Open Letter to Viola De Cruz Silva, President of Catholic Lawyers Society of Malaysia
Dear Madam,
I refer to your statements regarding the ongoing controversy on the use of the much debated word in the press recently, You have rightly stated that there are no provisions in the Federal Constitution banning non-muslims from propogating their religion in their community or to other non-muslims, However your society’s challenge to the enactment passed by the than BN govt comes 25 years late after it was passed and adopted in the Selangor State assembly. The question that needs to be asked is why wait 25 years to challenge this enactment on an unprecedented scale that is leading to a likely confrontation between muslims and non-muslims in this country?
“The 1988 enactment, which was passed by the Barisan Nasional state government , prohibits non-Muslims in Selangor from using 35 Arabic words and phrases, including “Allah”, “nabi” (prophet), “injil” (gospel) and “Insha’Allah” (God willing).”
Fr Lawrence Andrew editor of Herald claims that the word “Allah” is used in the liturgy during the BM masses all this while in Selangor. Is he really absolutely sure when he makes this statement? knowing full well that if this is true than the catholic church has blatantly broken a duly and lawfully enacted state law passed by a legitimately elected state govt that has been in existence for the past 25 years.
There were four existing state Islamic legislation that give the authorities wide powers to act on religious matters, namely:
• Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Selangor) 1995
• Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam (Kawalan Pengembangan di Kalangan Orang Islam) 1988 (“Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam”);
• Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003; and
• Syariah Criminal Procedure (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003.
Selangor’s Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment, which outlines offences deemed as acts of proselytisation by non-Muslims towards Muslims, grants the religious authorities powers to launch investigations and arrest individuals without producing a warrant.
Today 4 officials from Jais raided the Bible Society of Malaysia and arrested Mr Lee Min Choon the President. Lee said the Jais officers were merely doing their job and called on the Christians to remain calm. He said they were conducting the raid under a state enactment but did not say which. It is believed it was under Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988.
The Jais officials had no “authorisation card” or a warrant, and initially the staff of BSM had an heated argument with the raiding party , but the wisdom of the president prevailed as in all humility he allowed the raiding party to “carry out their job” we should ask ourselves why he meekly allowed himself to be arrested , and now I believe he has been released on police bail.
Now we must as seriously “practicing catholics” ask ourselves if the statement by Fr Lawrence Andrew that the Catholic church will continue using the word in our Liturgical celebrations despite the 25 year old enactment that is being “threatened” to be enforced now, would lead to “raids” by Jais during Mass and eventual violent confrontation in church premises? Is he sure it wont happen?, or is he wanting it to happen?
Why is the catholic church leading a judicial review of the ban by asking the so called 25 questions that they want answered by the court ?, Do they really think that the courts decision or answer would be based purely on evidence and fair play?
One of the questions asks:-
Where the decision of a Minister is challenged on grounds of illegality or irrationality and/or Wednesbury unreasonableness, whether it would be incumbent on the Minister to place before the Court the facts and the grounds on which he had acted?
I believe that the “law” gives absolute powers to the home minister to enforce laws that border on “Wednesbury unreasonableness” as long as he believes that if he remains passive it could seriously threaten peace and harmony of this country, and he answers to no one not even the court to give reasons why he acted in such a manner.
Another asks:-
Whether it is appropriate for a court of law whose remit is the judicial function of determining legal questions to embark on a suo moto research and make pronouncements or determination of theological questions or engage in discussion of comparative religions?
The law has been clear that the word is “prohibited” that is the “law” and this is I believe based on the reason that “misuse” of the word can lead to confusion, , now a judge if you ask him for reasons is not theologically adept and has to suo moto to arrive at a ruling that gives a semblance legitimacy to it.
It is hoped that this “confrontational” stand by the church after 25 years would not lead to something that we all dont want , I still believe that honest attempts at continuous dialogue by the church can lead to an amicable solution fair to all parties and we can still live together in peace and harmony albeit it may take a long time, as “thinking” is always changing.
Pope John Paul said that ” Stupidity is also a gift from god and we shouldnt misuse this gift”. Pope Francis warned of the dangers of “clericalism”in the church. Let the “Patriachs” of the church continually turn to the Holy Spirit for guidance in leading them in the ways of peace.
Deeply Concerned Catholic
