Something has gone terribly wrong in this country. The trends are worrying especially to those of us who want Malaysia to remain a constitutionally secular country which respects all religious practices.
First, The Herald, the official newsletter of the Roman Catholic Church in Malaysia, has been embroiled in controversy over the use of the word "Allah", Arabic for "the God", in the Malay language section of the weekly newspaper. The issue is now being resolved in the civil court.
Now, on July 16, the home ministry issued a letter to the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, the Rev Murphy Pakiam, who as publisher of The Herald, must show cause for allegedly publishing material that:. did not follow the concept of focusing on its religion, as laid down in the guidelines of its publishing permit; and degraded the status of Islam in an article dated June 22, titled "America and Jihad - where do they stand?"
The controversy did not end here. It is interesting that the home minister Syed Hamid Albar had defined what the Herald should cover on religion. He said "If you are to write on religion, then you are supposed to touch on matters pertaining to questions on rituals, adherence to God, followers and anything related to your divine mission."
Syed Hamid's interference complicated the matter. Why should a politician dictates how the Christian community should engage their own members? Is Christianity only restricted to matters pertaining to rituals or adherence to God? Isn't the divine mission of all religions is fairness, compassion, equality and dignity for all? Christians reserved their rights to discuss global and societal issues which affect them as human beings and members of the world community. Religion is about humanity.
The action taken by the government against the Herald missed this very important point about the need to look at religion from the viewpoint of humanity.
Next, the PKR MP Zulkifli Noordin has accused the Bar Council of being 'anti-Islam'. This is a very dangerous accusation. It is important to note that throwing wild accusations at any organisations at this point in time will not help to make the situation better.
It is within the ambit of the council to discuss grey matters of the civil laws if there are ambiguities. Zulkifli's action has denied many apolitical Malaysians a chance to seek for their fair judicial rights in matters pertaining to inheritance, conversion, apostasy and others. These are rights enshrined in the universal human rights.
The Bar Council is the right body to discuss these ambiguities and grey areas of laws. It is a shame that these politicians, so-called religious activists and individuals have refused to acknowledge that there is space within any religion to discuss any ambiguities.
Zulkifli must retract his accusation immediately or he should withdraw from the Bar Council, which he claimed is 'anti-Islam'.
Islam is holier and flexible than what Zulkifli and the likes thought.
Lastly, I would like to congratulate PAS's leaders and Islamic scholars who came out openly to question Saiful Bukhari's action. Rightly pointed out, if Saiful has proof and evidence he should respect the court's decision in the upcoming trial. His so-called Islamic swearing was criticised as un-Islamic by PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz and Indonesia's Gus Dur.
I am disappointed that a number of top lawmakers have given their support for this show of defiance against the court. They are pressuring Anwar to do the same. What can they hope to get out of this if Anwar does the same?
Respect the rule of law!
10 comments:
Dear Mr Khoo,
I found the book "RESET : Rethinking the Malaysian Political Paradigm" by Suflan Shamsuddin quite enlightening especially when it touched on the social contract and the federal constitution from the eyes of a Malay/Muslim intellect.
Have you read it yet? If you have, could you let me know what you think of the book?
Personally, I like the book and agreed with most of its assumptions except I had a hard time seeing how the offered solution could happen.
respect the rule of law? its more like they are above the law. thats how far BN has deviated to the dark side. and i dont see them changing until and unless they are being replaced by PR to govern and lead. Then, reformation within BN will only kick off.
remember Congress Party in India. Being too long in power is akin to over-used underwear. It stinks and needs cleansing and then after it can be re-used.
Romerz,
I have not read the book yet. Is it the one which suggests Malays as hosts of this country?
Mr Khoo,
Yes.
Dear Romerz,
I am not too impressed with the book. The writer uses a more polite term to describe Malay Master relationship.
Straits Chinese ancestry in Malaysia can be traced back to before 1403 (Zheng He's voyage to Southeast Asia).
If being this long in this country, we are still treated as visitors or guests then something is seriously wrong with this country.
I am not impressed with the writer.
Dear Mr Khoo,
Thank you for your opinion which is much appreciated since I subscribe to most of your views.
However I still think that the author is a moderate Malay/Muslim trying to find balance between the hardcore 'supreme' advocates and the liberal advocates of a Malaysian Malaysia.
I'm of the opinion that something is seriously wrong with this country which needs to be addressed soon.
But unless we can sit down together and talk about it with a common reference point, all efforts will fail for such talks will not even take place.
Maybe one day the majority in this country will 'force' the perpetrators of racial politics to really sit down and talk but it will not be without risk of anarchy from the hardcore minority as we have so often seen.
All I'm saying is that maybe we should temper our pace of change to a pace which does not force those hardcore out of their comfort zone too much.
Romerz,
Host-Guest relationship between Malays and others is not a reference point. We are all Malaysians. Sons and daughters of this nation.
Then again, you are entitled to your own pace.
Many political parties in BN believed in not forcing the hardcore out of their comfort zone. Keng Yaik was the main proponent of gradual change.
But at the present state, we are taking a step forward but several steps backward.
Is Malaysia today better than before in race relations?
I am the author of RESET, and thought that it might help if I were to explain what the chapter was intended to do. I think you need to understand the Notion of Hospitality as a means by which to reach a middle point between the argument put forward on one hand, by many Malays who wish to argue a distinction between the Bumis and non-Bumis, and on the other hand, those who wish to take the view that all Malaysians must be treated equally, and that there should be no distinction between one Malaysian and another. I think if we try to argue this point and entrench our respective positions, we will never get an alignment between Malaysians in a way that will allow us, as a united Bangsa Malaysia, to move forward together. I have proposed the notion of hospitality as a means by which to accomodate the concerns of both sets of stakeholders who take contrarian views, as a means by which to build consensus. It is by no means intended to be another way of expressing a master-servant relationship. In fact I go at lengths to explain that when two persons interact in a place in which both parties are entitled to exercise equivalent rights, eastern normative values predispose the exercise deference by one to the other, by reference to the circumstance upon which the relationship to the venue was built. So what is so wrong with that? It is unfortunate that Khoo cannot see this notion as a means to bridge gaps. Having said that, I do admit, in my opening Capter that it would not surprise me that some gaps are too big too bridge, simply because Malaysians refuse to find a middle point upon which to stand united (in a non politicisedway). If that is the case, then indeed, this country will have much difficulty in ever healing itself. Khoo's view is indeed a reflection of that sad state of affairs in our country. As I mentioned in the chapter on the Notion of Hospitality, when we refuse to yield to a common position, we are two sides of the same coin, and never the twain shall meet.
Suflan,
Thanks for taking your time to post a message on my blog. I have just bought a copy of your book.
I appreciate your intention to bridge the gap through your own theory of "notion of hospitality".
I have a problem with your theory mainly for one reason. By doing so, you have adopted and accepted the prevalent divide of non-bumi and bumi, sadly a politically motivated division to form exclusivity.
The real problem is when you take a socio-political perspective to resolve this issue, u missed the entire historical reasoning which is flawed about the non-bumi and bumi division.
From a Chinese Malaysian perspective, it is wrong to frame our existence in this country to merely the 19th century and as 'British subjects' brought in to work in the tin mining industry or what Ahmad Ismail termed us as 'squatters'.
If you looked at historical evidence, many of the strait chinese were rooted here hundreds of years ago. Because of intermarriages amongts chinese and with other races it is very disturbing and sad to call all chinese "squatters".
Khoo's has a long history of almost 650 years and at least half of them in Malaya.
Your sincerity in bridging the gap is appreciated but your notion is nothing new and nothing promising. At least for people like myself and my family.
Khoo,
I am glad you have now bought the book. To be fair to me, I think you should read it in its entirety, in particular the Chapter on The Notion of Hospitality. I think if you go through it carefully, you will realize that my approach is one that does not look at the issue in terms of black and white, but instead by reference to shades of grey, which change over time. Deference given in a social interaction by one to another as a mark of respect to take account of the relative relationship to the venue in which the interaction occurs is not insulting or patronizing. I would argue that eastern cultures understand this much better than cultures of the West. But you will see that I go further by saying that in due course, this notion works to recognize the change to the status of the actors by the sheer effluxion of time, such that both will end up with equal footing. So to be clear, I approach our relationships not by the black and white Bumi/Non-Bumi angle. And I expressly describe this notion as NOT being one that makes non-Malays as "pendatang" or to be treated as guests. It is a much more sophisticated argument than that. I am trying to depoliticize a highly political position for one purpose. And that is so that we can sit together and work out what is wrong with the nation. If we let the Dato' Ahmad's of this world hijack our nation, we are screwed. Do read the book, and I am more than happy to discuss it further with you. I am sincere in looking for a solution that will enable us to look beyond the pall of chauvinism that surrounds us. All the best, Khoo.
Post a Comment