Dear Reader,
Please note that “Religious Liberty Watch” has been merged with “Krisis & Praxis”. Re: https://krisispraxis.com/
This site is now a repository of basic documentation on issues of religious liberty. For analyses and responses to new issues on religious liberty, please refer to “Krisis & Praxis.”
Thank you for your support.
https://www.facebook.com/Madiustangau
Madius Tangau – 18 May 2023
I call on all politicians, political parties, madani community organizations, important opinion leaders (KOL) and fellow Malaysians to seek national reconciliation between the Peninsula and Borneo in the controversy related to the ban on the use of the Kalimah of Allah by non-Muslims, and not nodding in muddy water.
I call on all parties to accept the following facts:
Borneo Christians who speak Malay do use the word Allah such as “Allah Taala” in the Iban Language, “God of Allah” in Lun Bawang, Lun Dayeh and Kelabit and “God of Alla” in Bidayuh Language.
The use of the word of God by Christians is certainly not to reproach Muslims and therefore has never been persecuted by Muslims in Borneo Province.
The use of the word of God among Borneo Christians has become visible (visible) since the 1980s due to the success of the National Language Policy and also the migration of the Borneo people to the Peninsula due to the lack of employment and education opportunities in the Borneo Region.
The freedom of Borneo Christians to use the word of God should not at all threaten Islam, but should be celebrated because of the success of Bahasa Malay as a National Language that crosses religion, and also national reconciliation between the Peninsula and Borneo.
On March 15, 2021, as many as 18 Members of Parliament, 4 Senators, 23 Sarawak MPs and 9 Sabah MPs across parties – PH, GPS, Warisan, PSB and Bersatu – issued a joint statement appealing to the Federal Government led by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin to withdraw appeal against the High Court decision on March 10 2021 that the ban on the use of the word of God contradicts the Federal Constitution.
We are very grateful that our call was finally heard by the Madani Federal Government led by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. We hope the Federal Government’s decision to withdraw this appeal is acceptable to all parties with a broad chest.
Read the rest of this entry »Free Malaysia Today 21 Feb 2022
PUTRAJAYA: A nine-member bench of the Federal Court today unanimously declared that it is unconstitutional for the Selangor legislative assembly to pass a provision to confer judicial review power to the Shariah High Court in the state.
Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said Section 66A of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003, as it stands, is also unconstitutional.
“I find Section 66A, as it stands, is unconstitutional and void as it is a provision the legislative assembly has no power to make,” she said of the unanimous ruling.
As such, she said, the petition filed by SIS Forum Malaysia is allowed and the declaration is granted, pursuant to the Courts of Judicature Act.
SIS filed the application in the Federal Court on Jan 21, 2020 after the High Court in Kuala Lumpur dismissed its judicial review application against the Selangor religious authority’s fatwa labelling the group “deviant”.
Malay Mail Kuala Lumpur 26 Jan 2022
The Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) today failed in its final court bid to reinstate the 2015 conversion of five young children to Islam when they were aged in the range of around three and nine years old.
A three-judge panel in the country’s highest court chaired by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat unanimously ruled in favour of the mother and dismissed the application for leave to appeal filed by both the Mais chairman and the Mais registrar of muallaf or Muslim converts.
In reading out the decision, Tengku Maimun pointed out that Section 117 of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (Selangor) enactment clearly stated that both the mother and the father must agree to their children’s conversion.
“This is our unanimous decision. The application does not meet the threshold of Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act for leave to be granted.
“The issue before us has been settled by the decision of this court in M. Indira Gandhi’s case. The courts below were therefore correct in following Indira Gandhi.
“Further the provision of Section 117 of the enactment is very clear that a person who is not Muslim may convert to the religion of Islam if he is of sound mind and attain 18 years or if he has not attain, the mother and father must consent to the conversion.
“The application is therefore dismissed,” Tengku Maimun said.
The court also awarded RM30,000 as costs to the mother.
MEDIA STATEMENT – 9 SEPTEMBER 2021
UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO CURTAIL RIGHTS OF NON-MUSLIMS
The announcement by Ahmad Marzuk Shaary, deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s department (religious affairs) that the federal government is drafting a bill on control and restrictions on the development of non-Muslim religions is an unwelcome piece of news for all non-Muslims in Malaysia, and especially in Sarawak. This is like a recurring nightmare that won’t go away, and reliving it this close to Malaysia day certainly gives us more reason to reflect on wisdom or otherwise of the decision taken by Sarawak in 1963.
Yesterday’s statement by the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) on this matter points out correctly that Article 11 (1) of the Federal Constitution gives the right to every person: “to profess and practise his religion and, subject to clause (4), to propagate it”. Clause (4) provides that there is to be no propagation of other religions doctrine or belief to Muslims. Clearly, the Constitution safeguards the right of non-Muslims to practise and propagate their religions so long as that does not involve Muslims. I strongly support the call by the MCCBCHST that the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakub clarify the issue, as it has caused much unhappiness and anxiety for the non-Muslims in this country.
I note that the deputy minister had remarked that the bill was in response to the recent High Court decision that non-Muslims are free to use the word ‘Allah’. That decision is consistent with what we understand to be the rights of all Malaysians under the Federal Constitution and particularly the rights of Sarawakians and Sabahans pursuant to the recommendations set out in the Inter Governmental Committee Report 1962 and the terms of the Malaysian Agreement 1963. During the talks leading to the formation of Malaysia, the non-Muslim communities of Sarawak had voiced their reservations about Islam being the religion of the Federation. It was finally agreed that ‘While there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in Sarawak, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to Sarawak’. The absence of a state religion was key to Sarawak’s agreement to join in the formation Malaysia in 1963, a fact which all political leaders should bear in mind. There is no official religion in Sarawak, and all are free to profess and practise the faith of their choosing.
De facto Law Minister Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar sought to downplay the issue, saying that religious matters are under state lists and such laws propagated by the Federal government are not legally binding on states. This does not address the issue of why the government keeps attempting to violate the rights of non-Muslims which are entrenched in the Federal Constitution. It is not good enough to brush the matter aside by saying some politicians shoot their mouths off. As the de facto law minister and a Sarawakian, he has to give us a better and more reassuring response that he and all the other Sarawakian ministers and deputy ministers will speak up against the bills when they are presented at the cabinet level. Better still, he should advise the deputy minister in the prime minister’s department against proceeding with it at this early stage.
Sarawakian MPs from GPS and Bersatu must take note that all Sarawakians are watching them closely – will they have the courage to stand up for our rights or will they be meek and mild minions to their Malayan masters? This is a crucial test for them. The direction the country has been heading is certainly not what our forefathers signed up for and Sarawakians are weary and bitterly resentful of certain Malayan politicians’ unceasing efforts to oppress the minority’s rights. We are slowing but surely becoming a country where religious and racial intolerance is increasing, and religious extremism growing. Passing more laws to control and restrict religious freedoms only encourages religious intolerance and bigotry.
This latest move by the government makes a mockery of the ‘Malaysian Family’ concept propounded by the new PM in his maiden speech. It will divide rather than unite Malaysians.
Baru Bian
MP 214 Selangau
What has Islam to do legally with the other religions in Malaysia? After all, shariah law has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims. Are the authorities planning to interfere with the Constitutional freedom of the non-Muslim citizens to profess, practice and propagate their faith? Looks like the authorities are back with their mischievous business.
Added on 8 Sept 2021 – The response from MCCBCHST (see below).
Four new shariah laws in the works, says deputy minister
Free Malaysia Today 6 Sept 2021
PETALING JAYA: Four new shariah laws are being drafted by the federal government, including a bill on control and restrictions on the development of non-Muslim religions, a deputy minister was reported to have said.
Ahmad Marzuk Shaary, who is deputy minister in the prime minister’s department (religious affairs), said a Wakaf Bill, Mufti Bill and Syariah Court Bill were the other new laws being planned.
The new laws are part of a five-year plan by the federal government in which 11 changes will be made to strengthen shariah laws, which will include amendments to existing legislation and eight subsidiary shariah laws, as part of the government’s ‘Empowerment Plan.’
“The government has drafted a plan to strengthen shariah laws, especially in the Federal Territories, over a period of five years from 2020 to 2025,” he said, Harakah Daily reported. “In this empowerment plan, the government has proposed to enact 11 key shariah laws, which include the enactment of new laws and amendments to existing laws.”
Amendments to the controversial Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 are part of the plan, he was quoted as saying.
The proposed amendment bill (commonly referred to as RUU355) gave rise to an opposition outcry with politicians and civil society groups accusing the federal government of seeking to allow the implementation of “hudud” as part of the Islamic penal code.
Islamic laws and the Islamic penal code come under the jurisdiction of state governments, but are handled by the federal government in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya and Labuan.
Road Map for New Shariah Laws
Official Response from MCCBCHST
Nur Hasliza Mohd Salleh Dec 24, 2020
The government’s halal authority today said the use of “Merry Christmas” on products would invalidate their halal certification, in a statement that is likely to reignite a debate on policies seen as regressive to Malaysia’s multicultural identity.
A spokesman for the Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) confirmed to MalaysiaNow the existence of such a condition before a company is awarded halal certification, following an incident reported by a member of the public.
MalaysiaNow earlier reported about a bakery which could not fulfil a customer’s request for “Merry Christmas” to be written on a cake he had ordered for delivery to a friend.
Instead, the cake was delivered with the words “Happy Holidays”.
The bakery owner said it was because he had to abide by the rules set by Jakim as part of the application process for getting halal certification.
“The bakery was not wrong as it is part of the regulations,” an officer from Jakim’s communications unit told MalaysiaNow.
He cited a labelling rule stated in Jakim’s manual on the procedures leading towards halal certification.
“Labelling and advertising of products and services should not involve the use of any religious or spiritual passage, symbol or noun such as the names of Allah, sunnah, idols and the like,” according to the document sighted by MalaysiaNow.
The “Merry Christmas” greeting has been a subject of debate in Malaysia, with some Muslim preachers claiming Muslims are prohibited from using the expression as it is a veneration of Christ.
But this is the first time it has emerged that the greeting could also affect a product’s official halal status.
Earlier, the customer, who declined to be named, said it was the first time he had encountered such a problem.
“But the management apologised to me saying it is part of the conditions during the audit process,” he added.
Jakim is legally empowered as the sole authority to issue halal certification for food and goods as well as eateries nationwide.
In the past, critics had questioned several conditions imposed by the department on food manufacturers and franchises seeking halal certification, including prohibiting certain names from being used on the product.
Popular pretzel chain Auntie Anne’s and fast food franchise A&W were forced to rename their popular products due to a requirement by Jakim that words such as “dog” and “beer” are not used on their menu.
Auntie Anne’s renamed its “pretzel dog” as “pretzel sausage”, while A&W was forced to change the names of two popular dishes for which it is known worldwide: Coney Dog and Root Beer, which were renamed as Chicken (or Beef) Coney and RB.
Only Hell Awaits if non-Muslims Lead, Hadi Says in Piece Calling for Islamic Supremacy
MalayMail Jan 8 by Zurairi AR
Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang has delivered a warning to Muslims to place their trust in Muslim leaders regardless of their wickedness, claiming that believers will end up in hell if led by non-Muslims.
In a lengthy opinion piece titled “Rule of Law: Where is Allah?” today, the PAS president stressed the importance of religion in keeping the law, and the importance for Islam to reign supreme in the governance of country.
“If the one leading is a Muslim, even if he were cruel, at least (others) can become cattle herders,” the Marang MP wrote.
“But if the one who leads is a non-Muslim, even if he were the kindest, (others) can work however they wish [but] without any limits of what is ‘halal’ and ‘haram’ they will still end up in hell.” Read the rest of this entry »
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 28 — Last week, the Home Ministry once again reiterated its stance that it will not remove one’s religious status on the MyKad.
But why do Malaysian Muslims have “Islam” printed prominently on their MyKads while non-Muslims only have their religious information recorded on the chip?
Why do Malaysians’ identity cards even contain information on what faith they profess? Why does the government collect information about the religion of each individual Malaysian?
The short answer is because it’s the law. But the actual journey to where we are today may surprise you. (Stay with us, since much of the information below is really hard to get publicly.)
Here’s Malay Mail’s quick summary of everything you need to know about the law and history behind the government’s keeping tabs on Malaysians’ religious affiliations:
1. What law?
The National Registration Act 1959, which only has eight short provisions, does not explicitly say what details should be shown on Malaysians’ identity cards.
But Section 6 of the law says the home minister may make regulations, including rules on how Malaysians’ identity cards will appear and what the details they must display.
As such, the real details are instead in the National Registration Regulations 1990, which has 30 regulations and contains procedures such as what to do if you lose your identity card and how much has to be paid when applying for new or replacement identity cards.
2. It wasn’t always like this
While “Islam” on Malaysian Muslims’ identity cards feels like it has always been there, it was not the case even just a few decades ago. Read the rest of this entry »
Religious Liberty Watch 