One’s religion is one’s personal affair with God and none has the right to interfere in it..........

While I doubt that the Sultan was truly informed on all aspects

DANIEL JOHN JAMBUN

The decision to use the Sultan of Selangor with regards to the incidence of alleged proselytizing at the Damansara Utama Methodist church dinner has set a dangerous precedence because of several reasons. The people of Malaysia, regardless of the ethnic background and creed, are all directly involved and affected by this historic case in which the Sultan, as the head of Muslim affairs in Selangor, made a legal decision on the very sensitive matter.

While I doubt that the Sultan was truly informed on all aspects, implications, ramifications and potential repercussions of the case, what has been done has been done, and we have to proceed to deal with it, possibly for many years to come. The king may reverse the situation if he rescinds his ruling but this seems unlikely to happen. So the first question that needs to be asked is why hasn’t the syariah court given the opportunity to contribute to the solution of the case? Since the case also involves non-Muslims, shouldn’t the civil court also be involved? We realize of course that if the two courts joined the tussle, it would lead to confusion about which law to apply on whom. Should the Muslims be dealt with with syariah law and the Christians be dealt with by applying civil law? But how would one settle the case with two laws clashing on a case that could potentially result in differing judgments made on two different parties, or both parties becoming affected by ruling of laws that shouldn’t apply to them? It would be a classic case of religious rights and freedom in which two irreconcilable laws try to dominate without any acceptable resolution! All it would do would be to cause an international embarrassment and shame to the country’s ridiculous two-layered legal system!

So now we have a situation in which the Sultan has been used as an instrument of solution, which immediately results in many people raising issues about what’s right and wrong. The royal ruling was made without any legal basis because he made it only as the leader of Islamic affairs in the state. There was no trial to decide who was guilty or not guilty. As a result the ruling in which the Sultan supported the raid by JAIS but assuring all that none would be charged, although the 12 Muslims who attended the fund-raising dinner would be given counseling, is spurious. The immediate assumption is that DUMC is guilty and that there was an attempt to proselytize. This then makes DUMC appear guilty, and so is in a defensive position while it is expected to keep silent and let the whole thing cool down. But it is not to be. Various parties are voicing out their unhappiness. The response from Sarawak is that one’s religion is one’s personal affair with God and none has the right to interfere in it.

The other issue is the question of JAIS’ right to flagrantly enter a church and disrupt its activities. Ng Kam Weng, of The Micah Mandate writes that “the jurisdiction granted by Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution was to permit the state to control or restrict the propagation of religion among people professing to be Muslims. This must be read in the context of the Article itself which fundamentally provides for every person the freedom to profess, practice and propagate his religion…. There is no legal provision under the Propagation Enactment that allows Jais officials to intrude into the premises of DUMC, much less carry out a raid. From my reading of the Selangor Enactment (1988), the closest possible justification that can be offered by Jais are Sections 12 and 13, which specify that ‘an authorised officer may investigate the commission of any offence under this Enactment and may arrest without warrant any person suspected of having committed any such offence.’”

By this, clearly JAIS is in the wrong and should be judged for a contravention of provisions of the Federal Constitution and the Propagation Enactment. I agree with Bob Teoh, an online commentator, that JAIS “cannot hide behind its spurious actions and be exonerated from its controversial intrusion into a charity dinner held at a church…. It must be held accountable for its actions because it strikes at the very heart of criminal jurisprudence, law enforcement, and administration of justice — Islamic or otherwise. Jais cannot (be)…allowed to get away with it through flawed reasoning…. Jais descended upon a charity function…without invitation, permission or due authority…. Conducting a search without a warrant or an order from the court is considered an extra-judicial action. Is Jais, therefore, exempt from due process? And if so, why?”

The simplistic method of using the Sultan to supposedly settle the whole thing down is clearly illegal and is a denial of the due process of law. What should have been done was to allow the due legal process to be carried out, especially because this is a test case for the country’s dual legal system. Such a process may be protracted and expensive but it is necessary to give our judicial system a sense of honesty and transparency, and an opportunity for clarification and resolution for the long term legal benefits of all Malaysians. Unfortunately, because of the simplistic approach, we are all left hanging with the doubt and dissatisfaction. Because of this the civil-syariah dilemma will continue unresolved, and several questions will continue to haunt us. Will any church building be safe from raids by Islamic enforcement teams from now on, with or without reasonable cause? Which law should now precede in cases involving proselytization, or cases in which Muslim voluntarily joins a church to become Christians (without the church being aware that they are Muslims)?

The other danger in this precedence is the now questionable position of the Sultan as the king of all the people of Selangor. He is installed as people’s king, not merely the king of the Muslims. By taking sides in a religious issue, he has established an unwanted position as a king who is a protector of Muslims and no longer favouring the Christians. By making the decision he has also entered into the soiled realm of politics. Royals are supposed to be above politics being the patron and protector of all his people regardless of their race and religion. Sadly, in the case of Selangor, this may no longer be the case.

Comments (10)...

written by Bukan Munafik, October 14, 2011 23:28:27

Read Dr Raja Nazrin's speech during the Kongres Majlis Agama Islam on 26 September, excerpts:

.." Kongres Ekonomi Islam Ketiga, melaporkan bahawa, dalam1999, jumlah dana masjid yang terkumpul dianggar berjumlah Rm300 juta ringgit tetapi disimpan beku dalam akaun pelaburan, mencerminkan keterbatasan pemikiran, keterbatasan pengetahuan, keterbatasan pengalaman dan keterbatasan pendedahan di kalangan ummah untuk mengupayakan mereka melaburkan dana terkumpul tersebut secara lebih produktif yang dapat dimanfaatkan untuk pertumbuhan ekonomi...." ...

..."kutipan zakat di Malaysia, meningkat dari 320.4 juta ringgit dalam 2001 kepada 806.3 juta ringgit dalam 2007; peningkatan kutipan 150 peratus dalam tempoh enam tahun,meningkat pada kadar purata 25 peatus setahun."..

"Laporan lengkap Kongres setebal 875 halaman, membuktikan ummah sebenanya tidak ketandusan idea."..

"Telah dua tahun sembilan bulan Kongres Ekonomi Islam Ketiga berlalu,sejauh manakah tindakan yang telah disusul? Institusi manakah yang telah mengambil tanggung jawab susulan secara serius.".....

JAIS and all the JAIs, start working seriously and don't diminish and debase Islam with your errant and skewed priorities. Those who can't accept what was said by Dr Raja Nazrin should resign or retire and spend the time praying for redemption. ..

written by Dr Andrew Choo, October 14, 2011 23:05:09

I like to congratulate Daniel John Jambun for clarity of mind in his anaslysis of the situationm i hope more intellectuals in the country will speak up for the good of the nation. ...

written by watsasadday, October 14, 2011 22:04:37

JAIS is a criminal in the name of Religion! What better way to be a legal peeping Tom than be a JAIS licence to peep. What better way to legally molest innocent girl than be a JAIS licence to molest in the name of their religion.

JAIS is for the pervert who most probably is a life member of OWC.

This is a sad country govern by the immorally twisted perverted criminals...

written by IbnAbdHalim, October 14, 2011 21:30:03

JAIS is more than above the law. One need to obtain a permit to propagate Islam. JAIS is playing god. ...

written by richfyf2000, October 14, 2011 21:26:08

Its is the church duty to spread Christianity. Its magnum business to sell four digits numbers. Its Genting business to open casino and promote gambling. Its a Pork seller business to sell pork.

All of the above have their legal right to do what they are doing and JAIS, MAIS JAKIM have no right to stop them. What JAIS or the Sultan can do is to educate muslim and take action against Muslim. They have no right to act against the non muslim.

If Christian goes do to to to muslim house trying to convert muslim to Christianity then the Police can take action because it the law. But if Christian can't promote CHRISTIANITY in their OWNED CHURCH!!!! then something is very wrong!!!

Is it the Priest duty to ask how many Muslim are there in the church every time he wants to pary?? ...

written by Jakim, October 14, 2011 20:56:43

Jais is above the LAW.This is what we call KETUANAN MALAYKUI. ...

written by BorneoHeadhunter, October 14, 2011 20:36:14

That's why we in East Malaysia don't give a damn for sultans and royalties in Malaysia. To us they are just a bunch of loafers waiting for handouts and freebies. They can go jump as far as we are concerned. ...

written by din, October 14, 2011 20:28:54

just past it to the sultan, and shielded the wrong doing, simple. the sultan never ask them to raid dumc, why involved the sultan, that what dumno good at. ...

written by joker, October 14, 2011 20:18:25

Nobody can do anything now, only the almighty knows how to overcome this issue. Overhere the main problem is Politics and Religion are all mixed up ...

written by Fart Fart Wah, October 14, 2011 19:49:54

As I have said earlier the role of a head of state...and more so a religious head of state should be one of conciliatory role. A non-partisan role. He becomes the neutralizer in issues of the rakyat if there is any kind of confrontation or issue that may seem to upset or seem to be biased to the one group. His role should be neutral. However, this ruler has exhibited a bias to show he supports a majority view and there again on a very sensitive issue of religion. I personally do not like this head of state messing around with young girls like his father and at the same time claiming to be a head of religion in the state. It is mockery to Islam when he takes this view and does not meet out the expectations of a prophet who taught fair is fair.