Harapan Yang Berbahaya

rabiddog
Tian Chua memang tidak menghormati penjawat awam

 

Pakatan Orang-Orang Yang Tidak Menghormati Undang-Undang

Pada bulan Disember 2007, harapan Pakatan iaitu Tian Chua telah menggigit seorang konstabel polis Rosyaidi Anuar yang sedang melaksanakan tugas beliau di luar perkarangan bangunan Parlimen.  Akibat perbuatan tersebut, Tian Chua telah dipenjarakan selama enam bulan dan denda RM3,000.00 pada tahun berikutnya.

Pada tahun 2017, Tian Chua telah menarik balik rayuannya di mahkamah terhadap hukuman penjara yang telah dikenakan terhadapnya kerana gagal mematuhi arahan polis untuk bersurai semasa perhimpunan BERSIH 3.0 pada tahun 2012.

Terkini, Tian Chua telah didapati tidak layak bertanding untuk Pilihanraya Umum Ke-14 kerana telah didenda sebanyak RM2,000.00.

Satu persoalan telah timbul kerana sebelum ini Tian Chua yang dikenakan hukuman denda RM3,000.00 pada tahun 2008 kerana menggigit seorang anggota polis seperti di atas, telah membuat rayuan dan mendapat pengurangan denda dari RM3,000.00 ke RM2,000.00.

Pada pendapat saya, Hakim Ghazali Cha telah membuat kesilapan dalam penghakimannya dengan mengulas bahawa hukuman denda tersebut dikurangkan dari RM3,000.00 ke RM2,000.00 untuk mengelakkan daripada perlunya mengadakan sebuah pilihanraya kecil yang akan memakan belanja yang amat besar untuk mencari seorang Ahli Parlimen yang baru.

Penghakiman tersebut berniat baik, namun tersilap dari segi Perlembagaan.  Akibatnya, Tian Chua telah dibenarkan untuk kekal sebagai Ahli Parlimen Kawasan Batu, dan bertanding semula pada tahun 2013.

Terkini, Tian Chua telah dilucut kelayakan untuk bertanding dalam Pilihanraya Umum Ke-14 kerana telah dihukum denda sebanyak RM2,000.00.  Pada asalnya, Tian Chua telah dihukum denda sebanyak RM3,000.00 kerana menghina seorang pegawai polis.  Hukuman tersebut telah dikurangkan kepada RM2,000.00 kerana ianya tidak melibatkan perbuatan fizikal seperti…kegemaran Tian Chua…menggigit.

Namun, Artikel 48(1)(e) Perlembagaan Persekutuan jelas menyebut mana-mana orang yang dihukum dengan pemenjaraan selama tempoh tidak kurang daripada satu tahun atau denda tidak kurang daripada dua ribu ringgit dan dia tidak mendapat pengampunan bebas adalah tidak layak untuk menjadi seorang Ahli Parlimen.

Ini bermakna, Tian Chua telah dihalang oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan bukannya oleh SPR itu sendiri.

Bahayanya Harapan

Pada bulan Ogos 2012, saya telah berpeluang untuk berbuka puasa dengan 120 orang Islam bekas murtad dan mereka menceritakan kepada saya bagaimana liciknya taktik yang digunakan pihak-pihak evangelis untuk memurtadkan orang Islam di Malaysia.

Ramai dari kalangan para pemegang jawatan dalam DAP adalah mereka yang beragama Kristian dan agak fanatik.  Di antara mereka yang tersenarai sebagai beragama Kristian dari kalangan pemegang jawatan dalam DAP termasuk Lim Guan Eng, Tony Pua, Teresa Kok, Hannah Yeoh, Ong Kian Ming, dan Yeo Bee Yin.

Saya juga pernah menulis betapa liciknya cara mereka memasukkan jarum evangelis di kalangan orang Melayu Islam hinggakan ada dari kalangan orang Melayu yang berjubah dan bertudung kini merupakan apa yang digelar oleh para pendakwah evangelis sebagai Messianic Muslims.

Sekarang kita lihat pula baju T yang dipakai oleh Tony Pua dalam satu videonya:

ponytua

Bermula dengan nama Barisan Alternatif, pakatan yang ada kini dikenali pula dengan nama Pakatan Rakyat yang juga mengandungi parti PAS, dan kemudiannya dinamakan Pakatan HARAPAN setelah PAS tidak lagi mahu menyertai Pakatan tersebut.

Saya ingin tumpu kepada perkataan HARAPAN itu sendiri.

HARAPAN adalah HOPE di dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Menurut John Piper, pengasas DesiringGod.org dan seorang Canselor di Bethlehem College and Seminary di Amerika Syarikat, makna HOPE (HARAPAN) dalam Bahasa Inggeris mungkin menjurus kepada menantikan sesuatu yang tidak pasti akan berlaku.  Namun dalam pengajaran Kristian, HOPE atau HARAPAN adalah keyakinan/kepercayaan terhadap sesuatu yang telah dijanjikan oleh Tuhan, atau dalam bahasa mudahnya: AQIDAH (FAITH).

Menurut kitab Injil, “Kepercayaan datangnya dari mendengar, dan mendengar kata-kata Tuhan.” (Romans 10:17).

Lihat gambar di atas – perkataan yang tertera di bahagian depan baju beliau ialah HOPE.  Adakah disebabkan pengaruh Islam dalam Pakatan telah dihapuskan dengan tidak termasuknya PAS di dalam Pakatan yang baharu maka Pakatan kini digelar Pakatan HARAPAN?

Adakah secara kebetulan juga Reverend Bernard Paul pernah mengutus jemputan kepada semua yang beragama Kristian untuk “menubuhkan kerajaan Tuhan di negara ini” dengan menolak kerajaan Barisan Nasional yang diketuai UMNO, sebuah parti Melayu yang memelihara Islam sebagai agama Persekutuan serta Raja-Raja Melayu sebagai payung agama Islam dan adat-istiadat orang Melayu?

revbernardpaul

Mungkin HARAPAN ini ada kena-mengena dengan apa yang disebut dalam Kitab Injil melalui Zechariah 14:9 iaitu:

“Tuhan akan menjadi raja atas seluruh bumi. Pada hari itu Tuhan akan menjadi satu dan namanya hanya satu.”

Memang bahaya siapa yang harapkan HARAPAN ini. Bahaya lagi Pakatan ini kepada aqidah orang Islam.

Sabah 20-Point Agreement: Religion

Colonial passport for the colonised people of North Borneo

For the previous installment on the background, please click here.

In his book on Page 101, Dr Jeffrey Kitingan wrote that although there is no objection to Islam being the religion of the Federation there should not be a STATE RELIGION in North Borneo.  Therefore, anything pertaining to Islam in the MALAYAN CONSTITUTION cannot be applied to NORTH BORNEO.

His grouse on this matter came about as a result of the late Tun Datu Mustapha expelling Christian priests from Sabah and accused both Tun Datu Mustapha and Datuk Harris Salleh of acting in such manner to strengthen their political position with the Federal government, therefore Islam should not be the religion of the state of Sabah.

The above controversial statement goes against the agreements reached as recorded by the Cobbold Commission, the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee (MSCC) , and the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) in 1962.

According to the memorandum of the MSCC that was chaired by Donald A Stephens (later Chief Minister of Sabah, Tun Fuad Stephens) with representatives from Singapore, Malaya, Sarawak and North Borneo, the MSCC found that the acceptance of Islam as the religion of the Federation does not endanger religious freedom as evident on Page 120 of the MSCC memorandum dated 3 February 1962:

MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120
MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120

The MSCC had scrutinised the position of Islam in respect of states other than the Malay States and found no objection was made against the then-present arrangement for Pulau Pinang and Melaka to also be adopted by North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore.

Each of the states above would have its own constitution to address the requirement with Yang DiPertuan Agong as the Head of Islam in those states.  The respective State’s Assembly will enact laws to govern Islamic affairs and form a Board to advise the Yang DiPertuan Agong on matters pertaining to Islam.

On pages 120 and 121 of the memorandum mentioned it is stated so:

 

MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120-121
MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120-121

In the Report of the Commission of Enquiry (Cobbold Commission), North Borneo and Sarawak, dated 21st June 1962 found that there was everywhere agreement that as the Muslims are minorities in North Borneo and Sarawak, there should be no restrictions on complete freedom of other religions in those states.

Cobbold Commission Report dated 21 June 1962 PP 39
Cobbold Commission Report dated 21 June 1962 PP 39

In relation to that, the Inter-Governmental Committee, headed by Lord Landsdowne produced a report in 1962 and made the following recommendations on religion on Pages 5 and 6 which have been passed by the Sabah (and Sarawak) state assembly as follows:

IGC Report 1962 on Religion PP 5-6
IGC Report 1962 on Religion PP 5-6

The IGC, which has representation from the Federation of Malaya representing the states in the Federation, Singapore, North Borneo and Sarawak, recommended that Article 3 needed no amendment.  However, the provision of financial aid to Muslim establishments should only come with the concurrence of the states of North Borneo and Sarawak.  This has since been provided for via Section 3 of the Sabah Islamic Laws Administration Enactment, 1992 where the Yang DiPertuan Agong is the Head of Islam in Sabah, and a Council (Majlis Agama Islam Sabah) was formed to manage and administer the Islamic affairs in Sabah. This has also been provided in the Sabah State Constitution (Articles 5B(1) and 5B(2)).

