Dr M: Ibrahim Ali ‘advising’, not provoking with calls to burn bibles

(Malay Mail Online) – Perkasa patron Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today defended authorities’ decision not to prosecute Datuk Ibrahim Ali for his call to burn bibles, saying what the Malay rights leader did was “acceptable to Muslims.”

The former prime minister’s rationale differed from critics of the Attorney-General’s Chamber’s inaction against Ibrahim, who questioned how the provocative call he made last year could be construed as defending or acceptable in Islam.

“When he (Ibrahim) said that, he was advising on‎ something acceptable to Muslims. It is not seditious.

“He’s intention was not to provoke clashes between Muslims and non-Muslims,” Dr Mahathir said during a press conference here after delivering the keynote address at the Women ‎Extraordinaire Forum 2014 (WEF 2014).

Dr Mahathir explained that Muslims often burned copies of the Quran that were old, with the practice considered to be “alright.”

He said that it was disrespect towards the Muslim holy text that was prohibited.

The former prime minister then said the prohibition against such disrespect should also be extended to the holy texts of other religions.

“The Muslims, if they have some documents (other holy texts) that they are averse‎ to, they should not throw it around, throw it on the ground or step on it,” he said.

Earlier this month, de facto law minister Nancy Shukri had in a written reply to Bagan MP Lim Guan Eng, said that Ibrahim was not charged over his threat because the police had concluded that the latter was merely defending the sanctity of Islam, and had not intended to create religious chaos with his statement.

Nancy had said that the police’s probe had also found that Ibrahim’s statement was directed at individuals who had purportedly distributed bibles containing the word “Allah” to students, including Malays, at the Penang school.

This was roundly criticised by lawmakers and civil groups, and drew outraged response from the Christian Federation of Malaysia.

Yesterday, the Attorney-General’s Chambers finally broke its silence in the matter, explaining that Ibrahim was investigated but not charged for his call as the Malay rights group leader did not intend to create religious provocation but had merely sought to defend Islam.

Opposition lawmakers have noted the inconsistency in the explanation, pointing out that the Sedition Act 1948 does not require intent or motive as proof of harm caused by an individual’s remarks.