Posts Tagged ‘Hinduism’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

The MCCBCHST presents a statement to Parliamentary Selected Community on National Unity

August 9th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The MCCBCHST presents a statement to Parliamentary Selected Community on National Unity

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism, and Taoism led by its President Datuk A.Vaithilingam and accompanied by Mr. Ng Hong Pau (Buddhist), Rev. Dr. Hermen Shastri (Christian), Mr.K Shanmuga (Hindu), Sardar Jagir Singh (Sikh) and Mr Tan Hoe Chieow (Tao) met the Parliamentary Select Committee, Chaired by the Minister in Prime Minister Department YB DatuK Dr. Maximus Ongkili.

The Parliamentary Select Committee was made up of members from various political parties including UMNO, MCA, MIC, Gerekan, DAP, PAS and others.

Please read the statement which has been presented to the Parliamentary Select Committee.

source
      
Statement to Parliamentary Select Committee on National Unity
 

» Read more: The MCCBCHST presents a statement to Parliamentary Selected Community on National Unity

1 comment »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

Secular or not?

July 19th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Does Najib now respect the “social contract” as always threatened by UMNO whenever the Others question sensitive issues, or is this another case of different rules for them?

We don’t seem to be islamic state since we don’t fully practice syariah laws in all areas of the country’s administration, finance, law etc. My muslims friends say that we are not Islamic country.

On the other hand, we are not exactly secular as well since Islam plays a significant role in many areas, indirectly.

Overall, I think we are secular if we clearly understand that some of the things happening is due to racial discrimination, rather than religious discrimination. The racial trend is hiding behind religion, for example bumiputera status and points like all malays are muslim. Oops, am i questioning the social contract now?

The Star and NST both highlighted MCA’s stand and Bar Council stand, and NST even added MCCBCHST two cents as well. Itu PPP, IPF, MIC, Gerakan, mana pigi? Tarak baca paper ka?

Groups: We are secular

source
KUALA LUMPUR: Various groups have disagreed with Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s statement that Malaysia was never a secular state, saying that he had ignored the country’s constitutional history and social contract.

They referred to several important events, including those that led to the country’s independence and formation of Malaysia, to show that it had always been stressed that Malaysia was a secular state.

MCA secretary-general Datuk Ong Ka Chuan quoted the Alliance memorandum to the Reid Commission on Sept 27, 1956, that stated:

“The religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion, and shall not imply the State is not a secular state.”

He cited notes prepared by the Colonial Office dated May 23, 1957 at the London Conference Talks which said: “The members of the Alliance delegation stressed that they had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy and that Malaya would be a secular state.

“This was the unequivocal original intention of Umno, MCA and MIC,” Ong said.

He added that the documents and facts had given a true picture of Malaysia, whereby a secular state was the foundation of the formation of Malaya, and this consensus made by the country’s forefathers should always be remembered and obeyed.

Kota Melaka MP Wong Nai Chee said that the issue of Malaysia as a secular state was vigorously debated again during the 1962 Cobbold Commission before the entry of Sabah and Sarawak to form Malaysia.

He said the secular nature of the Federal Constitution had been the basis for nation-building since 1957 and re-enforced in 1963.

“The constitutional position of Malaysia being a secular state has also been confirmed in the 1988 Supreme Court decision in the case of the Public Prosecutor versus Che Omar.

“Therefore, legally, we cannot see how it can be interpreted differently now,” he said.

Wong added that the fact that Muslims were the majority did not in itself make Malaysia an Islamic state but “rather, Malaysia is a secular state with the majority being Muslim.”

Bar Council Malaysia president Ambiga Sreenevasan said that one had only to look at the Articles in the Federal Constitution, the system of government and administration of justice to know that Malaysia was not an Islamic state.

“The civil courts set up under the Constitution dispense secular justice on a daily basis to all the citizens of the country.

“Secular law governs contracts, commerce, international relations and trade and every aspect of lives of a citizen.

“Islamic law governs specific matters set out in the Federal Constitution in relation to persons professing Islam,” she said.

She added that in the context of the country’s history and the Constitution itself that proclaimed supremacy, the council did not doubt that Malaysia was a secular state.

“It is time that the proposition that Malaysia is not secular, (which is rewriting of the Constitution), be put to rest once and for all and that there is due recognition and reaffirmation of the clear legal and constitutional position that Malaysia is, and has always been, a secular state,” she said.

MCA: We are a secular nation
By : Eileen Ng
source

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia is a secular state, insists the MCA.

It said the position was clear as evidenced by numerous historical documents, including the Reid Report, the Cobbold Commission and a 1988 Supreme Court decision.

After reviewing the documents used in the process of drafting the Federal Constitution, the party’s secretary-general, Datuk Ong Ka Chuan, said Malaysia was a secular state based on the consensus and social contract agreed upon by the nation’s forefathers.

“The documents showed that a secular state is the foundation of the formation of Malaya and this consensus was made by our forefathers,” he said yesterday.

He said this in response to the statement by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak on Monday that Malaysia is an Islamic nation that protects the rights of non-Muslims.

Citing an example, Ong said according to the Alliance’s memorandum to the Reid Commission dated Sept 27, 1956, it was stated on Page 19 that “The religion of Malaya shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion, and shall not imply the state is not a secular state.”

Ong said former prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj had said during a meeting on April 17, 1957, that “the whole constitution was framed on the basis that the federation would be a secular state”.

Ong said notes prepared by the Colonial Office dated May 23, 1957, at the London Conference Talks mentioned that “the members of the Alliance delegation stressed that they had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy and that Malaya would be a secular state”.

Additionally, Ong stated that when former MCA president, who was Finance Minister, Tun Tan Siew Sin spoke in parliament on July 10, 1957, in support of the Constitutional Bill, he said that although Islam would be the official religion, “this does not in any way derogate from the principle, which has always been accepted, that Malaya will be a secular state and that there will be a complete freedom to practise any other religion”.

Ong added that all these documents showed a true picture of Malaysia, which is a secular nation.

MCA central committee member and Kota Melaka MP Wong Nai Chee said Najib’s interpretation was “not in accordance with the spirit and intent of the Federal Constitution”.

He said that the issue of Malaya as a secular state was vigorously debated again during the 1962 Cobbold Commission before the entry of Sabah and Sarawak, forming Ma- laysia.

“Again, the secular nature of Malaysia was reiterated as having been stated in the Reid Commission. The secular nature of our Federal Constitution has been the basis for our nation building since 1957 and reinforced in 1963.”

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism president, Datuk A. Vaithilingam, urged the government and all Malaysians to respect the social contract agreed to in 1957.

The council also strongly objected to attempts by the government to change the status quo.

The Bar Council said that in the context of the country’s history and the constitution itself that proclaimed its supremacy, there was no doubt whatsoever that Malay- sia was a secular state.

“It is noteworthy that the prime minister in his speech delivered at the conference yesterday and in his propagating Islam Hadhari has never referred to Malaysia as an Islamic state,” the council’s president Ambiga Sreeneva- san said.

“It is time that the proposition that Malaysia is not secular (which is a rewriting of the constitution), be put to rest once and for all and that there is due recognition and reaffirmation of the clear legal and constitutional position that Malaysia is, and has always been, a secular state.”

Comments Off on Secular or not? »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

Extracts from Hindu Human Rights Report 2006 by Hindu American Foundation

July 17th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


source: http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/pdf/HHR2006.pdf (7MB)

note that information to the foundation was provided by Hindu Rights Action Force (HindRAF)

Malaysia: Pg 49-52 and 162-167

Introduction

The Indian and Chinese influence in the Malay-speaking world dates back to at least 3rd century BCE when traders from both regions arrived at the archipelago. Hinduism and Buddhism were both established in the region by the 1 st century CE. Between the 7th and 14th centuries, the Indian Hindu culture reigned in the Malay world. During the 10 th century the arrival of Islam broke apart the Hindu empire and led to the conversion of most of the Malay-Indonesian world. The 16th century saw the arrival of the European colonizers, beginning with the Portuguese, followed by the Dutch, and ultimately the British. In 1824, the Anglo-Dutch created a border between British Malaysia and the Dutch East Indies, which is now Indonesia. This phase of occupation was followed by the mass immigration of Chinese and Indians who entered the country as workers in the colonial British economy. Between 1942 and 1945, the Japanese occupied the region, detracting power from the British in East Asia. Although short-lived, this occupation triggered feelings of nationalism, ultimately leading to the establishment of an independent Federation of Malaya in 1957. Upon the acquisition of British territories in North Borneo and Singapore, Malaya became Malaysia in 1963.

Status of Human Rights of Hindus in Malaysia, 2006

For years, Malaysia seemed to be balancing a secular government with the strong Islamic roots of the majority of its citizens. However, in recent years that balance has shifted and increased religious tensions among the population. Marina Mahathir, a rights activist and daughter of Malaysia’s longest-serving premier, says that the Malaysian government is not properly protecting the rights of its citizens from conservative Muslims. She spoke further about the incursion of Muslim values through a variety of confrontations, including the trial of a Chinese couple caught kissing in public and rules requiring non-Muslim policewomen to wear headscarves in parades. Mahathir also says the policy of giving preferential treatment to ethnic Malays should be modified. “The original intentions were good; it was about equality, bringing up people so that there was a level playing field, but I think maybe nobody foresaw some of the psychological side effects,” she said, citing the “sense of entitlement.

Religious freedom has been eroding within the country. As it is, ethnic Malays are required to be Muslims, as they are born into Islam and do not have the freedom to convert. However, even the minority Hindus and Christians in the country struggle to maintain and practice their religions. In the past few years, numerous disputes have come to light over the burial of Hindus in accordance with Muslim rites. The most well-known of these incidents occurred in 2005 when a prominent Malaysian climber was buried as a Muslim, despite protests from his Hindu family that he remained a Hindu.

In a further incident, an ethnic Indian man, Chandran Dharma Dass, was buried according to Islamic rites despite claims by his family that he had renounced Islam. Dass had converted to Islam in 2001 in order to marry a Muslim woman, but renounced Islam when he married a Thai woman instead. However, Syarifuudin Alsa Osman, a Kuantan Islamic religious offer, said that as Dass had not embraced another religion after renouncing Islam, “the deceased was a Muslim and should be buried according to Islam and this cannot be disputed by his family or other parties.” Dass was buried at a Muslim cemetery in his hometown of Gopeng, Perak.

In another example of the growing religious tensions in Malaysia, two practicing Hindu siblings of Indian origin are trying to change their religion on their birth certificates from Islam to Hinduism. The sibling’s father, K. Seshadri, converted from Hinduism to Islam before their birth but reverted back to Hinduism in 1991. Again, Seshadri was buried according to Islamic rites despite protests by his family. The siblings, S. Jeevanathan and S. Maneemegalay, are registered as Hindus on their identity cards but have been denied by Malaysia’s National Registration Department in changing their Muslim status on their birth certificates. “According to the law, when one embraces Islam, there is no provision that allows him to take another religion or go back to his former religion,” said Rahimin Bani, Malacca religious department head.

Separately, Fauzi Mustaffar, the head of Malaysia’s Shariat Department, has asked Muslims in Malaysia not to wish Hindus a Happy Diwali. Although the government distanced itself from the directive, Mustaffar’s message claimed that for a Muslim to greet Hindus on Diwali was equivalent to practicing polytheism. In an email to his staff, Mustaffar wrote, “So Muslims who have inadvertently wished Hindus a Happy Diwali, Happy Durga Pooja or Happy Lakshmi Pooja [all are prominent Hindu festivals] must immediately repent and not repeat it in the future.”

The highest profile atrocity faced by Hindus in Malaysia is the destruction of their temples. A total of seventy-six separate demolitions, desecrations or forcible relocations of Hindu temples are enumerated and discussed in Appendix C. According to P. Waytha Moorthy, Chairman of the Hindu Rights Action Force (an umbrella of approximately 40 NGOs in Malaysia), authorities are destroying temples “in an unlawful and indiscriminate fashion, at the federal, state, and local levels.”

Many of these temples have existed since British colonial rule as Indian laborers who were brought into the country to work on rubber plantations built them. Malaysian mosques have not faced similar fates and actually mosques are given preference in the government allocation of public funds and land. Moorthy lists six major temples that were demolished by the authorities between February and June 2006:

– Sri Ayyanar Sathiswary Alayam at Jalan Davies demolished February 22
– Malaimel Sri Selva Kaliamman at Pantal demolished April 17
– Sri Kaliamman at Midlands Estate demolished May 9
– Sri Balkrishan Muniswarer at Setapak partly demolished May 14
– Gangai Muthu K Karumariaman at PMR Batu Buntung Estate Kulim torched May 15
– Muniswara at Setapak demolished June 8

A more prominent case involves the demolition of the Sri Muthu Mariamman, a temple that is over 100 years old. The temple, which was located on rubber plantation that was home to approximately 1000 families, has been at the center of a fight since 1992 when the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) made claims to temple’s land. There have been various attempts to save the temple, but a court order allowed the demolition of the temple in December 2006. The deities within the temple are to be moved to a separate location that will be provided by the Johor state. Hindu Rights Action Force has filed an application with the Malaysian High Court in Kuala Lumpur in order to stop the continued demolition of Hindu temples.

Violations of Constitution and UN Covenants

Malaysia has not taken any action toward signing or ratifying the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the UN’s International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Malaysia’s Constitution upholds Islam as “the religion of the Federation” but provides for the practice of other religions “in peace and harmony.” Part II of the Constitution defines the fundamental liberties of people, which include the right to equality before the law; the right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly; and the right to “prove and practice his religion.” The Constitution also guarantees that every religious group may “manage its own religious affairs, establish and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes, and acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law.” Furthermore, religious groups hold the right “to establish and maintain institutions for education of children in its own religion” although the Federation retains the right to “establish or maintain or assist in establishing or maintaining Islamic institutions.” Additionally, the Constitution mandates that no individual is “required to receive instruction in or take part in any ceremony or act of worship of a religion other than his own.” Clearly, state-sponsored temple destruction and infringements on personal religious freedom seen in Malaysia today are direct violations of the aforementioned guarantees enshrined in the nation’s Constitution.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Over the past decade, the rights of minorities in Malaysia have eroded as the government shifts from its seemingly secular state to one that is rooted in conservative Islam. Religious freedom is not protected and for ethnic Malays, does not exist at all. While the Hindu community faces numerous struggles, the two key ones are their right to cremate their dead as Hindus and the demolition of their temples. The Malaysian government should respect the wishes of family members and permit them to carry out final rites for their deceased in accordance with Hindu tradition. The U.S., UN and various human rights groups should pressure the Malaysian government to protect Hindu temples from desecration and destruction ? the primary institutions of the Hindu community in Malaysia. Hindu places of worship that existed prior to independence should be designated as temple property and title to the land should be handed to the respective temple trustees/committees as has been done for pre-independence era mosques. The Malaysian Government should be urged to not discriminate in the allocation of public funds and land for places of worship between Muslim and minority religious groups.

Appendix C:

Destruction of Hindu Temples in Malaysia – 2006

ELEVEN HINDU TEMPLES DEMOLISHED IN THE KLANG VALLEY

1. The Sri Ayyanar Sathiswary Alayam Temple (more than 65 years-old) was demolished on February 22, 2006 and the sacred icons buried at the site.
2. The Malaimel Sri Selva Kaliamman Temple Pantai (more than 100 years-old) was demolished on April 17, 2006 on orders by the Kuala Lumpur City Hall.
3. The Vaalmuniswarar Rajaamman Kovil (more than 60 years-old) at the Lady Templer Hospital was demolished on May 3, 2006 or orders by the Kuala Lumpur City Hall.
4. Sri Kaliamman temple at Midlands Estate, Seksyen 7, Shah Alam (more than 100 yearsold) was demolished or orders by the Shah Alam City Hall on May 9, 2006.
5. The Sri Balakrishan Muniswarer temple in Setapak (more than 60 years-old) was partly demolished on May 11, 2006 or orders by the Kuala Lumpur City Hall.
6. The Sri Balakrishan Muniswarer temple in Setapak was completely demolished and sacred icons destroyed on June 8, 2006.
7. The partly demolished Sri Kaliamman temple at Midlands Estate, Seksyen 7, Shah Alam was demolished for a second time on June 12, 2006 wherein three main Hindu deities were hammered and smashed to pieces with a sledge hammer by the Shah Alam City Council enforcement officers.
8. On August 1, 2006 the Om Sri Sakti Nagamma Allaya Hindu Temple in Taman Sri Manja, PJS 3/30 Petaling Jaya, Selangor was demolished by the Petaling Jaya City Council.
9. The Sri Subramaniam temple in Country Homes, Rawang, Selangor, Malaysia was demolished on September 29, 2006.
10. On October 31, 2006 the Sri Muniswarar Temple (more than 100 years-old) which was built on private land in Bandar Rinching, Semenyih Selangor was demolished.
11. The Devi Sri Karumaniamman Hindu Temple, Petaling Jaya Utara, Section 21, Kampung Taman Aman was demolished on November 30, 2006.
12. On December 29, 2006 the Sri Muniswarar Temple (more than 100 years-old) which was built on private land in Bandar Rinching, Semenyih Selangor was demolished.

FOUR OTHER DEMOLISHED HINDU TEMPLES LOCATED OUTSIDE KLANG VALLEY BUT WITHIN PENINSULAR MALAYSIA

13. The Sri Maha Sivalingaeswarrar Hindu Temple, Batu 7, Gemas Tampin was demolished on April 10, 2006.
14. The 80 year-old Sri Muthumariamman Alayam Hindu Temple in Skudai Johor Bahru was demolished in August 2006.
15. Sacred icons in the Sungai Wangi Mathurai Veeran Temple (60 years-old) in Sitiawan, Kampung Tirali, 9 th Mile Jalan Air Tawar, Sungai Wangi Estate, Perak were hammered, smashed up and thrown into a drain and the temple demolished on October 17, 2006 by the Manjung District Council.
16. The 55 year-old Kaliaman Alayam Hindu Temple in Taman Impiana Mengelembu in Ipoh was demolished on November 27, 2006.

