Updated on 21.10.2013 to include Peguam Negara's press release on the Court of Appeal ruling. please read to the end.
Original Post:
'Politicians and religious leaders should desist immediately from misconstruing the Court of Appeal decision on the use of Kalimah Allah in the Catholic weekly, The Herald, which has no bearing upon other Christian publications or the Al-Kitab, the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible.'
'It is wrong of them to demand that the ban on the term in the Catholic weekly be extended to Sabah and Sarawak where it has been used in daily prayers in churches for more than a hundred years.'
'Prime Minister, Dato Sri Mohd Najib should assure everyone that he is determined to uphold the letter and the spirit of the ‘10 point solution’ that he had signed on 11 April 2011 in which he spelt out his commitment to the exercise of the freedom of religion of the Christian minority within the context of the Malaysian Constitution.'
'Christians in Malaysia should at the same time see the 10 point solution as an arrangement which expects them also to understand and empathise with the feelings of an extraordinarily accommodative majority community which has genuine concerns about its identity.'
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar
The Controversy over Kalimah Allah should never have gone to Court. An adversarial system of adjudication which pits one side against the other cannot resolve satisfactorily complex disputes that intersect notions of religious and ethnic identity.
In fact, the controversy which has burdened us for almost three decades is more about protecting identity than about preserving the sanctity of a hallowed term. It is fear about how identity would be undermined if what is perceived as an exclusive religious symbol is usurped by others that has triggered a strong reaction from the Muslim majority. Christians and others who have taken a position against Muslim sentiment are also motivated to a great extent by the prevailing ethnic divide in the country.
Expectedly, the stances adopted by some politicians, both Muslim and non-Muslim, have exacerbated the situation. Because issues of identity are at the centre of politics and power in our multi-religious, multi-ethnic nation, they are hoping to reap a harvest from the Kalimah Allah controversy. In the process, society is becoming even more polarised along religious lines.
This is why politicians and religious leaders should desist immediately from misconstruing the Court of Appeal decision on the use of Kalimah Allah in the Catholic weekly, The Herald, which has no bearing upon other Christian publications or the Al-Kitab, the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible. It is wrong of them to demand that the ban on the term in the Catholic weekly be extended to Sabah and Sarawak where it has been used in daily prayers in churches for more than a hundred years. Since the Catholic Church is appealing against the decision in the Federal Court, all individuals and groups should allow the judicial process to take its course.
More important, Prime Minister, Dato Sri Mohd Najib should assure everyone that he is determined to uphold the letter and the spirit of the ‘10 point solution’ that he had signed on 11 April 2011 in which he spelt out his commitment to the exercise of the freedom of religion of the Christian minority within the context of the Malaysian Constitution. It is a significant document in the shape of a letter to the Chairperson of the Christian Federation of Malaysia because it provides guarantees to a minority that resonate with the tradition of Muslim Rulers protecting the position of Christian and other minorities that harkens back to the Prophet Muhammad’s (may peace be upon him) celebrated treaty with the Christians of Najran.
Christians in Malaysia should at the same time see the 10 point solution as an arrangement which expects them also to understand and empathise with the feelings of an extraordinarily accommodative majority community which has genuine concerns about its identity. For these reasons, highlighting the 10 point solution at this juncture would help considerably to reduce the prevailing mistrust and suspicion between the majority and minority communities.
In the ultimate analysis however what really matters is not who uses the term Allah but whether all of us are willing to strive to the utmost to perform those good deeds which alone demonstrate our love for Allah.
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar,
Chairman,
Board of Trustees,
Yayasan 1Malaysia.
Petaling Jaya.
18 October 2013.
KUALA LUMPUR: The Court of Appeal’s decision on the usage of the word “Allah” is confined to the publication of the Bahasa Malaysia text of the Catholic weekly Herald and does not affect the use of the word anywhere else.
Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail said the court had held that the Al-Kitab and the Herald were two publications of an entirely different character, whereby the Al-Kitab was the Malay version of the Bible and used by Christians in churches, whereas Herald is a newspaper
accessible online and read by Muslims and non-Muslims.
Gani said the court had made it clear that the permission given by the home minister for the printing and publication of the Al-Kitab, in which the word "Allah appears", could not be treated in the same manner as that of the Herald.
Urging everyone to respect and abide by the court's decision, he said all parties should refrain from making any statements, which may lead to contempt of court.
In a statement issued yesterday, Gani pointed out the court had unanimously held that constitutional protection afforded to the practice of one's religion was confined to the religious practice, which formed an essential and integral part of the religion.
He noted the court held that the use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Herald to refer to God was not an essential or integral part of the Christian religion and, therefore, did not attract constitutional guarantee under Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.
Below is the A-G's full statement:
ON Oct 14, the Court of Appeal had allowed the appeal by the home affairs minister and the government against the decision of the Kuala Lumpur High Court made on 31 December 2009, which allowed the judicial review application by Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur (Titular) against the minister's decision made on Jan 7, 2009, prohibiting the Titular from using the word "Allah" in the Bahasa Melayu version of the Herald -- The Catholic Weekly (Herald).
In allowing the appeal, the Court of Appeal held that the minister had not acted in excess of his statutory power or functions under the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984.
His Lordship Mohamed Apandi Ali in paragraph 27 of his written judgment states that the decision was made within the function and statutory powers of the minister and it is intra vires the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984. His lordship Abdul Aziz in paragraph 11 of his judgment states that having given his utmost consideration to the law applicable to exercise of discretion as well as the reasons given, the minister's decision is reasonable and has not contravened the principles of illegality, procedural impropriety, proportionality and irrationality.
The Court of Appeal held that when it concerns national security and public order, the minister has a discretion to decide whether the word "Allah" in the publication has the potential to disrupt or prejudice public order, public safety and tranquility. In paragraph 42 of his judgment, his lordship Mohamed Apandi Ali held that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Herald is without doubt, has the potential to disrupt the even tempo of life of the Malaysian community.
Justice Abdul Aziz in paragraphs 39 and 40 held that the minister's consideration on national security and public order is not limited to actual disruption of public order or tranquility and in this case, events that unfolded after the High Court's decision showed that the minister's concern that the use of the word Allah as interpretation of the word God or the concept of God by the Herald may cause religious sensitivity and has the potential to harm the public order and safety was justified.
The Court of Appeal also unanimously held that constitutional protection afforded to the practice of one's religion is confined to the religious practice which forms an essential and integral part of the religion. The court held that the use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Herald to refer to God is not an essential or integral part of the religion of Christianity and, therefore, does not attract the constitutional guarantee under Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.
The Court of Appeal decision is confined to the publication of the Bahasa Melayu text of the Herald. Justice Abdul Aziz in his judgment in paragraph 30 held that the Al-Kitab and the Herald are two publications of an entirely different character. The Al-Kitab is the Malay version of the Bible and meant for Christians and use in churches whereas the Herald is a newspaper which is also accessible online and read by Muslims and non-Muslims. His Lordship went on to state that the permission given by the minister for the printing and publication of the Al-Kitab, in which the word "Allah" appears, therefore, cannot be treated in the same manner as that of the Herald.
The thrust of the decision is that where national security and public order are concerned, the minister has a discretion to ban any word which is prejudicial or likely to be prejudicial to national security and public order. As long as the discretion is exercised legally, reasonably, rationally and proportionally, the court will not interfere with the minister's exercise of discretion in these matters.
Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail said the court had held that the Al-Kitab and the Herald were two publications of an entirely different character, whereby the Al-Kitab was the Malay version of the Bible and used by Christians in churches, whereas Herald is a newspaper
accessible online and read by Muslims and non-Muslims.
Gani said the court had made it clear that the permission given by the home minister for the printing and publication of the Al-Kitab, in which the word "Allah appears", could not be treated in the same manner as that of the Herald.
Urging everyone to respect and abide by the court's decision, he said all parties should refrain from making any statements, which may lead to contempt of court.
In a statement issued yesterday, Gani pointed out the court had unanimously held that constitutional protection afforded to the practice of one's religion was confined to the religious practice, which formed an essential and integral part of the religion.
He noted the court held that the use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Herald to refer to God was not an essential or integral part of the Christian religion and, therefore, did not attract constitutional guarantee under Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.
Below is the A-G's full statement:
ON Oct 14, the Court of Appeal had allowed the appeal by the home affairs minister and the government against the decision of the Kuala Lumpur High Court made on 31 December 2009, which allowed the judicial review application by Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur (Titular) against the minister's decision made on Jan 7, 2009, prohibiting the Titular from using the word "Allah" in the Bahasa Melayu version of the Herald -- The Catholic Weekly (Herald).
In allowing the appeal, the Court of Appeal held that the minister had not acted in excess of his statutory power or functions under the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984.
His Lordship Mohamed Apandi Ali in paragraph 27 of his written judgment states that the decision was made within the function and statutory powers of the minister and it is intra vires the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984. His lordship Abdul Aziz in paragraph 11 of his judgment states that having given his utmost consideration to the law applicable to exercise of discretion as well as the reasons given, the minister's decision is reasonable and has not contravened the principles of illegality, procedural impropriety, proportionality and irrationality.
The Court of Appeal held that when it concerns national security and public order, the minister has a discretion to decide whether the word "Allah" in the publication has the potential to disrupt or prejudice public order, public safety and tranquility. In paragraph 42 of his judgment, his lordship Mohamed Apandi Ali held that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Herald is without doubt, has the potential to disrupt the even tempo of life of the Malaysian community.
Justice Abdul Aziz in paragraphs 39 and 40 held that the minister's consideration on national security and public order is not limited to actual disruption of public order or tranquility and in this case, events that unfolded after the High Court's decision showed that the minister's concern that the use of the word Allah as interpretation of the word God or the concept of God by the Herald may cause religious sensitivity and has the potential to harm the public order and safety was justified.
The Court of Appeal also unanimously held that constitutional protection afforded to the practice of one's religion is confined to the religious practice which forms an essential and integral part of the religion. The court held that the use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Herald to refer to God is not an essential or integral part of the religion of Christianity and, therefore, does not attract the constitutional guarantee under Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.
The Court of Appeal decision is confined to the publication of the Bahasa Melayu text of the Herald. Justice Abdul Aziz in his judgment in paragraph 30 held that the Al-Kitab and the Herald are two publications of an entirely different character. The Al-Kitab is the Malay version of the Bible and meant for Christians and use in churches whereas the Herald is a newspaper which is also accessible online and read by Muslims and non-Muslims. His Lordship went on to state that the permission given by the minister for the printing and publication of the Al-Kitab, in which the word "Allah" appears, therefore, cannot be treated in the same manner as that of the Herald.
The thrust of the decision is that where national security and public order are concerned, the minister has a discretion to ban any word which is prejudicial or likely to be prejudicial to national security and public order. As long as the discretion is exercised legally, reasonably, rationally and proportionally, the court will not interfere with the minister's exercise of discretion in these matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment