Let Syariah Court deal with issue
IKIM VIEWS
By Dr WAN AZHAR WAN AHMAD,Senior Fellow/Director,Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science, Ikim
Matters pertaining to Islamic law must be referred to the Syariah Court, as it is the main body entrusted with administering justice according to the confines of Islam.
ALL the hue and cry prior to and after the Federal Court’s judgment in the Lina Joy case are manifestations of ignorance, arrogance and sheer defiance of logic. It once again proves that the most unsettling problem afflicting our people is the problem of knowledge.
It’s alarming to encounter certain individuals or groups of people are ignorant of their ignorance and yet are bold enough to indulge in matters alien to their understanding. To further exacerbate the confusion, they choose to remain obstinate by discarding authority, i.e. true knowledge and erudite scholarship.
As was adjudicated in the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court, the case of Lina Joy is primarily administrative in nature. It essentially deals with the question of conversion procedure – whether or not a Muslim has to obtain a decree from the Syariah Court confirming one's apostasy.
A lot of people appear to consciously reject the fact that this country practices a dual legal system of parallel status – civil and syariah. This unique system is sanctioned, among others, by the Ninth Schedule and further bolstered by Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution, the supreme law of the country.
When it comes to matters pertaining to Islamic law, they must be referred to the Syariah Court, as it is the main body entrusted with administering justice according to the confines of Islam.
Conversion out of Islam is part of Islamic law, and therefore the Syariah Court is the only proper platform to resolve the issue. It is hard to believe that some people simply refuse to deal with the Syariah Court, assuming that justice will be denied.
The law is simple and straightforward. There is no need to complicate matters by manipulating the issues to the extent of threatening national unity. If one is not happy with any decision of any subordinate Syariah Court, then one may appeal. But some seem to already admit defeat without even trying.
It is amazing to learn that segments of our learned citizens throw their allegiance to a “foreign” law as compared to our readily available own internal legal provisions.
It is well and good to acknowledge the superiority of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 (UDHR) over our Federal Constitution, namely with regard to the freedom of religion.
But it appears to run foul if one were to make the same recognition, say, with the provisions of holy scriptures: the Bible, the Vedas, and particularly the Quran and Sunnah.
Many do not realise that in adopting any international document, we must first examine if it is binding. The UDHR is not legally binding even in countries which have agreed to adopt it.
Furthermore, in the Malaysian context, section 4(4) of the Human Rights Commission Act 1999 clearly provides that the application of any external laws must be filtered through the Federal Constitution.
Certainly, apostasy is currently the hottest issue at stake; it is an internal legal problem. Like it or not, in order to resolve the issue, we must first acknowledge and apply all rules and laws available in our own backyard. The so-called international law only plays a persuasive role that may be referred to as a guide, not the determining factor.
One must not approach apostasy strictly from its constitutional or civil legal perspective alone. Religious representation must be given, if not more, at least an equal consideration.
In the case of Muslim apostates and those who support them (especially fellow Muslims), it is inconceivable that they would willingly leave Islam or give tremendous support if they properly understood the religion of Islam.
This holds true even to the followers of other religions. One will only renounce one's own religion as a result of utter ignorance, frustration or disenchantment.
First and foremost, Muslims must understand that they have chosen Islam consciously and willingly as a result of understanding and knowledge. Even Muslims cannot take things for granted believing that they are Muslims simply by birth.
All Muslims, either by birth or by conversion, must be made to realise that they have actually entered into a primordial covenant with God in the supernatural realm long before they were born to this world.
And this divine contract, i.e. the pledge of recognition, trust and allegiance between all human souls and God, is recorded in the Quran, namely, in Surah al-A’raf (7): 172.
This recognition and trust needs to be observed accordingly. In fact, this is the very foundation where all aspects of human life originate. None can ever claim that he/she is not aware of this spiritual contract, as the Quran is the reminder.
Therefore, once a Muslim breaches this divine contract, he is subject to a certain kind of religious remedial measure or punishment. This situation is very similar to that of commercial transactions where, for instance, those who breach contracts are punished in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in their agreements.
In the case of the Islamic legal system, there are provisions available pertaining to apostasy. If a crime takes place, then all parties involved are required to abide by them. In fact, every aspect of life, including the issue of freedom, has to be understood and exercised within the framework of religious parameters.
Certainly, the availability of fixed rules and regulations do not negate the possible and necessary modifications in the manifestations of justice according to Islam.
One of the substantial differences between Islam and the other religions is that, the latter possibly do not speak of a divine primordial covenant. This explains why the question of leaving one's religion for another is never an issue in non-Islamic religious traditions.
Muslims must not become Muslims simply because they are born within Muslim families or societies. For the converted Muslims, the motivation must not be for personal gain, be it in the form of marriage or other socio-economic and political benefits.
It is never too late to rectify any wrong once it is discovered. Gradually he/she must make efforts to increase his/her knowledge about Islam. In this regard, other Muslims, especially the loved ones (husbands, wives, parents, etc.), or those responsible for the conversion, must assist him/her along the way.
With proper understanding of religion, one will not easily leave religion for mundane reasons. A lack of compassion on the part of the Muslims will perhaps stifle any attempt to call the other to Islam.


20/06: Lina Joy - Response to IKIM's Dr Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
Farouk A. Peruhttp://www.jidal.org/
The issue of Lina Joy's attempt to have 'Islam' struck off her MyKad has once again raised its head, this time by IKIM's senior fellow, Dr Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad who is the Director of Ikim's Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science. The authority in this article is significant, given the qualifications of its writer but its message is basically the same. In essence what is being said is this : we are right and Lina Joy is wrong to leave us and that's why she can't and so please don't interfere with this.
Wan first laments the people who are 'ignorant of their ignorance' yet still choose to protest without 'true knowledge and erudite scholarship'. We hope that Wan himself would provide this much needed 'true knowledge and erudite scholarship' we lack so much.

1. Wan asserts that most people are ignorant of the fact Malaysia functions on both a Civil and Shariah legal system. In matters pertaining to Islam, which by the way includes apostasy, the Shariah court must take precedence.
My response:
a. There is a problem of logical consistency in the constitution. Lina Joy is a Malaysian and so is subject to freedom of religion but she is also a Malay and constitutionally defined as a Muslim. This contradiction in our constitution must be addressed.
b. Shariah law is not a monolithic entity without disagreements. In fact, the first source of Shariah itself is universally (if titularly) acknowledged to be the Quran, yet there is no agreement at all on how the Quran should be utillised as a source. The Quran gives complete freedom of religion and if like Ibn Abbas (who asserted that punishment for theft was clearly in the Quran and so cannot be changed), we limit the law to the Quran itself, Shariah courts should give Lina Joy complete freedom of religion

2. Wan expresses astonishment that many Malaysians have supported the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which he calls a 'foreign law' yet do not express the same support for 'the Quran and Sunnah' . He goes on to say that that this 'foreign law' must be filtered through the Federal Constitution.
My response:
a. If the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land, then any attempt of Shariah law to encroach upon the domain of Federal Laws must be seen as we see UDHR, as something to be filtered. Why make fish of one and fowl of the other?
b. If you claim that in the matters pertaining to Shariah, it must take precedence then why do you limit the matters to simply martial issues and apostasy. Shariah law was never meant to be limited to those issues but encompasses even matters considered part of criminal law. Futhermore, classically Shariah law is not limited to Muslims alone but is for everyone. Why do you only choose to apply the apostasy law while forgetting the rest? Why do you not claim these attributes as also part of Sharia Law and call to abrogate the Federal Constitution altogether?

3. Wan invites Lina Joy to apply to leave Islam via Shariah courts.
My response:
a. Is it not true that this act would be considered by the court to be insulting Islam? Can Lina Joy be penalised and thrown in jail?
b. What is the criteria for the court to say 'yes' to Lina Joy? What is the justification of this criteria?

5. Wan further claims that civil and legal representation isn't enough. 'Religious representation must be given, if not more, at least an equal consideration.In the case of Muslim apostates and those who support them (especially fellow Muslims), it is inconceivable that they would willingly leave Islam or give tremendous support if they properly understood the religion of Islam.'
'My Response:
a. What if the individual gives no credibility to his religion? Can we force the individual to accept 'religious representation' when she considers it to be without credibility? How can anyone tell any other person how much credibility to give a religious body?
b. While you may consider it inconceivable for Muslim apostates to leave 'if they properly understood', can you be so arrogant as to claim that you have imparted upon them a proper understanding. Even the messenger himself was not never to be a compeller but to remind (Qaf, 45).

6. Wan goes on to make a rather interesting claim, 'This holds true even to the followers of other religions. One will only renounce one's own religion as a result of utter ignorance, frustration or disenchantment.
My response:
a. This is a wonderfully egalitarian claim. To show how much you believe in this, we have to make conversion INTO Islam illegal as well. Furthermore, we have to convince all potential Muslim converts that they are 'in utter ignorance, frustrated or disenchanted'. Can we do this?

7. The most preposterous of Wan's claim is the following, where he claims that Muslims 'must be made to realise that they have actually entered into a primordial covenant with God in the supernatural realm long before they were born to this world'. Since 'None can ever claim that he/she is not aware of this spiritual contract, as the Quran is the reminder',when a Muslim 'breaches this divine contract, he is subject to a certain kind of religious remedial measure or punishment. This situation is very similar to that of commercial transactions where, for instance, those who breach contracts are punished in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in their agreements.'
My response:
a. How does Wan know that the apostate-to-be has read the Quran or even believes in it. What if the person rejects this objectively unverifiable statement by the Quran?
b. Even if Lina Joy was consciously a Muslim before, how can we know that she truly understood Islam. There are many slogans by Muslim preachers about how fair Islam is and how liberating for women. What if Lina Joy consciously practised Islam then found out that some Muslims believe that it's ok to beat their wives or that some Shariah lawyers believe that a Muslim can never be convicted of killing a non-Muslim?
c. Even if we could verify this metaphysical (and therefore empirically unverifiable) information by the Quran about the divine contract, how do we know that it is Wan and his friends who are appointed to carry out the law? Have they taken that authority without any authority from Allah.Any way you slice it, this case exposes the bigotry of our Islamic establishments.
They have to make the following assumptions before they have deduced what they did about Lina Joy, namely:
a. That Islam is the ultimate truth. (While believers in the Quran believe this, they are in no way to force anyone to accept it)
b. That their interpretation of shariah law is correct (even though the Quran gives complete freedom of religion) and no one else has any right to question that interpretation.
c. That they have the ability to consel anyone from leaving Islam (even though the Quran tells us that even the Prophet could not guide those whom he loved)
c. That they are preaching Islam correctly people (even though they refuse to entertain any questioning about what they pass of as 'islamic')I urge Muslims to please check the Quran for yourself and see how it vehemently opposes this law which is being passed off as 'Islamic'. It's a shame that Wan considers those who disagree with him to be without 'true knowledge and erudite scholarship' yet preaches a ideology so contrary to the book he believes in.

Comments

wanbozo wrote:
Farouk
what Dr wan espouses in his column should be debated and question. He and many like him has skewered the idea of freedom of choice as guaranteed in the Koran. Sadly many of the Malay ummah also feel that way. This affliction effects many of our friends but many of them too believe that if Azlina Jailani wants to apostate let her be.Even Dr Wan do not understand the meaning of the death penalty for apostate as proscribe by the Ulamak of old. In a country of Daulah Islamiah, where the Koran is the constitution, the death penalty is proscribe because renouncing Islam is regarded as treason and crime against the country. Traitors has always been regarded as heinous and their acts are usually punish as a capital punishment with death. So apostate are regarded as traitors and no wonder the punishment is harsh.But in a country like ours which is an Islamic Nation not an Islamic State, this type of punishment as advocate is ridiculous, thus Tantawi which I concur with, regard apostate as personal matter and he or she should be allowed to do so. But traditionalist will always hold the view of old which sadly will regard apostasy as a crime. You as an intellectuals should be the vanguard of the malay minds so that they can make this choice with a clear and coherent understanding.
22/06 16:52:36
22/06 19:31:16
farouk wrote:
Wan,When we say our country runs on a parallel system of Civil and Shariah laws, unless we clarify further, we'd be speaking with ambiguity.Shariah law, no doubt you know functions at the most all-encompassing level. Pendek kata, if Shariah law works at 100%, then memang Civil law would cease to exist.The question right now is to determine if the 'level' of Shariah law we're at includes apostasy law or not. So to me, unless this is clarified, then civil law must take precedence as the supreme law of the land.I believe conflating apostasy law and the law of treason is wrong as you do. Treason must include actual war in the land which of course most apostates don't do. I won't even include acts like preaching other religions to Muslims because we can preach to others!I've been getting some criticism about my views on this, people calling me a 'traitor to Islam' etc etc. I'd like to say here, my reason for upholding Lina's rights is the Quran. I believe that the Quran promotes a way of life which if adhered to, will bring us peace. In the Quran, the people who say 'either you return to our religion or we'll stone you' are people who get destroyed. It must be painful for some to see Lina leaving the faith they love but this is all God's test.Many thanks for your kind words, Wan. I'm no intellectual although I'm a big admirer of some of the intellectuals here.

wanbozo wrote:
Farouk
Many thanks for you answer. I am not a person who regard you as a traitor to Islam but trouble is many Malays are emotive with their beliefs. I too espouch your idea to them but I do so by appealing to them. Malays are an emotional lot. They have an innate believe in the supernatural, thus this show they do not think with reasons but with their heart.By appealing to their heart you might achieve more, remember, the traditionalist feed them with fears that it consume them so much that they cannot think with reasons. You are a clever man farouk, your points are clear and lucid but remember you are talking to a child, whom, civilization wise is still considered young.Malays inherently is a race of peace but this they have change, unlike Indonesia, Malays here perhaps have been indoctrinate too much to fear and regard the non muslim as a bogeyman. You, Farouk must bridge the gap by promoting your views across but do so with bijaksana after all is that not one of the Sifat2 Muhammad beside Tabligh(menyampaikan)? As to the law do take heart that the late Tunku always maintain that this country is secular and is so, it is the politician who is at fault, who has open the Pandora box and now they can't close it. I believe strongly in my heart that Muslim must embrace pluralism of thoughts which is sadly missing. Dr Wan is not wrong but neither is he right. He is wrong perhaps in not embracing pluralism and thus open his mind to a different possibilities and answers.
Salam
Wan
PS it has been clarified please look at the judgment by the Chief Justice. This verdict is indeed alarming.
22/06 22:10:46

Today the 16th of January I got my book sign by Karen Armstrong. I went to her talks that was open to the public but it was a disappointment. The topic was about Islam and the west but she skip the topic altogether. She talk about pluralism and the inherent concept that exist in all religion. I guess, she was advice not to proceed with that topic which is a surprise because I really admire her for her work and basically I want to know what she thinks about my religion. I regarded her very knowledgeable, as a non muslim, thus I want her opinion from the knowledge she has glean from her studies.

But I was disappointed although her talk was enlightening but lack the punch that I like. Perhaps with the prevalent atmosphere in Malaysia, it might not be advisable for her. It is sad that the Malaysian public were denied, to me , a most fruitful and entertaining polemic on Islam delivered by Karen Armstrong. This is sad the malady that effect the Malay mind here. We have over protective zealots who see fits to control the knowledge made available to the Malaysian public. Luckily there is the web for me, if not where can I seek to find knowledge. During my growing up years all kind of journals were made available. From Sexology books to Sci Fi and the search for philosophical truth were made available. Now I heard even Eric Von Daniken books are banned. Reading all the materials didn't make me an apostate or a sex fiend but now books even by karen Armstrong are banned!!!

The need to control people's mind is endemic here in Malaysia. Books of Darwin are ban here now, it was not so a few years back but the tide has change, more and more books are ban because of 'high security risk'. I know Darwinism has been shown flawed but why ban the book. It seems the Theologians have a hold on the authorities mind. The truth is, it is though we are heading back to the dark ages where in Europe the church has a say in what is right and wrong. Galileo was punish for saying the Sun is the centre of the Universe and not the moon and he was later ask to repudiate it or be put to death.

I hope Malaysia won't fall into the trap, for I believe all books must be made available as a point of reference and if they are needs to control then let it be made available in the Universities Library and Public Libraries . It doesn't make sense because we have a Bill of Guarantee signed and agreed whereby there is no censorship on the Internet thus I can find any information I want and download it to my computer. And now the Traditionalist are asking the government to have a sort of control on the net and do away with the Bill of Guarantee. If this happen I will be very sad indeed.

I hate to make comment about the case of Lina Joy or Azlina Jalaini but because of her I think, Karen Armstrong talk has been muted. As far as I am concern I have always agree with Tantawi assessment that a person has the right to renounce his or her faith for in the Koran it said there is no compulsion in religion thus faith must be regarded to be a personal issue unless he or she turn around and mock and degrade the faith that he or she once belongs to. But then I am alone and many others who are like me are regarded as liberal and my thoughts are blasphemous to Islam.

I found that the Muslim intellectuals minds are warped trap in time. They forgot the Ulamak who came out with the religious edict live at a time when there was a Daulah Islamiah State. Whereby the Constitution of the Country is the Koran. But, presently the Islamic States have evolve from a totally Islamic State into an Islamic Nation, Koran has been replace in the constitution and a written one has been put in place, and instead of Kafir Harbi and Dhimmi as it once was, we regard them as part of the citizen of the state, having equal rights and equal status. So Shariah Law must reflect this changes to make it relevant to the times without losing its inspired law from the Koran.

