Posts Tagged ‘intolerance’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

The word that divides when it should unite

January 9th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Well the Word has gained popularity overnight. I can’t say much because its not my area and secondly, the rules seems to be different for the others.

As of 12.15am, three (or four) churches had some sort of explosives thrown, with one damaged quite bad, and another two escaped because the materials didn’t explode. A pastor was “mandhandled” by four guys and some items vandalised in Kg Pandan. One pastor in Kuala Selangor was given advice by a (hopefully) wellwisher to be careful. Ibrahim Ali, as expected, says it may be acts to sabotage his religion. Well, that’s his opinion and we respect that.

The King has issued statement while PM, DPM, and host of politicians condemned the attacks. MIC guys are still in India (150 over people attending the Parvasi I  think) so local media may not be able to access their response.

But note what Singapore Straits Times quoted from Minister Ahmad Zahidi:

‘This is Malaysia. Do not equate us with another country. We are an Islamic country as stated in the Constitution,’ he said, adding that there was a hidden agenda to use the word ‘Allah’ in the Herald, the Catholic publication.

In raising this issue, Mr Ahmad Zahid said a small group of non-Muslim leaders was trying to question the position of Islam in Malaysia.

Islam is the official religion under the Federal Constitution while the right of non-Muslims to worship is also protected.

‘Don’t play with fire and challenge the Muslims. We are willing to do anything to protect our religion,’ he warned.

If we have people who don’t understand constitution as Ministers, what else to expect? Or is it the paper misquoted the minister?

The former president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) , Datuk A. Vaithilingam, said the inter-religious committee should be reconvened immediately. The committee has not met for more than one year, he claimed. I doubt this idea will be welcomed by the protesters.

Small protests (Utusan said 3000 strong, but others put it at few hundreds) at mosques (within compounds) happened in about 10 locations in KL, Selangor, Johor, Terengganu among others. While Home Minister said nothing seditious was said at the protests, MK mentioned that one of the protesters (from the cow head case) mentioned about “burning”. Not sure if there’s any recording of that which can be provided to the police and Home Minister.

What about the situation on East Malaysia, the source of the cause of this problem? Why the protests are largely in KL and Selangor, plus unaffected area like Terengganu? Where are the politicians from East Malaysia? I think only Bernard Dompok and Maximus Ongkili said something so far (here, here, and here). I wonder what Bung Mokhtar would say 🙂 Say, would the folks in East Malaysia remember this?

Makes me think, if the ban was not put into place, all this would not have happened. Things were going well as it is, until someone saw it fit to interfere in the religious affairs of the Christians. I see it as interference because what they do with their religions and books is their problem as long as they don’t proselytize to Muslims. If there’s proof that such attempts took place, then can charge the persons because our law says cannot promote other religions to Muslims.  So, if some of the Muslims purposely go and search for materials from Herald, is it Herald’s fault or the Muslim’s fault?

The religious experts are saying different things about the use, exclusivity, and history of the Word. They themselves can’t (or won’t) agree on this, what more of politicians and public who have practically lesser knowledge. Some experts saying it involves sociological context, sensitivity of the majority, and other what-nots. Some even say Syariah Court should rule on Herald’s application! Lots of factors to consider.

I think the judge ruled wisely saying that banning the Word is interfering with other’s people’s rights because there are laws that exist to ensure others don’t misuse their freedom.

I can’t really see a solution to this problem because ruling on a total ban will most likely damage our name in the international circle and create uproar in East Malaysia (from which the ruling government draws some of its power), while a total approval will provide ammo for more protests and attacks.

I have to offer a word of thanks to the Christian community which consists of various races, for not reacting aversely to the attacks on their places of worship.

As for Hindus, let us pray for a solution, an enlightenment from almighty God, that an amicable solution be found. Let us not become emotional or condemn without purpose and care. We have not used the Word in our prayers, so we are not affected. Yet, we can empathize with the Muslims and Christians, and pray for the Divine to open their minds.

Well, let’s see if the Word divides or unites (and who it divides and/or unites).

Comments Off on The word that divides when it should unite »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags:

If it was not a church but…

January 5th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I couldn’t help but wonder, if this was not a church/tokong/temple/gurdwara but you-know-what, would the outcome be different? Maybe the land would have been gazetted, allocations provided, and grand officiating ceremony performed. Hmm…

Temerloh High Court Tuesday dismissed the application by two orang asli who sought a judicial review of the decision by a local district and land office which had cut off water and electricity supply to a multi-purpose building that was also used as a place of worship by 70 Jahut Christians in Kampung Pasu.

Judicial Commissioner Justice Akhtar Tahir said that the decision to cut the water and electricity supply was proper because the building was illegally erected.

He added that under Section 6 and 7 of the Aborigines Act, the state authority was empowered to gazette an area as orang asli reserve land.

“However, in this case, the land or area is not gazetted for the orang asli and as such, the application is dismissed.

”The decision made by the Temerloh District Land Administrator is proper,” Justice Akhtar said.

The judicial review was initiatied by father and son, Wet Ket, 59, and Yaman Wet, 33, who named Temerloh district and land office and Pahang government as respondents.

They filed the application in December 2007.

Senior federal counsel Kamal Azira Hassan represented the respondents while counsel Annou Xavier and Kenny Ng appeared on behalf of Wet and Yaman.

The applicants were accompanied by 10 people in the court here Tuesday.

In July 2003, the applicants erected the building, which was also used as a church by the Jahut Christians.

They, however, received a notice by the district office at the end of July stating that the building was illegally built on government land.

In Dec 2006, Wet and Yaman lodged a police report and complained to the Government and following some negotiations, they were given a compensation of RM35,000 to rebuild the place.

Their application for water and electricity was, however, rejected by the Temerloh district and land office on the grounds that it was erected on an ungazetted land while the building was constructed without the approval from the authorities.

1 comment »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags:

You want to be Indian or Muslim?

December 28th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Hey, don’t look at me! That’s what ex-PM Mahathir said to the Indian Muslims at their function (dinner organised by the association of Muslim Kadayanallur in Penang). Yup, he was their invited guest, and I think they are regretting that now! 🙂

To a claim that the Indian Muslims in the country have been neglected, Mahathir said they should choose to either become a Muslim or an Indian.

“The country is very liberal and I think they (Indian Muslims) will be accepted by all if they can pick either to become a Muslim or Indian,” he was quoted as saying by Bernama.

Mahathir said there was no difference between the various races as everyone is a Malaysian.

“The federal constitution also defines a Muslim very clearly. If they want to become a Muslim then just follow the constitution,” he added.

The former premier said if Indian Muslims in the country still call themselves as such, others might think that they still have links to their country of origin.

“The problem of Indian Muslims will be resolved if they can decide and choose to become either a Muslim or an Indian,” he added.

Maybe he’s confused (well, he is 84 after all) between race and religion. Obviously these folks are Muslims (and maybe even better ones than some of the majority race Muslims), so people would be confused with his call. Would JAKIM or the police investigate him for maybe trying to mislead the ummah or something? I don’t know much but I think that a crime has been committed here under some law for saying Indian Muslims are not Muslims. The federal constitution (Article 160, I think) defines a Malay, not a Muslim.

Maybe he just saying drop either Indian or Muslim from their association so that things are clearer for this community. So, the option is to assimilate, rather than integrate. The rational (and beneficial) choice would be to opt for Muslim (and also Malay).

He also asked Chinese and Indians to call themselves Malaysians instead of Chinese or Indians. Says that the Indonesians and Thais do the same. Yup, but they still end up killing each other at the slightest problems, so its just rhetoric.

So, the Indian Muslims need to choose now. What would be? Indian, Muslim or some choice words for our ex-PM?

5 comments »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian

Tags:

Brave questions by the Sikhs

November 26th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I’m sure we remember the cabinet directive which has no legal effect during the case of  Indira? Remember her? The husband ran away with her 11 months old baby. After that, we don’t hear anything now. What happened to her and her kids?

And just yesterday, we read about the proposed amendments aimed at solving the conversion problem.

While the MCCBCHST did not directly ask any questions on the amendments, the Gurdwara Council did. And must say, really respect them for highlighting this:

The Malaysian Gurdwara Council has called on the government to state whether it is sticking to the April 23 directive that both parents must consent to a child’s conversion .

If so why is this not reflected in the proposed conversion laws, asked the council today.

On April 23, the cabinet had announced:

  • the religion of a child under 18 years of age would continue to be that at time of birth and one parent cannot convert the child unilaterally; and,
  • the converted spouse cannot use his conversion to run away from his obligations under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, 1976, the law which have contracted their marriage.

However it was reported in the media on Tuesday, quoting a federal counsel of the Attorney General Chambers Mohamed Naser Disa, that the proposed amendment to Section 51(2) of the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 included a suggestion that the civil court not be empowered to determine the religious status of a child when divorce between a Muslim and a non-Muslim couple takes place.

“The court could also decide on the custody right as stipulated under the constitution, where either the father or mother could determine the religious status of the child. Hence, the parent who has converted to Islam need to register their child as Muslim,” Mohd Nasier was quoted to have said.

The Malaysian Gurdwara Council president Harcharan Singh today said that they strongly oppose any provision allowing unilateral conversion of a child.