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, Dr Jeffrey Kitingan was angered by Tun Datu Mustapha’s action to chase out Christian missionaries from Sabah in 11972.  Dr Jeffrey used this as the basis of raising the religion issue that was presented as part of the 20-point memorandum for the inclusion of Sabah into the Federation of Malaysia.

Having understood the reason for his raising the issue again, we must also understand the events that had taken place after Tun Datu Mustapha’s ousting of the Christian missionaries.

Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) won the state elections and formed the Sabah state government in 1985.  From that point up until 1991, the Sabah state government built 825 churches compared to only 216 suraus and mosques.

The state government’s refusal to entertain a request by the Sabah Islamic Council made on the 2nd August 1986 and again on the 12th August 1986 to amend the state’s Shariah Law (Administration) Enactment No.15/77 to accord to the Yang DiPertuan Agong the power to administer Islam in the state of Sabah as required by Article 3(3) of the Federal Constitution (as amended on the 12th August 1976) and Article 5B of the Sabah State Constitution (as amended on the 28th December 1985) clearly denied the Yang DiPertuan Agong His Majesty’s prerogative that was agreed by the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Council, the findings of the Cobbold Commission as well as the Inter-Governmental Committee, and the wishes made by the Muslims of North Borneo in 1962.

The ousting of the Christian missionaries in 1972 was made because the nine missionaries who were foreigners abused the work permit given to them to work in Sabah, not to conduct evagelical missions.  They were Roman Catholics, Anglicans, the Basil Mission and from the Borneo Evangelical Mission.

As Immigration affairs is a Sabah prerogative as accorded in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, the first act by the Sabah state government under Tun Datu Mustapha was to deny them an extension of their work permit.  They were then given a 14-day special pass to enable them to make arrangements to leave Sabah.  However, the missionaries refused to obey the 13-day order.

Consequently, they were removed from Sabah through a Removal Order issued by the Sabah Immigration Department made under Section 32 of the Immigration Ordinance 12/59.

The Federal government had no role whatsoever in the removal of these missionaries.  It was purely a state decision that was made based on a sound reason – the people of Sabah, regardless of race or religion had been living harmoniously.  However, these missionaries have been sowing the seeds of hatred among the Christians of Sabah towards the Muslims by telling them to fear the “Islamisation” of Christians through forced conversions, a claim the missionaries themselves could not substatiate.

There was a plea made by the Christians in Sabah to the then-Prime Minister for the missionaries to be allowed to remain in Sabah.  Tun Abdul Razak however recommended to the Christians of Sabah to instead allow priests from the Peninsular and Sarawak to replace the nine missionaries.

In his book, Jeffrey Kitingan had profusely spoken about alleged digressions from and breach of the Federation of Malaysia Agreement but avoided on the issue of the Sabah state government of 1985 breaching agreements made by the MSCC, findings of the Cobbold Commission, the IGC as well as the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

On the contrary, the Federal government has been fulfilling its end of the agreement by allowing the freedom for other religions to be practiced by its followers as per the agreement.

At no point was there any intrusion made by the Federal government in the affairs of Sabah, and that the removal of the missionaries from Sabah for violating the conditions of the work permit was totally a state issue, made using the powers accorded to the state of Sabah, as agreed by all parties that had agreed on the formation of the Federation of Malaysia.

In the next installement, we shall talk about the second point – LANGUAGE.

Allah: The Son and the Crescent

20140109-152910.jpg

I wrote a posting early November 2013 on the issue of evangelism and the evangelical efforts to bring Muslims to accept the Trinity concept ( The Herald of Glad Tidings: Messianic Muslim Followers of Isa ).

Discovered on the Internet today is this article on Christian Today that speaks of the Allah issue and how Christians have made headway in getting Muslims to accept that Allah, or God, that is worshipped by the Muslims, is the same as the Trinitarian god worshipped by the Christians.

Go back to my article above after you have read this one and decide for yourself if subtle evangelism is not real:

Christianity Today: The Son and the Crescent