Abide by A-G, he has final say - The STAR

AS a Muslim and a student of constitutional law, I am embarrassed and dismayed by the overzealousness and oppressiveness of several actions of Mais (Selangor Islamic Religious Council) and Jais (Selangor Islamic Religious Department) over the last few months.

Among them are the seizure of 321 Bibles from the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM) on Jan 2, the raid on a Hindu temple to arrest a Hindu bride suspected of being a Muslim and the more recent defiance by these state authorities of the constitutional decision by our Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, that BSM has committed no offence in importing or possessing Bibles in the Malay or Iban languages.

The A-G is the country’s highest legal officer under Article 145 of the Federal Constitution. It is he, and not Jais, whose power is to decide whether prosecution must commence before a civil court. (BSM is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts.)

The A-G is appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the Prime Minister. His status is that of a Federal Court judge and to brush aside his views on a matter with significant constitutional, international and political implications smacks of recklessness and arrogance.

It is legally true that under Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution, state assemblies are authorised to “control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among” Muslims.

In pursuance of this power, Selangor has enacted Section 9 of the Non-Islamic Religion (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988 banning the use of 35 words, including the term “Allah”. This law is an overkill and (in my view) clearly unconstitutional. It does not link the usage of the banned words to propagation. Most absurdly, it imposes an absolute ban.

The word Allah appears in the Selangor state anthem. The words Allah and Muhammad appear on every police badge. Are we then to believe that every non-Muslim police officer wearing the police badge is attempting to proselytise Muslims and must, therefore be prosecuted?

To make sense of this law, it must be read in light of the rest of the Constitution, especially Article 10 on free speech and Article 11 on freedom of religion. Only if the usage affects public order, national security or amounts to propagation, can the law be triggered.

This is also the learned view of the A-G who found that the import and possession of the Bibles by BSM did not violate the terms of any law.

As to the Mais and Jais view that the seized Bibles must not be returned but must be referred to the court to be disposed of under Section 407A of the Criminal Procedure Code, my understanding is that the section applies only if a charge is framed. The A-G has already said that there will be no charge.

According to Mais and Jais, the A-G is wrong. The order of the Selangor government is wrong. Only Mais and Jais are right.

This smacks of pride and arrogance which is both a threat to our system of rule of law and a violation of the spirit of Islam.

Click here to read more on this article

Boko Haram And The Politics Of Terror by Dr. Chandra Muzaffar

The heinous abduction of 276 girls from a boarding school in the village of Chibok in the north eastern part of Nigeria on the 14th of April 2014 falls into a pattern of hideous terror unleashed by the Boko Haram in Nigeria, north Cameroon and Niger for a few years now.

Boko Haram’s terror, i t is estimated, has resulted in about 10,000 deaths. Both Muslims and Christians, clerics and nonclerics, Nigerians and non Nigerians, have been the victims. Police stations, government offices, schools, mosques, churches, and tourist sites frequented by Westerners have been attacked at various times.

Through acts of violence, Boko Haram, founded in 2002, seeks to oust the Nigerian government and replace it with an “Islamic State” based upon the sharia. Eliminating Western education in particular and a secular way of life in general is central to its notion of an Islamic state. It subscribes to a myopic interpretation of sharia with the emphasis upon harsh, punitive laws. Many of its rules keep women subservient to male power. Those who do not adhere to its notion of the sharia are categorised as “apostates” who deserve to be put to death. In that sense, Boko Haram is very much a Takfiri movement — a movement which easily condemns fellow Muslims as apostates. 

A number of leading ulama (Islamic religious scholars) in Nigeria and West Africa have criticised Boko Haram for not only resorting to violence but also for its bigotry and dogmatism. Its attempts to coerce Christians to embrace Islam and to force what are perceived as secular schools to close down have earned the ireof a lot of the ulama and Muslims who constitute half of Nigeria’s total population. They rightly regard Boko Haram as a movement that has shamelessly betrayed Islamic teachings. Indeed, some Muslims insideand outside Nigeria have even begun to wonder if Boko Haram isn’t the creation of forces that are determined to tarnish the image of the religion ! It is alleged that it is funded by foreign elements though Boko Haram is also known to have staged bank robberies and the like to finance its operations.

From its criminal activities it is obvious that the movement is not just about a distorted, perverted interpretation of religion. Boko Haram is essentially about the pursuit for power. Like many other groups, both Muslim and non-Muslim in various parts of the world, it has consciously chosen to manipulate religious
emotions as it lusts for power and the glory that accompanies it. 

However, if Boko Haram continues to command a constituency, it is partly because of the larger situation prevailing in the country. Nigeria is one of the most unequal societies in the world with an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor. There is also massive corruption at all levels of society. A weak delivery system has increased the burden of the people. All this has fuelled anger and disillusionment with the State. As a movement fighting the State, Boko Haram has been able to tap into some of that frustration.

The global environment has also abetted Boko Haram. The unending suffering of the Palestinian people at the hands of Israel, an intimate ally of the United States; the US-led invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and the massacre and torture of innocent civilians; and the alienation and humiliation of Muslims in many Western
countries post 9-11, have helped to reinforce the anti-Western sentiments of groups like Boko Haram. These episodes and trends provide justification for militants who try to avenge injustices and indignities
perpetrated against Muslims through their own acts of terror.In recent months, the presence of French soldiers in Mali and the Central African Republic has given Boko Haram yet another reason to ventilate its hostility towards the West.

In this regard, there are Muslims who ask why Western elites are so concerned about the kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls now when just two decades ago, Washington had imposed sanctions upon Iraq that killed some 650,000 children and when hundreds of deformed babies — the tragic victims of depleted uranium from US military operations —— continue to be born in that blighted land to this today? What this shows is that a selective approach to issues of justice in the global arena and the stark double standards of the powerful undermine the battle against violence and terrorism.

It is further undermined by the material and political support that the centres of power in the West and in other parts of the world sometimes offer to certain terrorist outfits — in spite of their rhetoric against terrorism. This had happened in Libya in 2011 and is happening now in Syria on a much more extensive and systematic scale. It is this hypocrisy that has compelled analysts to conclude that there are good terrorists and bad terrorists, the former being those who are useful tools in the perpetuation of Western hegemony while the latter are those who oppose that hegemony!

Given this scenario, how does one address the terrorism of Boko Haram and other such groups? One, it is the responsibility of everyone — governments, businesses, unions, civil society organisations, media, professionals, academics — to work towards a just and equitable international order where no nation or cluster of nations exercises global hegemonic power that can only be sustained through violence which in turn begets violence from terrorist outfits.

Two, elites in power and with influence at the state level everywhere should ensure that there is good, honest governance. For elite corruption as we have seen in so many countries, is grist to the mill for groups that seek to remedy the situation through violence.

Three, hidden hands that manipulate terrorist groups for their own nefarious agenda at national, regional and international levels should be exposed without fear or favour. This is where the media has a critical role to play.

Four, the sources of funding of terrorist groups at different levels should be laid bare through more effective intelligence gathering and exchange. There should be no tolerance for attempts to conceal or camouflage terrorist funding, even if it involves the powerful.

Five, Muslim intellectuals committed to the universal, inclusive message of Islam should join hands across continents to counter the narrow, bigoted, dogmatic distortions of the purveyors of violence and terror within the ummah. In fact, there should be similar movements within all the other religious communities too, since bigotry and dogmatism often spawning violence is a challenge that has emerged in all religious communities in the 21st century.

Thursdays With Zubedy - #WahaiMelayu Allah Tak Akan Ubah Nasib Melayu, Kalau Kita Melayu Tak Nak Ubah Diri Kita Sendiri

  

" Ungkapan 'Allah Tak Akan Ubah Nasib Melayu, Kalau Kita Melayu Tak Nak Ubah Diri Kita Sendiri' seperti yang dipilih oleh Anas Zubedy untuk buku ini bertepatan dengan perjuangan bangsa dalam memastikan kelangsungan kewujudan mereka dalam persaingan moden era globalisasi. "

- Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

As aptly captured by Tun Dr Mahathir in his foreword for #WahaiMelayu, this book by Anas Zubedy aims to help and positively motivate the Malays, especially budding entrepreneurs, in moving away from their 'takuk lama' (rut) and challenging them to be competitive and independent. This is to break self-limiting artificial boundaries like the concept of a lazy race or that Malays are only good in politics or arts and not business, and many other sociocultural myths.

The book encourages the right motivation and inspiration for a specific culture like the Malays. This is the same in dealing with people anywhere around the world - we just need to find the right way to communicate and engage with them. To trigger the best of them, so they can come forward to be productive and effective.

#WahaiMelayu is now available at major bookstores at the price of RM24.90. Please contact 'Aizat Roslan at 03-77336919 / 019-3570699 or via email at aizat@zubedy.com, should you wish to place a direct order from zubedy. 

#SaySomethingNice 2014 @ Putrajaya Youth Festival

The #SaySomethingNice campaign for 2014 formally kicked-off on 24th May at zubedy's office in Damansara. During the same weekend, the #SaySomethingNice campaign also participated in the Putrajaya Youth Festival, which took place from the 23rd to the 25th of May, 2014.

As a part of the campaign's collaboration with the Ministry of Youth and Sports, the #SaySomethingNice campaign was given a spot at the Festival. The Putrajaya Youth Festival had a total of 60 segments, of which it gave a particular focus to education, spiritual, skills, arts, talent, interactive, and volunteerism. With the participation of many youths and youth-related groups and the attendance of many other, the Festival served its theme of "From Youths to Youths".

Placed alongside the Scouts Association of Malaysia, Malaysian Red Crescent Society, and many other bodies, the #SaySomethingNice campaign exhibited photos from last year's campaign as well as the #SaySomethingNice posters, which passers-by took the opportunity to share and write nice things on it.

It is this simple and positive message of the #SaySomethingNice campaign that attracted many organisations and individuals to enquire and participate in this Unity effort.

My own child by Cecilia Dias - The STAR

An adopted child is destiny’s gift, with all its joys and complications, writes this mother.

I HAVE no photos of my daughter’s first months of life, no tasteful black and white images taken by an expensive professional of tiny toes and downy head. There was no delivery room drama, capped by the triumphant delivery of a healthy, bawling baby with which to regale dinner guests with. When you adopt a child, rituals of memory are, by necessity, different.

My daughter’s first weeks with us were spent in the Intensive Care Unit of a nearby hospital. We found ourselves researching the best strollers and infant bottles to buy, alongside reading about neonatal complications. She was what is termed a high-risk baby. It’s a phrase we only learnt after we adopted her, which is not to say that we were blindsided by her situation.

We knew what we needed to know just by looking at her. She was tiny, with wrinkled skin over fragile bones. She had no eyebrows or eyelashes, yet came with a full head of glossy, black hair. Her toenails were like the edible rice paper used to wrap milk sweets.

She came with a hematoma on her belly button, harmless but usually a result of prolonged crying. That’s a tough one for me to think about, still.

Family and friends shared the news of the adoption with unreserved joy. There were, however, those whose concept of family is delimited by bloodlines and genes.

One friend was thrilled by our decision to adopt, because, she explained, I was now bound to get pregnant, and we’d finally have a child of our ‘own’.

It’s a popular urban (uterus) myth, in which families dogged by infertility “cave in” and adopt only to become pregnant soon after. I found it annoying, the assumption that adoption was Plan B for my husband and I.

Even more offensive was the hierarchical distinction between biological and adopted children her comment implied. Was my daughter merely a means to an end, a simulacrum that would get my ovaries juiced up and provide me with an authentic, biological child in the near future?

Yet another friend, an Evangelical Christian, counselled us not to go through with the adoption because it was not God’s will for us to have an ‘imperfect’ child. This misguided interpretation of the biblical promise of blessing, was perhaps the point of no return in my already fragile relationship with the fundamentalist church I’d been raised in.

Yet, at the same time, I drew closer to God, filled with gratitude for the gift of our beautiful child.

click here to read more on this article

Towards a shared destiny - Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi

Introduction

FROM 1957 to 1969 and, (despite the trauma of 1969), for about two decades thereafter, we can say with confidence that Malaysia was regarded by many Asian and African societies as an exemplar of how a deeply divided, plural society can survive and thrive politically, economically and socially. Till about a decade ago, we would have compared favourably with India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Mynmar, Philippines, Thailand, Greece, Cyprus, Lebanon, the US before the Civil Rights Act 1964 and the UK up to the late seventies.     

Despite the obsession with race and religion in public discourse, we have made many strides towards nationhood since 1957.

• The identification of race with social and economic function has been weakened. 
• The vibrant economy has united our disparate racial groups.
• Sabah and Sarawak have given to pluralism a territorial dimension. Malaysia has successfully used the economy to create and maintain social harmony. By encouraging entrepreneurship and allowing the minority communities to provide leadership in the economic arena,  twin objectives have been achieved:  the economy has developed fabulously. Every community has acquired a stake in the country.

Not all is well, however

Sadly, since the nineties racial and religious polarization has reached alarming levels. We have become a “nation of strangers”. In many corners of the world walls of separation are being dismantled. Sadly, in our society these walls are being fortified. Recently the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, an advisory body of the US Government, has placed us on Tier 2 of a Watch List over concerns about limitations in Malaysia on freedom of religion.[1] 

To this bleak picture two qualifications must be added.

One, some of the racial and religious discord that exists in our society is a natural process of democratic freedoms. As a transforming society opens up, pent up feelings are expressed, often in ways that are deeply hurtful to others.

Second, many of the conflicts between the Muslims and non-Muslims of this country are actually not about Islam versus non-Islamic religions but about a resurgent Eastern society seeking an alternative to the hegemony of “Western” values. For example conservative Malay-Muslim hostility towards gambling, drinking, free sex, drug-laced music concerts, same-sex marriages, homosexuality, a free-wheeling media, over-sexualisation of female dressing, separation of religion and morality and extolling of a secular way of life are not necessarily reflective of a clash between Islam on one side and Confucianism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religions on the other but a clash of traditional Eastern values with the hedonistic, media-driven culture of the dominant North Atlantic colonial nations..  

There is wide gap between the theory and reality of the Constitution

If we read about the making of the Constitution, we will see that by far and large the forefathers of our Constitution were animated by a remarkable vision and optimism of a shared destiny among the various peoples of the Peninsula.

“Out of Many, One” was perhaps their creed. Their life was enlightened by a spirit of accommodation, compassion and tolerance. They abjured ideological purity of the political, economic and religious type. They walked the middle path of moderation. They gave to every community a stake in the nation.  No group received an absolute monopoly of power or wealth. Every community received something to relish and cherish. Pluralism was accepted as a way of life and the unity that was sought was a unity in diversity. 

The Constitution, even in its “ethnic provisions” sought to avoid extreme measures and provided for a balance between the interests of the “Bumiputera” and “non-Bumiputera” communities. Fifty-seven years ago, a pact, an understanding, a  “social contract” was forged between the Malays and the non-Malays. In 1963, with the birth of Malaysia, a new pact was drawn up to safeguard the interests of Sabah and Sarawak.  

Regrettably the Constitution’s “social contracts” of 1957 and 1963 are not being fully observed. The public sector as well as the private sector and all sides of the racial and religious divide are culpable of causing breaches. A few examples may illustrate the point.

Article 153: This Article was about affirmative action for the weak, and not about racial exclusiveness or racial superiority or ketuanan Melayu. In reality, however, overzealousness prevails. Affirmative action under Article 153 has metamorphosed into something else that is not easily possible to defend under constitutional jurisprudence. In some areas racism has become institutionalised.

Article 11(4): This Article permits State legislatures to enact laws to control or restrict the propogation of any religious doctrine or belief among Muslims. Most States have enacted such laws. Though Article 11(4) is broadly phrased, its primary purpose was to prevent conversion of Malays to Christianity due to the global reach and influence of Christian evangelists. By far and large, Article 11(4)’s restrictions have been observed. But now and then, stories of Muslim apostasy break the calm. Missionary work amongst Muslim children and critically sick Muslim patients in hospitals is not unknown. Bibles are discretely placed in hotel rooms. These proselytising activities cause disputes now and then. For example in April 2014, the Pahang Malay and Islamic Customs Council (MUIP) barred non-Islamic materials and symbols from the guest rooms and public reading areas of all the 147 hotels in the State. The MCA questioned this ban immediately and did not take Article 11(4) into consideration. 

Article 152(1)(a):This Article provides that the Malay language shall be the national language and shall be used for all official purposes. However, no person shall be prohibited from using (other than for an official purpose) or from teaching or learning any other langauage. The Court in Merdeka University Bhd v Government [1982] 2 MLJ 243 has distinguished between the right to learn a language and the right to learn in a language.This means that under the Constitution there is a protected right to teach and learn a language as a subject but there is no constitutional right that the language be used as a medium of instruction. Vernacular schools are permitted by the Education Act but they are not a constitutional right despite what some political parties represent.

In many other areas, the demagogues, the racists and extremists of all communities are preaching their own sectarian interpretation of our “document of destiny” and are fanning fears and suspicions. Extremism has become mainstream and moderation is seen as capitulation to other races and religions and as a betrayal of one’s own community.

Within society, extremist race and religious organisations are mushrooming. It will not be proper to call for their ban. They have a right to exist under the Constitution. But the authorities must ensure that  (i) other moderate organisations are allowed to exist and function without unfair restrictions and (ii) the law is applied fairly and equally to all and there is no selective prosecution where transgressions of the law take place.

Inter-religious disputes are intensifying

•   Around the world, attempts at proseylitisation often result in violent reactions. Malaysia has mostly been able to avoid religious riots but tensions remain high due to intense competition between Islamic dakwah and Christian missionary activities in regions inhabited by the orang asli and by the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.
•    The use of the word “Allah” by West Malaysian Christians has aroused the anger of many Peninsular Muslims. The argument by some Christians that the word “Allah” is central to Christian faith and restrictions on its usage will hinder freedom of religion has not convinced Muslims, most of whom suspect that the new-found veneration for the word Allah in Christian dialogue is an adroit attempt to circumvent the pre-Merdeka restriction contained in Article 11(4) on propagation of other religions to Muslims.
•   Some Muslims allege that the constitutional limitation on preaching to Muslims in Article 11(4) is often  adroitly evaded or ignored.

click here to read more on this article

Conquer hatred with Love - Have A Meaningful Wesak - Tuesday (Tomorrow) in The STAR

Kanishka, the great patron of Buddhism who turned a new leaf by choosing to embrace peace and positivity

Back to basics: Choose to be Positive, conquer hatred with love

As a nation, we can perform only from our strengths. One cannot build greatness on weaknesses.

To perform on our strength, we must first choose to be Positive. A Positive approach creates new energy and multiplies our power. A negative one drains energy and dilutes. Which attitude are we practicing today?

Take our history. When we look back at May 13th do we choose to highlight our strength or weakness? Choose to see the positives or negatives? Do we harp over and over again the thousands that rioted and failed us, or should we celebrate the millions peace loving Malaysians who stayed United – helping to protect each other? The former helps us hate each other; the latter makes us love each other better. We must make smart choices.

What about our media? Do we give more space and attention to positive news or negative ones?  Should we highlight the few extremists spreading hate and make quick gains or choose to focus on news of unity, cooperation, and collaboration that help build our nation and reap long term profits from a cohesive society?

We the rakyat too must choose wisely. Do we crave to read, resend and repost news that hurts each other or promote those that help build unity?

We must choose the Positive approach. We cannot conquer hatred with hatred; we can only conquer hatred with love.

Join us in conquering hatred with love through #SaySomethingNice campaign 2014 by spreading and sharing positivity in Malaysia. We are kick starting the campaign this 24th May, 3pm at our office.

Let us be Positive and conquer hatred with love.

At zubedy, our programs draw strength from shared values and traditions. We believe that at heart, all Malaysians want good things for themselves and for their brother and sister Malaysians, simply because our nation cannot prosper as a whole if some of us are left behind.

Let us be, first and foremost, Malaysians.