Home Minister very at home with his ignorance


by Martin Jalleh

Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar believes it is his prerogative and position to preach to the Catholic community in Bolehland on what they should and should not believe in.

“Religion and politics should not mix”– he pontificates. This is ludicrous especially coming from a Minister whose political party’s interpretation of its own religion has politicised almost everything in Bolehland.

The Home Minister hops on the bandwagon of the horde of “little mullah napoleons” (LMNs) in the country to dominate, dictate, decide and even define what non-Muslims can and cannot discuss, deliberate on, and display in print.

He joins the LMNs in his ministry in hounding The Herald. He says he was not aware of the instructions by his Ministry to decide whether to suspend or revoke The Herald’s publication permit, yet he decides to threaten the publication.

An official in his ministry had said that Herald may have its permit suspended if it goes ahead and publishes an editorial on the Permatang Pauh by-election, because an editorial on the by-election was a topic under current affairs and politics (Star, 13.08.08).

Yet, as was pointed out by The Herald’s editor Father Lawrence Andrew, the officer had not even seen the editorial. Yet he had the audacity to issue such a threat. And as it had turned out the editorial was only asking people to pray for a just and fair by-election.

So now it appears the LMNs even feel they have the right to tell adherents of faiths other than Muslim what they can or cannot pray for!

Rites & Rituals

“If you are to write on religion, then you are supposed to touch on matters pertaining to questions on rituals, adherence to God, followers and anything related to your divine mission.

“If you go beyond that, definitely you have committed some breaches,” so declared Syed Hamid when responding to questions from reporters on The Herald being given a show-cause letter and several warning letters for writing on politically-related issues and events.

In response to Syed Hamid’s hype the Catholic Lawyers’ Society of Kuala Lumpur homed in on the fact that “(u)ltimately, the interpretation of what constitutes religious matters should be left to the leaders and adherents of the faith”.

In a recent press statement, its president Mabel Sabastian said that the reporting in The Herald was “in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church in social and political charity”.

“The Home Ministry is not in a position to dictate to the Catholics (or for that matter, the proponents of any other faith) the scope of their religion,” she drove home the point.

“In seeking to control the contents of The Herald, the Home Ministry’s warning and show-cause letters go against Article 3 (1), Article 10(1)(a) and Article 11(3)(a) of the Federal Constitution, that is, the right to freely practise one’s religion, the general freedom of speech and expression and the right of a religious group to manage its own affairs.”

“Such controls will deprive the Catholic community of current information and education in relation to their faith. Such an act by the authorities is tantamount to curtailment of religious freedom,” she concluded.

Dangerous dichotomy

Contrary to the narrow and naïve definition of religion by Syed Hamid, the Catholic Church teaches that her religion must go beyond the realm of rites, rubrics and rituals and be one that seeks to respond radically to her “divine mission”.

In fact, the Catholic Church has warned her adherents of having a religion that is “nothing more than the fulfillment of acts of worship and the observance of a few moral obligations”.

She calls the “compartmentalization” of faith (as dictated by Syed Hamid), “one of the gravest errors of our time”. She says that “the dichotomy between the faith which many profess and their day-to-day conduct” is vehemently denounced in the Bible.

Catholics are taught not to view their faith as a purely private affair. It may be true that there are personal dimensions of faith but there are also social dimensions that require believers to live and take their faith into the public and political arena.

Indeed, far from pietism and personalized salvation, the Catholic faith is profoundly social. “We cannot be called truly “Catholic” unless we hear and heed the Church’s call to serve those in need and work for justice and peace,” a Church document succinctly puts it.

In sharp contrast to the narrow perspective of the Home Minister, the Catholic church also believes in carrying out its “divine mission” in solidarity with others. It proclaims that “no matter our national, racial, ethnic, economic or ideological differences, we have a global commitment to love our neighbors and to work for justice.”

“We also have a commitment to work towards a just, even and fair development of our world, where no one society is exalted materially above the rest, and no other society is left, quite literally, in the dust. Development must respect the rights of all nations and their people, always promoting the moral, cultural and spiritual dimensions of each person.”

If Syed Hamid is sincere and serious about religion being related to “your divine mission” then he can find no fault with The Herald which has only been reporting and reminding Catholics of their divine mission – which is the same as Jesus’ divine mission of bringing “good news to the poor, liberty to captives, and new sight to the blind” (Luke 4:18) – a mission that clearly and inevitably and ultimately involved the political realities of his time.