So Dr Wan from IKIM and Qardhawi are both not wrong in proscribing death penalty for apostate or some kind of punishment for it. For in a true Daulah Islamiah setting apostate is a capital crime for it is an act of treason, and treason by any law whether secular or religion, the act will be punish harshly. It is a capital crime. But we are not living in a Daulah Islamiah State, we live in an Islamic Nation, the idea of a siege mentality must desist. We must uphold the spirit of the Koran that there is no compulsion in religion and we must be prepared to make law which, how hurtful it is, to let them be. In the Hudabiyah treaty, Umar was ready to take his sword out because he thinks that Muhammad pbuh has given too much to the Quraish by allowing Muslim who wants to return to the Quraish to do so, while he has to return any Quraish who seek his refuge. But then to Muhammad pbuh this is allowed simply that if you have faith you will never renounce your faith and if you don't so be it. It is better not to have hypocrites with you for the strength of the ummah is not in numbers but in faith.

The trouble with the Malays here they are afraid to embrace pluralism, they fear that by embracing different thoughts they might question their beliefs, which is said for they equate belief with faith which is wrong. Faith is an innate thing that you have, beliefs are a set of ideas which you think is true but might not be true. Malays must be able to question beliefs all the time, they must be able to challenge their mind to excel and then they can stand tall with the rest of mankind. I have to end now this is getting too much time, I am exhausted.

This is an article of reasons which touch a cord of which I identify myself with? Zainah Anwar wrote in her perspective on the issue of Lina Joy of which I promise not to touch anymore sadly I have to break my vow for this article is worth reading
ZAINAH ANWAR ON FRIDAY:
Mediation the wiser path to take

IN August 1998, the Sheikh of Al-Azhar University caused a stir in Malaysia when he publicly declared that Islam recognises freedom of religion and Muslims are free to leave Islam as long as they do not harm the religion.
Dr Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi believes that there can be no compulsion in Islam. He asked what was the point in forcing those who wanted to leave Islam "to stay as this will only make them hypocrites". "It’s probably Allah’s will to save us from worse harm which these people could have caused if they had remained in Islam," he said.His opinion was supported by many others, including the then minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Dr Abdul Hamid Othman who reiterated that the government had no plans to take any punitive action against those who peacefully changed their religion.As could be expected, the Pas mursyidul am, Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat, expressed disbelief. He questioned the accuracy of the translation of the Sheikh’s Arabic speech.
He did not believe that a scholar of Tantawi’s stature could believe that apostasy was not a crime in Islam. If indeed Tantawi believed in freedom of religion, then Nik Aziz cautioned Muslims not to believe in any Islamic ruling based only on a person’s status and authority.Many foreigners are surprised at the depth of confusion on freedom of religion in Malaysia. To many Muslims living in other parts of the Muslim world, Tantawi’s position is a given. Freedom of religion is explicit in the Quran. They don’t understand how Muslims could force someone to remain a Muslim if he does not believe in the religion anymore. What good does it do to Islam and to Muslims to force someone against his will to believe when he does not believe? "How does that serve the interest of Islam and the Muslim world?" they ask, puzzled at the seeming insistence by many Malaysian Muslims to use force in matters of faith.
Faith cannot be faith when it is adduced through coercion seems fundamental to others, but not, it seems, to many of us in Malaysia.In 1999 and for a few years afterwards, Pas tried to introduce a private member’s bill in parliament demanding the death penalty for apostasy. Of course, in a parliament dominated by Barisan Nasional, the bill got nowhere.
In 2000, Perlis adopted a model statute drafted by the federal Islamic authorities called the Islamic Aqidah Protection Bill, which provided for one-year mandatory detention without trial in a faith rehabilitation centre for those who attempted to change their faith. The bill, which was to be introduced in parliament, was withdrawn because of public opposition.This still-born effort by the government to deal with demands that apostates be punished led to another round of consultation when a team from Islamic Development Department (Jakim) visited several Arab countries.
The late Justice Tan Sri Harun Hashim told me how surprised the Malaysian delegation was to meet scholar after scholar who believed in freedom of religion in all the countries visited. He was shocked, he said, to find that the Arab ulama who were reputed to be conservative were far more enlightened than the Malaysian ulama.In my years as Suhakam commissioner, freedom of religion cases were raised persistently in our visits to the states.
It is no wonder that these cases are now reaching the judiciary as the state apparatus insists on an exit certificate from a religious authority that is unwilling to co-operate. The cases range from those born Muslim who want to renounce Islam; those born Muslim but brought up as non-Muslims; those who converted to Islam in order to marry but now want to renounce the faith because of the collapse of the marriage; those who challenge the alleged conversion of their dead children or spouse to Islam, claiming that their loved ones had all along led the life of a non-Muslim; and in the latest case, a young man accidentally switched at birth and brought up by Muslim parents and who now wants to go back to the religion of his biological parents.
All these cases involve heart-wrenching stories of lives and relationships damaged, put in limbo, and the right to family, marriage, children, even the right to domicile in your home country denied because of state intervention in the right to freedom of conscience.Given the public divide over this most fundamental of rights, no amount of court judgment, swaying from one side to the other, over the past years has resolved the matter.What is needed now is political will, guided by clarity in thinking, compassion for the lives of those affected by this indeterminate state of affairs, and wisdom in reconciling the conflicting interests of different stakeholders.
Let us go through some of the key questions, one by one.Is there freedom of religion in Islam? The government has on its side some 20 verses in the Quran on belief and disbelief that do not prescribe any form of temporal punishment for apostasy. It has Article 11 in the Federal Constitution and Article 18 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It has a whole range of juristic opinions from the earliest period of Islam to the contemporary period to support freedom of religion.
The one hadith that proclaims "Kill whoever changes his religion" is regarded by many scholars as a weak hadith that cannot validate capital punishment. Nor is there any Tradition where the Prophet Muhammad sentenced anyone to death solely for renunciation of faith.Except for Pas and its diehard supporters, few rational-minded Malaysian Muslims would support death to apostates or mandatory detention without trial to those who attempt to leave Islam.
The second and more tricky question, then, is should this freedom be absolute or should it be regulated? Constitutional lawyers and many liberals would argue that freedom of religion is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Federal Constitution and human rights principles. Faith is a private matter between the believer and his God and the state has no role to play in intervening to determine whether a citizen is a good, bad or non-believer. A free conscience is fundamental to being human.
However, there are also many Muslims who believe in freedom of religion, but given the particular context of an ethnically divided Malaysia where the status of being Malay is constitutionally linked to being Muslim, any attempt to leave Islam should, they believe, be regulated.This effort at establishing official procedure for Muslims who wish to leave Islam is not meant to thwart freedom of religion, but to mitigate the deep concerns and sensitivity of certain segments of the Muslim community about one of their own wanting to leave that community.
This procedure is only to establish that the person wants to leave Islam out of his own free will and choice, and not out of coercion, and he has considered all the legal, social and economic implications of that change of faith.Negri Sembilan is the only state which provides for a procedure for a person to leave Islam. And it has not opened the floodgates to thousands wanting to leave the religion. Between 1994 and 2003, it was reported that only 84 applications were submitted to leave Islam. The procedure requires the person to apply to the Syariah High Court judge and specify the grounds on which he intends to renounce the religion. Any hearing will be adjourned for 90 days, during which the judge requires the applicant to undergo a counselling session for the purpose of advising him to reconsider Islam as his religion. A report will be submitted to the judge at the end of the 90 days and should the judge feel there is hope for repentance, the person can be directed to undergo further counselling up to a maximum period of one year. Should there be no repentance, then the court declares that the person has renounced Islam.
While for some, the time period for counselling is too long, this Negri Sembilan provision nevertheless sets a time frame for some certainty in outcome. It could form a basis for the government, faith groups, the Bar Council and human and women’s rights organisations, to begin to work out an acceptable compromise which will respect a citizen’s right to freedom of conscience, and at the same time assure the Muslim community that all effort has been taken to verify that this was a genuine change of faith.If there could be agreement on procedure for a way out, then the third question arises over the contentious issue of jurisdiction. Given the divided opinions over civil or syariah jurisdiction, and the lack of confidence in a judicial process, it could be decided that a more neutral civil institution like Suhakam could be the platform for mediation, negotiation or conciliation for applications for a change of religion.In the interest of peaceful co-existence in a plural society, dispute resolution on matters of faith should go to an adversarial open court process only in the last resort. Given the continuing controversy, many more Muslims are beginning to feel that mediation is the wiser path to take to find a peaceful and just resolution to enable those personally affected to get on with their lives.

This is a very lucid article from someone whom I admire. It concern a gigantic development project in South Johore a state neighbouring Singapore. A real concern of sovereignty


13/06: Singapore Straits Times publishes my response
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
A Kadir Jasin[The following is the reproduction of my response to the Straits Times which was published by the newspaper today, June 12. I e-mailed my letter to them on June 5. The letter was published almost in totality.]

THE ISKANDAR DEVELOPMENT REGION
PM Lee is taken very seriously
By A. Kadir Jasin, For The Straits Times The following is a response to a June 1 column, The Paranoia Of Suspicious Minds, by Senior Writer Janadas Devan. IN HIS column, Mr Janadas Devan posed the following question: 'So how is it possible for someone like Mr A. Kadir Jasin, a former group editor-in-chief of Malaysia's New Straits Times Press, to suggest that the Malaysia-Singapore (Joint Ministerial Committee on the Iskandar Development Region) may affect Malaysia's sovereignty?'
I am talking about sovereignty in the broad general term. I cannot recall any previous instance when a national project situated in Malaysia's sovereign territory had the ministerial-level participation of a foreign government. Unlike the Malaysia-Thai Joint Development Area in Kelantan for the exploitation of oil and gas resources, the Iskandar Development Region, to my understanding, is not a joint-development area. It is in Malaysian territory and is meant to attract not only Singaporeans but also investors everywhere.
By my definition, sovereignty encompasses the element of pride and dignity (maruah). It cannot be very dignified for a sovereign nation to have a minister from another country involved in a state-sponsored national project.
Your writer further stated: 'It cannot possibly be because he thinks (Mr Lee Hsien Loong's) use of the word 'consultative' means that the JMC will be a bilateral 'operations council'. Mr Kadir, a crisp writer in English, is too smart to believe such nonsense. 'But he, like many others in Malaysia, has raised this canard because, one, it carries a political percentage on the ground, and two, because they genuinely fear globalisation. The ridiculous fuss over the JMC's purpose is a stand-in for a generalised fear that the policies that must be put in place to ensure the IDR's success will threaten entrenched privileged domestic groups.' Yes, I take Mr Lee very seriously because I believe that the Singapore Prime Minister, being a crisp speaker of English and an articulate person, would not make a mistake of using such an important term as 'consultative'. To my simple mind, Mr Lee had understood the Joint Ministerial Committee to be a consultative mechanism. In short, the Malaysian Government, through the JMC, is consulting the Singapore Government on the development of the IDR. Unlike your writer, I do not take Mr Lee's words to be nonsense. And even if, as your writer put it, I raised this canard because, one, it carries a political percentage on the ground, and two, because they (I) genuinely fear globalisation, what is so terribly wrong about that? This is politics. The IDR is Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's major political decision - a gamble almost. He openly declared that the project was his brainchild. That it was his original idea. As such, to get the Singapore Government involved in whatever form is a political decision. I do not intend to engage in hair-splitting with your writer on his very strong accusation that 'they (I) fear globalisation'.
I do not fear globalisation. But it is good to have fear. Fear is in itself a motivation. There is a difference between fearing globalisation and being careful about it. Malaysia, like Singapore, is what it is today - multiracial, multireligious, multicultural and multilingual, and fairly successful - because it embraced globalisation long before the term became a mantra. Surely your writer is not about to deny that Malaysia is ethnically diverse because it has never closed its doors to outsider influences and to immigration. But your writer has chosen to ignore the fact that not only peoples but also governments are becoming more circumspect about the degree to which they should open their borders to globalisation. Your writer further asserted: 'The ridiculous fuss over the JMC's purpose is a stand-in for a generalised fear that the policies that must be put in place to ensure the IDR's success will threaten entrenched privileged domestic groups.' I am least concerned about the 'entrenched privileged domestic groups', whoever they may be. These groups are well-to-do and mobile. Even as we speak, some of them are investing billions of US dollars in Singapore's mega gaming projects or are transferring the control of their assets to Singapore. My concern is for the majority, who are still poor and are unable to compete in a laissez-faire economic environment. Incidentally, these very same people form the core support for the present government.
The writer is a former group editor-in-chief of Malaysia's New Straits Times Press.

Let's continue with my journey. At the end of 1971 we have to pack our bags and belongings and move to Kuala Terengganu, a costal town and the capital of Terenggannu, which later on will discover oil near her shores. When we move there it was a backward place. The town has only one traffic light at the junction of Gong Kapas. At that time the karak highway was still not yet been built. We have to go the old way and it took us 12 hours to reach Kuala Terengganu from Kuala Lumpur. We use the old road via Bentong , Kuala Lipis to reach her. It was a very tiring journey. Now it takes approximately 5 hours to reach her. But of all places I ve been in Malaya Terengganu was the most beautiful. When we reach there we stay at the rest house which is now has been turn into a premier hotel, the 4 star Pantai Primula Hotel. Our Government Quarters House has already been allocated so when the truck arrives the next morning,with all our belongings we start to move to our new home. Our new Address will be at 415 Jalan Dato Amar Batu Burok Kuala Terengganu. It was a house built for American Peace Corp Volunteers, it was single storey detached house, at a cul de sac area, but instead of two rooms it has three and two servants room at the back. As usual for a Division 1 government officer it was furnish. The beauty of the house was it was right on the beach which was just outside the door. It is still there, as well as my house I stay in Kuala Lumpur. Terenganu has the longest shoreline of all the states in Malaya comparitively. It's main economy at that time was fishing. There was Iron deposit which was mined by the British and Japanese but by the time war was over it was not economical to extract iron from the mines. The mine closed in mid 70's. So it was a poor state but that would change by the discovering of oil deposit near their shores. In Kuala Lumpur I was expose to the upper middle class Malay whom I would regard as friends. Some of them belongs to very rich family but here in Terengganu I seen poor and destitute malays, who live in shacks and yet always have a smile on their face. They were happy and contented in their lives. Terengganu was at that time was 20 years behind the nation, as though time has stood still. Bear in mind that these East Coast States were the cradle of the Malay civilisation even up to now. 95% of these States Population were Malays Muslim. Unlike their West Coast counterpart which I came from, the Malays here carries with them their innocence which presently most Malays I know have lost. In the West Coast, yes, you could see poor Malays,but they have lost their innocence. They were world wary, anger was in their hearts. My Step Grandparents were poor. Both of them were working in the mental hospital as orderly. They were given quarters which is no more than a shack with no rooms just a roof over their head. A brick barrack which houses hundreds of families at a streacth. They share a common bathroom and toilets which still use a bucket system. Not modern western toilets but labourers whose jobs early in the morning to pick up this 'bucket' of humans stool to be destroy. An unpleasant site and job I suppose but in Malaya up to the 70's it was still available. Even in Penang Georgetown old houses still use this bucket system until the 70's. I hate when Im there to do my business, I try to avoid it when I was young, later before my stepgrandfather retires he built a house with a land given by the government with flush toilets and it was ok then.

The only time when I was expose to poverty was when I went back to my ancestor's place in Patanni Thailand in 1971. We stay at a house with no electricity and running water. You do your business in the shrubs, digging a hole and covering it up after you finish. We took our bath from the well so it was an adventure for me. we visit our family crypt and I learn from where our family came from. Yes, I do understand the turmoil that goes on in South Thailand now. It is not unlike the Irish history where the people that never accept the sovereignty of the English fought for a losing war for pride and nothing else. But in Terengganu it was different. The state herself was poor and the people although poor could still smile at you with sincerity which sadly is missing nowdays. Why? Has modernation of the malay population has resulted in this? Why have a subdued and gentle race could turn nasty. Why have a race so confident in their religion and beliefs became so dogmatic! I have no awnser, to that, just a sad feeling of things that could have been but yet unfulfilled. My neighbours on my left was the State Director of the Road Transport Department the Late Encik Ariffin who is also a well known shaman or bomoh who practises Malay magic. The Sultan's Favourite Bomoh. He could heal a person or exorcise one from afar. A unique gift which later I will bear witness in Penang. In front of us stay Encik Aziz's a man from Kedah who is the State Financial Officer. He later would be knighted by the Sultan and earn a datukship. Datuk(Now known) Aziz would head the State Economic Development Corporation. He introduce the silk business to Terengannuand made Terengannu into a plantation state by introducing Oil Palm.His wife was Jamilah from penang. On my left side was the Sultan's Brother who love cars and have many of them. As royalties they keep to themselve and were snooty.

