Zahid: Herald’s ‘Allah’ ban extends to East Malaysia too

PUTRAJAYA, Oct 28 — The Catholic Church weekly, the Herald, cannot refer to God as “Allah” even in Sabah and Sarawak, Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said today, despite the prime minister’s assurance that East Malaysians were free to use the Arabic word.

By Boo Su-Lyn

Zahid said this was based on the recent Court of Appeal ruling that the Home Ministry’s decision to ban the use of the word “Allah” in the Herald was justified, but he stressed that the Al-Kitab, the Bahasa Malaysia translation of the Christian bible, is allowed to describe God as “Allah” as it is not technically a “publication”.

“It can be used in the Al-Kitab, but not in the Herald,” Zahid told reporters at his office here today, after meeting a Cambodian government minister.

“The Al-Kitab is not a publication; it’s a bible,” he added.

The Home Ministry seized copies of the Herald at the Kota Kinabalu airport last week for inspection, but cleared the newsletter for distribution yesterday after finding that the word “Allah” was not used in the weekly.

When asked if the ban of the word “Allah” was restricted to the Herald, Zahid said: “Refer to the court verdict”.

“I don’t want to go beyond what has been decided by the Court of Appeal,” he added.

According to Herald editor Father Lawrence Andrew, around 2,000 copies of the weekly publication were seized at the Kota Kinabalu International Airport on Thursday, apparently on order of the Home Ministry.

The Council of Churches Malaysia (CCM), an umbrella body of Protestant churches, decried the confiscation as a violation of the Catholic Church’s right to distribute the newsletter to its own members.

The distribution ban is the latest incident to hit the controversial tussle between the Catholic Church and the government over the use of the word “Allah”.

Earlier this month, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Home Ministry’s decision to ban the use of the word in the Herald was justified, as the use of the word “Allah” was not integral to the practice of the Christian faith.

The ruling — which overturned an earlier High Court decision that the ban was unconstitutional — has since sparked confusion over the use of the Middle Eastern word by Christians in their worship, especially with conflicting opinions within the government itself on how far the ruling would affect practising Christians.

Churches in Sabah and Sarawak, however, have said that they will continue their age-old practice of referring to God as “Allah” in their worship and in their holy scriptures.

Several ministers also said recently that the 10-point solution issued by Putrajaya in 2011 — which allows the printing, importation and distribution of the Al-Kitab, the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Christian bible, containing the word “Allah” — should stand, despite the appellate court ruling.

The Najib administration issued the 10-point solution shortly before the Sarawak state election in 2011 to end a Home Ministry blockade of shipments of Christian holy scriptures in the Malay language containing the word “Allah”.

The Cabinet, through Minister Datuk Seri Idris Jala, had stated in the resolution that the large Bumiputera Christian population in Sabah and Sarawak could use their holy books in the Malay, Indonesian, and indigenous languages.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said previously that the ruling would not affect Sabah and Sarawak, while separately, another Cabinet minister claimed that Christians from the Borneo states could refer to God as “Allah” in peninsular Malaysia.

According to a 2010 census, Muslims are Malaysia’s largest religious group, followed by Buddhists. Christians are the third-largest at 2.6 million, which comes up to about 10 per cent of the Malaysian population.

Bumiputera Christians, who form about 64 per cent or close to two-thirds of the Christian community in Malaysia, have been addressing God as “Allah” when praying and speaking in the national language and in their native tongues for centuries.

‘Allah’ ban wrong if not linked to conversion, says law don

Any blanket ban on the use of "Allah" and other Arabic words by state laws without linking it to proselytisation is unconstitutional, Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi told a lecture on human rights today.

The Universiti Teknologi Mara law lecturer said a ban on the word was particularly unfair to the people of Sabah and Sarawak, who have used it for a long time.

"I've said this many times before, 'Allah' precedes Islam.

"It may have even preceded Christianity and Judaism. It is a word more ancient that these religions," he said during question and answer session with law students at the Brickfields Asia College in Petaling Jaya today.

He said the word was also used by Sikhs and Hindus.

He said the only issue that arose was in Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution that permits the state to pass laws to regulate the preaching of religion to Muslims.

"Religiously and linguistically speaking, there is no basis for the ban, but Article 11 clause four is there.

"Some Muslims are saying that the use of the word is an attempt to proselytise," he said.

But he added that to have a blanket ban on 35 Arabic words as in the case of Selangor without linking the usage to proselytisation was beyond the scope of Article 11 (4).

"Article 11 does not authorise a complete ban no matter what, unless it invokes proselytisation," he said.

The Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988 bans non-Muslims from using 35 Arabic words and phrases, including "Allah".

Shad said today the concern now was that the Court of Appeal ban on the word appeared to be broad enough to cover Sabah and Sarawak.

He added that this was a problem as some of the people there only spoke in Malay.

"They have been using the word for a long time and nobody can tell them to wipe out their childhood memories and ask them to use new vocabulary.

"It is totally oppressive and unjust to ask them to change things," he said.

Shad was referring to the appellate court’s decision to uphold the Home Minister's ban on the use of the word Allah in the Catholic weekly.

The Catholic Church took their case to the Federal Court, which denied it leave to appeal against the ban in a 4-3 majority decision.

The church's review application against the Federal Court decision was also dismissed on Wednesday, ending the church's long struggle that began in 2009. – January 23, 2015.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/allah-ban-unconstitutional-if-not-linked-to-conversion-says-law-lecturer#sthash.UmOxbIV3.dpuf

Father Lawrence hopes for country to 'open up'

Archbishop worries Herald decision leads to curbs on minority rights

The Catholic church is concerned that yesterday's Federal Court decision on the Allah issue could open a Pandora's box in curbing the rights of minorities to manage their religious affairs.

Newly ordained Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Most Reverend Julian Leow said while he was disappointed with the ruling of the Federal Court, the decision was not totally unexpected.

"I would like to believe this adverse decision is confined only to the Herald and will not open a Pandora's box on curbing the rights of minorities in managing our own religious affairs.
‎
"In God we continue to pray and trust that there is light at the end of this tunnel," he told The Malaysian Insider in a text message.

A five-man panel headed by Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong delivered a unanimous decision yesterday to deny the Catholic church's application for a review of the apex court's earlier ruling which did not grant it leave to appeal the ban on the use of the word "Allah" in Catholic weekly, Herald.

Church lawyer Datuk Dr Cyrus Das, however, had said that the Allah case was not quite over.

Instead, he was hopeful the issues central to the case, on freedom of religion, could be revisited through other similar cases in the future.

Das said yesterday that ‎the merits of the church's case over the Allah issue needed to be raised in other cases, especially on the home minister's power to ban words.

"There are other constitutional issues that have not been addressed and this can be taken up in other cases, " Das had said.

Herald editor, Rev Father Lawrence Andrew (pic, right), acknowledging that the door is closed for this particular case, expressed hope that there would be an opening later to ventilate the issues relating to freedom to practise's one faith as well as minority rights.

‎"This was an important constitutional case on the right to profess one's faith and to live in peace in harmony.

"Now we hope to be able to work towards being able to live in peace and harmony and at the same time we pray that that the rights of the minorities will not be trampled upon.

"‎We also pray and hope there will be an opening later," he added.

Today, ‎a similar case involving Sarawakian Christian, Jill Ireland, who had her eight CDs containing the word "Allah" confiscated by the home ministry, will be heard at the Kuala Lumpur High Court.

The government is applying for a stay of a High Court order in July which ordered for the CDs to be returned to her.

In 2008, ministry officials confiscated the CDs from Ireland at the then Low-Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) in Sepang, prompting the Melanau Christian to challenge the seizure in court.

The CDs, which Ireland had bought in Indonesia for personal use, bore titles such as "Cara Hidup Dalam Kerajaan Allah", "Hidup Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah" and "Ibadah Yang Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah".

She also asked the court for a declaration that she had a legitimate expectation to exercise the right to use "Allah" and to continue to own and import such materials.

Ireland's legal team had argued that the case was not about Christianity against Islam, but about her constitutional right as a Bumiputera Christian.

In her ruling, however, High Court judge Datuk Zaleha Yusof who had ordered the confiscated CDs to be returned, did not address Ireland's constitutional right to use the word "Allah".

As such, Ireland is also appealing against the High Court decision which failed to address the issue, to be heard at the Court of Appeal next month. – January 22, 2015.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/archbishop-worries-herald-decision-leads-to-curbing-of-minority-rights-to-m#sthash.hJ69h6cP.dpuf

All quiet outside courthouse as church makes final bid to use ‘Allah’

It is all quiet with no signs of protestors outside the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya as the Federal Court prepares to hear the Catholic Church's review application against a decision denying leave to appeal the ban on the use of the word "Allah" in the Herald weekly.

In the past, thousands of supporters of groups such as ‎Perkasa and Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) had turned up at the courthouse to lend support to the government's challenge against the Herald using the word in its Bahasa Malaysia content.

There were also no large groups of Catholic church supporters in past hearings.

Church lawyers will today try to convince the bench that there was injustice and abuse of court process when it was denied leave to appeal against the ban on the word Allah by the Court of Appeal.

In June, ‎four of the seven-member bench dismissed the church's application for appeal, citing that the Court of Appeal was right in its decision to ban the word in the Herald.

Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria, president of Court of Appeal Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif, Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin and Federal Court judge Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar were in the majority.

Three other judges – Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Tan Sri Richard Malanjum, and Federal Court judges Datuk Zainun Ali and Tan Sri Jeffrey Tan Kok Hwa – held that leave must be granted to the church.

Lawyer Annou Xavier (pic, right), who is part of the church's legal team said today that ‎the three dissenting judges had looked into the core issues of the appeal and questions of leave to appeal to the Federal Court.

He said the issues fell squarely within the threshold of Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act which sets out the conditions of appeal.

‎"We lost by the skin of our teeth, it was a 4-3 majority, not a 6-1 or 5-2," Annou told The Malaysian Insider.

He noted that one of the core issues was the lack of a clear decision on Article 11 of the Federal Constitution on the freedom of religion, and as such expressed hope that the new bench this round would act without fear of third parties.

"This is a fitting case for judges to exercise its power to review the leave that was not offered because it hinges on constitutional issues that goes to the root of the nation," he said.

‎The five-man bench today comprises Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong, Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop, Tan Sri Hasan Lah, Datuk Ramly Ali and Datuk Azahar Mohamed, all of whom are Federal Court judges.

It was earlier believed that the Chief Justice would co-opt one or two judges from the Court of Appeal to sit on the bench to hear the review today. – January 21, 2015.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/all-quiet-outside-courthouse-as-church-makes-final-bid-to-use-allah#sthash.Eb6DAKQA.dpuf

Church fails to get 9-man bench to hear ‘Allah’ review

The chief justice of Malaysia has turned down a request by the Catholic Church to convene a minimum nine-man panel to deliberate its review application against the ban on the word Allah when the case comes up on January 21.

The church was instead informed that only a five-man bench would be constituted to hear the matter.

The decision by Tun Arifin Zakaria was conveyed to the Catholic Church by the special officer to the chief justice, Dr Alwi Abdul Wahab, in a letter dated December 31.

The letter which was sighted by The Malaysian Insider, said that the request for a full bench could not be entertained. There were no reasons given on why the request was dismissed.

On December 23, a lawyer for the church had sent a letter to Arifin, urging for at least nine Muslim and non-Muslim judges to hear its arguments on fundamental constitutional provisions relating to religion.

The letter, which was also sighted by The Malaysian Insider, had said the church wanted a quorum that reflected the multi-cultural and multi-religious diversity of Malaysian society, given the nature of the issues raised.

"This is because fundamental constitutional provisions relating to state religion, freedom of minority religion, freedom of expression, which have far-reaching consequences for Malaysians of all races and religions, will be raised," the letter had said.

In February last year, lawyers for the church had asked for, and given, an unprecedented seven-man bench to hear their leave application which was dismissed in June the same year.

The review application is aimed at setting aside the ruling by the apex court's seven-man bench that upheld the Home Ministry’s ban on the use of the word “Allah” in the Catholic weekly, Herald, and establish a new panel to re-hear the leave application.

Four of the Federal Court judges, who formed the majority, had refused the leave-to-appeal application while three others took the position that leave should be granted.

"It is pertinent to note that each dissenting judge had written his or her own grounds allowing the application for leave,” the letter had said.

It had added that the church, therefore, believed that it was appropriate for at least a nine-man bench to be formed to hear the review.

The letter cited a precedent in India where a 13-man Supreme Court bench sat in 1973 to deliberate on an important constitutional issue in the case of Kesavananda Barati v the Government of Kerala.

The church also drew Arifin's attention to the October 2013 Court of Appeal ruling, which continues to raise serious public concern where parties had used portions of the judgment to seize holy books of Christians even though the majority ruling in the leave application had declared that those portions were mere remarks made in passing.

A copy of the letter was sent to the Attorney-General's Chambers and Messrs Zainul Rijal Talha and Amir, the legal firm that is representing one of the respondents.

On June 23 last year, Arifin was among the majority apex court judges who dismissed the church's application for leave to appeal.

Others were Tan Sri Raus Shariff, Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin and Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar.

The dissenting judges were Tan Sri Richard Malanjum, Tan Sri Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha and Datuk Zainun Ali.

All the seven judges as well as Tan Sri Apandi Ali, who was in the Court of Appeal panel that heard the church’s case, but who is now a Federal Court judge, cannot hear the review application.

A five-man bench to hear the review application could still come from the remaining six Federal Court judges but nothing in law prevents Arifin to also scout for members in the Court of Appeal.

The church is seeking to reverse the findings of the Court of Appeal decision, which had allowed the home minister's appeal to overturn the 2009 High Court's decision that the Herald could use the word “Allah”.

The High Court had declared that the decision by the minister to ban Herald from using the word “Allah” was illegal, null and void.

The church, led by the then Kuala Lumpur Archdiocese Archbishop Emeritus Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam had filed a judicial review application in 2009, naming the minister and the government as respondents.

Lawyer Benjamin Dawson, a member of the church's legal team, had said the review was based on three broad grounds.

The first was that there were certain legal issues central to the leave application but were not considered by the Federal Court, such as the scope of Articles 3 and 11 of the Federal Constitution.

Article 3 states that Islam is the official religion of the federation while Article 11 touches on freedom to practise one's religion.

The church further contended that the minister's decision to prohibit the use of the word “Allah” in the Herald had also taken into account a theological consideration.

Dawson had said that the second ground was that the apex court's majority judgment decided on certain legal issues, which were neither argued nor raised by the parties before the Federal Court or the Court of Appeal, such as the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the Anti-Propagation Enactment.

The third ground is that the Herald's case is one of the most important constitutional cases to come before the apex court, especially where minority rights are concerned.

He added that there existed a public-interest factor to support the review application. – January 11, 2015.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/church-fails-to-get-9-man-bench-to-hear-allah-review#sthash.zTayqc4t.dpuf

Umno cabar S'gor, benarkan bukan Islam guna 'Allah'

Why such uneasiness among Muslims over 'Allah'?

As the nation anxiously awaits the Court of Appeal's decision on Monday regarding the use of the word ‘Allah' by non-Muslims, a short chapter on the controversial issue in former Tenaga Nasional Bhd chief's latest book, ‘Memoirs of Tan Sri Ani Arope', is both apt and timely.

Representing the "endangered species" of broadminded Malays who grew up in multicultural Malaysia, Ani asks, "Why there is so much uneasiness among Muslims to hear others using the word loosely?"

Ani is referring to the dispute on the use of ‘Allah' by non-Muslims in Malaysia, which has gone all the way up to the appellate court.

It has also created tension between Muslims and non-Muslims in the country, which led to a few churches being fire-bombed following the High Court decision to allow the Catholic weekly The Herald to use the word ‘Allah' for God in Bahasa Malaysia, the language used by many Christians in Sabah and Sarawak.

Pig's heads, wrapped in plastic, were also found in two mosques in Kuala Lumpur, but to date police have not arrested the culprits.

Sincere and frank dialogue

According to Ani, the term and use of the word ‘Allah' is not and cannot be exclusive to Muslims.

"The Jews and Christians in the Arab speaking world would use the name ‘Allah' to refer to the Almighty," he argues.

He further explains: "Allah (swt) to us, Muslims, is not merely a word but more importantly, the concept from an Islamic teaching."

The octogenarian, who turned 81 recently, said he had hoped that his sincere and frank dialogue on the Allah row could help to "continue to build peaceful and friendly relationships based upon mutual respect, justice, and what is common in essence in our shared Abrahamic tradition, particularly ‘the two greatest commandments' in Mark 12:29-31 (and, in varying form, in Matthew 22:37-40), that the Lord, our God, is one Lord (Rabi Allahu Ahad)."

‘Memoirs of Tan Sri Ani Arope' is published by the Fulbright Alumni Association of Malaysia. The soft-launch of the 143-page book was done at the Fulbright's 50th anniversary dinner in July this year by its president, Professor Dr Gendeh Balwant.

The book will be available in major bookstores nationwide soon.

---

STEPHEN NG is a chemist by training. He dealt with printing ink, paint and emulsion polymer for 15 years before becoming a freelance writer.

Perkasa demonstrates over Allah issue

They submit memorandum to Penang exco in charge of religious affairs and want him to resign.

FMT

GEORGE TOWN: A group of 50 Perkasa supporters demonstrated against state executive councillor in charge of religious affairs Abdul Malik Abul Kassim for supporting Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng over the “Allah” controversy in Komtar today.

Led by Perkasa state youth chief Mohd Rizuad Mohd Azudin, the group called for Malik to resign for backing Lim on the issue.

Chanting “Allahu Akbar” and “Malik Pondan”, the group later submitted a memorandum on the issue to Malik.

Malik’s aide Ziezul Hakim Zainol received the memorandum on his behalf from Mohd Rizuad.

The demonstration began at 2.40pm after Friday prayers and lasted for about 30 minutes.

The protesters tried to go to the third floor of Komtar to enter into the tower block, where government offices were located.

However, police stopped them and told Rizuad to handover the memorandum to Malik’s representative.

Earlier in the morning the group lodged 25 police reports against Lim over his statement last week that non-Muslims can use the word “Allah”.

The group also handed over a memorandum to the police to probe the case.

The Penang State Islamic Religious Administration Enactment 2004 has banned non-Muslims from using the word Allah via an amendment in 2010 under the Pakatan Rakyat government.

Under the amendment to sub-sections 48(3) and (4) of the Enactment, a list of 40 words such as Allah, Solat, Ulama, Soleh, Mufti, Iman, Surau and Nabi, were decreed as exclusive to Muslims by the Penang mufti.

Lim’s interpretation of the Enactment that it could not be enforced on non-Muslims drew mixed response from various quarters.

Umno and its cohorts criticised Lim that he had erred legally and interfered with the state Islamic affairs, which comes under the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s purview.

Other parties, such as Malik and several lawyers, however, backed Lim claiming that the chief minister was spot on with his interpretation of the law.

Another Allah Case Arises in Malaysia

More sticky ground for the government

On May 11, 2008, Jill Ireland, a member of the Melanau tribe in Sarawak, landed at the low cost carrier terminal at Kuala Lumpur International Airport, carrying with her eight compact disks containing Christian educational materials in the Indonesian language and intended for her personal use.

The CDs were confiscated by customs authorities on the basis that they contained the word Allah to denote the Christian god. It has become the third of three cases the government would probably like to forget.

Six years later, Ireland is still trying to get her CDs back. It is one of three major cases involving the Allah controversy. The case was supposed to come before Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Zaleha Yusoff on May 15. Yusoff, however, went on leave, raising questions whether the government would prefer that the case stay on the back burner. The case now has been deferred to June 30.

The Allah issue has earned the country widespread international ridicule and is tearing apart the multi-racial and multi-religious fabric of Malaysian society. It is the only Muslim country in the world, including all of the Arab nations and Indonesia, that bars Christian use of the word. Language scholars point out that it was used as a Christian name for God in the Middle East before Islam came into being.

The High Court actually granted Ireland leave for judicial review on May 4, 2009 – five years ago. But the hearing for the legal battle has yet to begin. It is a particularly thorny one for the government because as Ireland has said repeatedly, the compact disks, which are perfectly legal in Indonesia, where they were made, were for her personal use.

Sources close to the case said that the judicial review is supposed to be the final in a series of court cases involving the Allah controversy in Malaysia for at least the next 12 months. The government, the sources say, wants no more such cases to come before the courts for awhile in order to appease the country’s Muslims, who make up 60 percent of the population.

However, Aziz Bari, a professor and constitutional expert who appeared at the court, said "Both the government and the judge have to understand that the case involves eight CDs, which are meant for Jill Ireland's personal usage. They were never meant for proselytisation purposes. Hence, either the government should just withdraw the case or the judge should make a ruling that will put the house in order."

"In short, the Ministry of Home Affairs could have just returned the eight CDs to Jill Ireland, and the case is close," pointed out Aziz. "The longer the case is being dragged, the worse it will become. How long more can the country fight over that one name of Allah?"

The Allah controversy can be traced back more than three decades ago, when the government painted itself into a corner it can’t get out of. Capitulation on an issue that should never have become an issue, since it isn’t anywhere else, is something the authoritarian government can’t do without humiliating itself. Successive court cases have only hardened the government’s stance on an irrational issue.

Since 1982, barely a year after Mahathir Mohamad became the country’s fourth prime minister, Malaysian Muslims have maintained that they have exclusive claim to the name Allah, and non-Muslims were forbidden from using the name of Allah in their publication.

In that same year, the Indonesian Alkitab, or Christian Bible, used mainly by native Christians in Sabah and Sarawak, was banned although it continues in widespread use. In 1986, the government issued a directive that banned the use of Allah in non-Muslim publications. It was on this directive that customs seized Ireland’s CDs.

The same controversy led to a more celebrated case involving the Catholic Church, which led to the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruling in favor of the use of the word Allah by the Herald, a Malaysian Catholic weekly newspaper, on Dec 31, 2009. The same court had ruled that Islam’s position as the federal religion of the country did not empower the government to prohibit the use of the word Allah. It also found that the word Allah was not exclusive to Muslims.

The High Court rule, however, led to a series of street demonstrations involving Malaysian Muslims, which Najib had claimed the government could do nothing about. After several firebombings of religious places of worship, the government belatedly appealed and reversed the High Court decision.

The Herald case is now awaiting a hearing date before the country’s Supreme Court, with no date in view. Lawyers that have fought the case said any claim to exclusivity of the term "Allah" at the expense of native Bumiputra Christians of Sabah and Sarawak as well as a younger generation of Christians in Peninsular Malaysia who are proficient only in the Malay language, cannot prevail given the constitutional provisions on religious liberty and freedom.

"However, the situation is dicey," a lawyer involved in the case said on condition of anonymity. "The court can decide otherwise. This is why we feel that the rights of the minority are being suppressed."

In another case involving the Sabah church of Sidang Injil Borneo, an evangelical branch of Christianity in East Malaysia, the High Court judge referred to the appellate court’s decision, saying she was bound by the Superior Court ruling suggesting a Muslim monopoly over “Allah”

Sincerity

Aziz said that the Ireland case will once again put to test the already doubtful sincerity of Prime Minister, Najib Abdul Razak’s transformation plan since taking over from Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in 2009. Najib had been using his all-inclusive One Malaysia campaign during the last General Election in 2013, and prior to the Sarawak state election in 2011, his government had also drawn up a 10-point agreement for both East Malaysian states.

However, when the Bible Society of Malaysia was raided in January this year, Najib said the agreement was subject to state constitutions and enactments on the use of terms deemed exclusive to Muslims. "As the Federal Government, it must ensure that the Constitution of the country is always upheld," said Aziz.

Malay groups hail latest ‘Allah’ ruling as victory for Muslims

(Malay Mail Online) – Muslims should celebrate the High Court’s ruling against the Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) church as a validation of “Allah’s” exclusivity to the religion, Malay groups have said.

Earlier today, the High Court struck out Sabah SIB’s 2007 lawsuit against the Home Ministry for confiscating three boxes of Christian publications that contained the word “Allah”.

Right-wing groups Perkasa and Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (ISMA) lauded the court’s decision, saying it was a “victory” for Muslims who have argued that the Arabic word ‘Allah’ cannot be used by any other faith in Malaysia.

“This is definitely a victory for us, for Muslims nationwide. We are not talking about who is right or wrong, just that ‘Allah’ has always been for Muslims,” Perkasa youth chief Irwan Fahmi Ideris told The Malay Mail Online when contacted.

The High Court said that it was bound by a Court of Appeal ruling last year saying the Catholic weekly, the Herald, could not use the word “Allah” to refer to God as the word was not an integral part of the Christian faith.

Today’s case demonstrates that the Court of Appeal ruling has set a precedent which will have wide implications.

“This is right, justice has been served, the courts are following what is in the Federal Constitution,” Irwan added.

Christian groups have argued from the outset that their right to use the word is enshrined in the Constitution which guarantees religious freedom.

ISMA president Abdullah Zaik Abdul Rahman said the High Court had done its job and that both rulings showed that there should not be any more confusion on who could use the word “Allah.”

“The decision today is consistent with the Constitution… the court’s interpretation on the matter is correct and just,” he told The Malay Mail Online when contacted.

The Sabah Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) church filed its lawsuit on December 10, 2007, seeking to quash the Home Ministry’s decision to seize three boxes of Malay-language Christian educational books that contained the word “Allah”.

The books, imported from Indonesia, were seized at the international budget airport terminal in Sepang on August 15, 2007 while in transit.

They were later returned to the Sabah church on January 25, 2008. In an immediate reaction, Sabah SIB president Rev Datuk Jerry Dusing said the church will instruct its lawyers to file an appeal against the High Court decision.

He maintained that the SIB lawsuit, unlike the Herald’s case, covered a much broader scope as it deals directly with the practice of the faith by their Malay-speaking congregation.

Sabah SIB’s case is one of a string of legal challenges initiated by the Malaysian Christian community against the federal government over alleged infringement of their constitutional right to freely practise their religion.

On March 5, a seven-man panel in the Federal Court heard the Catholic Church’s application for leave to appeal a ruling preventing the Herald from publishing the word “Allah”, but has postponed its decision indefinitely.

Another lawsuit, brought by Sarawakian Christian, Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill, against the Home Ministry for seizing personal compact discs (CD) containing the word “Allah” back in May 2008.

Jill, a Melanau, filed her suit on August 20, 2008 seeking to quash the Home Ministry’s seizure of her CDs and a declaration that she has the right to own, use and import materials containing the word “Allah”.

The court is scheduled to review the ministry’s decision on May 15, nearly five years after she won leave for a judicial review in 2009.

Court Dismisses Application Over Import Of Christian Books With The Word 'Allah'

KUALA LUMPUR, May 5 (Bernama) -- The High Court today dismissed an application by Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) for leave for a judicial review to challenge a Home Ministry order prohibiting the import of Christian books containing the word "Allah".

Justice Datuk Zaleha Yusof ruled that the High Court was bound by the Court of Appeal's decision that the word 'Allah' is not an integral part of faith and practices of Christianity.

In her judgement, which was read out by Senior Assistant Registrar N. Arun in chambers, Zaleha said the court had no choice but to refer to the Court Of Appeal's decision in the case of the Home Ministry against the Roman Catholic Church involving a prohibition on the use of the word "Allah" in its 'Herald' weekly publication.

"So, although the decision, was particular to the weekly Herald, all the learned judges held that the word "Allah" is not an integral part of faith and practices of Christianity and, therefore, the prohibition by the minister is not unconstitutional.

"As long the decision stands, the doctrine of 'stare decisis' (precedent), this court is bound by the decision of the superior court," she said.

She said the court dismissed the application with no order as to costs.

On Dec 10, 2007, SIB and its president, Rev Jerry W. A. Dusing alias Jerry W. Patel, filed a leave application for a judicial review against the Home Ministry and the government to challenge the Customs Department's seizure of its books brought in from Surabaya, Indonesia, at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal in Sepang on Aug 15, 2007.

The books were, however, returned to the church on Jan 25, 2008.

They had sought a declaration that they had the constitutional right to use the word "Allah" in all their religious publications and practices, and not just within the church.

Lawyer Lim Heng Seng represented the church and Dusing while senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan acted for the government.

MCA: Stop playing games with Bible issue

Both MCA and DAP today urges the state government to be more proactive on the Malay bibles issue rather than passing the buck to the Attorney General Chambers.

PETALING JAYA: A MCA leader today questioned why Selangor Tourism exco, Elizabeth Wong wrote a letter to the Attorney General (AG) demanding the release of the Malay and Iban language bibles instead of menteri besar Khalid Ibrahim or Islamic Affairs Exco, Sallehin Mukhyi.

“The proper authority rests with the Khalid,Jais and Sallehin. It gives an impression that the state government is not serious about the matter,” said MCA Religious Harmony Bureau Deputy Chairman, Ng Chok Sin, in a statement.

Earlier today, the news portal Malay Mail Online, reported that Wong had writen to the AG, Abdul Gani Patail to request for the release of Al-Kitab and Bup Kudus.

Ng said that the Selangor state government should stop playing a charade as the people are getting tired of it.

“The people aren’t fools to have mind games played on them,” he said.

On related matter, Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo said that Khalid should take it upon himself to approach the AG in regards to the Malay bible issue.

“Khalid cannot and should not run away from this matter,” he said.

Having said that, Gobind agreed with Khalid saying that the matter is still under investigation, thus, needing the approval from the AG Chambers.

“Nevertheless, Khalid should inspire confidence by taking a proactive approach on the matter rather than passing the buck to Gani,” he said.

On January 2, Jais raided the BSM’s office, confiscating more than 16 boxes of the holy books meant for the Sabah and Sarawak Christians.

Protesters try to storm court during Allah trial

Federal Court reserves decision on ‘Allah’

The Federal Court has reserved its decision, whether to grant leave to the Catholic weekly publication, the Herald, to use the word 'Allah' to refer to God.
UPDATED

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court today reserved its decision to a date to be fixed later on whether or not to grant leave to the Catholic Church to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision which prohibited its weekly publication, the Herald from using the word Allah in its Bahasa Malaysia version.

The Federal Court made the ruling after seven senior judges heard arguments for and against the Court of Appeal judgment which had barred the Catholic weekly publication from using the term ‘Allah’ to refer to God.

The panel judges were lead by Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria.

The other six judges were Court of Appeal president Raus Sharif, Chief Judge of Malaya Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum and Federal Court judges Suriyadi Halim Omar, Zainun Ali and Jeffrey Tan.

The panel had earlier heard submissions from lawyers representing the church, six state Islamic religious councils and the Malaysian Chinese Muslims Association (Macma) as well as submissions from a senior federal counsel representing the Home Ministry.

The six states are Terengganu, Kedah, Johor, Malacca, the Federal Territories, and Selangor.

Earlier a group of supporters from different agencies and non-government organisations (NGOs) who are Muslims performed solat hajat in front of the Palace of Justice square.

The members, clad in red or black, arrived by the bus loads earlier this morning to protest against the Church’s bid to overturn the Appellate Court’s decision.

They began shouting “Allahu akbar” (God is great) while waiting for the verdict and ran in droves towards the building’s exit, where they were blocked by the police, who formed a human barricade.

“Let us show them that we Malays are not weak! We have been patient and tolerant for far too long,” the protesters shouted.

They tried to negotiate with the policemen on duty to allow them into the court room which turned out to be fruitless. They eventually gave in and dispersed.

A few of these protesters however said the scene would have turned ugly if the policemen were not Malays.protest fed court1

Others vented their frustration by hurling items at the Federal Court building, although they were stoped by fellow protesters who reminded them not to harm government property.

Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali who was with the protesters said if the Federal Court verdict was not in favour of the Muslims, then it would jeopardise the nation as Malays were the majority.

“Even minus the non-Muslim Bumiputeras, Malays are still the majority. We inherited this land when it was still called ‘Tanah Melayu’ (Malaya)… All the rulers, the royals are Malay Muslims,” Ibrahim told reporters.

“We respect any decision made by the court, but still I am worried what could happen to the country,” he said.

Ibrahim added that should the Federal Court allow the appeal to proceed, the Malay NGOs would come here each day to support the “Malay cause.”

In October last year, the Court of Appeal banned the Herald from using the word ‘Allah’ to refer to God in the Bahasa Malaysia section of its weekly newspaper.

A three-man bench chaired by Mohamed Apandi Ali delivered the decision then, ruling that the government’s appeal was allowed.

The church filed an appeal against this ruling and the Federal Court heard arguments on the leave application today.

On Dec 31, 2009, the High Court allowed the church’s judicial review application and lifted the Home Minister’s ban on the use of the word in the Herald.

Judge Lau Bee Lan had said then that the church had a constitutional right to use the word Allah in its newspaper on the grounds that religions other than Islam can be practiced in peace and harmony.

IGP Khalid and AG Gani must explain why they have abdicated from their responsibility to uphold the rule of law and preserve the peace in Malaysia in allowing Perkasa to break laws and commit breaches of peace outside Federal Court

By Lim Kit Siang,

It has been reported that the 500-odd people mobilised by Perkasa outside the Federal Court in Putrajaya this morning hearing the appeal on the use of the term ‘Allah’ turned unruly and threw objects at the front-door of the Palace of Justice, with many trying to breach the police barrier and enter the court building.
This is the report from The Malaysian Insider by Jennifer Gomez entitled “Perkasa supporters upset by church lawyers, try to get into courthouse”:

“The crowd outside the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya turned unruly just before the Federal Court stood down with many trying to breach the police barrier and enter the court building.
“Shouting and screaming, some members in the crowd threw a microphone and water bottle at the glass door entrance to the building.
“The crowd was 4m from the main door as police stood guard.
“Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali said that the crowd advanced towards the main glass door of the Palace of Justice as they had got word that Catholic Church lawyers questioned why the use of the word ‘Allah’ by Christians was being made an issue now when it had been in use in the weekly Herald for 14 years prior to 2009.
“’The supporters heard that this was the submission made by the Catholic Church lawyer, so they got upset.’ He added that no one had instructed them to advance.”

Ahmad Fadli KC of Malaysiakini filed the following report “Angry crowd tries to barge into court”:

“A fracas erupted outside the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya today, where members from various Malay rights NGOs had gathered for the appeal hearing on the use of the term ‘Allah’.
“About 11:15am, members of the crowd, who demanded that ‘Allah’ be exclusive only to Muslims in Malaysia, tried to push through policemen guarding the entrance to enter the court lobby.
“The crowd chanted ‘La ila ha Illalah (There is no God except Allah)’ and marched in solidarity to pressure the policemen.”

Imagine what would have happened if it was not Perkasa, but some Catholic organisation which had mobilised the 500-odd supporters outside the Federal Court this morning which had “turned unruly”, “shouting and screaming, some members in the crowd threw a microphone and water bottle at the glass door entrance to the building”; “tried to push through policemen guarding the entrance to enter the court lobby” allegedly in protest for being offended by submissions made by the Muslim lawyers demanding that ‘Allah’ be the exclusive term only to Muslims in Malaysia?
Would there be police arrests of the Catholic organisers and supporters of the gathering, including being charged for offences under the Penal Code for offences against the public tranquillity such as Section 141 for trying to “overawe by criminal force or show of criminal force” the judiciary from the lawful exercise of its public duties?
Or what would have happened if there had been two groups, one mobilised by Perkasa and the other mobilised by some Catholic organisers, outside the Federal Court, and both had turned ugly and unruly this morning?
The police and Attorney-General’s Chambers should explain why the double-standards in not upholding the law to prosecute Perkasa leaders and supporters for offences against public tranquility in seeking to overawe the judiciary outside the Federal Court this morning?
Very irresponsible and even reckless statements were made at the Perkasa gathering outside the Federal Court this morning, which continued the pattern of incessant incitement of racial and religious animosities and hatred in recent months in utter disregard of the law and the national objective to promote inter-racial and inter-religious peace, harmony and goodwill in Malaysia.
Are the police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers going to continue their stance of the traditional three monkeys, of having eyes that see not, ears that hear not and mouths that speak not?
At a time when the country is facing the unprecedented threat to inter-racial and inter-religious peace and harmony caused by incessant incitement of racial and religious animosities and hatred calculated to cause racial chaos and religious conflagration, the government agencies and institutions responsible for upholding the rule of law and keeping the peace and harmony in the country cannot continue to abdicate from their responsibilities.
Malaysians have a right to expect the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail to speak up and explain they have continued to be remiss in their oaths of office to uphold the rule of law and to preserve the peace and harmony of the diverse races and religions in the country.

The colour purple to spread message of peace

End ‘Allah’ dispute by settling court case, pastors tell Putrajaya

(MM) - Putrajaya should end its five-year-old legal tussle with the Catholic Church by coming to a mutual agreement on the latter’s use of the word “Allah”, a Sabah-based group of pastors said today ahead of next week’s appeal on the matter at the Federal Court.

Unhappy that the Court of Appeal had last October upheld a ban on “Allah” in Catholic weekly Herald, the group of clergymen also insisted that the appellate court has “no rights to interfere in religion”.

Claiming that the Court of Appeal had exceeded its constitutional jurisdiction by ruling that use of the word “Allah” was not integral to the Christian faith, it said federal government still had a chance to set things right at the country’s highest court.

“We now call on Putrajaya to rectify the mistake by entering into a consent judgment before the Federal Court based on the 20 points assurance given to Sabah and Sarawak in the formation of Malaysia in 1963,” the Kota Kinabalu Chinese Pastors’ Fellowship (Chinese PFKK) said in a statement tonight.

A consent judgment takes place when all parties involved in a court matter agree to a set of terms to resolve the dispute.

In the 20-point agreement inked before the formation of Malaysia in 1963, it was stipulated among others that the people of Sabah are free to practice their own religion, and there should be no state religion in North Borneo.

The Sabah Constitution was, however, amended in 1973 by the state government to make Islam the religion of the state of Sabah.

Besides the Catholic Church’s challenge of the Home Ministry’s banning of “Allah” in its weekly paper Herald, two other cases involving Christian materials with the Arabic word for God will be up for case management here next week.

The Malay Mail Online understands that the Sabah SIB Church’s case over materials previously seized by the Home Ministry will be heard in chambers next Tuesday, while Sarawakian Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill’s case is scheduled to appear in court next Thursday.

In reference to these three cases, the Sabah group said : “This is a call to prayer for all parties as well as the judges to act with justice and righteousness.

“More importantly, they must act with conscience based on the Malaysia Agreement,” it added, referring to the 1963 agreement which incorporated the guarantee of complete religious freedom to Sabah and Sarawak.

Noting that one-third of the Cabinet ministers were from Sabah and Sarawak ― whose Christian natives had long used “Allah” in their indigenous languages, the group urged them to speak up for religious freedom regardless of their religious beliefs.

“The crisis facing us is one of freedom of religion enshrined in the Federal Constitution. They are duty bound to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution,” it said.

In a show of solidarity with the the state’s grassroots movement of Christian natives ― Perpaduan Anak Negeri (PAN) Sabah, the PFKK said it was “equally affected and offended” when their rights were “crippled” by government restrictions on the use of the Malay language bible Alkitab and the banning of the use of “Allah”.

Despite acknowledging Putrajaya’s 10-point solution in 2011 which allows Christians to use, print and distribute bibles with the word “Allah” with certain requirements for Peninsular Malaysia, the group called it “the latest deception” and “a 1Malaysia but 2-Alkitab policy”.

“We reject this one-country-two-system policy,” it said.

On October 14 last year, Justice Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali, in reading a summary of the Court of Appeal judgement by a three-man panel, said the home minister had acted well within his powers to disallow the Herald from using the word “Allah” in its Bahasa Malaysia section.

The Catholic Church’s bid to appeal the appellate court’s October ruling is opposed by nine respondents, namely the Home Ministry, the government, the Malaysian Chinese Muslim Association and the Islamic councils of six states.

According to a 2010 census, Muslims are Malaysia’s largest religious group, followed by Buddhists. Christians are the third largest at 2.6 million, which comes up to about 10 per cent of the entire Malaysian population.

Bumiputera Christians, who form about 64 per cent or close to two-thirds of the Christian community in Malaysia, have used the word “Allah” when praying and speaking in the national language and their native tongues for centuries.

Malaysia’s Allah Issue Seen from Afar

A former US ambassador to Malaysia sounds the alarm

Like other friends of Malaysia overseas, I have followed the controversy over the use of the word "Allah" with interest, but also with great concern. For I believe that this issue, if left unchecked, has the potential to tear Malaysia and the dream of "Bangsa Malaysia" apart.

While there are racial and religious issues in every society, what makes the situation in Malaysia different is that it is the government that has condoned and even provoked these tensions for its own political purposes.

For years, UMNO justified its existence by saying that the Malays are under threat, and that only UMNO could defend “the Malay race”.

After the 13th general election, in which UMNO candidates received only 30 percent of the national vote – and in which BN as a whole got only 47 percent – it had two choices. It could broaden its appeal or it could narrow it by trying to appeal to the PAS voter base, for whom religion rather than race is a more important concern.

Unfortunately, UMNO chose the latter course and started to play the "Muslim" card. Now, according to the government and UMNO, it is not just Malays, it is also Islam that is under threat. As for the "Malay" card, UMNO increasingly has gone to the extreme, pandering to extreme racist elements, starting with PERKASA.

The irony of the “Malays/Islam under threat” claim, of course, is that in Malaysia, both Malays and Muslims are the majority. And UMNO controls the government. So how can the Malay race and the Muslim religion in Malaysia be under threat?

To UMNO’s leadership, it doesn’t matter. There is no need to explain. They just speak and offer no evidence, and use their propaganda instruments - Bernama, RTM, Utusan Malaysia, the New Straits Times, etc – to spread the word.

From an international perspective, they also make assertions that are totally out of line with Islamic thinking and practice in the rest of the world.

Think about it – Malaysia is the only country in the world that ignores history and linguistics and dares to ban non-Muslims from uttering the word "Allah." Like Humpty Dumpty, the Malaysian government stands alone – and claims for itself the right to decide what words mean and what words people may read, write, think, and speak.

How can Prime Minister Najib Razak, his government, and its supporters justify their actions, when no one else in the Islamic world agrees with them? When Islamic scholars like Reza Aslan say, “We are laughing at you,” how do they respond?

They don’t. Because they don’t know what to say. They seem to be living on their own planet.

Actions, not just words

But it is not just what Najib and his government say, it also is what they have done.

It is the government that seized more than 20,000 Bibles in 2009.

It is the government that banned the use of the word "Allah" in the Catholic weekly The Herald.

It is the government’s Police Force that joined the recent raid on the Bible Society of Malaysia, confiscating over 300 bibles without a search warrant.

It is the government’s religious affairs department, JAKIM, that directed mosques throughout Malaysia to say, without citing any evidence, that Islam is “under threat,” that Christians and Jews are “enemies of Islam,” and that Christians are responsible for turning Muslims against each other and tricking them into losing their rights.

It is Najib’s cabinet that stood silently by and decided not to enforce its 10-point plan to restore religious peace and harmony in the nation.

It is the government that refused to take any action after the leader of PERKASA called for the burning bibles.

There is no greater example of uniformed assertions than former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s recent claim that Christians have “no right” to use the word "Allah." Because he is Mahathir, he just says it, and he expects everyone to agree.

As the saying goes, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts. In this case, history and the facts are not on Mahathir’s side. Mahathir is totally, 100 percent, wrong.

The word "Allah" was used by Arabic-speaking Christians for centuries before the birth of the Prophet and the rise of Islam. Indeed, archaeologists have found an Arabic-language Christian Bible (the Mt Sinai Arabic Codex 151), that is nearly 1,300 years old, in which God is called "Allah."

Indeed, someone might ask what right Muslims have to say the word "Allah," when it was used first by Christians? Who is violating whose rights?

The answer is simple – even though Jews and Christians used it first, they would never deny Muslims the right to say the word "Allah." Because while over the years, men and women have practiced and interpreted our religions in different ways, in the end we all worship the same God – the God of Abraham, the Creator of the Universe.

So here is the question. In the entire Islamic world, why is it only in Malaysia that people claim that uttering or writing the word "Allah" is the exclusive right of Muslims? Why is it only in Malaysia, and nowhere else in the world, that some Muslims say they will be “confused” if other people – Christians – use the word "Allah" when they worship inside their own churches, or when they read the Bible in the privacy of their own homes?

What makes Muslim Malaysians different from the other 1.5 billion Muslims in the rest of the world? I would like Malaysian advocates of the "Allah" ban to explain this, not to me (a Christian), but to explain it to the rest of the Islamic world.

Dangers of ‘quick research’

The senior judge in the Allah appeal, Mohamed Apandi Ali, wrote in his opinion that through his “quick research” on the history of the language of the Bible, “it is clear that the word ‘Allah’ does not appear even once as the name of God or even of a man in the Hebrew scriptures. The name ‘Allah’ does not appear even once in either the Old or New Testament.

“There is no such word at all in the Greek New Testament. In the Bible world, God has always been known as ‘Yahweh’, or by the contraction ‘Yah.’ That being the historical fact, it can be concluded that the word or name ‘Allah’ is not an integral part of the faith and practice of Christianity.”

Justice Apandi’s judgment clearly shows the dangers of “quick research.” He should have spent a little more time on the web. But because he refers to how the word "God" is expressed in Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic, he has raised the important issue of language and the words that we use in different languages to refer to God.

How many languages are there in the world? The Christian Bible has been translated in whole or part into an astonishing 2,817 languages, according to the Wycliffe Bible Translator, a UK organization. The complete Bible is available in 513 languages, including Arabic and Malay.

Both the Arabic and Malay Bibles use the word "Allah" to refer to God. In the case of Arabic, it has been so for at least 1,300 years, and in the case of Malay, which “borrowed” the word "Allah" from Arabic, for at least 300.

Even so, Justice Apandi ignored both history and language when he claimed that the Arabic and Malay language word for God – Allah – belongs exclusively to Muslims. That is because Jews and Christians used the word "Allah" before the Prophet was even born.

Judge Apandi also was wrong when he said that the Jews have always referred to God as "Yahweh." My own “quick research” on Wikipedia, which must have lasted 15 seconds longer than the learned judge’s, shows that the Hebrew Bible uses many names for God.

While Yahweh is indeed the most common expression, two others are "Elah" and "Eloah." They both sound very similar to "Allah" and there is a reason for that. Just as Jews, Christians, and Muslims all believe in the God of Abraham, the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arab languages are all related to each other.

Most scholars say that Jesus spoke Aramaic, not Hebrew. And when Jesus spoke of God, he said, “Ellah.” That sounds remarkably very similar to the Arabic "Allah." And it should, because Aramaic and Arab are what linguists call “cognates.”

As word of Judaism and Christianity spread into the Arabian Peninsula, "Allah" became the Arabic language name for the God of Abraham. The word "Allah" was used first by Arab Christians and Mizrahi Jews, and only later by the Prophet and Muslims.

Sorry, Justice Apandi. Sorry, Mahathir. Sorry, Najib and UMNO.

If anyone owns the “trademark” on the word "Allah," it is the Christians, who first spread the word of the God of Abraham into the Arabian peninsula, and who first used the word "Allah." But here is the point – no Christian Malaysian insists and no Arabic-speaking Christian insists that the word "Allah" belongs exclusively to them.

So the burden of proof therefore is on any Malaysian who ignores history, language, and the facts – and who ignores what the rest of the Islamic world is doing – and simply asserts that only Muslim Malaysians may use the word "Allah."

John R. Malott served as US Ambassador to Malaysia from 1995 to 1998. He contributed this to the Malaysian website Malaysiakini.

Lies, lies, and more lies

 

 First there was the assertion that there exists an attempt by Christians to make Penang a Christian state; simply because the chief minister is reputed to be a Christian. No evidence was ever found or elicited for these unfounded rumours. The perpetrators of the crime were not charged. I believe they were Umno-linked bloggers.

Now there are ‘Jesus the son of Allah’ banners which, frankly, no Christian would ever make. The reason is simple: If we do, the whole sentence would be in Malay; never in English with the Arabic ‘Allah’ word. What will come next? Maybe a ‘Melayu balik kampung’ banner which then sparks another round of racial riot rumours, or pig-heads into mosques?

These were standard tactics since 1969 in Penang but it was stopped in good time because of the then chief police officer’s (CPO) quick response and actions? 

But he was an outstanding Special Branch (SB) officer well-trained in the matters of psychological warfare, but there are no such people any more, since our communist threat is no more. Our current CPOs are only of one race and religion.

Today, police officers appear to pursue their partisan agenda against both citizens and foreigners alike. People are losing faith in the so-called ‘not-so-royal police force’, but which however does not act against Umno extremists. Selective persecution and prosecution seems the order of the day today.

All these rumours when printed and taken up by both mainstream and even the sidestream media, become almost facts, and then the truth of matters. I would have thought there is a law against such rumour mongering. We also witnessed such abuse of print media before the 13th general election (GE13).

Consequently, and because of our lack of faith in both the police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers, some of us with the Media Group @ MiDAS took the initiative to make a formal and written complaint to Suhakam about mainstream media distorting truth and promoting lies through advertorials; basically distorting truths and reporting untruths.

To Suhakam’s credit, I believe that they called a formal meeting with all media to address the issue last week. We await the follow up action from Suhakam.

But, why are the media lying instead of telling and promoting truths and facts? What do I mean?  On the ‘Allah’ issue; do Malaysians not really know that the first and original version of the Bahasa Melayu version of the Matthew’s Gospel was translated in 1621 by a Dutch scholar named AC Ruyl?

The originals are still available at the University of Amsterdam and the University of Cambridge. By 1733, the first Malay Bible was complete and the word ‘Allah’ was consistently used.

Are these newspaper editors really ignorant and condone their journalists to choose to spread lies and not state the facts. Do they not know that Sabahans and Sarawakians had Malay Bibles well before Malaysia was formed in 1963? Furthermore, do not the same idiocratic editors not know that under the 18 and 20 point demands before the Malaysia Agreement was voted upon, these states had clearly clarified that Islam is not the religion of these states?

Dr Tajuddin’s proposal and Dr Patricia’s response

In a recent article submitted by Dr Mohd Tajuddin Mohd Rasdi, he sought to argue that Christians as a community should apply their love in action and learn to “turn the other cheek on this matter!” In reply, Dr Patricia Martinez has responded well on this issue. While his is a very noble and commendable effort, I think it is flawed both theologically and rationally.

Let me try and explain to my good friend and academic colleague why this is not feasible for the same factual reasons of misinformation:

• The ‘Allah’ issue is a bigger issue for bumiputra Christians of Sabah and Sarawak worshipping in Malay. Most peninsular Christians worshipping in English have no issue about this word and its non-usage. We would ordinarily not use the ‘Allah’ word unless when singing Malay songs or hymns;
• The East Malaysian brothers and sisters, on the other hand, whose mother tongue is Malay, make up about 65 percent of all Malaysian Christians of about 3 million citizens.  Their language of heart worship is Bahasa Melayu. Nonetheless, peninsular Christians cannot speak for them;
• They voted and elected, as moderated by the UN, to support the formation of Malaysia but under certain explicit conditions, which cannot be violated now;
• The peninsular Malays have to instead be educated about the root of the ‘Allah’ word, and that the de-sacralisation of the name of Jesus, as ‘son of Allah’, is totally in bad taste and does not even make for good theology; and
• The Christians worshipping in Malay use only the Malay Bible and have been using it since their days of the grandparents. They hardly even mix Malay and English and no English Bible would ever carry the word Arabic word ‘Allah.’

Conclusion and way forward

Bumiputra Christians, whether from Sabah or Sarawak, have and will always use their heart language to worship in Malay. It is their heart language and mother tongue, and cannot be changed or imposed even through theologically sound teaching, like turning the other cheek, even if it is well-communicated and well reflects Christian-type unconditional love.

Frankly, all this seems to reflect a clear and focussed agenda by some unscrupulous groups to create trouble through fear and uncertainty, but have we not learned that citizens in cities and towns today are more rational and cannot be so easily misled. There is another danger though, that all the ordinary and good hearted citizens may all get upset and decide to turn against the groups that are spreading such evil ideas and antics.

Let us not however respond to fire with fire, because once fire begets more fire and once a wildfire starts, we will all have some serious issue to deal with. I am not sure the security forces are really prepared to deal with these issues. It is better to deal with these issues before the real problems start.

Let us nip these symptoms in the bud; but that requires a police force that is indeed called to serve the public interest, not partisan interests. Let us all make March a month for prayer for good sense in this nation. May God bless Malaysia.

---

KJ JOHN was in public service for 29 years. The views expressed here are his personal views and not those of any institution he is involved with. Write to him at  kjjohn@ohmsi.net with any feedback or views.