The Catholic Church also teaches that “(t)he members of the Church, as members of society, have the same right and duty to promote the common good as do other citizens. Christians ought to fulfill their temporal obligations with fidelity and competence. They should act as a leaven in the world, in their family, professional, social, cultural and political life” (Justice in the World).

As an organ of the Catholic Church in Malaysia it is The Herald’s responsibility and even sacred duty to keep Catholics informed and involved in playing an active role as citizens of this country –and this logically includes the political sphere too.

Wisdom & Will

The ignorance displayed by Syed Hamid is so reminiscent of what the Prime Minister had warned us of when he opened the “International Conference on Religion in The Quest for Global Justice and Peace”, in July this year.

He had called on religious scholars and intellectuals to engage with the wider public in order for them to play a vital role in “combating ignorance and the perversion of religion” and “in broadening public understanding of religion, and its role in promoting justice and peace,”

“Our religious education should convince us that the dignity and integrity of all human beings is worthy of our respect. Religion should inculcate a truly universal and inclusive outlook, not a mentality that is narrow, exclusive and parochial,” Pak Lah added.

Pak Lah also stressed that there is “the need to amplify the role of the media in promoting a universal and inclusive dimension of religion that focused upon justice and peace”. Will this point by the PM hit home, Mr. Home Minister?

Perhaps there is no better statement by the PM himself that exonerates The Herald, affirms what it has been doing, and spurs the publication on to continue to translate into reality its “divine mission” than the following:

“Journalists and media practitioners in general should deepen and broaden their understanding of religion, in order to play a more effective role in advancing the universal values of justice, peace and compassion which lie at the heart of our great religious philosophies.”

Come this 31st August, may we be able to truly celebrate our freedom from all religious narrow-mindedness. May God grant to the adherents of each faith, the wisdom, will and way to live out fully their divine mission for the good of all. Merdeka!

(20 August 2008)

Print Friendly

  1. #1 by One4All4One on Thursday, 21 August 2008 - 10:42 pm

    The abuse of one’s position of authority is one of the worst kind of corruption that can happen in the world of politics and administration.

    A position in government is one which is tied to the votes he/she received in an election, and thus that person is directly responsible to the electorate and should endeavour to protect and advance their interests and concerns.

    Now, when you have an elected representative going against the wishes of the electorate what should the latter do? Surely, the electorate have their rights. They could elect to exercise that right to admonish the representative for not doing the necessary.
    What more when the representative went to the extent of threatening the electorate with this and that action?

    The state of administration in Malaysia has fallen to such abysmal level that it smacks of “jungle rule”. There seems to be a total lack of common-sense in dealing with day to day affairs. Issues are blown out of proportion. When just a sensible reply is the required response to placate a situation, an orchestrated oversized reply is given instead to complicate matters – creating unnecessary fuss and misunderstanding. Goodwill seems to be lost. No more mutual respect and tolerance are exercised. What a sad state of affairs.

    With this kind of seemingly high-handedness and wanton attitude what can we expect of the administration? The rakyat are indeed restless and agitated and driven to their wits end.

    Hope good and common sense will prevail.

  2. #2 by parameswara on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 12:10 am

    the chinese will vote for him because he speaks mandarin?
    people will vote for him just because he looks lembek and amiable?

    what a gimmick!

    we prefer substance over such superficiality.

  3. #3 by cheng on on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 12:46 am

    PP voters, Never vote for bn, whether their candidate speak, Mandarin, Urdu, Telugu?Punjabi, Tamil, Malay, Malayalam, Thai, Teochew, Hokkien or whatever.

  4. #4 by lucia on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 1:27 am

    to read the full editorial from herald about the permatang pauh by election(mentioned by martin here) including the prayer, hop over to my post.

  5. #5 by isahbiazhar on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 5:37 am

    The government should leave religion alone.The teh tarik sect in Terengganu went far before it was brought down.Syed should concentrate on other work and take in more non malays in his ministry so that he gets good advice.

  6. #6 by taiking on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 9:29 am

    Badak said:

    “Only during ELECTION you will see UMNO TALKING about being fair to the INDIANS and CHINESS.When not in election mode they draw the kriss and warn the CHINESS and INDIANS.

    Saw ariff on TV giving a ceramah in MANDERIN.Sunddenly the other races are important.”

    Yeah. Us chinese and indians are truly staple and standard election fodder.

    I kinda like this word “fodder”.

  7. #7 by AhPek on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 9:33 am

    You tell me,zak-hamaad,how can praying for a free and clean election be interpreted as contravening the policy of not involving in politics.If at all this is to be construed as playing with politics then it should be seen as playing good politics for the prayer comes from a wish of trouble free election!
    The trouble with Islam in Malaysia is that it wishes to intervene into the lives of non Muslims who have their own religion or no religion.It would be perfectly all right for anybody if Muslims stick to their way of Islamic life for themselves without trying to impose it on to others.There are around 45% non Muslims in this country and you want to have an Islamic state to impose your values on them.Christianity was once like that,not being able to separate religion from state matters.Over time it has come to accept that the church has no business in
    matters of state only in matters of religion.

    Secularism ought to be the best solution since it is neutral in its treatment on all religion preferring neither this religion nor that religion.I am an agnostic and it simply beats me why secularism is not acceptable??

  8. #8 by AhPek on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 10:04 am

    And cannot be accetable!

  9. #9 by One4All4One on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 12:36 pm

    If DPM (read : the government and their agents and followers) is sincere in the the importance of the Chinese language ( Mandarin ) and dialects ( eg. hokkien, cantonese, etc. ) as he has emphasised again and again in the run up to the PP by-election ( as displayed by the BN candidate’s ability to speak fluently in Mandarin & Hokkien ) then there is some hope yet for the development of Chinese schools and Chinese language in main stream schools.

    If the government sees the importance in knowing, thus learning of, the Chinese language, then we should see more activities in the training and recruiting of teachers for that purpose. Our education ministers and higher education ministers should begin to take urgent and serious measures to address the matter. They should take the cue from the DPM.

    Else, it only boils down to mere rhetoric and cheap publicity and deceiving the community that it is important to learn the Chinese language.

    What about the Tamil language? How come no emphasis given? It would be prejudicial to give attention to one and not to the other. As if Tamil is not important or has no place?

    We need answers. Thank you.

  10. #10 by zak_hammaad on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 12:43 pm

    badak, I do not disagree with what you’ve wrote and I was simply pointing out that if the Herald did contravene it’s terms and conditions (re: politics) then it is for both parties to sit down and sort it out. My personal opinion like yours is that praying for a free and fair election is not political but a moral statement.

    undergrad2, yes you are very much on the ball; western model of democracy is not only unsuitable to Muslim countries, it is also unsuitable for many Asian and African countries as you can see. What some have done is taken the most suitable of elements (and what overlaps) from the Western systems of capitalist democracy and atuned it to local geo-social-demographics. I also agree that Muslim societies are more amenable to an autocratic or authoritarian forms of government because Islamic governance does not accept a 2-party system as it’s history has shown.

    AhPek, the “trouble with Islam in Malaysia” is that the authorities who are seen to be championing Islam are actually contradicting it in many facets of public life. Until they either fully accept and explain (or do away with) Islamic governance, the confusion that you clearly portray will remain. Islamic governance has never been about intervening into the lives of non Muslim citizens; and again history has shown quite the opposite. How Muslims can restore what they have lost in terms of transparent and clean governance is the question.

    I would also argue in the same breath that it’s the Christian missionaries are also contributing in creating a climate of conflict in this region by their brand of covert prostelizing. Please refrain from making statistical errors as this will not help your cause; There are approx 62% Muslims in Malaysia (which would make the remaining 38% non-Muslims). I know that people have a fear of stats and I know that by manipulating these figures, you think you can stake a bigger claim in terms of ratio; you can’t change the demographic reality in Malaysia, which I believe favours the Muslims. Applying limited Islamic laws for the Muslims should neither be seen with distrust nor apprehension. This in no way contravenes non-Muslim rights in Malaysia.

    Speaking of an Islamic state is nonesensical at this moment in time. If the demographics change to reflect 90%+ Muslims, perhaps then, this question of creating an Islamic state with all it’s rules and regulations can be addressed.

    Over time, Christianity may have accepted secularism (perhaps this is also the reason why it has lost most of it’s original teachings) and may be accustomed to making it’s religion as it goes along, but Islamic fundamentals do not change with time, space or location.

    Secularism by default contradicts Islam at it’s very foundation and hence will never be accepted as an alternative mode of governance in any Muslim society. Turkey as an example still reels from an identity crisis since it abolished the caliphate. It continues to “sell it’s soul” in order to be recognised as “Europeans” and to be accepted into the EU. This of course, will never happen.

  11. #11 by taiking on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 3:25 pm

    Our country has roughly 62% “bumiputras”. That works out to a figure of 15.8 million people (thereabout). The 62% or 15.8 million bumiputras are actually made up of malays and non malays. The latter group has 2.8million in total numbers and by a simple deduction, the former has 13 million in numbers.

    Assuming that all malays are muslims then we have 51% muslims in the country.

    Assuming further that half of the 2.8 million non malay “bumiputras” are also muslims then the percentage of muslims in the country would increase to 56%.

    So it would be quite accurate for me to say that muslims in the country ranges from 51% – 56% of the whole population.

    Some of the muslims are actually recent imports from indonesia and the philippines. They should not have been present here as citizens of this country. Realistically, their numbers should not be included in the calculation above. Which is to say, the real percentage range would really be lower than the 51-56% as calculated above. The actual reduction is an unknown to all of us unless the relevant authority tell us the numbers involved.

    Even as things now stand, it is clear that muslims in this country do not enjoy a clear majority in terms of absolute numbers. It is only a slight majority we are looking at.

    Racial composition of a country is a strange animal. It is nothing like say a slab of meat with 51% meat and 49% fat – i.e. what-is-not-meat-is-definately-fat sort of situation. This is because part of the 51% (or 56% if you like) may, for reasons of their own, chose to to go along with the other 49%. You cant stop them.

    In other words, racial majority does not permit a neat translation into better rights. Things are not so straightforward and simple. This is where UMNO failed – for giving racial composition too simplistic a treatment.

  12. #12 by zak_hammaad on Friday, 22 August 2008 - 6:31 pm

    taiking, it is funny that you did not include any of the 2.8 non Malay bumiputera into your Muslim equation of 51%. As I figure it, out of the 11% non Malay bumiputera, 3% are Muslim. Out of the approx 8% Indians, 3% are Muslim, Chinese Muslims now make up approx 1% of total population and there are small pockets of Arab and other ethnically diverse Muslims (totalling another 1%). Therefore, figures cited here would put the Muslim population in Malaysia at 59% – It is true that a credible census is not available; but logical deductions will suit me fine for now.

    Realisitically, we should include every Malaysian citizen who is a Muslim. The “imports” you speak of is wholly inaccurate and not backed by any solid facts; could this be your envy and emotions doing the speaking for you. Taking the classic example of Singapore of today, you would understand that each state implements some mechanisms to make sure that those who rule are not made a minority in their own country. FYI – Migration and trans-migration is as old as man himself and no one person or race or religion can claim exclusivety to any place.

  13. #13 by AhPek on Saturday, 23 August 2008 - 2:27 pm

    zak-hamaad,
    Whether I twisted the figure or you twisted the figure or taiking twisted the figure is of little concern, the fact that the census from the Statistic Department has not been credible suggests that the Department being an appendage of UMNO like every civil service department has dutifully done the job of cooking up a more than actual percentage of Muslims in order to emphasize the dominant position of the Muslims while down sizing the very large significant non Muslim population and even larger non Malay population(49%) in this country.After all Mamak is the master mind behind all this by taking in large number of Indonesians first into Peninsula and second bringing in both Indonesians and Muslims Filipinos by design.This is an insidious and systematic method to suppress the percentage both non Muslim and non Malay
    population in the country altering dramatically the demographic landscape of the country.
    The population statistics of Malays in 1938 found in the”Malayan Postscript” by Australian war correspondent Ian Morrison states:
    (a) Chinese 2.22 million
    (b) Malays 2.21 million
    (c) Indians 0.74 million
    (d) others 0.95 million

    TOTAL 6.12 million

    Most of Indians (mostly indentured Tamil labour employed in plantation and road building) and others (mostly Orang Asli,Europeans and Eurasians) are almost 100% non Muslims.AT most I give it 2%.The Malay population is 36.1% and Muslim population is 38.1%.Look at the present figure and see the steep climb of Malay population 51% and Muslim population(45%-60%). Isn’t that shocking?

  14. #14 by AhPek on Saturday, 23 August 2008 - 2:36 pm

    Should be the population statistics of Malaya.

  15. #15 by lopez on Sunday, 24 August 2008 - 7:09 am

    this man is sick and very sick, there is no medicine to cure him.
    you cannot be more motivated than him because he has to prove he is more malay than those in Hum no.
    Every one knows he is a rojak, having roots in some minority group in mid east desertlands.
    He cant go back , there is no future there and standards of living is relatively lower and tougher and no good hospital and doctors.

    He cant join MIC , he is not wlecome, he certainly wont join msee air.
    he cant form a club of his kind , there is not enougn of his kind.

    so it is by convenience you scratch my back i scratch your , what more better i called my self maly.

    Errrrr…what you want me to do, round up the the….the …okay considered done…right away sir.

Comments are closed.