1. Malaysiakini （http://www.malaysiakini.com）
(1) So can non-Muslims also have their Himpun?, 20 October 2011
'Would BN-Umno be singing the same tune if there was an alternative gathering of non-Muslims in a show of unity?'
Don't fear Himpun, minister Jamil Khir tells PAS
Onyourtoes: Slowly, one by one, they will surface and show their true colours. Events around the world are rarely random; they are always planned and orchestrated for a reason.
Didn't I say earlier that we can quite easily ascertain who is behind this rally by looking at the speed in which the police permit is obtained?
Sure, the rally is held in the stadium and therefore assumed safe and orderly. Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom, you have not answered the question as to what is the purpose of this rally.
Whose position or interests are under threat? Whose fundamental rights are being stifled and snatched away? If there is the need for rally, it is the minority and the Christians.
But of course, we know our position in this country - we are not ‘tuan', we do not practise the official religion, we don't have the numbers, we do not have state support, and we can't get police permit.
Louis: Most of the Malays that I know do not believe that Christianity is a threat to Islam. In my whole life as a Christian, I have yet to meet a Malay Muslim who has converted to Christianity.
The gathering this weekend is nothing but a ploy to drag PAS into the fray so that Christians, too, will reject Pakatan Rakyat.
I am sure Muslims in PAS have a better picture of the whole situation and know the threat to Islam in Malaysia does not exist. With or without Umno, Islam is as solid as a rock.
Garrulous Gary: Everyone can see now that this so-called apolitical gathering of bigots has the sanction of the government.
AkuMelayuIslam: Saya cadangkan dua juta umat Islam berhimpun bagi mengatasi masalah perangai orang Islam sendiri, seperti suka fitnah, rasuah, lucah, boros, malas, menipu, hiburan berlebihan, pergaulan bebas, buang bayi, rempit, dadah, berpecah, tolak hukum Allah, dan lain-lain. Masalah ini dihadapi oleh berjuta juta umat Islam.
Ini lah masalah sebenar yang dihadapi umat islam sekarang, bukan dikristiankan yang melibatkan mungkin beberapa ratus orang. Wassalam.
Dood: This ‘Himpun' nonsense is nothing but an attempt to cause disarray and disunity among Pakatan parties as well as an attempt to incite racial and religious tension.
Would BN-Umno be singing the same tune if there was an alternative gathering of non-Muslims in a stadium in a show of solidarity and unity against alleged Muslim oppression against non-Muslim interests?
I think we can all see the police squad cars and the elite forces storming the organisers' offices and homes before we can even say ‘ISA'.
Anonymous_5fb: "When a rally is held in a stadium, there are less problems," said Jamil, who is in charge of Islamic affairs.
You said it - 'less problems' means there are still problems. Previously, Bersih 2.0 gave the commitment of 'no problem', yet PM Najib Razak refused to give them a stadium of their choice even though he had made a promise earlier. You people are hypocrites.
Disbeliever: The question is, why have the rally in the first place when the issue of "defending Islam for the sake of the umat" is much ado about nothing? It is making a mountain out of a molehill.
With Perak mufti Harussani Zakaria claiming 250,000 having converted to Christianity in the last few years, are Muslims so naive as to believe this to be the gospel truth? As a Muslim, one has to be strong in the akidah (faith).
I can only see more negative outcome to the rally rather than positive - perhaps the only positive side to it is to show or brag to others that Muslim Malaysians are united (whatever the cause, just or unjust).
The negative impact would be creating more mistrust and disharmony among multi-racial, multi-cultural and multi-religious Malaysians.
Please prove me wrong, but I think only Muslims resort to such shows of unity. I don't see this happening with the other religions.
Joker: Who is this Himpun? Are they a registered body? If not, the police should not have given them a permit as in the case of Bersih 2.0.
I also had no idea that there are 1,000 Muslim NGOs in Malaysia. There are so many Muslim NGOs and still some Muslims are going to Harapan Komuniti for financial help?
I hope the organisers will not receive handouts and support in whatever form from the government, thereby using the rakyat's money to entice people to join.
They are saying that this Himpun is to gauge Muslim unity (whatever that means) so they shouldn't bribe people to come with free bus rides, free food and free handouts.
RR: This Himpun is a sure divider of the multi-racial and multi-religious society. The majority in the country are Muslims, therefore there should be no fear of Islam being threatened.
In actual fact, it is the other religions of the minorities that should have felt threatened, as it is happening in some other Muslim countries. Islam is safe and strong in Malaysia. The police should therefore advise the organisers properly.
Kev: I thought protests and rallies are not part of their culture as previously mentioned by Umno leaders a few months ago?
・The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda.
(2) Christian state: Will the cops, MCMC take action?, 20 october 2011
'If the police is apolitical and fair then they should charge this rumour monger, Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman, for making a false report.'
Christian-state plot exists, insists ex-DAP man
Fade2grey: Islam is the official religion of state as specified by the constitution. It takes at least two-thirds of Parliament to amend the constitution.
If there is indeed a plot to turn Malaysia into a ‘Christian state', how do these conspiracy theorists proposed that this be done? Via a constitutional revolution?
How is fewer than 10 percent of Malaysians going to persuade the other 90 percent (who are of different religious backgrounds) to vote in favour of a ‘Christian state'?
What is a ‘Christian state' anyway? Is it a situation where the country is ruled by the pope?
Could PM Najib Razak have been speaking to the pope about surrendering power to the Vatican? Unless that is what is happening, I cannot see how this plot can come into fruition.
Ferdtan: The police have cleared the air - there is no such thing as a Christian state plot. If the police is apolitical and fair then they should charge this rumour monger, Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman, for making a false police report.
DAP, or the Christian NGOs, should also sue him to teach him a lesson.
Henry Hock: Mohamed Razali, can you describe in detail:
1) what are the circumstances that you concluded there was a plot?
2) how is the plan going to work?
3) what is the strategy of DAP and/or the Christians to make it work?
If you are unable to explain, these questions, I don't think there is a plot unless the Christians are just too stupid building castles in the air, hoping blindly to have a Christian state.
David Dass: This happens when everyone is recruited to protect Islam from the Christian threat. The ignorant and the mischievous see threats behind every tree. The authorities are in danger of losing control to kooks and mobs.
We then see the worst type of political activity - when anything is justified - because the end game is to win elections, at all costs.
If the Malays are conditioned to believe that Christianity represents a real and present danger to Islam and Muslims, then there can never be peace between Muslims and Christians.
Can the government allow this to happen? Other nations have gone down this road and the result is always chaos and mayhem. Do we really want to go down this road?
Devout Christians interact daily with equally devout Muslims as they do with Buddhists and Hindus and Sikhs, etc, without any incident - and without any of them thinking and feeling that their religious beliefs are being compromised.
Passerby: Mohamed Razali, please stop all these nonsense. Haven't you done enough damage to embarrass all Malays and Muslims alike with your lies? These kind of allegations, right from the beginning, is not even believed by the rakyat.
Slimboy: You were there, Razali? You, a Muslim, was privy to a plot by the DAP and Christians to create a Christian state?
PAS will not join anti-apostasy rally
Onyourtoes: The organisers of this rally are smart. They want maximum turnout, so they say it is non-political to allow supporters from both sides to attend.
They said it's really about Muslims and Malay unity. My next question then is, unity for what - for a more united and inclusive Malaysia or for a more exclusive Malaysia?
What is this fear of proselytisation all about? Who got converted and how many? Is proselytisation real or is it orchestrated to create another fissure within the Malaysian society?
I think it is easy for one to fathom who is behind this rally, judging by the relative ease the police permit was secured. PAS, you must educate, inculcate and enlighten the people, not appease and keep them in their ignorance.
MfM: PAS is playing it smart. Their statement is clear, they will not be participating as a political party, but that does not stop its members from attending in their personal capacity.
PAS wins both ways. Their members can show they support the movement, but officially the party is out of it. They have decided not to play the Umno game.
I am against apostasy but I believe that the apostate is the one that should be punished accordingly to syariah law. Even if a non-Muslim incited it, the person has a choice - to remain a Muslim and strengthen his iman (faith) or to apostasise and face the consequences.
If they believe this so-called Christianisation movement does exist, why not move to strengthen dakwah amongst the Muslims first?
Ashoka PJ: PAS, you made the right move even though I have this gut feeling that the decision was made with the intention not to lose anymore non-Muslim and even Muslim votes rather than being against this rally.
As Muslims, we will be judged by our niat (intention) amongst others, so please make sure you walk to talk. Don't be a lallang. I am a Muslim as well as a PAS supporter and I like to keep our perspective straight and clear.
Swipenter: The latest population census confirms that there is not a single Malay Christian. But Perak mufti Harussani Zakaria, alleges that more than 250,000 Malays have converted to Christianity or left Islam for some other faith.
The Home Ministry has also confirmed that there is no Christian conspiracy to make Christianity the official religion. If that is so, what is this anti-apostasy rally all about?
This is nothing but a naked attempt by Himpun organisers and their backers to advance their political interests by playing the triple cards of race, religion and Malay royalty, to intimidate non-Muslims and the minorities.
It is a wise decision for PAS not to get involved in this anti-apostasy rally even if I don't believe their stated reason for not joining in.
We all know which political party expediently uses the race, religion and Malay royalty card to hold on to political power if and when it suits them.
Compass: I salute PAS. I respect the right to hold a rally. I also respect the right not to join one.
・The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda.
(3) Slapping the hands that feed the poor, 21 October 2011
'For heaven's sake, if a certain Christian group try to prosyletise to the Muslims, why not just report the group to the police and have them arrested?'
Soup kitchen used to proselytise, insiders tell daily
Ethnicmalaysian: If it's true, and if a Muslim can be converted as a result of being forced to in order to get food, then there are far more serious problems in this 'Islamic state' than proselytisation.
Why are these hardcore urban poor forced to resort to such desperate measures just to get food? Where are the so-called government welfare agencies? What happened to the millions of ringgit, if not billions, allocated to such agencies and ministries?
The root cause or underlying factors are again being submerged in the emotional rhetoric of race and religion.
Ferdtan: Nothing is sacred anymore in politics. Love of power makes mankind mad: they even make use of the poor, hungry and unfortunate people for their purpose.
Now it is the Sinar Harian's turn, not the usual Umno propagandist arm, Utusan Malaysia, to report unfounded accusations that charitable organisations are using soup kitchens as a front for proselytising the Muslims.
These organisations must be worried now that they can be accused of a religious 'crime'. The big one like the Buddhist Kenchara Soup Kitchen (KSK) have been feeding many Muslims. Will they be accused like the smaller Christian outlets? They too have their religious flavour.
Or is it because our First Lady Rosmah Mansor once officially opened one of their soup kitchens that they escaped scrutiny? Or is the 'menu of the day' Christians?
Sad - very sad indeed, we have unscrupulous politicians in the Umno-led government.
Swipenter: My conclusion is that being kind towards our own fellow countrymen, especially towards Muslims, is not easy in our country. You never know when you are being accused of ulterior motives and for proselytising them.
An act of kindness can turn into a personal and national nightmare just like what is happening now.
Yeow: Where is the zakat (Islamic tithe) going to? How come in Bolehland where the Malays are fed from cradle to grave still need handouts from the loving Christians? How come Utusan, Sinar Harian are out with ‘scoops' just before the Himpun rally, which has been legalised by Umno?
There can be many more questions, but the Christians and even the Buddhists don't want their fellow human beings from any race, creed or religion suffer in poverty. Does it mean the Muslim poor only need to taken care by Muslims?
The Umno Muslims are an uncaring lot who know how to judge others but will not lift a finger to help unless they get some goodies in return. PAS is concerned about welfare. Are they too doing anything?
Anonymous: "It's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you; you are defiled by the words that come out of your mouth."
God commands us to feed the poor and destitute regardless of their race, religion, ethnic background. They come to the feeding place because they are hungry and for many, this is their only decent meal they have for days. There is no compulsion and coercion for them to convert.