THIRTY ONE HINDU TEMPLES IN KLANG VALLEY THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED A DEMOLITION NOTICE

17. A demolition notice was issued to the Kuil Hindu Sri Mariaman di Seksyen 11, Shah Alam on April 26, 2006 by the Shah Alam Municipal Council.
18. The Sri Maha Mariamman Temple Taman Intan Baiduri Selayang was issued a demolition notice in June 2006.
19. The Sri Subramaniam Temple Kg.Jawa Klang (107 years-old) was issued a demolition notice in June 2006.
20. The Mariamman Temple Jalan Meru Bandar Setia Alam, Shah Alam (101 years-old) was issued a demolition notice in June 2006.
21. The Kg.Jawa Mariamman Temple (more than 120 years-old) was issued with a demolition notice in June 2006.
22. The Sri Maha Laxhsmi temple in Sunway was issued with a demolition notice in June 2006 by the Petalaing Jaya City Council.
23. The Sri Angineer Temple in Taman Tun Dr. Ismail, Kuala Lumpur built on a private land was issued with a demolition notice in June 2006 by the Kuala Lumpur City Manager.
24. Sri Mahamariaman Hindu Temple in Kg Semarak, Old Klang Road has been threatened with demolition five times (Nanban, July 6, 2006, pg. 12)
25. The Sri Sai Bala Raman Hindu Temple in Klang Jaya was threatened with demolition (Nesan, July , 2006)
26. The 101 year-old Dewi Sri Karumari Aman Temple at the 4 ? Mile Jalan Meru, Klang was ordered closed by the Selangor State Government on July 10, 2006, and the temple was threatened to be demolished to make way for housing development.
27. The 101 year-old Thevy Sri Karumariamman temple’s Bandar Setia Alam, Shah Alam access road was closed on July 10, 2006 by the Selangor State Government and later threatened with demolition to make way for a private housing development.
28. The Arun Estate Temple in Shah Alam was issued a demolition notice (
Nesan, July 12, 2006, pg. 6)
29. In July 2006 the 110 year-old Tepi Sungai JKR Mariaman Temple was given a notice that it would be demolished.
30. In July 2006 the Sri Muniswarar temple in Jalan Air Panas Baru Setapak was given a notice that it would be demolished.
31. In July 2006 the Sri Jada Muniswarar Hindu Temple in Danau Kota, Kuala Lumpur was given a notice that it would be demolished.
32. The Jedda Manismanar Hindu Temple in Jalan Setapak was given a notice that it would be demolished (Nesan, August 17, 2006)
33. The Sri Maha Megeswari Hindu Temple in Lembah Jaya, Ampang is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, August 20, 2006)
34. The Muniswarar Hindu Temple in Bandar Baru Ampang is being threatened withdemolition (Nesan, August 20, 2006)
35. The Sri Sakti Vinayar Hindu Temple in Kampung Ampang Indah is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, August 20, 2006)
36. The Mariaman Hindu Temple in Kg Tasik Permai, Ampang is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, August 20, 2006)
37. Siti Subramariam Hindu Temple in Kg Tasik Permai, Ampang is being threatened with demolishment Nesan (20/8/06)
38. The Sri Mariaman Temple (60 years-old) in Section 18 was issued a notice demanding relocation, on October 18, 2006.
39. The Sri Kaliaman Temple (80 years-old) in Section 18 was issued a notice demanding relocation, on October 18, 2006.
40. The Sri Vinayagar Temple (80 years-old) in Section 18 was issued a notice demanding relocation, on October 18, 2006.
41. The Sri Mariaman Temple (109 years-old) in Section 19, which has a sacred 100 year old tree, was issued a notice demanding relocation, on October 18, 2006.
42. The Sri Mariaman Temple (100 years-old) in Section 15 was issued a notice demanding relocation, on October 18, 2006.
43. The Sri Maha Mariaman Hindu Temple in Section 11 was issued a notice demanding relocation, on October 18, 2006.
44. The 80 year-old Sri Athi Muniswara Temple in Jalan Semarak, off Jalan Gurney in Kuala Lumpur was issued a demolition notice on October 19, 2006.
45. On November 21, 2006 the Sivaksakthi Linggeswara Hindu Temple in Kampung Tropikana, Jalan Padang Tembak, Subang Jaya was issued a demolition notice.
46. The Sri Kamatchie Amman Telecoms Temple Cheras (more than 100 years-old) is being threatened with demolition.
47. Despite receiving recognition from UNESCO, the Nageswari Hindu Temple in Bangsar is being threatened with demolition.

