This is the first time that I know of a judge being attacked on the ground of her religious credentials rather than her judicial competence
AG Gani Patail should initiate contempt proceedings against Nazri while MCA, Gerakan, MIC, Sabah/ Sarawak BN and other Umno Ministers should repudiate Nazri’s stand in Cabinet tomorrow that it is too late for inter-religious dialogue to resolve the “Allah” controversy
Lim Kit Siang
I was completely astounded and outraged by de factor Law Minister, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz’ statement yesterday that it is too late for dialogue to resolve the “Allah” controversy, which had sparked a spate of arson and vandalism against churches, surau and a Sikh temple since the beginning of the year.
Nazri reiterated that it was not the fault of the government but that of the Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church, Kuala Lumpur, Reverend Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam who had brought the matter to court.
If anybody is to be blamed for the Herald litigation, it is the government which had allowed the Home Ministry to violate two decades of religious equilibrium on the issue with its ban in 2007 on the use of the word “Allah” in the Catholic weekly, forcing on the Roman Catholic church the final remedy and recourse of the courts.
But it is what Nazri said about the Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan and her judgment which completely floored rational and reasonable Malaysians, as no Law Minister or a de facto one had done more than Nazri to attack the independence, impartiality, integrity and professionalism of a judge when his first task should be to start the very difficult and arduous process to restore national and international confidence in the Malaysian judiciary after suffering more than two decades of usurpation, emasculation and rape by the Executive.
Nazri launched a most improper, unwarranted and unprecedented attack on Lau, not only saying that her Dec. 31 decision was wrong, but also maligning and besmirching her judicial competence and role by declaring that she is not a Muslim and had improperly ruled over a matter that concerned the “akidah” (faith) of the Muslim community.
This is the first time that I know of a judge being attacked on the ground of her religious credentials rather than her judicial competence and temper – and coming from the de facto Law Minister, it must be regarded most seriously as a totally unacceptable attack on the independence, impartiality, integrity and professionalism of the judiciary.