The Christians (and other religious groups - Buddhists and Hindus) are simply doing it out of love and compassion. The government should support and participate in such initiatives instead of accusing and slapping the hands that feed the poor.
Myop101: To be honest, it is because of my gratefulness to Jesus for what He did for us that I am willing to do more for charity than otherwise I would.
Do you know I felt compelled to do charity each time I read the Bible? And yes, I am glad to tell everyone about that. If that means I am proselytising, then so be it. Why should I not talk about someone I am grateful of?
I am getting tired of this nonsense. Help goes to those in need regardless of their faith. A few acquaintances of mine, who are incidentally Muslims and in need of help after they encountered problems overseas, sought help from their relatives and friends but none of their Muslim brothers and sisters lend them any money in their time of need.
Instead, a non-Muslim like me, without thinking much, ran around town like a madman to raise funds to remit to them. Imagine if I double guess myself whether I should do this for a Muslim in fear that I am accused of proselytising?
And the sum is not small to begin with. But we thank the Lord for giving us the opportunity to help those persons in need.
My wife later asked why I did it. I told her, my hope is if someday we are to seek help for something, we would also see the face of true humanity extending assistance to us, regardless of which faith or race they are from.
Gerard Samuel Vijayan: This story is not credible at all. The soup kitchen in Pudu has been under the radar of Jawi (Federal Territory Islamic Affairs Department) for a long time. In fact, their officers frequently check out the place to make sure that the Muslim poor are not influenced in any way to convert to Christianity.
Sinar Harian is creating this story just like Utusan did before with the Penang Christian state conspiracy nonsense simply to stir up Muslim anger before the Himpun rally this weekend. If these Muslims who went to the soup kitchen were so scared about conversion, please stop going there in future. Let the Muslims themselves take care of their own.
Some of these poor, destitute and marginalised will say anything when offered money by those who want to stir up anti-Christian propaganda because they have no choice in the matter.
Geronimo: In the Catholic Church, we have the St Vincent de Paul Society for the Poor in which we distribute monthly rations to the destitutes staying the vicinity of our parish, irrespective of race, colour or creed.
During my association with the society, there were many poor Malays who came to our church for their monthly rations but never once did we ever tried to convert them or use the rations as a bribe to convert them.
This is certainly something new to me and I am sick and tired of all these allegations. For heaven's sake, if a certain Christian group try to prosyletise to the Muslims, why not just report the group to the police and have them arrested? After all, they have broken the law.
Now at the height of the DUMC (Damansara Utama Methodist Church) case, suddenly all these stories are popping up like blisters all over the place to incense the Muslims further.
Anonymous: Is it possible that the hosts of the soup kitchens, be they Buddhists or Christians, do so because of pure compassion and genuine concern for the homeless and the hungry?
To the Christians, there is such a thing called 'unconditional love'. They help because it is the right thing to do. No strings attached. Perhaps the Muslims do not understand this.
Tkc: The Star newspaper reported several stories on soup kitchens a few months ago.
If I am not mistaken, the soup kitchen at Jalan Pudu was featured with a photo of an ex-drug addict doing his part to feed the hungry. In addition, there was also a story about a Malay family giving out free food to the homeless along a busy street somewhere in Kuala Lumpur.
It was really inspiring to read about these good Samaritans sacrificing their time, energy and money to make this world more bearable for the less fortunate amongst us.
Why would anyone want to destroy such acts of kindness in the name of religion?
Zz2XX: I don't know why non-Muslim charities give aid to Muslims. They must stop all aid/donation to Muslims as they can be blamed for trying to convert them. Give only to the non-Muslim poor.
Soup kitchen denies proselytising claims
Imran: In view of all these controversies, why can't all these Christian-related associations stop helping the Muslims. There are enough non-Muslims who need help.
The government is more than capable of helping poor Muslims. Put a sign board that say: ‘Non-Muslims Only'. If you get any Muslim coming for help, just point them to the right direction. It is as simple as that.
If you can't do a simple thing like this, then you are guilty of trying to convert Muslims.
ACR: Imran does have a point after all. The Soup Kitchen claims to have been conducting this social service for 13 years but for reasons best known to God, its social service has now become controversial.
The Malays have various support mechanism from the government. The individuals with zero assistance are the non-Malay poor and there are many of them in the urban areas. Focus your attention there.
Tangsyt: Dear Imran, you are saying that if a Christian sees a Muslim in need, he should turn him away or tell him that help is only for non-Muslims so as to avoid being accused of proselytising.
Is fear of being converted out of one's religion making people blind to the universal principle of brotherly love? One cannot be so weak to believe that accepting help from another of different faith will erode one's own faith.
On your point that the government is capable of helping poor Muslims, surely that can't be true if there are indeed many Muslims resorting to soup kitchens for their meals.
Tan Kim Keong: Good adherents of any religion will continue to do works of charity regardless. Good adherents of any religion will oppose evil where and when it exists in the form of such as what's happening now in Malaysia - the stoking of the anti-Christian hysteria.
I appeal to good adherents stay the course with regards to doing works of charity. Do more so that evil will be flushed in the open for the world to see.
Artchan: It is simple to avoid this controversy. Get a Muslim organisation like Perkasa or a silat group or senator Ezam Mohd Nor to open a similar soup kitchen next to the present one, and the Muslims can go there for food.
・The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda.
2. Free Malaysia （http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com）
(1) MCA and hudud: Part 1, 18 October 2011
by Stanley Koh
The party can’t hold a candle to DAP when it comes to principled opposition to Islamic state ambitions.
COMMENT
Two questions arise from MCA’s recent call on DAP to abandon the Pakatan Rakyat coalition because PAS is pushing for hudud punishments and, ultimately, an Islamic state.
First: Why did former MCA president Dr Ling Liong Sik fail to protest when former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad declared Malaysia an Islamic state in 2001?
MCA Youth chief Wee Ka Siong’s recent defence of Ling’s silence does not hold water. He said Mahathir’s declaration did not include a threat to change the Federal Constitution. Neither has Pakatan said it would change the constitution to suit PAS’s ambition.
Second: Since MCA is questioning DAP’s commitment to principles, what has happened to its own principles in the face of Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s recent remark that Malaysia was merely “not ready” for hudud?
Muhyiddin’s statement seemed to suggest that Umno, like PAS, longs to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state.
If PAS’s insistence on pushing for hudud is a “methodological tactic”, then what should we call Umno’s long-term process of Islamisation?
When it comes to opposing hudud and other proposals that could lead to the establishment of an Islamic state, MCA’s track record is dismal. It does not come anywhere near DAP’s standards of consistency in commitment to principles.
It was on Sept 29, 2001, that Dr Mahathir claimed Islamic-state status for Malaysia.
“Umno wishes to state loudly that Malaysia is an Islamic country,” he said in his address at Gerakan’s 30th national conference. “This is based on the opinion of ulamas who have clarified what constitutes as Islamic country.
“If Malaysia is not an Islamic country because it does not implement the hudud, then there are no Islamic countries in the world.”
Kelantan Menteri Besar and PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat responded immediately and furiously. “You can talk all you want,” he said. “You can declare a piece of wood to be gold or a wheelbarrow to be a Mercedes, but in reality nothing has changed.”
According to Nik Aziz, his party’s definition of an Islamic country meant a nation governed according to the tenets of the Quran and Hadith. Malaysia was still a secular state, he said. “If the present Malaysia is already an Islamic state, then what do you call the state ruled by the Prophet and his companions?”
DAP, like PAS, was shocked by Mahathir’s declaration. It called for an urgent parliamentary debate on the subject.
MCA’s forum and Ling’s remarks
On Oct 20, 2001, at the request of several members of the Inter-Religious Council, MCA organised a closed-door forum on the issue.
Among the participants were Dr Hamid Othman (the Prime Minister’s Department Religious Adviser), Shad Saleem Faruqi of Universiti Teknologi Mara, Zainah Anwar of Sisters in Islam and several representatives of the Inter-Religious Council.
Ling chaired the session. In his opening remarks, he said: “No one can claim monopoly of knowledge, because the frontier of knowledge keeps on expanding. This seminar is an opportunity to explore, discover and learn.
“There are many questions in mind. Is Umno correct in declaring Malaysia an Islamic country? Or an Islamic nation? Or an Islamic state? Or a Negara Islam? Have the Umno ulamas been correct in defining or in getting the right definition that Malaysia is qualified to be, like the OIC says, not just an Islamic state, but a shining example of a Muslim state?”
The following are unedited transcripts from tape recordings of some of Dr Ling’s remarks:
“We’d like to know what are the criteria for these definitions. We’d like to know are all Islamic countries the same? Is there a single model? What are the basic criteria that would qualify a nation to be defined as an Islamic nation?
“When the PM explained to the BN and the Cabinet about Umno’s position on Malaysia being declared to be qualified as an Islamic state, he also made this very liberal comment: ‘While Umno feels … ulamas feel … and the people who know this religion feel … Malaysia qualifies just as OIC who declared Malaysia or recognizes Malaysia an Islamic state, there is also this pertinent and relevant point of view that Malaysia is not a theocratic state. And that point of view, if you want to call Malaysia a secular state, it’s still correct. Because we do not call ourselves a theocratic state, we can still call ourselves a secular state.’
“We want to ask ourselves. Can we call a country by two or three different names—an Islamic state, a secular state?
“My simplistic thinking … if we look at a rose, being English educated, I would call it a ‘rose’. But other Chinese-educated call it ‘mei gui’ in Mandarin. A Malay friend will call it ‘bunga mawar’. And ‘roja’ in Tamil.
“Yet, it is still a rose. So can we call Malaysia an Islamic state, a secular state and so on and so forth?
“Similarly, an apple. It is round, has seeds, crunchy. It has a stalk, but some people call it ‘apple’, some call it ‘ping gor’.
“Politically, Umno’s definition as Mahathir described it, the status quo, describes the present state of Malaysia which derives from the same supreme law of the land, the Malaysian Constitution, which will not change, which has not changed as far as the religious descriptions there, which will never change.
“Some may ask how do we ensure that his thoughts, his thinking will not change? That the other implications will not change? How do we ensure this? Are there any international conventions we can subscribe to? Are there other instruments we can subscribe to so that … other safeguards … that the whole world watches over this status quo?”
Academic exercise
It was clear that Dr Ling was merely engaging in an academic exercise. The forum had no serious political inputs.
In closing his address, the MCA president said: “We hope in seminars like this, we can learn, we can discover and we can disseminate.
“Knowledge has three components—the generation of knowledge, the dissemination of knowledge and application of knowledge. Today, we are trying to generate for ourselves sufficient knowledge so that we can disseminate correctly to society.”
In a subsequent article, we shall examine what Dr Mahathir actually said, what Hamid Othman conveyed at the forum and how the other participants responded.
Most importantly, we will examine the policy stand taken by Ling on behalf of his party.
・Stanley Koh is the former head of MCA’s research unit. He is now a FMT columnist.
(2) MCA and hudud: Part 2, 20 October 2011
by Stanley Koh
In 2001, when Dr Mahathir declared Malaysia an Islamic state, MCA president Dr Ling Liong Sik said he and other non-Muslim leaders supported the prime minister’s position
COMMENT
What is the role of religions in politics? Is Islam compatible with democracy? How do we deal with the conflicts between the constitutional provisions for fundamental liberties and equality with religious laws and policies that may violate them?
Should the state legislate on morality? Is it the duty of the state to bring about a more moral society?
Can there be one truth and one final interpretation of Islam that must be legislated and govern the lives of every Muslim citizen of the country?
These were some of the questions raised in 2001 at a MCA-organised forum attended by Dr Hamid Othman of the Prime Minister’s Department, Shad Saleem Faruqi of Universiti Teknologi Mara, Zainah Anwar of Sisters in Islam and representatives of the Inter-Religious Council of Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism.
The forum came in the midst of public disquiet over then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s declaration, in September 2001, that Malaysia was an Islamic state. Many Malaysians were confused and quite a number were in fear that the country would eventually be run like a Taliban state.
Hamid, whose job was to advise the PM’s Department on religious matters, said he did not have answers to the questions raised.
“I would like a dialogue to begin on these very important issues,” he said. “This dialogue and debate have begun, particularly in Muslim countries like Iran and Indonesia. And the search for answers and solutions cannot be the exclusive preserve of the ulamas.
“All citizens have the right to engage in this dialogue and in this debate because nothing less than the future of this nation is at stake. The peace, political stability and prosperity, the celebration of our rich, multiracial and multireligious heritage that we have enjoyed, must be the heritage that we leave to our children.”
Why did Mahathir make the surprising declaration? Veteran political observers interpreted it as purely and simply a move to outdo PAS in the competition for Malay voting support. They said Mahathir had no other considerations apart from the political. Some interpreted it as a desperate political manoeuvre occasioned by increasing support for PAS as that party pushed its own brand of Islamic Malaysia, one that would include hudud punishments under Islamic law.
MCA’s stand
BN’s major component parties, particularly MCA, were caught in a bind. To its credit, MCA organised the forum on short notice to seek clarification and answers to end the confusion and fears.
What was the MCA president’s own response to Mahathir’s declaration? Dr Ling Liong Sik claimed that many non-Muslim leaders supported the prime minister’s position. The following were the exact words he used at the forum, as recorded on tape:
“Can I say my personal point of view? Now throughout the world, there’s conflict, struggle, war between the moderates and the extremists. In any society, sometimes even within the religious society—you name them—fundamentalists, some moderates, some of them reasonables.
“Now in Malaysia, we, in BN, are taking the moderate-centre stand. We try to discuss everything between races. That is why we have invited religious councils to give your views. Now we know, we know, the erosion of Malay support is serious.
“It is serious. And in Selangor, previous election, let us say in Shah Alam, won by 41,000 votes. Last election (1999), dropped to 2,400 votes. In Gombak, previous election won by 30,000-over votes, but last election, kalah 800 votes.
“This is the erosion of Malay support. And it is going the other way to the extremist call. The hudud laws, Islamic state, this and that, now non-Malay taking the middle road.
“Are you going to support the moderates? Because even if withdrawing support, being silent, is supporting the extremist line.”
Ling elaborated that supporting Mahathir’s declaration was merely a demonstration of support for moderates.
“Now, if Dr Mahathir said we are going to change the constitution and make this a theocratic state, I think it will be completely different.
“This is the constitution drawn up by our forefathers and everybody agreed to it. And it is the supreme law of the land. And it should not be changed. And that is what he said.
“By definition, we can now call ourselves an Islamic state. I am not saying Dr Mahathir’s saying is right but he has good reason in trying to stem the erosion.”
Only a duty
Hamid gave his interpretation of what Islam expects of Muslims who hold political power.
“Islam recognizes any values not contradicting to Islamic teachings,” he said.
“The implementation of hudud laws is only a duty, and not a pillar of Islam.
“If PAS refers to books on Islamic jurisprudence, PAS will say the same things as Umno. If PAS says that hudud is a pillar of Islam, they cannot hoodwink Islamic scholars.
“The governance and administration of Malaysia is run in accordance to Islamic teachings, particularly, in the eradication of poverty, or more correctly, hunger. Secondly, eradication of disturbances, meaning efforts to maintain peace and harmony for the country. From the very beginning, the Alliance, and later Barisan Nasional (BN), was run to achieve these objectives. It has been the objective of the government.
“You can call it an Islamic objective or secular. Islam accepts (what is) secular, but not secularism.
“Secular in … Islam means in this life, striving for betterment, providing services for the wellbeing and welfare of fellow men while carrying out your duties and responsibilities.
“Islam cannot accept secularism, which means that there is no life after death. Secularism means there is no punishment after death and this runs contrary to Islamic teachings.”
Neither Islamic nor secular
Shad agreed that there is no one model of an Islamic state, just as there is no such thing as a single model for communism, socialism, capitalism or secularism. “It is a matter of semantics,” he said.
He said the Reid Commission did “a good job” of drafting a “detailed constitutional document” for Malaysia, but he noted a “significant omission” in that the constitution does not have a preamble.
“Maybe it was a deliberate move,” he said. “Most constitutional documents have a preamble stating the nation supports either secularism, socialism or social economic justice. Our constitution lacks a preamble. Neither the word ‘secular’ nor ‘Islamic’ appears anywhere.
“Article 4(1) states that the written constitution is the supreme law of the federation. Though Islam is the religion of the federation, it is not the basic law of the land. And Article 3 (on Islam) imposes no limits on the power of Parliament to legislate.
“Islamic law is not and never was the general law of the land, either at the federal or state level. In such fields as criminal law, Islamic law has very little relevance. Thus, the hudud offence of zina (fornication) cannot be punishable in Malaysia under syariah law. Article 160(2) of the constitution, which defines law, does not include syariah as part of the definition of law.
“All in all, it can be said that Malaysia is neither a full-fledged Islamic state nor wholly secular. On the one hand, it maintains Islam as a state religion and is deeply committed to the promotion of religion in the life of Muslims. On the other, it places the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the state sultans as heads of the religious hierarchy and adopts the supremacy of the constitution as the basic rule of the legal system.”
According to the professor, the legal system is “mixed”. “It avoids the extremes of American style secularism or Saudi, Iranian and Taliban type of religious control of all aspects of life. It mirrors the rich diversity and pluralism of its population. It prefers pragmatism over ideological purity, moderation over extremism. It walks the middle path.
“Islam provides the basic norms for Malay society and culture. In view of the fact that Muslims constitute the majority of the population, and Islamisation is being vigorously enforced, Malaysia can indeed be described as an Islamic or Muslim country.”
To be continued in Part 3
・Stanley Koh is the former head of MCA’s research unit. He is now a FMT columnist.
(3) Bishop hails trio for stand against Himpun rally, 20 October 2011
Catholic prelate salutes PAS, Anwar Ibrahim and Dr Chua Soi Lek for espousing sanity in the face of incipient hysteria.
PETALING JAYA: Catholic Bishop Dr Paul Tan Chee Ing today hailed PAS, PKR supremo Anwar Ibrahim and MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek for “taking sane stances in the face of deliberate attempts to stoke anti-Christian hysteria.”
The head of the Catholic Church for the Malacca-Johor diocese, reached in Bangkok where he is attending a meeting of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conference(FABC), said:
“I’ve been following the developments in Malaysia on the internet and would like to salute PAS for declining to be involved in the upcoming rally in Shah Alam on Saturday,” said the Jesuit-trained prelate who is concurrently president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Malaysia.
“Further, I hail Anwar Ibrahim for having the courage to state there is no threat of Christianization of Muslims in Malaysia and salute Dr Chua Soi Lek for boldness in expressing the view that the rally would heighten tensions between Muslims and Christians and for that reason should be stopped.”
Bishop Tan said he was of the view that citizens wanting to gather together in a cause should not be prevented but “the Himpun rally appears headed towards stoking anti-Christian hysteria.”
“Judging from the campaign waged by some sections of the mainstream media and blogs you would think Muslims in Malaysia in droves are being covertly converted to Christianity,” Bishop Tan said.
“This is only true in the fevered imagination of the Harussani Zakarias’ of this country and not anywhere else,” added the bishop.
(Harussani Zakaria is the Perak mufti who has periodically raised the alarums about Christianization of Muslims in Malaysia.)
“In all the history of Muslim-Christian relations since independence I have never seen a government so casual and so irresponsible as to allow the fabrications this man has visited on the general population go by with impunity,” lamented the prelate.
One of the speakers at the Himpunan Sejuta Umat this weekend is Harussani Zakaria.
Bishop Tan said Christian leaders have a duty to oppose evil. “Any government this duplicitous, this craven in the face of the obvious troublemakers is a government deserving of the electorate’s rejection,” he asserted.
（End）