“Hence we reject any such proposed conversion laws. We also strongly oppose and reject any amendment allowing a child to be placed in an institution and hence negating the presumption a child below seven is best left with the mother,” he said.

Even a day old child can be converted

Harcharan said this would mean that even a day old child can be converted to Islam unilaterally by a single spouse.

“We do not think any religion allows conversion of such minors. Even the Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia director-general Dr Syed Ali Taufik Al Attas had stated in a newspaper interview that “a child is deemed ignorant, cannot convert to Islam as the child does not understand the “Kalimah Syahadah” and cannot bear witness of his /her own free will and understanding.”

Harcharan said under Article 12 (4) of the federal constitution should be interpreted that a child can be converted only with agreement between both parents.

“If the law only provides that all that is needed is one parent’s consent for conversion to take place, then that would be unjust and undesirable,” he said.

Harcharan also said the Attorney-General should be working for all Malaysians and questioned why non-Muslim communities were being kept in the dark.

“The so called proposed amendments are being revealed only to one party. The other party who will be adversely affected is not being consulted or briefed, nor a copy of the proposed amendments given to them.”

“The cabinet should clarify whether the decision made on April 23 still stands. If it so why is this not reflected in the proposed conversion law?” Harcharan asked.

Tough questions for the authorities to answer. Why no transparency? Do they plan to just bulldoze the amendments and ignore any opinions/protests from the other groups? Or expect the other groups “to understand” and “look at the bigger picture”?

Not sure how this fits in the new tagline 1Malaysia. Doesn’t seem correct to me. Don’t tell me everything also need PM to step in and clarify!

Oh ya, where’s MIC ah? MIA again? They part of federal government, so surely will know something? Or were they too sidelined?

6 comments »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags:

Banggarma saga continues while Masitah praises conversion!

November 25th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


She claims she said she was converted at the age of seven. The Welfare Department countered that her father converted her at the age of one! Now, which is which?

Her lawyer is demanding that the Welfare Department provide proof of their allegations:

Welfare Department director-general Meme Zainal Rashid should furnish evidence to substantiate her claim that S Banggarma was converted on Nov 30, 1983 in Rompin, Pahang.

Demanding this at a media briefing today, Banggarma’s lawyer Gooi Hsiao Leung pointed out that the conversion certificate dates the conversion at Dec 28, 1989.

“The Welfare Department now claims that she was converted by her Hindu parents when she was a year old. There cannot be two conversions into Islam for the same person,” he said.

Gooi chided Penang Islamic Affairs Council (MAINPP) president Shabudin Yahaya for saying that Banggarma, 27, is a Muslim and that her marriage to a Hindu is a legal issue.

He said the Welfare Department and Islamic authorities have failed to address the key question on the conversion of a minor by the administrators of the welfare home.

Section 80 of the Penang Administration of Islamic Affairs Enactment 1993 stipulates that anyone below the age of 18 shall not be converted to Islam without the consent of his or her parents.

Banggarma’s conversion, Gooi said, was illegal from the start.

“By converting her at (the age of seven), the Islamic authorities infringed their own law.”

Gooi hoped that MAINPP will assist Banggarma by expunging records of her conversion, so that the issue can be resolved amicably.

Banggarma, who was present, told reporters that her father had never mentioned anything about the 1983 conversion.

“My father is a practising Hindu like me,” she said, showing a photo of her father with vibuthi (sacred ash) on his forehead. [not sure when the photo was taken though!]

He had enrolled her and three siblings – two elder brothers and a younger sister – at the home, after its welfare officers convinced him to do so, she said.

“He was shocked to hear that my siblings and I were converted to Islam in the welfare home,” Banggarma said, alleging that the four were then separated and have not met since.

Meme had told Malaysiakini yesterday that Banggarma, whose Muslim name is Siti Hasnah Vangarama Abdullah, was placed into the welfare home in Kepala Batas in March 1990 following a order under the Juvenile Courts Act of 1947, for her own protection.

Meme claimed Banggarma was found wandering aimlessly in Sungai Petani, Kedah.

Questioning this, Banggarma pointed to the conversion certificate which shows that she was converted in 1989.

“It’s a lie. The department is trying to cover this up,” said the mother of two.

… Her birth certificate shows that she was born on Aug 13, 1982 in Keratong, Pahang to plantation worker B Subramaniam and Latchumy Ramadu, both Hindus.

Describing herself as a staunch Hindu, Banggarma said she would fight till the end to restore her rightful identity.

“I was born as a Hindu, I live as a Hindu, I will die as a Hindu,” she said. [ahh..the famous quotes! I’m sure you have heard this before]

The Star reported Banggarma as saying below:

Banggarma claimed it would have been impossible for the 1983 conversion to have happened as her younger sister, who was five years her junior, was not even born then.

“Three of my siblings were placed in the welfare home along with me and we all have conversion certificates dated Dec 28, 1989. How could my father have converted us in 1983 when my sister was not even born?” Bang garma asked.

Err…tough question, that one.

But what really surprised (and angered me) is these words:

Mashitah said while it was commendable for the orphanage to take the initiative to preach about Islam and convert Banggarma to Islam, it was also its responsibility to teach her about the religion.

“It should be followed with the efforts to bring her up according to true Islamic teachings and way of life,” she said.

Its disgraceful to say the least!  I must say that its a blot to their religion from outsider’s (like me) point of view.

And rightly, questions are being asked on this irresponsible conduct of the Deputy Minister:

Women, Family and Community Development Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil was asked to clarify if it was government policy to convert young children, especially minors, into Islam while being under the care of government welfare homes.

PKR Kedah deputy youth chief Gooi Hsiao Leung said Shahrizat’s clarification was imperative following a controversial statement by Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Mashitah Ibrahim, who praised such conversions.

“Mashitah’s statement is scandalous and reckless. Shahrizat should take an immediate stand on it,” said Gooi.

He also wants Shahrizat to clarify whether Mashitah’s remarks were made in her personal capacity or from her official position in the Putrajaya administration.

Mashitah was quoted as saying it was commendable for the orphanage to take the initiative to preach about Islam and convert Banggarma to Islam and it was also its responsibility to teach her about the religion.

“It is shocking that a deputy minister had condoned conversion of young children living under the care of government run welfare homes,” said Gooi.

“Welfare homes’ primary functions are to provide care and protection to helpless abandoned children or where parents are unable to care for them until they turn 18.

“It would be entirely outside the scope of their duties and a blatant abuse of their powers to convert young children’s religions, whether it is to Islam or to any other religion for that matter,” added Gooi.

He said Mashitah’s statement was also inconsistent with the remarks made by the Muslim Welfare Organisation of Malaysia’s secretary general Abdul Hamid Othman.

Abdul Hamid said it was inappropriate to convert a child before he or she reached 18, although the welfare homes can educate the children about the Islamic religion.

Gooi said as the minister in charge of women, family and community affairs, Shahrizat has a duty to explain the government’s religious policy to all Malaysians.

“It is of utmost public importance for Shahrizat to immediately clarify the government’s position,” he said

BTW, MCCBCHST’s president wrote in Malaysiakini on the council’s view:

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hindusim, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) refers to the case of Banggarma Subramaniam, 27 (a.k.a. Siti Hasnah Vengarama Abdullah) who has said that she was converted to Islam at the tender age of 7. 

Banggarma says this was done by the welfare home, whilst the welfare authorities say it was done by her father. In any case, Banggarma has vigorously and categorically asserted that for most of her life, she has lived as a Hindu and that she is now a Hindu.

We object most strongly to the suggestion by the deputy minster for Islamic Affairs (as reported by the media on Nov19) that Banggarma must go to the Syariah Court to ascertain her status, a statement repeated by Welfare Department’s Director-General Meme Zainal Rashid. 

Penang Islamic Council President Shabudin Yahaya, meanwhile, stated that she will have to undergo the standard procedure to leave Islam and to undergo counseling.

We recall that Dr Syed Ali Tawfil Al-Attas, the director-general of Ikim, was quoted by the media on May 1, 2007 as saying that a child deemed ignorant cannot convert to Islam as the child does not understand the ‘kalimah shahadah’ and cannot bear witness to his/her own free will and understanding.

According to Article 11 of the federal constitution, every person is guaranteed the freedom to profess and practice his or her religion. 

It is our view that Banggarma, upon reaching the age of majority, should have the complete freedom to choose her own religion without having to go through any procedure or counseling. 

In some states, people deemed to be Muslims face possible terms of imprisonment and punishment for ‘apostasy’ or for ‘attempting to leave Islam’ or ‘insulting the religion of Islam’. This renders illusory their exercise of the freedom of religion protected by our federal constitution and by all international norms.

The Syariah Courts only have jurisdiction over ‘persons professing the religion of Islam’. Banggarma does not profess the religion of Islam – she professes herself to be a Hindu. It is not proper to require her to go to the Syariah Court before she is allowed to profess her religion of Hinduism. 

We therefore reiterate our calls, made many times before, for the authorities to put in place legislative reforms to ensure that Islam, and Islamic law, is not forced upon people like Banggarma who do not profess themselves as Muslim.

The writer is president, MCCBCHST.

8 comments »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Religion

Tags: