Politics and religion
(Sin Chew) – Is Malaysia a secular or Islamic state? Or, is it a secular Islamic state as claimed by some people?
Our founding father, the first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, had clearly told the Parliament: “I would like to make it clear that this country is not an Islamic state as it is generally understood; we merely provided that Islam shall be the official religion of the state.”
On September 29, 2011, however, the fourth Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad declared at the Gerakan national conference that Malaysia “is already an Islamic state”. He said that Malaysia was defined as as Islamic state as “the status has been recognised by many Islamic states in the world”.
Paradoxically, when Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom said that historical facts indicate that Malaysia is not a secular state and stated Clause 1(A) of Article 121 of the Federal Constitution reads that civil courts have no jurisdiction in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of the Syariah courts, Mahathir overturned his own argument made in the past and said that Malaysia lacks the conditions to be an Islamic state, and called it a “wrong conclusion” for Jamil to say that civil courts have no jurisdiction in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of the Syariah courts.
From “is already an Islamic state” to “lacks the conditions to be an Islamic state”, Mahathir’s stand seems vague, causing the people wonder whether to blame him for making the trouble, or thank him for coming forward to end the problem. However, he has, after all, pointed out the following facts:
- Forceful implementation of Islamic state will lead to many social problems;
- It is not a legal interpretation of the law to refer Malaysia as an Islamic state;
- Malaysia is a multi-racial and multi-cultural country and it must be fair to everyone, not only Muslims.
It must be stressed that our Federal Constitution does not explicitly indicate whether the country is a secular or Islamic state. In addition to stating that Islam is the official religion of the country, it also clearly states that other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation. If everyone acts according to the Constitution, respect the spirit of the Constitution and maintain the status quo, dispute can then be prevented. The people can enjoy the freedom of religion and get along at peace.
Needless to say, like hudud law, Islamic state is an extremely sensitive issue to non-Muslims that makes them uneasy. Whether the freedom of religion stated in the Federal Constitution has been gradually eroded has been a significant concern to them. In fact, since the Mahathir’s administration in early 1980s, under the incitement of Islamic renaissance and nationalism, two priorities have emerged in national policies, namely the “Malay priority” and “Islam priority”. Meanwhile, how to expand “Islamisation” has become a competition between Umno and PAS to fight for political interests and votes. Politics seems to have kidnapped religion and it is also the factor behind the repeated occurrence of religion-related disputes in recent days.
The debates on whether Malaysia is a secular or Islamic state and whether hudud law can be implemented continue, but no matter how people argue and interpret, there is one unchangeable fact, namely the supreme law of Malaysia is secular law esteeming customary law. As Mahathir said, “We have been living under the common law for a very long time and this set of laws has been accepted by all”, keep raising the issue about whether Malaysia is a secular or Islamic state will only hurt the multi-racial society of Malaysia. Then why should national leaders keep debating the issue that will only create more problems?
