“Knowing that the spirit on the formation of Malaysia, as far as I come from, (where secular governance) is one of the central points, therefore I cannot subscribe to what has been claimed,” said the former Sabah chief minister Tan Sri Bernard Dompok.

His statement is correct. The Cobbold Mission’s report by which Malaysia was conceived contemplated Malaysia a secular & constitutional form of government and had it been otherwise Sabah & Sarawak wouldn’t have joined. Earlier on, Malaya’s independence was based on Reid Commission which also contemplated a secular & constitutional form of government with Islam being official religion. Though an official religion, Lord President Salleh Abbas in the 1988 Federal Court decision of Che Omar Che Soh had ruled that we were a secular, which has since not been contradicted by any subsequent judicial pronouncement.

The most relevant fact that in 1957 (Merdeka) and 1963 (formation of Malaysia), no Islamic state could possibly have been contemplated because at that time the concept of an “Islamic State”, as it is understood today, was non-existent and had not even entered popular lexicon. It was the Islamic Revolution of Iran in 1978 and 1979 led by exiled religious leader, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini followed closely by the Talibans in Afghanistan that created “the Islamic State” on the back of political Islam.

The influence of political Islam spread to Muslim States (in the sense of Muslim majority) world-wide including South East Asia and Malaysia which PAS capitalised. Knowing fully well that the cultural identity of its Malay/Muslim constituency is inextricably tied to religion, Dr Mahathir brought ABIM’s Anwar on board and embarked on an extensive Islamisation programme since the 1980s which saw the diversion of public funds to and construction of more mosques, encouragement of religious education, establishment of Islamic institutions like Islamic banking, bonds etc. No doubt those who attended Muslim religious schools (madarassas) or universities came back with appropriate zeal to spread its influence here. They are now everywhere – in the civil service and influence all aspects of government policies and their implementation. We have also seen the formation of many Islamic lobby groups and NGOs whose capacity to articulate their agendas, mobilize demonstration and exert influence on the government is very strong and exceeding that of even the other NGOs and civil and human rights societies.
So much so that today the overzealous could raid pubs and haul up muslim entertainers for improper dressing, snoop at lovers in parks, hotels and private apartments for Khalwat with impunity without government daring to intercede and even the judiciary stays clear of intervening or making any explicit statement that may otherwise be perceived and interpreted as inconsistent with the primacy of Islam even in cases of manifest injustice and oppression as in the cases of Ms Lina Joy, Revathi Masoosai, Moorthy and couple other conversion cases.

Like it or not, this is the situation the Mahathir administration bequeathed to his anointed successor who is now facing a very difficult task of balancing the religious aspirations of his own constituency (whose opinion is galvanized by the powerful muslim lobbies and NGOs) as against the legitimate anxieties – and rights – of other significant minority communities both in Semenanjung and East Malaysia and yet maintain unity and harmony.

I say legitimate anxieties – and rights – of minority non muslim communities because it is a historical and legal fact that although our constitution is “hybrid” (in the sense that it stipulates under article 3 that Islam is the official religion and its 9th schedule carves out wide areas by which Islamic laws may be and are promulgated), the principal premise upon which the country and its social contract were founded is secular which serves best a multi racial and multi religious citizenry and accepted by all for nation building. This being the premises, it is not right to change the ground rules midway in the game : the non malay muslims will legitimately feel short changed and betrayed.

One cannot insist on adherence to the social contract in terms of Malay privileges and yet renege on the same social contract in terms of ours being a secular state in the manner expressed above. That will be selective adherence depending on expedience than principle, and hence opportunistic and unfair. But being fair in terms of offering all Malaysians a level playing field has never been the ruling party’s defining trait – to politically survive and maintain power to infinity is.

I agree that our press should be more responsible and not just report verbatim Najib’s statement that would be debated out of context exacerbating racial and religious fault lines. It is not as if it was earth shaking or as if Najib had purposely made such a statement to articulate, as a matter of official government policy, a paradigm shift to an Islamic state in the sense that the devout and fundamentalists could straightway press for implementation of an Islamic theocracy.

The statement was reported out of context. Najib made it when opening an international conference on “The Role of Islamic States in a Globalized World”, for crying out loud, and it would be a joke if he had said we were a secular state to an Islamic conference: better we did not host such a conference. What was said and reported cannot be unsaid and we should understand that the gag order was made subsequently for damage control in that context.

In this connection there is some sense in what some posters said here to taper off discussing this sensitive issue (after the point that we’re secular had been made) considering further debate on this brings nobody any good, not even the minorities.

The ruling party has always leveraged on religion to legitimize its political capital and credentials. There is therefore no way top leaders of the government will affirm this is a secular nation because PAS would be the first to point out that if they are leaders of a secular nation then all claims of the ruling party being Islamic are hollow. [Don’t forget the bigger picture that the Western-Islamic conflict in the Middle East (flash point, Iraq) has further politicized Muslim movements worldwide and in Malaysia. They view themselves as counter-forces to cultural domination by the west of which secularism and human rights are Western imperialising concepts].

Meanwhile what is Malaysia? Defined historically and legally we are a constitutionally a hybrid with both secular and Islamic features of which the former was paramount in light of the multi racial/religious populace.

In terms of existing realities, we are an Islamic state if that term is used synonymously with an Islamic nation in the sense that Islam is given paramount importance in terms of formulation and implementation of government policies and a beneficiary of State’s public resources. No secular state would do what the UMNO government does for the Official religion.

If what a country is described or labeled as depends on the definition of whosoever who has political muscle to interpret and enforce such definition, then we are no more a state with dominant secular features but one with dominant Islamic features, making us an Islamic state in that sense but not in the classic sense that we’re an Islamic theocracy.

Not yet anyway as the ruling party only mobilises religion to legitimise political agendas based a lot on non-religious interests (eg economic development, the bread and butter of populace and also politicians by their OSA contracts), which is subtly and importantly different from PAS, on the other hand, that is pursuing religious interests as an end by itself. Admittedly, the gap between the two however gets increasingly narrower all the time, we go down the slippery slope, as UMNO appeases those who have theocratic ambitions to articulate and implement their agendas with relative freedom.

Which means that if the Opposition led by PAS comes to power, the Islamic theocratic state will be established. This is not BN’s propaganda. It is real. It is PAS manifesto that it has to fulfill for its constituency voting it to power.

Where to draw a line is the problem as one recalls the theocratic model has not been a shining success in the Middle East with large swathes of it in economic backwaters. No economic development means less contracts and less commissions.