Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe by Email This is an interesting news: The original location had 99% Muslims, so shift the temple (so says the article). Proposed location in Section 23 has 70% Muslims, so the residents have created a committee to protest. Since Shah Alam was created in the late 1970s as a”planned city”, the aim was to populate it with certain race, thus the situation we see now. Acres of estates was redeveloped and the Indians dissappeared. The whole of Shah Alam has become overwhelmingly majority Muslims. I had lots of problem looking for proper Indian restaurant when staying there. Had to travel to either Klang or Sri Muda from Section 17. After a while, one opened at Padang Jawa, so still OK.
Going by population ratio, looks like have to shift the temple to Sri Muda (which is fast becoming a foreigner-majority area) or out of Shah Alam. Unless the parameter used is different. For example, one temple for every 10km or for every place with 100 Hindu families. As the saying goes, “don’t stay in a place that doesn’t have a temple”.
Having said all that, maybe there’s too many temple in that area, and they can combine two or more into one bigger complex?
The Section 23 site on industrial land near Taman Ixora was picked for the Sri Mariamman temple as there was no other vacant site that was suitable.
The chairman of the Selangor state committee for welfare, women’s affairs, science, technology and innovation, Rodziah Ismail, said this was also because the industrial site of 0.2 hectares in Section 23 had been converted to place of worship status.
However, she said, since there had been objections from the residents, the issue will be referred to higher authorities for further action. She said this to reporters after the Programme with Kuwait Finance House and the handing over of Si Manja TAWAS (Tabung Warisan Anak Selangor) cards at Section 7 here today.
Rodziah, who is Batu Tiga state assemblyman, was asked to comment on the objections of Taman Ixora residents who did want the temple near their houses.
She said she and the Shah Alam member of parliament, Khalid Abdul Samad, the Selangor State Development Board and Shah Alam City Council will meet with the residents.
Yesterday, the Section 23 action committee against the temple construction sent a protest memorandum to Rodziah saying the temple was just 160m from houses, 50m from a playground and 150m from Surau Al-Jannah at the housing estate.
The committee also asked why there was no public hearing on the matter and that 70 per cent of the residents there were Muslims.
Rodziah said a public hearing was not necessary as the area was industrial land.
She said the temple was being moved from Section 19 as the area was 99 per cent Muslim and was near a residential area. — BERNAMA
aikk…quite interesting also….okeh since there is 99% ( wow 99% tu….oni 1% is other races ahh….quite confuzing fact….) okeh nvr mind since there is a lot of muslims there we need to shift the temple bcoz the residential also near to temple plus there majority muslims..okeh fine…like tat means they also need to shift the surau since i c certain place there is no muslims..all chinese n indians…i think i also want to give percentage lorrr….about 80% chinese n indians sumore the surau is near to residential….can we make a suggestion??? erkkkkkkkk……can we??
mmmmm….do we already merdeka for 52 years??? i cant believe it….
okeh as our PM always say…..1Malaysia…rakyat didahulukan, prestasi diutamakn….if like that please look at to this matter and prove it 1Malaysia…
thankx Malaysia
of course you can’t give a suggestion to shift the surau if got less muslims. those facilities are usually compulsory for approving housing projects. perhaps in certain development projects, these rules are “adjusted” with aid of some “incentives”.
update from NST:
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/articles/20090816203526/Article/index_html
The Selangor government will explain on its decision to relocate the site of a Hindu temple at Section 19, Shah Alam, to an industrial site near Taman Ixora in Section 23.
Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim hoped that the people, especially residents in Section 23, would understand and accept the government’s explanation on the matter.
“The decision (to relocate the temple) was made after several discussions with the parties involved, including the temple committee,” he told reporters after distributing aid to the poor in conjunction with the coming Ramadhan and Aidilfitri at Batu 8, Ijok, near here.
He said this in response to objections raised by 200 residents of Taman Ixora on the relocation of the temple to their area.
On Friday, the Section 23 action committee against the temple construction sent a protest memorandum to the chairman of the Selangor state committee for welfare, women’s affairs, science, technology and innovation, Rodziah Ismail, saying the temple was just 160m from houses, 50m from a playground and 150m from the Surau Al-Jannah at the housing estate.
The committee also asked why there was no public hearing on the matter and that 70 per cent of the residents there were Muslims.
Khalid said it was a problem for the government to find a place which was not densely populated in Selangor for the construction of a house of worship.
“We live in a multi-racial society. So we have to be considerate in this matter,” he added. — BERNAMA
—————————————————
Its a problem alright because of the population imbalance. This is something that need to thought about carefully because the percentage-view will be used in future cases, and “need to be considerate” will be thrown out of the window.
MP
This is going to set a dangerous and potentially a fatal precedence in Selangor and in other Pakatan and even BN ruled states.
If this is in Selangor the most cosmopolitan state in Malaysia, then what about others ?
You know I had always been consistent in the matter that we Indians need to be sensible and abide the law in building temples. However, the intolerance shown by the Shah Alam residents is shocking especially so when it is ruled by Pakatan which supposedly stand for a more liberal and multi-racial policies.
Shah Alam today is very different from Shah Alam perhaps 10 years ago. Those days it used to be almost 100% Malays but lately more and more non Malays are moving since the state govt realised that the township is dead due to over regulations and mono-religious population.
The problem in Shah Alam is that Indians need to find a suitable land before they build a temple and land is not easy to buy. They often had to build one far away from Indian areas due to this. Even if the land is available, the owner might not want to sell it.
In any case, this relocation of temples is not the 1st in Selangor. There were at least 2 cases before this under Pakatan. One in Kg Tunku and another one somewhere near PJ Taman Mayang. Remember the incident where the Kelana Jaya MP was slapped by PAS guy over the temple issue ?
What I am afraid of is that this relocation and the reason given will trigger more Muslims and even Chinese to do likewise in other areas of Selangor. With PAS and some sections of PKR showing intolerance, I expect this issue to crop up more and more often in the coming months. Worse off all, PAS and PKR might use the issue to create problem in other BN-held states to portray UMNO as anti-Muslim for allowing temples to be built in Muslim majority areas.
Most of all, I am worried something like what happened in Kg Rawa Penang where enraged mobs destroying temples and setting off racial/religous riots.
Killer, I wonder who are these residents. Most of the time, we will be quick to identify the protestors as being alligned or stooges of some party or other. So, are these protestors genuine or got big udang sebalik batu? that’s first thing.
If genuine, aren’t they protesting according to the law? that’s acceptable right? temple to near to house etc. All this got bylaws that govern buildings. are these complied to?
I doubt more non-Malays are moving in. Perhaps only in Setia Alam/Bukit Jelutong areas which are more high-end areas. The rest of Shah Alam (seksyen 2-23) is still the same. I can see more foreign workers though. the upcoming i-city may revive Shah Alam a bit, but not sure how PAS will react to it.
I think no need new temples in Shah Alam. Those days it was estate and plenty of temples. Gradually, estates disappeared, temples stuck in the middle. Now want to relocate temples, no more suitable place. End up, next to sewarage pond, water reservoir or other reserve areas.
yeah, i remember the cases. Also the one in Ampang. Looks like lose-lose situation. Don’t relocate, gets demolished. Want to relocate, gets protest.
Perhaps there should be rule saying one temple COMPLEX (housing many deities) every 10km or so. Let’s give the community 5 to 10 years to consolidate all the temples. make it a proper long term plan. the govt can chip in with allocation and land.
i won’t be surprised if this problem flares up into riot. there’s plenty of politicians who will take the opportunity.
@poobalan,
Hi MP
I agree with you idea of consolidating the temples.Which is something that I had been saying even before the Kg Karupiah incident in 2007.
Talking about these residents,usually the instigator is the local ustaz or PAS leaders based on my experience. By having a fiery sermon, they whip up the residents’emotion.
You see when you talk about regulations on places of worship,such matters comes under the purvue of the local government which the Federal govt has no control.
I have no confidence of the situation in Selangor and I don’t think Khalid is in control of the situation either. As we have seen from the beer incident, there is already a dangerous precedent has been set. By having oxymoronic term of “self regulation” again the rights of the non Muslims have been infringed. I don’t think PAS has quite finished and they will continue to impose their moral standards on others both Muslims and non Muslims.
You know we have 25k temples in Malaysia and probably many of those are not situated in Indian majority areas. As such, Khalid’s action has a very serious reprecussion.
While I agree that we Indians must be more responsible and abide the law, but I find it hard to stomach such naked intolerance from others.In the aftermath of Kg Karupiah a lot of Pakatan Indian leaders defended the building of temples whether they are legal or illegal. As such,I am keen to know what is their stance on this.
I also remember Khalid’s pledge of providing land for new temples and also legalising those sited in govt and private land. But I have seen nothing concrete done on this. And now they talking about re-locating temples.
I think just like MIC, Pakatan Indian leaders must work on a plan to legalise and consolidate these temples. But alas, these Indian leaders are busy playing politics. The same also applies to Penang where Prof Rama is just a mandore without power and has done nothing to those small and illegal temples.
To tell the truth,I don’t hava good feeling about these state of affairs. I think we are treading on a dangerous path. We have seen this had created a near clash at Taman Mayang and it is a matter of time it could trigger a bloody clash.
The legalisation of lands is taking place. Last week, 4 pieces of land were approved in Selangor for temple relocation. I think I blogged it.
As for the alcohol issue, I think PAS should follow through on health angle, instead of harping on religion (which only damages them since some Malays are drinking alcohol now, meaning signs of religious weakness). I support ban/limit on alcohol sales since it causes much damage to self and environment. More on that in future postings.
Not only politicians, but the religious leaders also not seem to be doing anything. MHS should be leading this kind initiative, but they having own internal problems. The temple owners/committee also won’t easily compromise.
Anyway, read the reply from Shah Alam MP at:
http://www.khalidsamad.com/2009/08/tapak-kuil-seksyen-23-shah-alam.html
The rebuttal to that posting is at:
http://khairulryezal.blogspot.com/2009/08/jawapan-yb-khalid-samad-mengenai.html
MP
I am a non-drinker but my concern is same as you that this cannot be approached in a religious angle. If the non Muslims agreed to such “self regulations” on health ground, this will only encourage PAS to come up with more restrictions. The thing is that if Selangor is successful it would enbolden PAS to do so in other states (Kedah & Kelantan) in a more comprehensive manner. And 2ndly it would give PAS to attack UMNO and that would force UMNO also to try similar regulations elsewhere. As such this is a dangerous game to play.
I would rather have MHS and Buddhist & other religious associations educate the members instead of blanket ban. As you know this was tried in India and failed.
Obviously, if PAS campaigns on its own, its seen as religious interence by others. This is where MCCBCHST, MOH, state governments, NGOs can join hand and campaign based on “health” and “social impact” angle. Just talking from religious point of view only irritates and alienates people, especially the liberals, free thinkers and weak religious background. Religion is seen as burden nowadays, many just wearing religion as a mask to fit in the society.
Pas may try attack UMNO with such successful campaigns against alcohol, but whether UMNO and BN will follow or not, its another story.
I read Khalid’s reply on the issue and it is rather shocking that he feels that having a temple in a Muslim majority area is unacceptable considering the fact that he’s the most liberal of all PAS MPs (Erdogan group) and very close to Anwar.
I am just worried that such practices will set a precedent to other such measures and this will become a standard for the whole country. At the same token, can Indians ask a mosque or other places of workship to be relocated if that area has majority Hindus ? Would PAS abide by the same principle ?
I think in this age where we are talking about 1Malaysia, PAS is happily rewarding and encouraging intolerance. This augurs bad for the state and the country. In fact if you read Khalid’s reply, he was insinuating that Najib was wrong to visit Batu Caves and trying to make an issue out of it.
@Killer,
whet ever u believe it or not…just wait n c on next PRU wat is propaganda of the pakatan rakyat lead by DSAI will do….i already get the pic wat goin to happen on next PRU…their tactics is sooo damn simple just playin wit saluran 1,2,3…..n the issue they all playin very carefully selected issue….i hope there is a SUPER hero going to save BN from losing more states afta this….MR.Killer u must knw rite now PAS untuk semua…tat means for all races….wow..tatz cool…waiting for UMNO to announce UMNO utk semua….hehe…wen tat happen..itz goin to b dreams come true for dato onn jaafar…hehehe