SeaDemon Says

Posts Tagged ‘Islam

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.

This was the headline on the first day of Ramadhan, 27 May 2017.

It would have read differently had it read Muslims Observe Ramadhan Today and left the ‘terrorist’ headline on Page 3. It cannot be THAT important if its report was on Page 3.

The headline above sparked anger among Muslims in Malaysia from the first day of Ramadhan until almost the end of the second day. A full 36 hours after it was published which prompted The Star to issue a half-hearted apology.


This only further incensed the Muslims.


Veteran journalist Datuk Ahiruddin Atan aka Rocky Bru wrote on his Facebook account:


What is more interesting is the comment left by renowned blogger BigDog:


Joceline Tan, a The Star columnist who writes mostly leaning towards the current government was not defended by her GEIC (Group Editor-in-Chief) when attacked at the Group’s AGM.

It has also come to light that the GEIC, Datuk Leanne Goh, transferred a senior journalist who writes a lot about the DAP out of Pulau Pinang.

Yet when pastors went missing it was The Star that played up the issue religiously, and little was said by the tabloid when one came back from Thailand conveniently after Songkran ended.


We are now made to wonder why is this MCA-owned tabloid pandering to the evangelists in the DAP.

Just two days before the headline was printed media editors were summoned by the KDN and were told to refrain from publishing offensive materials.

This story was carried by The Star.

Two days later The Star decided to offend the Muslims and called it a mistake. How can it be a mistake if it has eleven prepress workflow before it gets published?

Coincidentally the GEIC fled the country on the day the offensive headline went to press. She is said to be in San Francisco now, avoiding the summon by KDN today.

Instead, a low level Malay has been chosen to face KDN.

Six years ago, The Star published a recipe for Ramadhan feast.  It was a pork dish. The Star was summoned by KDN and it issued an apology much like the most recent one promising it would not happen again.

Back in 1987, The Star had its printing license revoked for fanning racial sentiments. It is now seen to do the same and getting the backing of Malay liberals to justify its tasteless articles.

It is about time the KDN slap it with a three-year ban.

I have written on how racist Lim Kit Siang is in Part 1 dan Part 2 prior to this final part.

Lim Kit Siang is not only a racist, he was also against any attempt by the government to counter communist revolutionary ideology.

Two days prior to the 3rd General Elections (1969), Kit Siang held a press conference to accuse his now right-hand man Christopher Ross Lim’s stepfather as “Lying Education Minister.”  Christopher Ross Lim now uses the name Zairil Khir Johari. No “bin (Arab for ‘son of’)”.

Kit Siang accused the Alliance government then of enrolling Malaysia into the World Anti-Communist League, an accusation denied by Khir Johari.

Question: why did Kit Siang slam the government even if it was true that Malaysia had joined the World Anti-Communist League?

Answer: the Opposition at that time was teemed with members and sympathisers of the Communist Party of Malaya.

Communist slogans displayed in anti-government rallies

Communist slogans carried by Opposition supporters

A month before that, on 24 April 1969, an UMNO worker, Encik Kassim bin Omar, who was on his way home after the end of campaign hours for the day was stopped by Opposition supporters as he passed the Datuk Keramat section of Pulau Pinang and brutally murdered.  His face was smeared with red paint used to paint anti-government slogans by the Opposition supporters. This is among the reasons long campaign periods can be detrimental to public safety and order.

Since July 1968, that is a month after the commencement of the Second Malaysian Emergency (second armed uprising by the Communist Party of Malaya) that ended 21 years later, Kit Siang fired up racial hatred among the Opposition supporters.

Among the events of incitements that he did were:

  1. On 27 July 1968, at a DAP rally in Tanjung Malim, Perak, Kit Siang on purpose twisted the facts of the National Education Policy by telling the audience that the policy had been designed to eradicate the Chinese newspapers, Chinese schools as well as the Chinese language.
  2. On 24 August 1968, at a rally in Slim River, Perak, Kit Siang intentionally twisted the facts of the policy on the National Language to raise suspicion of and hatred for the Malays .
  3. On 7 September 1968, at a DAP rally at KM38, Jalan Sungai Besi, and on 21 September 1968, at the Sungai Way new village, Kit Siang intentionally incited hatred towards the Malays and the Government by slandering MCA accusing the party of assisting a Malay government to eradicate the Chinese language by not recognising the Nanyang University project.
  4. On 29 September 1968, at a DAP rally in Batu Pahat, Johor, 2 November 1968, in Lawan Kuda Bahru, Gopeng, Perak, and on 26 January 1969, at Jalan Yow, Pudu, Kuala Lumpur, Kit Siang incited hatred by informing the audience that the government’s policies are racist policies by giving priority to the Bumiputera to enter the public universities, automatically placing the other races as second-class citizens.
  5. On 12 February 1969, at a DAP rally held at Jalan Lengkongan Brunei, Kuala Lumpur, Kit Siang once again incited racial sentiments by telling the audience that the Government has shown its racist character by giving priority to the Malays to enter public universities, giving government jobs and distribution of land.

What Kit Siang did not tell any of his audience is that even in government posts (except for the Malaysian Armed Forces), the percentage of non-Malays in the civil service far surpassed the number of Malays as evident in the excerpt from the National Operations Council’s (MAGERAN) White Paper below:

It is evident that Kit Siang’s racist and agitative character has never diminished till today.  The General Election was conducted on Saturday 10 May 1969.  The Alliance party (UMNO, MCA and MIC) won 66 seats, 23 lesser than in the 2nd General Election while the Opposition won 54.

At 5.30pm, 11 May 1969, DAP held a victory parade without police permit that comprised of five cars and 15 motorcycles that started from Brickfields towards Jalan Lornie (now Jalan Syed Putra).

When they passed in front of the Brickfields Police Station (now demolished), the mostly Chinese participants shouted:

What can the police do? We are the rulers! Throw out all the Malay policemen!

At 10pm on the same day, while parading in front of the Jalan Travers Police Station, they shouted:

Death to the Malays! Sakai (derogatory term for aborigines) go back to the jungle!

The same insults were hurled at policemen on duty when they again passed the Brickfields Police Station.

At the same time at Changkat Thamby Dollah near the old Pudu Jail (behind Berjaya Times Square), about 40 Opposition supporters shouted:

“Kuala Lumpur belongs to the Chinese!

On the next day, Monday 12 May 1969, 500 scooters rode by Opposition supporters passed Jalan Ipoh, Jalan Parlimen, Jalan Gombak, Jalan Raja Laut before returning to Jalan Ipoh shouting at every Malay person they encounter:

The Malays are now powerless. Now we are in control!

When this convoy arrived at the threshold of Kampung Bahru, they shouted to the Malays:

Malays get out! Why are you still here? We’ll beat you up! Now we are bigger (more powerful)!

At night, more insults and abuses were hurled at Malay policemen on duty:

Mata-Mata Lancau! (Penis Constables)

Butoh Melayu! Pergi matilah! (Fuck the Malays! Go and die!)

I did not make all the stuff above up.  You can read them in the MAGERAN report as per the images below:

Where was Lim Kit Siang when abuses and insults were hurled at the Malays in Kuala Lumpur?

Lim Kit Siang on the morning of Tuesday 13 May 1969 was ready to flee to Kota Kinabalu so that he would not be in Kuala Lumpur if any untoward incident was to happen.

The moment he arrived in Kota Kinabalu he immediately went to a DAP public rally in Kampung Air. Sabah was scheduled to vote on the 25 May 1969 and Sarawak on 7 June 1969. In Kota Kinabalu he not only incited hatred towards the Malays but also towards the religion of Islam.

He told the audience that the Government was trying to create a Malay Malaysia by dividing the rakyat into Bumiputera dan Non-Bumiputera.  He also lied by saying that the Government wants to turn the Sabah Government into a Malay Government.  He also incited hatred towards Islam by saying that the Government would send Malaysians including non-Muslims (including Sabah Christians) to fight and die in the Middle East to help other OIC members to free Jerusalem from the clutches of Israel.

That is how racist and despicable Lim Kit Siang is as well as the DAP that he leads.  Almost 48 years have passed since 13 May 1969, Kit Siang is still attacking what he calls the ‘Malay’ government.  Back then, the Malays were united in protecting their rights that have been in existence way before the arrival of Lim Kit Siang’s ancestors – rights that have been agreed upon by representatives of all the Nation’s races and enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

Unfortunate for us now there are those who claim that they are Malays but forget easily.  Now this traitor and his worshippers stick a straw up Lim Kit Siang’s rear orifice and suck up to the DAP Supremo.

Courtesy of Dr Aznil Hisham

Raveentharan a/l V Subramaniam, former Parti Keadilan Rakyat state assemblyman for Batu Uban in Pulau Pinang is in hot soup after the Inspector-General of Police instructed the Royal Malaysian Police for the former’s seditious post in hi Facebook account.

Raveentharan’s apology and the post that got him into trouble – courtesy of Dr Aznil Hisham

 

The IGP instructs the Bukit Aman Media Social Monitoring Team to haul up Raveentharan

Raveentharan, a Georgetown-based lawyer who was dropped from the candidates’ list during the 13th General Elections quickly apologised to Muslims in Malaysia saying that he did not mean to offend Muslims and that his best friends are Muslims.

Raveentharan is not new to controversies. In 2009, two SMS messages were made viral, sent by an unknown alleging that he sodomised and physically abused his ex-wife.  In 2013, he was dropped from PKR’s list of candidates for the 13th General Elections in favour of T Jayabalan.

Below are screen captures made from his Facebook account, courtesy of Dr Aznil Hisham:

Suddenly Raventharan is not so brave anymore. And as for his apology, I leave that to you and for the authorities to decide.

I would like to see him charged in courts.

This morning I was labelled a ‘Malay supremacist‘ by two non-Malays on Twitter for presenting my views on the Syariah Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) Bill to be proposed by PAS President Haji Hadi Awang.  They claim that I was trying to push my idea to them but at the same time ignore the fact that they were pushing their views to me for me to accept.

Then, I saw this on The Star and cannot believe my eyes that this is being said by our very own lawmakers!

A screenshot of The Star on the objection to having two legal systems

A screenshot of The Star on the objection to having two legal systems

Imagine our lawmakers, all born before Malaysia was formed, do not know that the two legal systems have been in place even before 31 August 1957, and was adopted into the Federal Constitution of 16 September 1963 when it was accepted by both North Borneo and Sarawak that entered a Federation with the other states of Malaya to form Malaysia.  The Federal Constitution even says that the Attorney-General does not have any jurisdiction over Syariah matters – clearly drawing the line between the two systems.

I have written at length on this matter prior to this.  Please refer to the following:

  1. Being Hard Over Hadi
  2. A Storm In The Hood Over Hudud
  3. Lighting The Wrong Path

The fear came about when Kelantan state assembly passed its Syariah Offences (II) Enactment last year that includes crimes of theft, fornication and so on prescribing the amputation of limbs, stoning et cetera.  Since the punishments prescribed are ultra vires in nature, Hadi Awang sought for the amendments to the Syariah Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act, 1965 (Act 355), dubbed by the uninformed as the Hadi Bill or Hudud Bill.

Citing the Bill as unconstitutional, the ill-informed began to attack the Bill at its earliest stage; while the Opposition uses it to mount attacks on UMNO for supporting the proposal to be tabled in Parliament, conveniently forgetting that the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

What Can Hadi Propose?

The following is the list of items that Hadi can seek amendments to:

img_3913-1

Only the ones in red (Enabled) are the ones Hadi Awang could hope to propose in his Private Bill.

Does The Bill Affect Non-Muslims?

Like I mentioned, the two legal systems have co-existed in Malaysia since the formation of Malaysia. Let us see Section 2 of the Act:

Oh! The Act applies only to Muslims! So why are people jumping like monkeys?

Oh! The Act applies only to Muslims! So why are people jumping like monkeys?

And did Hadi Awang seek to include the non-Muslims in his amendments?

It still says 'those professing Islam' as religion. Again, why do people jump like monkeys?

It still says ‘those professing Islam’ as religion. Again, why do people jump like monkeys?

So, no. Whatever you say or think, this law DOES NOT APPLY TO NON-MUSLIMS!

THIS LAW WILL PROMOTE DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Have you no brain?

Hadi Awang merely seeks to increase the penalties, not expand the jurisdiction of the Syariah court!  As per the table above, all offences covered by either the Penal Code or by any other law that was made under the ambit of the Federal Constitution cannot be charged under the Syariah law.

So how can there be double jeopardy? Murder, robbery, rape, sodomy, are all offences under the Penal Code of Malaysia.  You cannot charge these offences under the Syariah law.

How Is The Process Now? What Does Hadi Awang Have To Do?

Any Member of Parliament not representing the ruling government who wants to table a Private Bill will have to apply to the August House for leave to do so. At the same time the said MP is to submit the Bill with an explanatory statement of reasons and objectives of the Bill.

Every such application will have to be in the form of a motion. Only when the House agrees with the motion will the Bill to have been deemed as being read for the first time.

After the first reading the Bill will then be printed and circulated to all members and the Minister in-charge of the subject of the Bill for scrutiny.  Only when the Minister in-charge is done with the Bill will it then be reported to the House.  After this report is made, the Bill shall be set down for second reading.

There are more stages and hurdles for the Bill to have to go through before it finally makes it as an approved Act, or thrown into the bin.

We are now still at the first stage – the application.

What Else Does The Federal Constitution Say About Each Other’s Religion?

We have Article 11(3)(a) in our Constitution which states:

Every religious group has the right to manage its own affairs

By intruding, isn’t this right given also to the Muslims in Malaysia being denied by the non-Muslims? Remember, Islam is the religion of the Federation and others are given the rights to practice theirs in peace and harmony.

So, why intrude into our affairs?

Kerajaan bersifat zalim – dan itulah modal yang dihamburkan setiap hari bagi menghasut rakyat bangkit menentang kerajaan yang ada.

Ada yang menyamakan kebangkitan orang Melayu menentang pentadbiran British pada tahun 1946 dengan demonstrasi BERSIH. Malah ada juga organisasi bukan kerajaan (NGO) yang bertopengkan Islam yang menyamakan perbuatan Rasulullah SAW membebaskan kota Makkah dengan demonstrasi BERSIH menentang korupsi, kezaliman dan penindasan. Ini adalah merupakan suatu fitnah terhadap Rasulullah SAW.

Pertamanya, pada tahun 1946, kebangkitan orang Melayu menentang pentadbiran Malayan Union jelmaan British adalah di atas arahan para pemimpin orang Melayu itu sendiri untuk mempertahankan kedudukan agama Islam, raja-raja Melayu Islam, dan tanah air dari penindasan dan penjajahan kafir.

Keduanya, pembukaan Kota Makkah (Fathu Makkah) oleh Rasulullah SAW adalah sebahagian dari peperangan tentera Islam yang berpusat di Madinah menentang Bani Quraisy Jahiliyah dan membersihkan Kaabah dari patung berhala dan segala perbuatan syirik.

Rasulullah SAW bukannya bersekongkol dengan Kafir Quraisy untuk menjatuhkan Islam. Jauh sekali bekerjasama dengan puak-puak berikut untuk menjatuhkan pemimpin beragama Islam:


Apabila menyebut perkataan zalim saya nak bertanyakan beberapa soalan:

  1. Zalimnya kerajaan Malaysia adakah para Raja Melayu dan Perdana Menteri telah meninggalkan syiar Islam dan mengisytiharkan diri mereka kafir?
  2. Adakah masjid-masjid yang diperintahkan tutup atau dirobohkan?
  3. Adakah mana-mana orang Islam yang ditangkap atau dilarang dari melakukan sebarang bentuk ibadah?
  4. Adakah mana-mana orang yang mati atau kebuluran akibat kemiskinan?

Saya yakin yang paling hampir boleh dijawab adalah solan saya yang No.4. Namun kerajaan telah menyediakan pusat-pusat pungutan zakat. Kemiskinan dalam masyarakat adalah merupakan masalah Fardhu Kifayah. Sekiranya masyarakat sekeliling gagal melaporkan mana-mana anggota masyarakat yang layak yang memerlukan bantuan maka kesalahan itu terjatuh di atas bahu masyarakat tersebut.

Sekiranya tiada sesiapa di kalangan masyarakat tersebut membantu menghantar makanan kepada orang yang memerlukan dan meletakkan beban tersebut di bahu kerajaan sebab “makanan aku untuk keluarga aku sahaja” maka orang itu yang menanggung dosa membiarkan anggota masyarakatnya menderita.

Firman Allah SWT:

“Wahai orang-orang yang beriman, taatilah Allah dan taatilah Rasul dan para pemimpin di kalangan kamu.” (an-Nisaa’ 59)

Sabda Rasulullah SAW:

  1. Sesiapa yang taat kepada pemimpin maka dia telah taat kepadaku. Dan sesiapa yang derhaka kepada pemimpin maka dia telah derhaka kepada aku (Bukhari 2957)
  2. Kamu wajib patuh dan setia walau dalam keadaan susah atau senang, suka atau duka, dan walaupun merugikan kepentingan mu (Muslim 1836)
  3. Sesiapa yang dipimpin oleh seorang pemimpin lalu dia melihat pemimpinnya berbuat maksiat kepda Allah, maka hendaklah dia membenci perbuatannya namun jangan dia lepaskan ketaatan kepadanya (Muslim 1855).

Selagi pemimpin itu tidak syirik kepada Allah, menentang agama Islam, maka wajib kita mentaatinya.

Pada tahun 2015, kerajaan telah memperuntukkan RM488 juta untuk memakmurkan masjid di seluruh negara. Jika ini satu kezaliman, maka tentanglah kerajaan.

Dalam Bajet 2017 yang dibentangkan baru-baru ini, sebanyak RM30 juta telah diperuntukkan untuk melahirkan tahfiz yang berdaya saing dalam pasaran pekerjaan melalui Dasar Pendidikan Tahfiz.

Malah 1MDB yang menjadi bahan kutukan warga kota selama ini jugalah entiti yang telah memperluaskan dan menjadikan Masjid Kampung Baru suatu tempat beribadah yang amat selesa untuk mereka-mereka yang mengutuk 1MDB menunaikan solat mengurangkan dosa kemunafikan mereka sendiri.

Soalan saya, kenapa berdemo dengan mereka-mereka yang ingin menyesatkan dan mengkafirkan umat Islam di negara ini?  Saya sendiri pernah duduk bertanya kepada mereka-mereka yang telah dimurtadkan oleh golongan ini.

Sekiranya anda tidak puas hati dengan apa yang telah dilakukan oleh kerajaan, atau bencikan kerajaan hanya disebabkan beg tangan Rosmah, maka apabila tiba masa mengundi, undilah pihak lawan. Dan jangan berikan saya alasan bahawa sistem pilihanraya kita tidak adil. Kalau tidak adil dan berpihakkan kerajaan Barisan Nasional, masakan DAP boleh mentadbir Pulau Pinang dan Selangor (menerusi boneka mereka – PKR)?

Tepuk dahi tanya diri: aku nak ikut agama atau telunjuk kafir?

Mari sama-sama kita hayati video yang telah dikongsi oleh Dr Aznil Hisham berikut:

Alwi_Jantan

Tan Sri Alwi Jantan

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be a moderate.  Moderation is what is preached in Islam.  Moderation is what seems to be eroding by the day not just in Islam, but in other religions and cuts across the racial board as well.  And this applies to every single country there is on the face of this Earth.  And to have a group of people advocating moderation is a more-than-welcome effort in this young-but-amnesiac country that seems to have lost all institutional memory of the events that had brought about the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

Reading the The Star’s interview with Tan Sri Alwi Jantan (Torchbearers for founding fathers – Sunday, 4th September 2016) I cannot help but agree to some of his points, but at the same time feel as if there is some form of misguidance, or misinterpretation of the Federal Constitution, and a deliberate misleading on the respected Tan Sri’s part.

I agree that rather than focusing on petty issues such as whether or not the Langkawi statue is haram, the religious councils as well as JAKIM should focus more on the development of correct as well as balanced knowledge on Islamic subjects such as TauhidFardhus Ain and Kifayah.  This is important to counter the influence of deviationists especially that of the Da’esh.  However, religious as well as racial extremism is not confined to Islam alone.  In the name of pluralism as advocated by the G25, there should only be single-stream schools.  Children who do not grow up together will grow up apart. We can never talk about unity and understanding if we do not understand each other.  Preserving the mother-tongue can be done after formal classes are over and this can be done at the school itself, perhaps after lunch. So could the Islamic religious classes. In the latter category, this would ensure that correct teachings are being imparted to the children rather than by private religious schools whose curriculum are not being monitored effectively by the religious councils. Also that way working parents do not need to worry about the whereabouts of their children and can pick them up at school after work, or a similar arrangement could be made.

In a plural society such as ours, the need for our children to grow up together for the sake of unity is paramount. Sending children to separate schools based on mother tongue rather than a common national language is against the spirit of the Constitution. When the Constitution was being drafted for it to be in operation by Merdeka Day 1957, the Reid Commission adopted the Alliance’s (UMNO, MCA and MIC) proposal to establish Malay as the official language of the Federation. However, there were differences on how to go about with this.  Ng Ek Teong, the MCA representative submitted that English should be allowed to be used for official purposes for a minimum of 10 years. MIC was in support of this.  Both MCA and MIC also proposed for Mandarin and Tamil be allowed to be used in the legislatures for a minimum period of 10 years.  UMNO however proposed that English be allowed to be used for a maximum period of ten years after independence. Ng Ek Tong told the Commission that this would only serve as a temporary measure (Colonial Office CO 889/6, Minutes of Alliance hearing before the Reid Commission, 27 September 1956, pp 290-294).  Tunku Abdul Rahman however said:

“At the end of 10 years, the general trend will be that people will still demand for it and the people who propose it now are not sure that they would be there to guarantee it. It is bound to cause a lot of debate later on.” (Ibid.)

Even Lord William Reid himself was not in favour of the proposal by MCA and MIC saying that it would cause practical difficulties (Ibid/Making of the Malayan Constitution, Joseph M Fernando, pp 128-129).  It was for this reason that the Tunku promoted the Rumi script for the Malay language at the expense of the Jawi script to enable the non-Malays to learn the national language rapidly (Tunku Abdul Rahman (1984), op. cit., pp. 112-114).  This has been enshrined in Article 152 of the Federal Constitution as well as in the National Language Act, 1963/1967.

The reality of it now is that the migrant workers from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Myanmar are more able to grasp the Malay language than many of our own Identity Card-wielding citizens.  Mind you, they also stood still at Dataran Merdeka while the NegaraKu was being played. Our own citizens refuse to stand up when the NegaraKu was being played in the cinemas, extinguishing the very torch of our founding fathers.

The Constitution is secular only up to a certain point. The Reid Commission, commissioned by both Her Majesty The Queen of England and the Malay Rulers had initially omitted a proposal by the Malay Rulers to have Islam as the religion of the Federation.  Reid saw it fit that matters of religion be handled only by the Ruler of the respective States, and that the special position of the Malays be reviewed after 15 years.

When the report was published, the strongest objections came from the man revered by Malaysians now as the father of multiracialism – Dato Onn Jaafar, who as the leader of Parti Negara said that the Malays had been let down.  PAS claimed that the Malay interests had been cast aside (von Vorys (1975), op. cit., p.132). Hence, the Tunku later submitted that Islam be made the religion of the Federation with two provisos added: first that it would not affect the position of the Rulers as head of religion in their respective States; second, the practice and propagation of other religions to the non-Malays in the Federation would be assured under the Constitution (UMNO/SUA 154/56, Minutes of Alliance ad-hoc political sub-committee meeting, 2 April 1957).

Sir Donald Charles MacGillivray personally felt that such a provision would be advantageous because the Yang DiPertuan Agong could at the same time become the head of the faith in the Settlements of Penang and Malacca (CO 1030/524 (10), MacGillivray to Secretary of State, 25 February 1957; See also CO 1030/524 (18), MacGillivray to Secretary of State, 21 March 1957).

Fast forward to the present, Article 3 of the Federal Constitution has clearly mentioned Islam as the religion of the Federation with the Rulers being the Head of religion in their respetive States, while the Yang DiPertuan Agong becomes the Head of religion in the States of Pulau Pinang, Melaka, Sabah and Sarawak, as well as in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya.  It is not an official religion but the religion of the Federation.  The provisos added to safeguard the practice and propagation of other religions are now enshrined in Article 11 with limits to propagate given in Clause 4 of the said Article, to safeguard and honour the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation.

There is even a separation of jurisdiction when it comes to the position of Islam in the Federal Constitution.  The Syariah Law comes under the purview of the respective Rulers, and the Attorney-General of Malaysia, under Article 145(3) does not have the jurisdiction over proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court of a court-martial.  This separation of jurisdition is also present as provided by Article 121(1A) where both the High Court of Malaya and High Court of Sabah and Sarawak do not have any jurisdiction over Syariah matters.  Therefore, the respected Tan Sri should be aware that, borrowing the words of Sir Stamford Raffles in a 1815 letter to his cousin mentioned how “Religion and laws are so united” in Muslim dominated areas that the introduction of Christian beliefs will bring about “much mischief, much bitterness of heart and contention”. (Seademon, A Case For God, 1 Jan 2013) .

Even Act 355, the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act, 1965 (last revised in 1988)  states the following:

1. (1) This Act may be cited as the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction), 1965.

1. (2) This Act shall apply to all the States of Peninsular Malaysia.

2. The Syariah Courts duly constituted under any law in a State and invested with jurisdiction over persons professing the religion of Islam and in respect of any of the matters enumerated in List II of the State List of the Ninth Schedule to the Federal Constitution are hereby conferred jurisdiction in respect of offences against precepts of the religion of Islam by persons professing that religion which may be prescribed under any written law:

Provided that such jurisdiction shall not be exercised in respect of any offence punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding three years or with any fine exceeding five thousand ringgit or with whipping exceeding six strokes or with any combination thereof.

The Act, clearly says that it first and foremost, applies to all States of the Peninsular Malaysia. It is not applicable to where the Yang DiPertuan Agong is the Head of religion ie. the Federal Territories, Sabah and Sarawak.  Second, it applies only to Muslims and any matters in List II of the State List of the Ninth Schedule to the Federal Constitution. Third, it cannot propose any punishment that prescribes any jail term exceeding three years, or with any fine exceeding five thousand ringgit, or with whipping exceeding six strokes or with any combination thereof.

Therefore, there is no question of introducing stoning to death, amputation of limbs etc.  Anything above those limitations will be referred to the Criminal Courts.

So, Tan Sri, care to explain how are secularism and pluralism being attacked with examples of provisos of the Federal Constitution or any laws made under it?

Finally, let me quote the interview given by the respected Tan Sri to The Star:

G25 has also expanded its scope to include good governance and tackling corruption. As not only the former head of the PSD but also former secretary-general in the Local Government and Federal Territory Ministry, Health Ministry and Agriculture Ministry, Alwi has focused on good governance, which he calls the precondition for a constitutional democracy: “Those in power must be made accountable for their actions and conduct.”

During his time, civil servants were able to do their jobs without fear or favour, he recalls. “The division of responsibilities between the politicians and civil servants was fairly clear cut.”

But over time good governance has been eroded at an alarming rate, he says.

“There are hardly any more checks and balances.”

What either the good Tan Sri or The Star have also failed to mention is the fact that for more than three years, Tan Sri Alwi Jantan was the Deputy Secretary-General for the Prime Minister’s Department under the founder of Parti Pribumi, Mahathir Mohamad.  Mahathir’s now good friend, Lim Kit Siang, wrote not so long ago, on Thursday, 12 February 2015 at 12.57pm:

“This shows the rot in Malaysia, but it is a rot which was started during Mahathir’s 22-year premiership, and by Mahathir himself!

Today, Mahathir is obsessed with the toppling of Najib as Prime Minister, but this is not because he wanted to stop the rot in Malaysia, to restore the independence and integrity of the judiciary and a just rule of law; to end the subversion of the independence and professionalism of national institutions whether the civil service, the police, the elections commission or anti-corruption agency; eradicate rampant corruption; restore ethics and honesty in public life; re-establish a good education system or restore Malaysia’s economic competitiveness.

Mahathir wants Najib out as the Prime Minister for Malaysia, not to stop the rot which was started by him during his premiership, but for an agenda personal to himself.

This is the rot of Hamlet in Malaysia.”

I’m surprised the good Tan Sri had made no mention whatsoever of this episode.  And he was a civil servant by definition, under the tutelage of the Pribumi person himself and remained in public service until 16 April 1990, thirteen years before Mahathir steped down.

So, Tan Sri, it is good that you want to become the torchbearer of the founding fathers of this blessed nation. However, please ensure that you are on the right path first before you decide to light that torch and guide others.


Taqweem al-SeaDemon

June 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Blog Stats

  • 1,206,624 hits

Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Archives