Restructuring and rationalising race and religion

Religion is relatively safe if it remains within the sanitised confines of established orthodoxy that uplifts and upholds morality. Neo-reformers with intellectual power challenging spiritual revelations and scriptural tenets are plain incendiary troublemakers.

Our troubles stay like a festering wound when religion, religiosity and religious strictures and tenets are subject to mainstream misinterpretation, misinformation and misapplication. We have utterly failed to fix this with any measure of permanence.

Article 11 of the Federal Constitution (Freedom of religion) cannot be anything but a near-absolute right despite the restrictive rationale enunciated in Ahmad Yani bin Ismail & Anor v Inspector General of Police [2005] 4 MLJ 636. Common law interpreting constitutional law is an aberration.

Freedom of religion is a very private matter that has found its way into the public domain. Nonetheless, it should not invoke, evoke or provoke controversy. If the supreme law of the land dictates a freedom, let it be.

People practising various faiths must always be on the guard not to be “ungrateful toward God” (kafir). Incidentally, research shows that there are 26 ayats in the Holy Quran about kafirs. This is a common denominator in various creeds and Scriptures.

In Malaysia, race and religion have caused a divide displaying disunity and disharmony affecting public order, public health, morality and national security. The laws are silent during the clash of values and beliefs.

Avowed racists and religious extremists are immunised from lackadaisical law enforcement. They hardly face charges, trials and punishment. Religious extremists meanwhile nonchalantly equate their warped beliefs with religious freedom.

Article 10(1)(c) Federal Constitution grants you the right to associate with anyone, anything any belief, opinion or persuasion no matter how reprehensible it may be. But beware, ideas and misguided rights have consequences.

The loaded question would be whether associating with political Islam is constitutionally binding in the context of religious freedom. The Madani government must defuse the situation. Get the uranium out of the equation.

Article 3 Federal Constitution (Religion of the Federation) has been judicially interpreted and declared to confine and define Malaysia as a secular nation. The Executive and Parliament must be hardwired to obey the rule of law.

Interestingly, ‘religion,’ per se, is not defined in Article 160 (Interpretation) Federal Constitution. Did the Reid Commission elect to deliberately omit it to avoid a clash of sensitivities and sensibilities?

Freedom of religion can be absolute as long as it does not encroach into Article 149 Federal Constitution when pubic order, public health or morality is threatened. Rigorous, robust and vigorous law enforcement is another matter.

Talking about morality from a religious freedom viewpoint, how come the government is not blocking access to Internet pornography? Are Malaysians allowed to cackle like Kamala Harris at the reference to morality in Article 149 Federal Constitution?

Conflict, confusion and controversy quietly rages on whether it is politically correct, or incorrect, with political Islam challenging constitutional supremacy. The two-thirds majority in Parliament is silent and unfazed like a well-quoted statistic.

Religious freedom in secular Malaysia is about reconciling differences wrought by ill-gotten and mundane opinions. It will be refreshingly delightful if Muslims are serious and faithful to the Divine Revelation in the Holy Quran concerning politics.

Quote: “Allah enjoins the believers to amicably reconcile their mutual differences and conflicts, and forbids them from falling into disputes with one another, and warns them if they do not do so they will become weak as a community and their strength will be lost.  And reconcile your mutual differences.” (Al-Quran Surah 8: Verse 1). Unquote

Clarity, certainty and consistency are incontrovertibly contained in this powerful Revelation. This Holy Injunction must be taken seriously by those professing the faith. It surpasses written constitutions and laws. It lays the only permanent foundation for comity in heterogeneous Malaysia.

Therefore, developmental Islam or political Islam should not be encouraged because the scriptural and spiritual values of Islam will be diluted for political leverage. Some Rulers have expressed their strong views on this matter.

Surely, freedom of religion cannot be interpreted as freedom to alter, amend, interpret and apply religion for the sake of the ‘freedom of politics’ if such an item enjoys constitutional fiat.

Malaysia’s socioeconomic and geopolitical destiny should not be pivoted on advancing any religion. Albert Einstein remarked that “those who believe that politics and religion do not mix, understand neither.” The key issues are political maturity and morality.

“As a species we’re fundamentally insane. Put more than two of us in a room, we pick sides and start dreaming up reasons to kill one another. Why do you think we invented politics and religion,” quipped author Stephen King. Can’t blame him as he was trying to market his books.

The dire consequences of politicising religion become an admixture of deviancy coupled with the precision of a blind watchmaker. Some political observers say that a win for PN in GE-16 will spell socioeconomic and geopolitical disaster.

Will separate electorates resolve the race and religion divide where the voting population is divided into different electorates, based on religion, race, gender and occupation. Here, members of each electorate vote only for elected representatives for their electorate.

The ultimate check and balance maybe an elected Senate in the Dewan Negara. Ultimately, politics and morality through religious tolerance should become inseparable as national security and national unity.

The views expressed here are those of the columnist and do not necessarily represent the views of Sarawak Tribune.