SEVENTEEN OTHER HINDU TEMPLES LOCATED OUTSIDE THE KLANG VALLEY BUT WITHIN PENINSULA MALAYSIA THAT HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH DEMOLITION

48. The Sri Muniswarar Aalayam Seremban (150 years-old) and a 150 year-old “rain tree” have been threatened with demolition since March 2006 by the District and Land Office.
49. On June 26, 2006 the 110 year-old Sri Chinna Karuppan Temple in Masai Johor was issued a notice of demolition.
50. The 60 year-old Saiva Muniswarar Temple Temple in Sg.Petani Kedah was given a notice of demolition (Nanban June 29, 2006, pg 4).
51. The Sri Muthumariaman Aman Skudai Hindu Temple (70 years-old) in Lindon Estate risks being demolished (Nesan, July 3, 2006, pg. 7)
52. Sri Muniswarar Temple in Slim River risks being demolished (Nesan, July 14, 2006)
53. On July 15, 2006 the Muniswarar Temple in Sitiawan was given a demolition notice (Nanban, July , 2006).
54. A Hindu temple was threatened with demolition (Nesan, July 19, 2006, pg. 6)
55. The Sri Nageswari Amman Alayam Hindu Temple is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, July 19, 2006, pg. 6)
56. The Muniswarar Hindu Temple is being threatened with demolition (
Nesan, July 19, 2006, pg. 6).
57. The Sri Sakti Viyanayagar Hindu Temple is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, July 19, 2006, pg. 6).
58. The Sri Maha Mariaman Hindu Temple is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, July 19, 2006, pg. 6).
59. The Sri Subramaniam Hindu Temple is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, July 19, 2006, pg. 6).
60. The Muthu Mariaman Hindu Temple in Liutan Estate Skudai was threatened to be demolished on August 13, 2006.
61. The Sri Subramaniam Hindu Temple in Kampar is being threatened with demolition (Nesan, August 21, 2006).
62. Bangi Mariaman Hindu Temple is being threatened with demolition (
Nesan, August 23, 2006).
63. The Taman U Hindu Temple in Skudai, Johor Bahru was on the verge of being demolished when about 600 Hindu devotees protested on August 23, 2006.
64. The Sri Mathuraimeeran Hindu Temple in Kampar Taman, Sri Wangi is being threatened with demolition (Nanban, August 25, 2006).

THREE HINDU TEMPLES THAT HAVE BEEN BURNT TO THE GROUND

65. The Ganggai Muthu Karumariaman temple in PMR Batu Buntung Estate Kulim, Kedah on May 15, 2006 was torched by unknown individuals.
66. The Sri Kalikambul Kamadeswarar temple in Ebor Estate Batu Tiga, Shah Alam Selangor was burned down.
67. The Sri Kalkattha Kaliamman temple in Kampung Sungai Kayu Ara, 47400 Petaling Jaya was burned down.

SIX TEMPLES FORCED TO BE RELOCATED NEXT TO SEWAGE TANKS

68. The Sri Muneeswarar JKR Temple, Batu 5/12, Jalan Kapar, 42100 Klang, Selangor (73 years-old) was given notice to be demolished and forced to be relocated next to a sewage tank (June 2006, Hindraf)
69. The Sri Kumaravel Hindu Temple in Kampung Medan, Petaling Jaya, Selangor was forcibly relocated next to a sewage tank, electric station (TNB) and high voltage cable on July 14, 2006 (Makkal Osai, August 15, 2006)
70. The Mariaman Hindu Temple in Bukit Beonang, Taman Bukit Melaka was forced to relocate next to a sewage tank (Nanban, August 25, 2006).
71. The Sri Raja Rajeswarar Hindu Temple in Taman Tunku Jaafar, Senawang, Seremban was relocated next to a sewage tank (Hindraf).
72. The Mariamman and Perumal Hindu Temple in Puchong Perdana, Selangor were relocated next to a sewage tank (DAP sources).
73. The Mariamman Temple in Desa Mewah, Sunway Semenyih was forcibly relocated next to a septic tank, according to Bandar Rincing, the Semenyih Temple Chairman.

THREE HINDU TEMPLES WHERE DEITIES WERE FORCIBLY REMOVED

74. Icons in a 73 year-old JKR Sri Muniswarar Temple, Jalan Kapar Klang Temple were forcibly removed and taken away under mysterious circumstances in July 2006.
75. Deities from the Devi Sri Karumariaman Hindu Temple, Petaling Jaya Utara, Section 21, Kampung Taman Aman were forcibly removed and left in a construction site.
76. At the Kaliamman Hindu Temple, Jalan Matin Batu 5 Seremban (which is more than 28 years-old) deities and temple bell were removed (Nanban, September 3, 2006).

3 comments »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian

Tags:

Malaysia ‘convert’ claims cruelty – BBC version

July 9th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Malaysia 'convert' claims cruelty

By Jonathan Kent
BBC News, Kuala Lumpur


 

Revathi Massosai

Revathi Massosai alleges harsh treatment in detention

A Malaysian woman held for months in an Islamic rehabilitation centre says she was subjected to mental torture for insisting her religion is Hinduism.

Revathi Massosai, the name by which she wants to be known, says she was forced to eat beef despite being a Hindu.

Miss Massosai was seized by the Islamic authorities in January when she went to court to ask that she be registered as a Hindu rather than a Muslim.

The case is one of a number that have raised religious tensions in Malaysia.

Miss Massosai was born to Muslim converts and given a Muslim name, but she was raised as a Hindu by her grandmother and has always practised that faith.

However, under Malaysia's Islamic law, having Muslim parents makes one a Muslim and, as such, one is not allowed to change one's faith or marry a non-Muslim.

But Miss Massosai married a Hindu man in 2004 and the couple have a young daughter.

Headscarf

When in January she asked a court to officially designate her a Hindu she was detained and taken to an Islamic rehabilitation centre.

Muslims take part in Friday prayer at the National Mosque in Kuala Lumpur

Only the Islamic courts can allow a Muslim legally to change faith

Her detention was twice extended to six months, during which time she says religious officials tried to make her pray as a Muslim and wear a headscarf.

However, the claim that will particularly shock Hindus is that the camp authorities tried to force her to eat beef.

A lawyer representing the Malacca state Islamic department responsible for Miss Revathi's arrest, rejected her allegations and said officials believe that she can still be persuaded to embrace Islam.

She is adamant that she will remain a Hindu. In the meantime, Miss Revathi and her daughter have been placed in the custody of her Muslim parents.

Comments Off on Malaysia ‘convert’ claims cruelty – BBC version »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian

Tags:

Revathi released conditionally

July 6th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Revathi really freed and placed under parents care? imagine that..an adult..married and mother of a child is deemed unfit to take care of herself. what a joke!!! no wonder she says

"Because of their behaviour, I hate (benci) Islam even now," she added.

 
lets hope our voice – the consultative council – and MHS will take some action over this. perhaps start an online and offline petition or  even candlelight vigil all over malaysia – 31st august is a good date, public holiday so many can come and support.

 
please forward.
 
 
The mild version from the Sun

Woman freed from Islamic centre, court dismisses habeas corpus application
R.Surenthira Kumar

source
SHAH ALAM (July 6, 2007): The High Court here today dismissed an application by the husband of a woman whom he claimed was unlawfully detained for 180 days in an Islamic faith rehabilitation centre in Hulu Yam Baru in Batang Kali, Selangor.
Lawyers representing Siti Fatimah Abdul Karim's husband V.Suresh had prepared to argue the Habeas Corpus application but were only informed late yesterday about her release from the Baitul Aman Faith Rehabilitation Centre in Hulu Yam.

The remand period, initially for 80 days and then extended to 100 days, was supposed to expire midnight today.

Suresh had claimed his wife, who goes by the name M.Revathi, 29, was being unlawfully detained in the centre after she was taken away by officials from the Malacca Islamic Religious Council officers (MAIM) when she turned up at the Syariah court on Jan 8.

Lawyer representing the Superintendent of the centre and the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (MAIS) Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla told the court Siti Fayimah was released from detention and ordered to be placed under the custodyof her parents following a decision by the Syariah court in Malacca yesterday.

"Since the Syariah court has the wisdom to release Siti Fatimah, she is no longer under detention and therefore this application becomes redundant," said Mohamed Haniff Khatri.

He cited several Federal Court cases and decisions on the issue to support his argument and appealed to judge Datuk Su Geok Yiam to dismiss the application.

Lawyer representing Suresh, Karpal Singh appealed to the court for the case to be heard despite it becoming academic after Revathi's release.

He said it was necessary for the matter to be heard as it was a case of public interest and perhaps it was an appropriate time for the court to ventilate further on the case because there was an increasing trend in such cases.

Karpal also cited some Federal Court cases on the issue and appealed to the court to give Revathi a chance to tell the court what transpired in the Syariah court.

He also said the Syariah court's order for Revathi's parents to take custody of her was odd because she was no longer a minor and is married.

Judge Datuk Su Geok Yiam, in her decision, said since Siti Fatimah was no longer under detention and therefore she had no choice but to dismiss the case.

"The law on this issue is clear, once the subject matter of a habeas corpus application is no longer under detention, the court has no jurisdiction to hear the application," said Su.

Later outside the courtroom, Revathi claimed the following took place at the centre:

-not given medical attention when she was sick;
-no proper food and was also forced to consume beef;
-forced to wear headscarf;
-not allowed to meet her 18-month-old daughter Diviya Dharshini; and
-threatened her "thali" (saffron coloured woven thread or gold chain worn around the neck by Indian women who are married) would be removed and forced to embrace Islam.

She added her husband took care of their daughter before Diviya Dharshini was handed over to her parents' custody.

Revathi said her parents had converted to Islam before her birth but she was raised as a Hindu by her grandmother.

She married Suresh in March 2004 according to Hindu rites in a temple in Malacca, but the marriage was not registered. Revathi had sought to renounce Islam and was told to go throught the Syariah court to obtain the necessary approvals and certificate when she was taken away by MAIM officers for rehabilitation.

The couple is now having difficulties registering the birth of Diviya Dharshini.

MAIM spokesman Tuah Atan, who was present in court, said Siti Fatimah is a Muslim and her parents were given custody to enable her to continue living as a Muslim.

He said they will assist Siti Fatimah to "return to the right path" in due time.

Suresh, meanwhile, said he is glad his wife has been released but was uneasy about the Syariah court order handing custody of his wife to her parents, adding he will seek advice from his lawyers on the next course of action.

Mohamed Haniff Khatri was assisted by counsels Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, Rahim Sinwan and Abdul Halim Bahari.

Karpal was assisted by J.Amardas and Nicholas Netto while Edward Saw held a watching brief for the Malaysian Bar and Sunil Lopez for the Malaysian Consultative Council on Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST).

AND the STRONG version from MK

Revathi, 29, still steadfastly wants to remain a Hindu, despite her six month detention by religious
authorities and ongoing efforts to make her a Muslim.

"My name is Revathi. I want to hold on to that name forever. I want to drop the name Siti Fatimah,"
Revathi, sporting pottu (Hindu symbol) on her forehead, told reporters outside the Shah Alam High
Court today.

Born Siti Fatimah Abdul Karim to Muslim convert parents, she was called Revathi Masoosai by the
grandmother who raised her.

She married to V Suresh in 2004 according to Hindu rites and has a 18-month old daughter.

In January this year, Revathi was detained at the Malacca Syariah High Court when she attended a hearing
over her application to have her official religious status be recognised as a Hindu.

She was detained at the court and subsequently held at the Ulu Yam religious rehabilitation camp in Selangor
for six months until she was freed yesterday.

Speaking about her experience inside the camp, Revathi today described that she was subjected to 'mental
torture' and claimed that she defied attempts to coerce her to follow religious classes.

"Their programmes are solely on religion. (There were also) prayer classes. I never attended (any of them).
I only attended counselling. During counselling, they said I had to do this and that. They said I had to
follow (religious) laws. I just buat tidak tahu (ignore).

"I argued that I had a right to choose my religion, but they replied that I should not talk about (my)
rights," said Revathi who is presently living with her Muslim parents as ordered by the religious
authorities.

She claimed that many had ran away from the 'jail-like' conditions of the camp but she had not.

"A lot of people ran away, even though (the camp was for Muslims). Though I'm a Hindu, I could bertahan
(bear with the conditions), because I'm upholding the good name of Hinduism," she added.

During her detention, she was not allowed visits. Recalling the only time she got to see her husband
during her detention, Revathi said: "Even though I was allowed to meet my husband, I got
to see him (standing) outside the camp, without their permission. I saw his car and I ran towards the fence.
It was only once (I got to see him during the detention). After that, they (from the centre) dragged
me away.

"Before, it was not enclosed. Now, they used zinc (sheets) to surround the area. You can't see inside
and we won't know who is outside," she said.

The emotional moment where Revathi and Suresh were momentarily reunited was captured on film by
Al-Jazeera and aired on April 23 in current affairs programme Everywoman.

Revathi was initially detained for 80 days at the camp but her detention was extended for 100 days twice. Her
stint ended yesterday when she was presented before the Malacca Syariah Court.

She was ordered to live with her parents and undergo counselling. She lamented that she was "unsatisfied"
with the decisions made by the court.

"They held me for six months, only to say that I cannot leave Islam. If that is the case, they should
have told me earlier, so I don't have to go into the centre.

"Who's going to compensate for the six months I was there? (It is a) waste of my time! I was separated
from my child and husband. How are they going to compensate?" she asked.

"I have a right to choose my religion. In six months, they cannot make me change my mind, how can they do it now?"

She also said that religious officials tried to force her to pray, eat beef and wear a headscarf.

"Because of their behaviour, I hate (benci) Islam even now," she added.

Comments Off on Revathi released conditionally »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian, Religion

Tags: