All Cabinet Ministers should study the 57-page judgment of KL High Court judge Lau Bee Lan to decide whether Home Ministry should withdraw the appeal on the “Allah” controversy and focus instead on inter-religious dialogue to resolve the issue

The Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin should not be so hasty and even trigger-happy to declare that the government will not withdraw its appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment allowing the Catholic Church to use the word “Allah” in the Bahasa Malaysia section of its newspapers, Herald.

By doing so, Muhyiddin is unfairly and undemocratically denying the rights of Cabinet Ministers from considering whether the Home Ministry should withdraw its appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment on the “Allah” controversy to demonstrate the government’s seriousness and commitment to resolve the issue through inter-religious dialogue.

I had in Ipoh yesterday made the proposal that the government withdraw the appeal and to focus on resolving the controversy through inter-religious dialogue, as certain Umno Ministers and leaders had given the impression that when they speak about inter-religious dialogue, they were not talking about an open, full and free discussion and inter-reaction among the different religions to reach a lasting and satisfactory solution but using the inter-religious dialogue to achieve a pre-determined outcome – in the case of the “Allah” controversy, to achieve the same objective as the 2007 Home Ministry ban on the Catholic weekly Herald from using the word “Allah”.

This impression has been strengthened by Muhyiddin’s hasty rejection of my proposal that the government withdraw its appeal against the KL High Court judgment on the “Allah” controversy and his accompanying reasons.

Muhyiddin said today that the government will not withdraw its appeal against the KL High Court judgment but will instead wait for the judgment of the appeal.

He told reporters after launching the MyID and Heads of Public Sector Conference at the Putrajaya International Convention Centre this morning: “We will wait for whatever the judgment is based on the appeal that has been submitted.”

This is clearly a change of stand as Umno leaders including the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Muhyiddin himself as well as former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, had publicly indicated support that the solution of the “Allah” controversy should not lie in the courts but through inter-religious goodwill, understanding and dialogue.

So is Muhyiddin saying that the government now supports the idea of an inter-religious council, so long as this is not the means for the solution of the current “Allah” controversy?

This is all the more the reason why the Cabinet should revisit the issue to decide whether it should resort to inter-religious dialogue instead of an appeal to the Court of Appeal to resolve the current “Allah” controversy, which has catapulted the country to adverse international attention since the beginning of the year with the spate of arson and vandalism against churches and other places of worship, including surau and Sikh Temple.

There is another potent reason why the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday should give top priority to the issue as whether the Home Ministry should withdraw its appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment and to focus instead on inter-religious dialogue to resolve the issue.

This was because the decision to file the appeal against the ruling of Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Datuk Lau Been Lan handed down on Dec. 31 was made – filed in High Court on the first Monday of the year, January 4, 2010 – without Cabinet consideration, decision or approval as the first Cabinet meeting of the year was on Wednesday January 6, 2010.

Last Friday (15th January), Lau released the written grounds of her judgmernt laying out the reasons and the laws behind her ruling.

I call on the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail to ensure that all Cabinet Ministers are immediately given copies of the 57-page judgment by Lau so that they can individually make up their minds on whether the Cabinet should take the decision on Wednesday that the Home Ministry withdraw its appeal in the “Allah” controversy, and to focus instead on the inter-religious dialogue to resolve the issue, in view of Lau well-reasoned and solid judgment, in particular on:

  • the 22 grounds why the Home Ministry’s ban on Herald on the use of the word “Allah” is illegal;

  • why the Home Minister’s ban is unconstitutional;

  • on the seeming conflict between the Federal Constitution and the state enactments to control and restrict the propagation of religious doctrine among Muslims;

  • on the claim that the Home Minister’s ban was to safeguard public security and order; and

  • on claims from Muslim groups that “Allah” cannot be challenged in court.

I call on all Ministers to ensure that they get copies of Lau’s 57-page judgment and to spend the next two days to study it (burning the “midnight oil” if necessary) and understand its implications and to demand that the Cabinet at its meeting on Wednesday should decide whether the Home Ministry should withdraw its appeal and to focus instead of inter-religious dialogue to resolve the issue.

Muhyiddin should not deny and deprive Cabinet Ministers from deciding on the issue for two reasons:

  1. the principle of collective Ministerial responsibility as the appeal is not just the appeal of the Home Ministry but represents the appeal by the Barisan Nasional government and Cabinet; and

  2. he should be reminded that all Cabinet Ministers have the right and duty to decide on this issue, and not to forget that the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are only “primus inter pares” and Cabinet Ministers are puppets or dumb followers of the PM and DPM!

