beliau sibuk ‘melayan’ iPad selain menjamu selera walaupun turut bertafakur semasa paderi-paderi itu berdoa.

“Bukankah berdoa itu suruhan tuhan. Apa yang saya tahu, ‘bigdog’ (penulis blog) tidak sebut nama saya, dia tidak tuduh saya. Kalau mahu tahu lebih lanjut, sila tanya polis Cawangan Khas dan dengar rakaman yang dibuat mereka,” katanya melalui khidmat pesanan ringkas (SMS) kepada Utusan Malaysia di sini hari ini.

Difahamkan, majlis makan malam yang dihadiri lebih 100 paderi Kristian itu diadakan di sebuah hotel di sini semalam yang kemudiannya disusuli dengan beberapa konvensyen hari ini.

Malam ini pula akan diadakan satu majlis di Pusat Kristian (Katolik) Pulau Pinang di sini dan satu ceramah perdana pula dianjurkan esok. Pertemuan itu dikatakan dianjurkan setiap tahun.

Dalam majlis makan malam itu, seramai 35 orang paderi dikatakan berdiri dalam bulatan dan saling berpegangan tangan tanda bersetuju untuk menjadikan Malaysia sebagai sebuah negara Kristian dan mahu Perdana Menteri juga dalam kalangan penganut agama itu.

Sementara itu, tinjauan Utusan Malaysia di hotel yang terletak di Jalan Burmah mendapati persidangan sehari itu yang bermula pukul 8.30 pagi berlangsung di Bilik 2 dan 3, tingkat 7 hotel itu.

Kira-kira 10 meja dan kerusi disusun di luar bilik persidangan yang dikatakan diadakan setiap tahun dengan beberapa rahib dilihat berbual-bual sebelum masing-masing masuk ke dalam bilik persidangan.

Kenyataan Jeff itu bagaimanapun berbeza dengan laporan blog ‘bigdog’ yang mendakwa majlis itu dianjurkan oleh kawasan Parlimen DAP dipercayai Jelutong dan turut dihadiri oleh kira-kira 100 yang lain termasuk wakil rakyat parti itu dari Sarawak dan beberapa pekerja parti.

“Apa yang dilakukan DAP adalah sesuatu yang sangat berbahaya. DAP membawa strategi politik cauvinis mereka ke satu tahap perubahan dan sensitiviti yang sangat tinggi,” dakwa blog berkenaan.

Blog tersebut menambah, sebagai satu komuniti minoriti, cita-cita DAP itu jelas membuktikan mereka cuba bertindak sebagai kaum majoriti.

“Ini merupakan lembaran baru dalam politik yang mana kaum minoriti memainkan peranan sebagai kaum majoriti di samping strategi cauvinis DAP menyemai politik kebencian. Sesuatu yang pasti ia bergerak pada landasan yang sangat berbahaya,” dakwa blog itu.

Christian leaders condemn claims trying to usurp Islam LINK
By Debra Chong. May 06, 2011

“Organisers of a Christian meeting in Penang denied today allegations from pro-Umno bloggers that they were conspiring with the DAP to supplant Islam’s position as the country’s official religion in a bid to take over Putrajaya…

The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF), together with partners Global Day of Prayer, Marketplace Penang and Penang Pastors Fellowship, said the claims against their community were lies and slammed the pro-Malay rights groups for driving a further wedge to create social disharmony in multicultural Malaysia apart from being seditious…

Several pro-Malay rights blogs posted today articles charging the secular party of sedition for trying to change what the bloggers believed to be the country’s laws to enable a Christian to be prime minister…

In a posting headlined “Agong under threat? DAP wants to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia?” blogger Marahku (marahku.blogspot.com) accused DAP of trying to amend the federal constitution to allow a Christian to become prime minister.”

———-

PRESS STATEMENT BY MCCBCHST

In response to this groundless accusation the Majlis Perundingan Malaysia Agama Buddha, Kristian, Hindu, Sikh dan Tao Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) released the following press statement on 6 May 2011:

MCCBCHST: Let Us Work Together Towards A Harmonious, Judicious And United Malaysia

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) is concerned by the statement issued by Dr Yusri Mohamad on behalf of Muslim NGO’s that lslam’s position in Malaysia is under siege.

How could lslam’s position be under siege when all public institutions and other Organs of Government are under the control of Muslims? We Quote ZAID IBRAHIM (Malaysia Today: 29/4/2011; www.zaiduntukrakyat.com).

“…Even without recent “unity call”, the Malays are in complete political control. More than two-thirds of the cabinet is Malay….more than two-thirds of Parliamentarians are Malay or Bumiputra. The Sultans are Malay. All except one of the Menteri Besars and Chief Ministers are Malay Bumiputra. Eighty-five percent of Civil Service is Malay’ including the diplomatic Corps and the educational and judicial services. The Armed Forces and Police are composed primarily of Malays. Rela Members are mostly Malay.

….Government-linked companies (GLCS) such as Maybank, Petronas, Telekom Malaysia, TNB, Khazanah Nasional, PNB, Media Prima, Felda, Sime Darby and many others the vast majority of which are owned by the Government and managed by Malay-Bumiputras? The G-20 group of largest listed GLCS alone possesses RM353 bilion (around half) of the market capitalization of the entire Bursa Malaysia”.

We are further amazed to read that the designation of a Non-Muslim affairs exco in Penang is unconstitutional and threaten’s lslam’s position. There is no prohibition anv where in the Federal Constitution aqainst the desiqnation of a Non-Muslim affairs exco. ln fact, currently most states under Barisan Nasional have Non-Muslim Affairs Committees to address religious, places of worship, burial grounds and other issues faced by the Non-Muslims.

ISLAM’S POSITION

The MCCBCHST is not aware of any person or body having questioned lslam’s position as enshrined in Article 3 of the Federal Constitution.

ARTICLE 3(1) provides that lslam is the religion of the Federation and concludes with “…other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”

ARTICLE 3(4) provides that “Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of the Constitution….” This means that Article 3 does not extinguish anything else in the constitution. Professor Shad Faruqi (STAR: 3/5/2011 page N51) stated;

“…Further, Article 3 (on lslam) does not extinguish anything else in the Constitution. Article 3(4) provides that “Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution. This means that Articles 3 cannot be employed to challenqe the validity of a druq traffickinq law on the ground that some of its provisions were Un-lslamic (Che Omar Che Soh (1988). Nor-can Article 3 be relied on to trump any other constitutional provision – whether on fundamental rights or system of parliamentary government…”

Thus, one cannot use the position of lslam as the religion of the Federation to question other’s rights. lt has to be based on the provisions of the Federal Constitution.

Therefore, fundamental and other rights guaranteed in the Federal Constitution cannot be over-ridden by Article 3 and some such rights are:-

Article 4(1) – “This Constitution is the Supreme law of the Federation…”

Article 8(1) – “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”.

Article 11(1) – “Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and subject to clause (4) to propagate it”

Article 153(1) – “The legitimate interest of other communities” most of the time ignored”.

Article 153(9) – Which prohibits restriction of business or trade solely for Malays is also totally ignored.

The MCCBCSHT reiterates and accepts unequivocally the Position of lslam as the religion of the Federation as provided for by Article 3. We note however that Article 3 cannot be used to challenge any other constitutional position.

The MCCBCHST therefore calls on Dr Mohamad Yusri and the Muslim NGO’s to work together with all citizens towards a harmonious, judicious and united Malaysia.

Reverend Dr Thomas Philips
President
MCCBCHST

To download the pdf version of this press statement:  LINK http://www.necf.org.my/view_file.cfm?fileid=360

———————–

Pembela blames ‘aggressive Christians’ for Muslim siege mentality LINK
By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal
Malaysia Insider May 07, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, May 7 — Islam is under siege in Malaysia because aggressive Christians are determined to convert Muslims who are nonchalant about their faith, several Islamist groups alleged today.

The Muslim Organisations in Defence of Islam (Pembela) accused Christians of strategising an elaborate plan to ensure that more and more Muslims leave the faith, which is illegal in Malaysia.

Pembela president Dr Yusri Mohamad said the Christian community’s demands over the “Allah” issue as well as the Alkitab row proved that they wanted to convince Muslims to embrace Christianity and abandon Islam.

“We are dealing with aggressive, confrontational groups of Christians.

“Their demands over the Alkitab, kalimah Allah are connected to their attempts to spread Christianity… They are using this strategy to tame Muslims, by using terms that we are familiar with in our own religion,” Yusri said today during a Pembela function here.

The syariah lawyer said these are direct attempts to “compromise the position of Islam” as the country’s official religion.

Muslim convert Ann Wan Seng, who was part of a panel today to discuss whether “Islam was under threat?”, said the problem with Muslims in the country was that they did not feel that they were under siege.

“We need to feel threatened; the problem is our people don’t feel anything, even when we are actually being threatened.

“We cannot just blame the Christians for doing their work, we are not doing ours,” he said.

Ann alleged that Petaling Jaya currently serves as a hub to spread Christianity and Muslim apostasy.

“Christians have been doing it in quiet and also in the open, they have been passing leaflets to our Muslims students.

“I have seen it happen in Universiti Malaya. The girls wear tudung but when you take away the tudung, they are wearing a crucifix,” Ann charged.

He claimed that something similar happens in Johor, where the “Malay Christian Association of Singapore” sends people over to Johor to convert Muslims there to Christianity.

Another panellist, Zaid Kamaruddin from Jemaah Islamiyah Malaysia, said Muslims could not afford to rest on their laurels and expect their rights to be protected by the federal constitution or even political parties.

“We cannot rely on political parties or the federal constitution because this can be amended.

“All Muslim groups, NGOs need to be united on common ground,” he said.

Utusan Malaysia had carried out a front-page article today titled “Malaysia, a Christian country?” (Malaysia, negara Kristian?), based entirely on blog postings by several pro-Umno bloggers.

The bloggers had charged the DAP with sedition for trying to change the country’s laws to enable a Christian to be prime minister, pointing to a grainy photograph showing what they described to be a secret pact between the DAP and pastors at a hotel in Penang on Wednesday.

The federal constitution does not expressly specify race or religious requirements for the position of prime minister. Article 43(2)(a) of the constitution states only that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall appoint as PM a member of Parliament who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the Dewan Rakyat.

In a posting headlined “Agong under threat? DAP wants to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia?” blogger Marahku (marahku.blogspot.com) accused the DAP of trying to amend the federal constitution to allow a Christian to become prime minister.

“The whole point of changing the official religion is to allow a Christian to become prime minister of this country,” the blogger said.

On bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com, the writer claimed to have received a message that the DAP’s Jeff Ooi had organised a dinner for pastors from Sarawak and overseas at the Red Rock Hotel in Jalan Macalister, Penang.

“Among the activities that night included the 35 pastors taking a group oath. They formed a circle and touched each other’s shoulder and vowed in English to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia and put a Christian prime minister in office,” the anonymous writer said in his blog under the headline “Making Christianity the official religion?”

He also pointed to the same grainy picture he posted at the top of his blog page, which he had captioned “Partying pastors or pastors doing the party do and vow to have a Christian as Malaysian prime minister”.

The blogger further alleged that the DAP had labelled the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition as an “anti-Christ agent” in the run-up to polls in Sarawak, showing the opposition party was “openly against BN on religious grounds and they are now making it their clarion call, their rabble rousing horn”.

The blogger said it was a seditious and religiously-divisive statement that was never investigated by the police “or at least they did not tell us about any investigations on the matter”.

He called on the authorities to investigate the allegations for sedition, warning that if the authorities failed in their duty the country may be “shattered again”.

The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF), together with partners Global Day of Prayer, Marketplace Penang and Penang Pastors Fellowship, said the claims against their community were lies, and has already denied the bloggers’ allegations last night.

Similarly, Ooi said the dinner had been organised by the Christian pastors in recognition of the DAP team who had visited them while in Sarawak for the state election and that the prayer sessions — one before dinner and one at the end — were a usual part of their worship, and not a pledge as alleged.

In response, another panel speaker at the Pembela forum today said that even though there were no legal provisions as to the race or religion of the country’s prime minister, the prime minister must be Muslim.

“The PM must be a Muslim. Or else he cannot advice the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on Islamic matters… how can you have a non-Muslim advise the Agong on Islamic matters?” said lawyer Datuk Zainal Rejal.