There is possibly some wisdom in what Undergrad2 said in his postings July 27th, 2007 at 22: 20.32, “Enough of the Islamic state and the state of Islam, Mr. Kit!” and smeagroo’s posting of July 27th, 2007 at 22: 51.14, “Yeah i agree!”.

Lets evaluate the situation:

Najib described us as an Islamic State. So what? One could say he is a DPM, a future PM and therefore what he stated or misstated is important. But it is still his opinion. Isn’t he entitled to his opinion?

Well the father of our independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman also had an opinion. He said that we were a secular state and this was supported by another former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn who said, “the nation can still be functional as a secular state with Islam as the official religion.

Opinion is opinion but what about the law? The constitutional position was stated by Lord President Salleh Abbas in his judgment in the 1988 case of Che Omar Che Soh. He said that “we have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, secular law, where morality not accepted by the law is not enjoying the status of law. Perhaps that argument should be addressed at other forums or at seminars and, perhaps, to politicians and Parliament. Until the law and the system is changed, we have no choice but to proceed as we are doing today.”

Well that law as laid down has still not been changed. Until 2007, no judicial authority, not even the highest (Federal Court) had contradicted explicitly the 1988 statement of constitutional position by Salleh Abbas. So it is still law.

Now having examined opinions and law, lets look next at existing realities of the state of nation.

We are definitely not secular. There are many grounds to say this but it suffices to state one obvious ground – no secular state would with absolute partiality single out an official religion like ours and support it so extensively from public funds over the rest.

But having said that, the realities do not support the contention either that we’re an Islamic State in the ordinary grammatical sense by which the term is used when one takes into account the following contradictions:

· We’re not an Islamic state in the sense of a theocratic state because the constitutionally prescribed formula for the leader of government – the Prime Minister – is not that he must be an ulamak, erudite in Islam, but a leader of the political party that won the election;

· How could an an Islamic state have licensed casino like the Genting, lotteries like Magnum, Toto, 3+1D and Bigsweeps? Or public entertainment places serving liquour and markets selling pork?
· How could an Islamic State have criminal laws based on our Penal Code for muslims and non muslims alike and not Syariah/Hudud?

There are other contradictions but these would for time being suffice.

We are, in terms of existing realities, neither here nor there of either secular or Islamic theocratic models.

When we are “rojak” in the sense above because of the realities of multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural composition of society, perhaps it is best to leave things as they are.

Najib might have made the Islamic State statement for any motive. One could speculate like what Undergrad2 did that “it is all about the elections. It is all about labeling and bottling old wine in a new bottle” or that he did so to bolster his political capital amongst malay/muslim constituency at a time he felt it threatened by swirling rumours relating to a current case.

Or it may actually be due to some reason practical than opportunistic – he made the remark when opening an international conference on “The Role of Islamic States in a Globalized World” from the 17th to 18th July 2007 organised by Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia (IKIM). How could Malaysia host such a conference and yet tell conference participants that we are a secular nation and not an Islamic state?

So Najib had his opinion. So what? 2 former PMs had a diametrically opposed one. The law laid down by 1988 Federal Court decision remains as yet uncontradicted.

Whilst individuals or civil societies could express disagreement with Najib’s statement the issue here is whether this possibly divisive issue should be publicly escalated to the level of a Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm the Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement.

Is it wise and does it serve the nation’s best interest to force explicit position on this issue at parliamentary level? Would it not make it worse for all if the 92% BN dominated Parliament governed by party discipline (of which Najib is chief Whip) takes the position that we’re an Islamic State?

There is a need here to distinguish between 1. movements inspired by religion (Ayatollah Khomeini’s revolution or PAS’s political cause) from 2. movements using religion to legitimise political agendas based on non-religious interests (to make money out of contracts).

No leaders in power in the case of 2. are going to say the truth that we’re “rojak” but they will instead use every power at his disposal to further buttress their credentials as Islamic leaders by declaring this an Islamic state ten times over if necessary!

How could anyone making claims to be an Islamic leader dare we’re a secular nation implying that he is a leader of a secular regime or upholder of a secular constitution? Then how could he then still claim to be an Islamic leader?

We have all lived long enough to know that Life in general and political life in particular is abounding with hypocrisies. But we must also know when to push and, after making the point, when to stop and let go, lest our persistent action produces boomerang effect, adverse to and more detrimental to our interests that we had sought to protect when we started to push (in first instance).

One latest example of this “boomerang effect” is what happened recently to an old guard UMNO chieftain, wishing a political come back who went to Dang Wangi police station to fix an irritant in the person of RPK by using the old tried ways of intimidation and police action for disparaging Islam and the King and not knowing the new ways of the Cyber World came away exposed as to his own shenanigans and damaged as to his political prospects instead…..

In the premises of the above discussion, of course the educated will reject UMNO unless their education and opportunties in life are enhanced by its NEP policies. But for the not so educated masses who constitute the bulk of the voters, who may not even have access to the alternative media offered by the Internet, who will they choose between two viable PAS or UMNO? PKR that holds the strongest promise can’t even hold its own without defactions of office bearers like Ezam and having to hang onto PAS to piggy ride to power!

Amongst non muslim elites (I mean the business and corporate class) they will throw their support and nmoney behind UMNO and BN, never mind the corruption because the corruption – though bad for the country in the long run and inimical to the interest of the younger educated who will be inheriting the country – is however one avenue with which they could partake with their political cronies in UMNO as well as other BN component parties through the contracts and projects dished out. At least there is benefit and sharing of the spoils of largesse and patronage amongst all races and religion within the ruling class and their friends in business. If the country is a theocracy under PAS, they will be treated as Dhimmis and they perceive their position as worse off…So in the absence of alternatives between the hammer of UMNO and the anvil of PAS the former is still the lesser of the two evils.

Revathi Masoosai, an ethnic Indian born to Indian Muslim family but was raised as a Hindu and married to a Hindu husband in 2004, was detained for 6 months by the Islamic Religious Department in southern Malacca in an Islamic rehabilitation center after applying in an Islamic Syariah Court in Malacca to have her Muslim name and religion changed. During ‘rehabilitation’ she said that officials subjected her to extensive counseling, tried to make her pray as a Muslim, wear a head scarf and eat beef, a practice sacrilege to Hindus. She said that the Islamic authorities also seized her daughter from her husband and handed the child to Revathi’s Muslim mother.

Was her fundamental constitutional right under articles 5 (personal liberty) and 8 (freedom of religion) of Federal Constitution violated or would one consider it not violated for being “in accordance with the law” – and if so whose law?

It is extraordinary why if a person were put on a wrong flight to Bangkok instead of Qatar that he intended, he should blame himself or bad luck and not MAS and its management/crew!

It’s not only problem of wrong flight in isolation. If you follow recent reports including this link http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/index.php?itemid=6857 in RPK’s Malaysia Today, it is the common experience of many Malaysians as well as international commuters alike – for over 3 weeks now – of daily delays in take off , some as long as eight hours, not to mention mixed up of seats under its flight booking system that left passengers stranded. (Last week my Indonesian guests were at KLIA at 7.30 am for a scheduled 9 am flight but could take off for Jakarta only at 3 pm! And they sms me Mana Ada System?)

[Even the Minister of Transport, Dato’ Seri Chan Kong Choy and three other MCA Minister/Deputy Ministers failed to show up on time at Sabah MCA Convention last Sunday. Then the Minister of Information, Dato’ Zainuddin Maidin was delayed at Kuala Terengganu. According to latest rumours, even the BN Senators’ Club called for the sacking of Idris].

Some say it was sabotage. The recently concluded clandestine reward scheme (including ESOS) for very selected employees based on the much tauted Performance Management System (PMS) evaluation system generated rampant unhappiness of 20,000 MAS workforce suspected of the sabotage.

Earlier when Idis took over, there was unhappiness with the Voluntary Separation Scheme. They said a lot of lazy and unproductive staff were rewarded by handsome pay offs whilst the productive sector were not availed to the benefits of VSS so that they are retained to slog it out.

Now those suffering would make no distinction who’s at fault – whether the 20,000 MAS workforce suspected of sabotage or its group MD Datuk Idris Jala. All the same MAS has been blamed – even if it was formed only in 1971 – and they are beginning to take other airlines. How to be patient?