46 Replies to “All Cabinet Ministers should study the 57-page judgment of KL High Court judge Lau Bee Lan to decide whether Home Ministry should withdraw the appeal on the “Allah” controversy and focus instead on inter-religious dialogue to resolve the issue”

  1. How can a lawless government follow the law. They can tell you nobody is above the law, but they alawys put themselves above the law. and they will call the shot of who can break the law and who cannot. They will tell you that the court is the right place to address any disputes but now they say it is the wrong place. Some are echoing Mahathir’s malevolent opinion. The man who destroy the judiciary will of course say that is the wrong place. However once the appeal court reverse the judgment (which will happen soon), then those same guys will say we have to abide by the court’s decision. These UMNO fools do not know what comes out from their rotten orifice .

  2. Nazri says too late for dialogue on ‘Allah’

    By Debra Chong – The Malaysian Insider.

    KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 18 — Contrary to public opinion, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz (picture) thinks the court is the only way to bring an end to the “Allah” debate.

    While his Cabinet colleagues, including fellow Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Jamil Khir Baharom, have been pushing to bring religious leaders to the table to settle the simmering stew, Nazri says it is too late for a dialogue.

    “It’s too late. I’ve mentioned it many times,” the minister in charge of law and parliamentary affairs said when asked his opinion on the best way to resolve dilemma, which appears to be pitting the Malaysian Muslim community against the non-Muslims.

    “It was the failure of the rundingan that resulted in the matter being brought to court,” he pointed out.

    “It’s not the fault of the government. Let it be known that it was Tan Sri Pakiam, not the government, who brought the matter to court,” Nazri stressed.

    The Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Reverend Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam representing the Roman Catholic Church had taken the federal government to court after the home minister banned the church newspaper from publishing the word “Allah” three years ago.

    The High Court, had on December 31 last year, ruled that Herald had the constitutional right to publish the word in the Christian publication,to cater to its Bahasa Malaysia-speaking followers.

    If there was to be any out-of-court settlement over the “Allah” row, Pakiam, as the official publisher of Herald — the Catholic Weekly, must make the first move, the government minister added.

    “I got no choice as the minister in charge of law. Because of Tan Sri Pakiam, I must be the person to advise the government that we must use the courts-lah,” Nazri, who is also Padang Renggas MP said.

    He said if he did not take that stand, the public would also lose their confidence in the country’s judiciary system.

    “If I don’t do that, people may say, ‘Apa ini, menteri undang-undang tak konfiden dengan mahkamah ke? (What is this, the law minister is not confident with the court?)” Nazri added, half-jokingly.

    “We must respect the system. So I’m using the court system to appeal the court decision,” he said.

    Nazri did not reply when asked if he had read for himself the written grounds of judgment by High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan which was released last week.

    Instead, he noted that the judge is not a Muslim, and had ruled over a matter that concerned the “akidah” (faith) of the Muslim community.

    “You must study the psyche of the Malays. The Chinese can be Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, no problem, but the Malays, the race itself is defined in the Constitution,” he said.

    “Who is a Malay? In the Constitution, a Malay is one: a Muslim; two: speaks Malay and three: practises Malay culture. In the Constitution, there can’t be a Malay who is not a Muslim. Anything at all, any suspicious will confuse the ordinary Malays. They become so protective because Malay and Islam cannot be separate,” Nazri pointed out.

    The Umno man said in the Borneo states the people had embraced the “1 Malaysia” concept a long time ago, unlike in the west where racial lines are still very apparent.

    —————————————

    Does this mean no dialogue whatsoever as promised by Najib and the only solution is through the courts to resolved the “Allah” issue?

  3. ///Instead, he noted that the judge is not a Muslim, and had ruled over a matter that concerned the “akidah” (faith) of the Muslim community.///– Nazri

    So, Nazri challenges the judgement not on the reason but on the person and particularly the race of the judge. He should be charged for contempt of court.

    Nazri implied that if Malay judge made that ruling, he would accept. Non-Malay judge cannot be accepted for making important judgement. It has been reported that Justice Lau Bee Lan has been transferred since Jan. 1 to commercial crime division, and can the world have faith in Malaysian Judiciary?

    Article 160 on the interpretation of the term Malay is the cause of the problem. Now it is the NEP that made Malays ever sensitive of the status of Islam. They are sensitive that if the status of Islam is not being enhanced continuously, any erosion of would affect the economic interests of the persons whose classification is based on the religion. It is the economic interests that matters more than the religious issue per se. Clearly religion is being politicised.

  4. It’s not the fault of the government. Let it be known that it was Tan Sri Pakiam, not the government, who brought the matter to court,” Nazri stressed.
    Looks like this is finger pointing that Tan Sri Pakiam is responsible for the fiasco. This is the typical characteristics of UMNO. Only God will have the answer for this sinister people. What option do Tan Sri Pakiam has at that point of time? We all know what happen in Penang during an interfaith dialogue.

  5. > “Who is a Malay? In the Constitution, a Malay is one: a Muslim; two: speaks Malay and three: practises Malay culture.

    Now UMNO may want to include in another condition. A Malay is one who is non-Pakatan….

  6. UMNO can keep on finding ways and means to get out of their stupid low class dirty politics on the “Allah” matter…by contradicting each other….while PAS is rubbing in to say.. “Allah” is free for Christians to use..in Kelantan State…. dominated by 95% Muslims.
    You can again expect…UMNO feel no shame at all…and Malaysians are sick of their nonsense…particularly ..from the ordinary Malays.

  7. Nazri response to this judgement is that the judge did not understand the psyche of the Malay. Its Nazri and UMNO leaders who prejudge the psyche of the Malays. Take a lot of respond on Facebook discussion. The judge understood it quite well…

  8. Reversal of the High Court decision by the Court of Appeal will give UMNO the upper hand to deal with the conflict. However, that could also mark the beginning of UMNO’s downfall as people in East Malaysia (UMNO’s deposit) are displeased with the revised decision and vent their anger on UMNO by joining PR in the 13th GE.

    If the Court of Appeal really reverses the High Court decision, I bet a cunning UMNO will study East Malaysians’ REACTION before making decisions whether to hold inter-faith dialogs to make a compromise.

  9. Asking cabinet ministers to read 57 pages of judgement papers.You must be crazy.If it were to be 57 ways to screw the country dry then ministers will be more than willing to spend some time.

  10. Both Muhiyiddin, Nazri ‘waiting for the court of appeal’ are the same as telling the next violent protestor of whatever ‘sensitive issue’ to go ahead and kill someone.. Any blood spilled is on their hands…

  11. //Instead, he noted that the judge is not a Muslim, and had ruled over a matter that concerned the “akidah” (faith) of the Muslim community.

    “You must study the psyche of the Malays. The Chinese can be Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, no problem, but the Malays, the race itself is defined in the Constitution,” he said.// (referring to the conversation of Dato Seri Nazri, the de facto Law Minister)

    Nazri tries to politicizes this issue further by making it an issue of Special Position of Malay as promised by the Federal Constitution. The KL High Court Judge did not judge anything on the issue of whether it is legal or illegal to proselytize a Malay by a Catholic Church attempting to convert this Malay from a Muslim into a Catholic. Therefore, Datuk Lau’s ruling shall not affect the Special Position of the Malay, as promised by the Federal Constitution.

    Instead, Datuk Lau Bee Lan judged that Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution, which is the restriction, does not state that State law can forbid or prohibit but “may control and restrict”; does not provide for State law or for any other law to control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing a religion other than Islam.

    The following are excerpted from Justice Datuk Lau’s verdict:
    //Further, all these State Enactments are made pursuant to Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution which reads “State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.” (Emphasis added)…
    “Mr Royan drew to the Court’s attention (i) that Article 11(4), which is the restriction, does not state that State law can forbid or prohibit but “may control and restrict”; does not provide for State law or for any other law to control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing a religion other than Islam…// (Justice Lau Bee Lan)

    If Dato Seri Nazri really has a big ego which does not allow him to see that the greatest court ruling pertaining to protection and preservation of the non-Muslims’ constitutional right to freedom of religion and their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression had been initiated by Datuk Lau Bee Lan, who is not acceptable in the eyes of racist Umnoputras because of her skin colour, then Dato Seri Nazri should get all three Malay judges who are going to sit in the Court of Appeal to write a concurring opinion in order to show that the Malays, not solely a Chinese like Justice Lau Bee Lan, also made great contribution to the protection and preservation of non-Muslims’ constitutional rights in Malaysia.

  12. Is it UMNO’s intention to propagate some form of ideology that the Malay Muslim bumiputra is ‘more bumiputra’ than the non-Malay, non-Muslim bumiputras?
    It seems this issue with that Arabic word appears to be an attack on the more-than-a-century-old religious practices of the Malay-speaking Christian bumiputras of Sabah & Sarawak.
    If UMNO stubbornly wants its way on this issue, will West Malaysia (Peninsular/’Malaya’) & East Malaysia (Sabah & Sarawak) one day end up like what had happened almost 4 decades ago between West Pakistan & East Pakistan?

  13. //The Umno man said in the Borneo states the people had embraced the “1 Malaysia” concept a long time ago, unlike in the west where racial lines are still very apparent.// (Malaysia Insider reported by Debra Chong, referring to a conversation of the De Facto Law Minister of Malaysia, Dato Seri Nazri)

    To a certain extent, Dato Seri Nazri could be true in saying that in the Borneo states the people had embraced the “1 Malaysia” concept a long time ago. In Sabah and Sarawak, it is common for us to see Muslims eating in the food court or eating house operated by a non-Muslim. What the muslim customers need to do before consuming the food is just to tell the food server that they don’t take pork! And the non-muslim food court or eating house operator will give instruction to their muslim cook for making preparation to cater for the special halal food order. That really makes the life much easier and less stressful!

  14. “For us, it’s only a word. But for a Malay, it’s not. It’s their psyche.” – Nazri.

    We should question the accuracy of this racial stereotyping. If the number of demonstrators at the various mosques are an indication, it would appear that the statement is not quite accurate.

  15. Based on my observation, some muslims prematurely responded by saying that the court ruling regarding the Herald case was not acceptable because the ruling was issued by someone who is a non-believer and has no religion (perintah Mahkamah kes Herald tidak boleh dipersetujui kerana perintah ini dijadikan oleh “orang Kafir” atau orang yang tidak ada ugama.)

    I believe some radical Umnoputras will continue to politicise this judicial review case by citing the emotional and baseless accusation on the KL High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan, putting blame on the court for dropping judgement on the matter of “Allah”, which is, by the radicals’ presumptuous belief, not justiciable because it was, according to their claim (whether correct or not), a Muslim issue.

    Things in Malaysia will look bleak and be subject to tough racist tension if the Umnoputras are to continue incite the Malay people to come forward for extreme action such as arson, vandalism, and street fight in order to demonstrate their disagreement with Justice Lau’s court ruling!

    If the late Tun Sambanthan were still alive, perhaps he would be the best BN leader to organise some kinds of school activities and social activities among the NGOs in order to promote the sense of “Muhibbah” among all fellow Malaysians. Does anybody here still remember the lyric of the song “Muhibbah”, which many Malaysians sang during 1970s?

  16. //Instead, he noted that the judge is not a Muslim, and had ruled over a matter that concerned the “akidah” (faith) of the Muslim community.// (Malaysia Insider news reported by Debra Chong, referring to the conversation of the de facto Law Minister, Dato Seri Nazri.)

    If Nazri wants to talk about the “akidah” of the Muslim community, it is OK and completely permissible with the court ruling of Justice Lau Bee Lan. However, the issue of the Islamic “akidah” shall be irrelevant in Herald case because the Islamic “Akidah” shall have nothing to do with the non-muslims who do not profess Islam as their religion, and who profess a religion other than Islam!

    Furthermore, there are two versions of “akidah” in existence in Malaysia – the Umno version and the PAS version. Each and every Muslim is permitted by the Court ruling to choose whichever set of “Akidah” that he/she prefers, subject to the discretion of the state ruler. There shall be adequate constitutional right for each individual in Malaysia to enjoy the freedom of whether to have or not to have a religion and the freedom to profess a religion of his/her personal choice, so long as the religion is not banned by the Law due to the complaint about “Cult” in which the religious doctrine is accused by the relevant religious authority for containing some occultic substances which are against the rule of law.

    For those who are interested to know more about the Islamic “Akidah”, please check out this blog:

    http://www.blogtokguru.com/pages/posting/25/istilah-akidah-umno

  17. As is usually the tactics of UmnoUtusans, Moreyoudin is just playing politics.

    He wants to capture the extreme ground in Umno as are those who are vying for higher positions such as Khir Toyo and Mukriz Mahaltail.

    Let’s go to Pagoh to explain to the people there to bring this lousy DPM down come the next GE.

  18. YB Lim,
    The fact is these UMNO idiots filed the appeal even before reading the judgment. In simple language they are not interested in the law so long as the judgment is not to their liking.
    For 14 years, the use of the word in the Herald publications had not caused any trouble but within days of the judgment and incitements from these UMNO politicians, churches were burned.

  19. Even if all cabinet ministers read 57-page judgment of High Court Judge Dato Lau Bee Lan, it does not mean that they will all understand fully the nuance and arguments of the Judgment (as not all ministers have the legal background to facilitate them to do so). And even if they do – and even privately agree with its correctness in law – it does not mean they will support the judgment if big brother UMNO takes a position against it.

    According to Nazri, if indicative of UMNO’s stance, his party has already determined that, to its constituency, Islam is so intrinsically intertwined with their cultural/racial identity that it is of the utmost paramount importance in their psyche. “They become so protective because Malay and Islam cannot be separate,” Nazri pointed out. The word “protective” implies that it holds the top priority position in their worldview, so that the moment the controversy were not settled privately and brought into public domain by the high profile court case, the ruling party has determined (rightly or wrongly) that the majority of its constituency) will not countenance and accept any compromise to concede to the Herald’s challenge (whether actual or an appearance of it) of the revered place of supremacy that the Official Religion holds in their psyche. (Hence it would have been better if Herald did not bring a legal action in the first place but had proceeded low profile to negotiate/seek compromise via dialogue with the authorities on the issue. However since it didn’t, the time is well passed for that now.

    [I read Nazri as saying, the Herald’s Cause may in fact not be an actual challenge by facts or even by law to Islam – but it suffices if there is an “appearance” or or perception of such by his conservative constituents].
    Which is why Nazri said “I may look liberal but my constituents are not…Actually, in my opinion, I prefer to let it be” (I read “it” to be status quo before ban). “If everyone prays to Allah, they’ll all be Muslim. It’s a good ploy for Muslims to convert non-Muslims” he quipped.”
    When he said his constituents were not liberal it meant that they were sensitive, and hence after the court action, interfaith negotiation/dialogue becomes impossible due to intervention of pride.
    The excerpts are taken from The MalaysianInsider Jan 18. On the basis of what Nazri said, there appears little prospects that the government will give in to the Herald in toto of what it wants according to the terms of the High Court’s decision. The reason for that appears “political” and not legal. No one is talking of logic here. It is about senstivities ie (read emotions).

    This is obvious as Nazri, a lawyer by training, has not given any single legal argument about why the Lau BL’s decision is wrong in law or facts or misapplied. According to The MalaysianInsider “Nazri did not reply when asked if he had read for himself the written grounds of judgment by High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan which was released last week”. This is consistent with the view that he and his party/the govt look more to the political implications and imperatives than legalities – and the way Herald decision by Lau Be Lan provokes negatively emotional sensitivities (amongst his constitutency) rather than its appeal to intrinsic logic or law) that explains why the government cannot compromise by withdrawing its appeal.

    He has also said “we must respect the system. So I’m using the court system to appeal the court decision” – in other words, one gets the impression that the govt seeks recourse from the appellate courts based on political than legal imperatives. Put another way, recourse to appellate court to secure legal legitimacy for a political imperative.

    Against such a background, it is highly unlikely that Herald will eventually get all that it wants. At best it gets the compromise (East-West) compromise offered by Nazri as an olive branch; at worst not even that.

  20. “By doing so, Muhyiddin is unfairly and undemocratically denying the rights of Cabinet Ministers from considering whether the Home Ministry should withdraw its appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment on the “Allah” controversy to demonstrate the government’s seriousness and commitment to resolve the issue through inter-religious dialogue.”

    This is his best chance to score points, men! He is an expert opportunist.

  21. What business has UMNO to interfere in the practice of other religions? The Koran does not proscribe the use of the word “Allxh” only to Muslims nor does it says that Islam is tied to a particular race? If UMNO is successful in their bid to ban “Allxh”, then Allxh is their plaything.

    What other prohibitions will follow henceforth? Will there be exclusive enclaves for Muslims in this country? Will there be separate infrastructures for Muslims and non-Muslims? Will there be dictates that other religions should not literally pray to any Gods because according to UMNO interpretations there is no God but only their brand of “Allxh”?

    This is no joke because it is already in the Constitution that the definition of a race is determined by legislation and not by biology. There were also calls by UMNO ultras in the light of the cowhead incident and the liquor ban in Selangor that certain areas were the exclusive enclaves of section of a particular religion. UMNO is in total control of all the apparatus of the state and like the Fascist and Communist regimes in the days of yore there will be the temptation to ban all other religion except their brand of Islam.

    UMNO has already demonstrated that they are out of control and has no respect for the law of this country. Scary isn’t it?

  22. off topic a bit

    Lim Guan Eng,

    There are certain parties under your administration who are asking for commission for certain projects to kick-off. I hope you will clean up this from the spineless swine before they gave PR a bad name.

    These individuals have no integrity or self respect anymore. Please look into this.

  23. ”Actually, in my opinion, I prefer to let it be….If everyone prays to Allah, they’ll all be Muslim. It’s a good ploy for Muslims to convert non-Muslims” quipped Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz per TheMalaysianInsider report of 18th Jan.

    By quipping that Non Muslims could also stand a chance of being converted by use of the common word, Nazri obliquely admits that even (personally) he may not believe that the use of the word by Herald would proselytize Malay/Muslims (prohibited by our Federal Constitution). The ban by Foreign Minister Hamid in 2007 is after all misconceived. It is misconceived in facts – because there is no evidence that all the while since time immemorial running to the ban the use of the word in Malay version of the bible has converted – or used to proselytize – any Malay/Muslim. It is also misconceived in law because the Non-Islamic Religions Enactment 1988 restricting the use of the word “Allah” for non-Muslims – based on which the ban is ostensibly justified – is only applicable in 10 states of Peninsular to the exclusion of Federal territories, Penang, Malacca Sabah/Sarawak. This is not even considering point 1 of the 20 and 18 point agreements with Sabah & Sarawak respectively that makes clear “…the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to North Borneo.” It is also not considering the gist of what Justice Lau Bee Lan ruled : that even if the Constitution prohibits ‘proselytization’ of Malay/Muslim, it also upholds freedom of religion for Non Muslims who are not prohibited from religious expressions/pursuits that do not infringe the constitutional ‘proselytization’ prohibition!
    From the time of the ban until the present appeal against High Court’s decision it is obvious that the ban was invoked and defended not on factual or legal basis but political considerations. The political considerations are deductible from Nazri’s remarks discussed in my posting #26 above.

    In a nutshell these are political considerations relating to Ketuanan Melayu, the raison de etre of UMNO forged and strengthened during 22 years of Tun Dr Mahathir’s rule. The conservative segment of UMNO’s traditional vote bank still upholds this tenet and ideology. Right wing Umno warlords on whom top party’s officials depend on for political survival within the party still champion it, thinking its best for the protection of their vested patronage interest in groveling at the gravy train – even though these very same top officials know that from the results of the May 8th 12 General Election, the ground – especially Malay ground – has shifted more to the Middle, and that Ketuanan Rakyat is an idea that has come, giving the Opposition that carries its banner unprecedented victory depriving the BN 2/3 parliamentary majority and 5 states! Hence the need for BN to “re-invent“ with “1 Malaysia”, a diametrically opposite concept/ideology and the tentative steps to revise BTN’s curriculum, enroll 30% of Non Malays in RMC, new economic policy to water down some aspects of NEP that thwart foreigners and investors. UMNO cannot just jettison Ketuanan or NEP because such a drastic about-face turn – after more than 22 years of indoctrination of this ideology – will, in its determination, spell open rebellion within the party and possibly en masse desertion by its traditional vote bank.

  24. (Continuing from preceding posting) Its strategy then, when driving the vehicle of the state (here I am using a manual car for the analogy) is to treat Ketuanan as a kind of clutch pedal and its opposite, the more inclusive 1 Malaysia, the gas pedal: it hopes to slowly lift/release the pressure on the clutch pedal in tandem to application of greater pressure on the gas pedal! This process takes time : more than 50 years of mind set – much of it is its own doing – cannot be unwound or changed over night but time is something the BN does not have with the next General Election around the corner.

    Which is why it regrets the way the Herald’s Allah controversy is turned out. The high profile dispute plunges UMNO in an unenviable dilemma. It gives right wing and conservative segments within the party and those outside within its larger traditional vote bank the ammunition to hype, rally, champion and be galvanized under the traditional anchor of Ketuanan of both race and religion, one and indivisible.

    [Commenter vsp in #28 commented that the Koran does not restrict the use of the word to only Muslims nor does it say that Islam is tied to a particular race. Islam may not (internationally) be tied to a particular race but in the landscape of Malaysia (at least Peninsular) a particular race is tied to Islam as home ministry secretary-general Mahmood Adam explained to foreign missions of the controversy, and as Nazri also explained by reference to the Constitutional definition of a Malay.]

    It is trite that the whole public controversy provides those whose mindsets are etched on Ketuanan Melayu a second wind at the expense of the PM’s more inclusive ‘1 Malaysia’ competing against PR’s Ketuanan Rakyat! Using the clutch and gas pedals analogy it seems the circumstances conduce – from the ruling party’s standpoint to an immediate step down on the clutch and release of the gas pedal putting a brake on 1 Malaysia….which is of course not necessarily good for UMNO/BN’s political fortunes, a large part sustained by East Malaysian voters counting amongst whom are about a million Christians disconcerted by the Govt’s official stand!

  25. (Continuing from preceding posting).

    As UMNO/BN gets ready for the next general election, Umno is forced by the controversy to face the dilemma whether it is prepared to lose the votes of the non-Muslims and of other BN component parties and also the support of East Malaysian Christians by not giving in to Herald’s position or by giving in, lose a portion of its traditional Malay/Muslim votes.

    To take either extreme position is high stake and risky. Hence Nazri comes out with the compromise based on political imperatives – lift the ban in East Malaysia, maintain it in Peninsular, never mind the internal inconsistencies of logic and law that such a compromise engenders.

    But even a compromise like that is risky and high stake. There is no telling that both sides of the Herald controversy will be appeased : it may satisfy no side!

    A satisfactory solution is elusive because the Herald is after all basing its claims and fighting its battle on considerations of logic, law and constitutional position whereas the ruling establishment, the political considerations as Nazri said, “Those people not in politics, they can say anything. But people like me, I depend on my voters.” (There is difficulty in forging compromise when contening parties proceed to stake their claim on different platform and premsies].

    That’s why Nazri blames Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam for instituting a court action and plunging UMNO/BN into a dilemma which it would be happy avert, to compromise in quieter and less publicised circumstances; that’s why other BN component parties are quiet on this controversy because they know the entire UMNO/BN coalition faces this dilemma and instead of pouring fuel to fire, left it to their leader UMNO to resolve it; Thats why the Opposition and DAP in particular advocates “Middle Malaysia” because thats the way in the future to go which UMNO/BN caught in the quagmire and controversy of its own doing is lagging behind in this race towards the goal of the “Middle”!

  26. if the judge (A VERY RIGHTFUL , BRAVE AND FOLLOW THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION) made her 57 pages judgement in ENGLISH, don’t expect them to study nor understand because their language is ALL BM ONLY but most of all ‘MONEY LANGUAGE’ .

    hamid should be charged in court for trying to ban non-muslims from using allah name as the malay version of their god because in the first place, he has acted against the federal constitution which gives freedom to non-muslims to use it. likewise, those who object to the rulings via the press or make public property damages should also be charged for going against malaysia law !!!

    unfortunately, no oppositions of bn dare to take these people to courts (not even the fearless karapal singh) most probably because they know what is the result.

    the rakyat also know nothing will happen to these culprits because we are in fact, living under UMNO LAW !!! the rakyat just want the opposition to take them to courts to show the world that malaysia is indeed under UMNO LAW .. that should be enough to tell the tourists and investors to think twice about malaysia

  27. Thats why it is also true that if the controversy is not easily resolvable – and protracts – it may well, be on balance, produce a more favourable impact on the Opposition as regards its electoral chances, especially when PAS in officially backing Herald has painted UMNO counterpart as more extreme from the Middle on this issue of Religion.

    However the boon to the Opposition is not altogether good news, because if the controversy is not easily resolvable – and protracts – it also means those whose vested interests lie in maintaining political status quo will have plenty opportunities of stoking fire around this sensitive issue to cause unrest and disharmony hoping to disrupt the ballot process before or its outcome. Already it has started with arson attacks on churches.

    They will do so if they make the determination that the party they support which they hope will maintain power forever is on a losing streak faced with an unresolvable dilemma and no win situation. So the situation could (but not necessarily) turn dangerous. Much depends on majority of Malaysians to act calm and level headed, and not emotional about the issue.

  28. Both Nazri and Moo-hee-din are fanning extremist sentiment again through their public pronouncements. Of course they are playing with fire by tacitly allowing public dissent against the High Court judgment. Let’s see what happens this Friday after prayers.

  29. I took a step back and relook at this raging debate about the “ALLAH” issue.

    I believe the root of this entire matter has nothing to do with religion. In Malaysia, Islam is synonymous with Malay. When the court ruled that the other communities can also use the word, the ruling hit a raw nerve because those who espouse the “ketuanan” issue sees this as an affront and challenge to the “ketuanan” concept and they lost. This they cannot accept hence the reaction by firebombing churches. The excuse that the ruling will “confuse”Muslims is just that, an excuse to camouflage the real reason.

    In Indonesia, which has the world’s largest Muslim population, there is no such “ketuanan” baggage so they have no hangups about the word being used by non Muslims. So is countries in the Arab peninsula.

  30. Jeffrey,
    To a large extent, I agree with your opinion that both Muhyiddin and Nazri were trying to please the Malay voters in order to lay path for the gain of a much better ballotbox margin in the next General Election which is around the corner. However, you failed to point out an important fact. The fact is that our past history proved that Barisan Nasional was able to win in the General Elections during the past 40 years not solely because the Malays supported Barisan Nasional but also because the non-Malay communities, such as Chinese, Indians, Kadazan, Murut, Bajau, Sulu, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak had given a considerable large portion of their votes to Barisan Nasional during the General Elections.

    In 1999, when many political watchers expected that Barisan Nasional would lose a considerable amount of Malay votes because of the effect of Anwar Arrest, Barisan Nasional still managed to win a two-thirds majority in the parliamentary seats. Apparently, there are other choices of political strategies which are available for buying by the Barisan Nasional and these other alternative strategies may be much better and much more politically convincing and feasible than the racist approach. Najib is not wrong in choosing the “1 Malaysia” strategy. However, the biggest problem which is faced by Najib is that he is not in the best position to implement the all inclusive policy of “1 Malaysia” when he has to rely his political strength on the support of such racist hawk leaders as Dr. Mahathir and Muhyiddin. At present, Najib’s biggest enemy is not coming from Pakatan Rakyat. His biggest enemy is coming from the racist emotional incitement found within Umno itself.

  31. A few moons ago, only Muslims can use Allah, Christians no, no
    A few days later, Christians in Sabah n Sarawak, OK lah can use Allah = God
    A few more days later, Christians in Penang, KL, Melaka, also OK lah can use Allah = God
    A few few more days later, WHAT?
    Such wonderful principle, d only constant is CHANGE

  32. Mad Cow Disease is also known as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
    Related 2 Chronic Wasting Disease n Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD)
    Dey belong 2 d unusual grp of progressively degenerative neurological diseases
    So obvious in ppl who spoke senselessly

  33. Maybe this controversy is the last straw that breaks the BN’s back?
    Let us all pray to whatever deity we worship that Malaysia can finally transition to the 2 or 3 party system in peace in the next elections.
    We need a government that operates more on meritocracy combined with needs assistance for the truly needy and not subsidies and corruption driven.

  34. Onlooker Politics,

    Re your comment of #37, I did not say that UMNO or “Muhyiddin and Nazri were (only) trying to please the Malay voters in order to lay path for the gain of a much better ballotbox margin in the next General Election which is around the corner”.

    I agree with you that “that our past history proved that Barisan Nasional was able to win in the General Elections during the past 40 years not solely because the Malays supported Barisan Nasional but also because the non-Malay communities, such as Chinese, Indians, Kadazan, Murut, Bajau, Sulu, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak had given a considerable large portion of their votes to Barisan Nasional during the General Elections.”

    However because many of these “non-Malay communities, such as Chinese, Indians, Kadazan, Murut, Bajau, Sulu, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak” may be Christians reading the malay version of the Bible, they won’t be happy with the govt.’s official position supporting the ban of the word against Herald, which is precisely why I say UMNO is in a “dilemma” caused by the issue because to satisfy its traditional Malay voter bank upholding “Ketuanan” it would alienate the non Malay Christain supporters amogst “Chinese, Indians, Kadazan, Murut, Bajau, Sulu, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak” and conversely to satisfy them means alienating its traditional Malay voter bank. Its like one can’t have the cake and eat it at the same time. Which is why Nazri comes out with a half way house compromise solution – based on lifting the ban in East Malaysia but not Peninsular – to please both sides of the divide though ironically it may please neither side.

  35. One would tilt more on the side of traditional Malay voter bank upholding “Ketuanan” to support the ban if it is felt, and assumed, that Christian “Chinese, Indians, Kadazan, Murut, Bajau, Sulu, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak” in East Malaysia, though unhappy with govt’s stand will still give their unstinting support to BN come next election because of the “lollies” and development largesse like motor boats and other material benefits distributed to them. This assumption is of course dicey because the two things important to many a voter are (1) money/material benefits (2) religion too! So the assumption can proceed only if it is felt that loss of support of majority East Malaysian Christian Chinese, Indians, Kadazan, Murut, Bajau, Sulu, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak” can be compensated by retention of votes from the thousands of muslim voters brought in via Projek M.

  36. O no, only Christians in Sabah, Sarawak, Penang, n KL, OK lah can use Allah = God
    Christians in Melaka, no, no, only God exits n Allah does not exit in d bible
    Kepala pusing lah, how 2 remember where OK, where no OK ah
    Imagine teachers in Sunday schools 4 kids
    Kid asks: teacher, teacher, last week, me in KL, Allah everywhere
    Today me in Ipon, Allah no more, only God left, Y like this 1, where Allah disappears
    Teacher: no know lah, ask nazi loh

  37. Since this is an Islam issue on an Arab words, they (BN) should invite 3 Arab judges to deliberate at Msia Court of Appeals

    MAYBE SEVERE TIES WITH INDONESIA SINCE INDONESIA DISREGARD ISSUES SENSITIVE TO MALAYSIA AND KEEP CONFUSING MUSLIM MALAYSIAN BY USING THIS SENSITIVE ARAB WORD IN THEIR BAHASA INDONESIA BIBLE

    MOREOVER, UMNO SHOULD WARN ALL THOSE CHRISTIAN INDONESIAN, BRUNEIAN , ARABIAN N SINGAPOREAN, ETC (TOURISTS, BUSINESSMEN, MAIDS, WORKERS, ETC.) NOT TO BRING IN ANY BIBLE IN BAHASA INDONESIA / MALAYSIA /ARAB WHICH USE THIS SENSITIVE ARAB WORD.

    COME OUT WITH A LAW TO FINE ANY PERSONS A MINIMUM OF SAYS, RM6, 000 FOR VIOLATION ON USE OF THIS SENSITIVE ARAB WORD. PASTE NOTICES AT ALL ENTRY POINTS.

  38. MAYBE…Chengho become our next PM….and half of Malaysian population will run away.
    UMNO really do not know how to choose the right PM…..to scare away millions..to ruke forever.
    Migrating.. is a must..just to avoid being infected by Chengho’s brain diseases..and go mad for no reasons.

Leave a Reply