Futher down the road were the Mufti of Trenggannu. the Islamic Head of the state which advice the Sultan on all things religion.He was an Arab Egyptian, very fair and has two lovely daughters who I was smitten with. I think my hormones were acting up. I began to realise the beauty of the opposite sex at still a very relative young age. I began to be aware of them ever since I saw a girl, my father's friend daughter in Genting, when our family went for a trip together at the newly open resort up on the hill. She was exquisite and like the two Egyptian girls she was fair.The Mufti Sheikh Yusof, was a friendly man and he and his wife has a big family. Tomi and Julie was the eldest two girls. Tomi was more beautfiul but Julie has class.They were much older than me and it was just a crush. One of his son is a Doctor in Terengganu and open a private practice there. He was a liberal and an elightened Muslim as forward thinking as Dr Asri the present Mufti of Perlis who is now causing a ripple with the conservative. He was well loved by the Sultan but one of his fatwa, religious edict would cause a furore among the Malays.He kept a pair of dogs, a mongrel and one was given to us to keep.The dog later die. His fatwa was on the samak or cleansing of oneself after touching a wet dog. As it is known, Dogs and Pigs are forbidden to touch by us if it is wet. If it is dry then it is ok but you still wash your hand which is good advice. To make matter worse the malays muslims now have been brainwashed to believe that dogs and pigs are dirty and unclean animals whether it is wet or dry. This is wrong, it is najis, whether it is wet or dry so is your stool and carcass of animals and soil of the earth and blood etc. But when it is wet cleansing it is troublesome, for as syafiee we have to use one part clay(soil) and seven part water.This is messy and troublesome. When it is wet both dogs and pigs became to the muslim Najis Mughlalazah which really means a Gravity Najis. According to this Mufti you could use soap instead of soil or sand because one thing soap is now cleaner than sand or soil was in the olden days. It does make sense and I welcome it with open arms because what if one is allergic to sand a mild soap is the best and what if she or he is a veterinarian, which is fardu kifayah for a muslim to be one, is not pigs and dogs creature of God!

Yet for this fatwa he was panned and ridicule by the malays. The malays forgot that he came from a well connected family,His Grandfather who was the keeper of the Kaabah key and was in charge of the Kaabah covering blanket, was shunned.For what?, because of his view?, he support that view with the hadiths and verses after all being a qualified mufti he does know his religion very well. Sadly the malay Muslim cannot accept his reasoning. At that time the department of religious affair was a small unit under the Prime Minister office lead by a junior officer who was despatch to see the Mufti to resolve his fatwa which was causing ripple with the other muslim clerics. He failed in the end to save his face, he declare that the Mufti belongs to Hanafi school of thoughts thus his edict cannot be accepted for Malays were syafiee. It was ridiculous because he is still Sunni like the Malays but this edict need to be debunk, and so they did. Character Assisination on his family continues, he is said to have dogs in the house etc which was blasphemous and shameful, and even when I entered college years later these unsubstantiated and baseless rumours were circulating among the so called learn elders of the robe. How mean and cruel people are. He was later transferred to the National Mosque in Kuala Lumpur in 1976. He retired there in Kuala Lumpur hide away from the people's eye whom he once lead in prayers.

This is the last posting on Lina Joy's case. this article is very elucidating written by a man who knows the law. But I beg to differ on the date of Islam in Malaya 1136! I have to check on that it is as long as when the battle of hasting occurs 1o66!!!

03/06: Lina Joy, The Decision (Counsel's Explanation)
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
http://www.wanzafran.com/
I received some questions in my previous post, which discussed the Lina Joy case. This is the reply by counsel for the respondent. Please note that you are welcome to ask more questions, which will be forwarded to the respective counsel.—————————–Islam has been the law of the Malay Peninsula since 1136, ever since the Hindu Sultan of Kedah, Merong Maha Wangsa converted to Islam and assumed the Muslim name of Sultan Muzaffar Shah. Before Merdeka in 1957, Islam was the official religion of all the Malay states. What the Constitution did was to state that Islam becomes "the religion of the Federation", by virtue of Article 3 (1) of the Federal Constitution. The British in their treaties with the Malay rulers had never interfered with the Rulers' sovereignty over Muslim matters and Malay custom. The British came to the Malay Peninsula via Penang in 1786 and had gradually introduced their laws - mostly commercial laws. But they have not encroached upon Islamic laws. (In fact, when a British Resident (James Birch) in the 19th century tried to interfere with the powers of the Sultan over Muslim matters in Perak, the Resident was killed.)Please understand that in the Lina Joy case the Federal Court does not say that Lina Joy cannot leave Islam. The Court merely says: Lina will have to go to a Syariah court if she wants to leave the Religion of Islam - this is a requirement of Article 121 (1A) of the Constitution. She can do this in her place of domicile - i.e. the state where she permanently resides. If she resides in Wilayah Persekutuan, then she has to go the Syariah High Court in Kuala Lumpur to make her application.The right to profess and practise one's religion in Article 11 (1) of the Constitution is interpreted differently for Muslims and non-Muslims for the simple reason that Islam is not only a faith but also a law. The Muslims have their own family laws (personal laws). The right of equality in Article 8 of the Constitution is subject to personal law. When Lina wanted the word "Islam" to be deleted, she was to all intents and purposes asking the National Registration Department (NRD) to accept her statement on her legal (religious) status. This the NRD could not do. That is why they wanted her to acquire a declaration from the Syariah court. On the other hand if a non-Muslim wants to change his name to reflect his new religion (a non-Islamic religion) in the NRD records (not in the IC) the NRD cannot refuse; that would be illegal under the law. The only communities that have their own personal laws in Malaysia are the Muslims of Peninsula Malaysia, and Bumiputras of Sabah & Sarawak (this expression includes Muslims). Other non-Muslims in Malaysia have no personal laws; they share the civil laws on family matters - these laws are based on English law. Examples are the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, the Wills Act, the Distribution Act, the Guardianship of Infants Act. For Muslims, they have their own body of laws, even if some are still uncodified in Malaysia. Whether a person such as Lina will succeed or not in the Syariah court will depend on the grounds that she gives to the Court i.e. she will have to state why she is leaving the religion. Although Wilayah Persekutuan does not have specific provisions in the Islamic Administration Act on how to leave the religion, it does not mean that the Court cannot go through the body of Muslim jurisprudence in order resolve her problem. In the state of Negeri Sembilan, there are special provisions for Muslims to leave Islam. The Court may impose counseling on the would-be apostate for a certain period until the Court is able to satisfy itself that there is no hope for the applicant to return to Islam. Once the court declares that she is an apostate, she cannot be charged for any offence which other Muslims are subject to. If she is charged, she can raise her defence under Article 11 (1) of the Constitution. If she was originally a Malay, she will lose this status by virtue of Article 160 of the Constitution. Negeri Sembilan has recorded the highest number of applications to leave Islam. Of the 89 applications made between 1984 and 2003, 16 applications were allowed, 29 applications were dismissed and 39 postponed. In 2005, there were 5 successful applications; in 2006 (until August) there were 3 successful applications. This is based on a study carried out by two legal scholars; their article was published in a journal of the University of London early this year. The application by a person to leave Islam is a civil suit/proceeding and not a criminal proceeding. No one will be charged under Islamic criminal law for making such an application. Federal Court judge Justice Malanjun (a Kadazan Christian from Sabah) is misled for saying in the Lina Joy case that a person will incriminate himself and can be charged for a criminal offence if he applies to leave Islam in a Syariah court. Under the Malaysian Constitution, Syariah courts cannot impose punishments on convicted offenders beyond 3 years in jail, a RM 5,000/- fine or 6 strokes of the cane. (Lawyers call this the 3-5-6 rule.) Caning is Islam is humane - it is akin to caning in school - quite unlike the cane punishment imposed in Malaysian criminal courts - the latter is regarded by human rights advocates as torture. As to the fact that some states have enacted Islamic laws making apostasy a crime, these laws are seldom enforced. State Islamic criminal laws that are enforced are often those relating to deviant teachings, adultery, sodomy, eating in public during the fasting month, etc. But they are subject to the 3-5-6 rule.

This is getting ludicrous, after this readers no more posting on religion but I have to post this guy awnser to the article below. It is only fair


04/06: Response to‘Theantijihadist’ – How to respect your fellow Man
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
Farouk A. Peruwww.jidal.org
This response is aimed at ‘Theantijihadist’ response to my comments on his anti-Islamic fascism.At the outset, I would like declare that I do not condone the acts of Muslims which go against the teachings of Prophet Muhammad. Rather, I condemn them. ‘Theantijihadist’ is unable to appreciate the existence of Muslims with differing opinions to the fundamentalist type, so intent is he on condemning an entire pan-race and socio-culture. However, I call upon the discerning reader, for the good of humanity, it’s vital for us to not practise the racism of either ‘Theantijihadist’ or the Muslim fundamentalists. Judge people individually for their peacefulness towards us, not the labels they wear.
To the ‘Theantijihadist’, please refer to the questions I have systematically laid out for you at the tail of his response. Lets not ‘forget’ any more points, please.
‘Theantijihadist’: First out the gate, my opponent is correct. Islam is not just the Quran. The Quran cannot be understood in a vacuum. Islam can and must be judged by other sources besides the Quran, such as the Hadith, the actions of its followers, and most of all, the actions of its founder. This range of sources can give critical insight into the worthiness of the ideology that Mr. Farouk holds so dear.
Farouk: This is quite typical of anti-Islamic fascists. Instead of analysing how the Quran itself lays the foundational structure of information, they choose to dictate to Muslims how Islam should be. Does ‘Theantijihadist’ know of the divergent opinions within the house of Islam? Does he know that information is being revised even during the present day? This is why we have the Quran. All information about the Prophet must be scrutinised in light of his adherence to the Quran. The Quran calls itself the criteria but ‘Theantijihadist’ will never acknowledge this, because it will cause detriment to his agenda.‘
Theantijihadist’ : Mr. Farouk talks about (in his words) the ‘apostasy law.’ This is an interesting euphemism for a barbaric law that calls for the outright murder of people solely on a religious pretext. In a massive ongoing and unchallenged violation of human rights, ‘only’ six Islamic countries officially engage in the execution of apostates. One of these six is Saudi Arabia, the heart of Islam and the location of the two holiest sites to Muslims, and also the home of some of the most revered and highest authorities in Islam. These clerics and other Saudi scholars have always called for apostates to be put to death if they do not recant their kafir beliefs. What a delightful state of affairs this is.
Farouk: I call it ‘apostasy law’ for the sake of convenience. To me, it is in fact murder and yes a violation of human rights. It is indeed a sorry state of affairs but for the second time, may I point out to you a few things. Perhaps this time they may register:
1. These laws are NOT from Islam. I explained above how the Islamic information system works and I’ve said to you, if Islam commands this law, kindly refute my article.
2. It IS possible in the Quranic world-view, to be acceptors of revelation in name only and yet one’s actions contravene that (PAS is a very good example of this). Such people will face debasement in this life and the next. So the Quran DISSOCIATES itself from people who in practice do not follow its commands. Try to understand that, please.‘
Theantijihadist’ : As for the other 51 countries in Dar al Islam, it is a fact that apostates in virtually every Muslim country face sanctions of some kind, official and/or unofficial (including Malaysia). These sanctions against apostates range from fines, imprisonment with or without trial, torture, discrimination, forced exile, financial ruin from loss of livelihoods, loss of property, death threats and intimidation. Clearly, being an apostate from Islam in an Islamic state is very dangerous indeed
Farouk: How is it a ‘fact’ ? Have you personally visited these countries and met everyone from a Muslim socio-culture who rejected Islam? I’ve personally met Christian converts from Turkey , Morocco and Tunisia who have had no problems becoming Christian in their home country. Indonesia has no such issue either. Please do not hide behind these sweeping generalisations. What you’re actually trying to do is to prove something by quoting platitudes. Provide actual evidence, not just the expression of your hate for a pan-race.
‘Theantijihadist’ :This universal Muslim persecution of its apostates exists for a reason. The teachings of Islam are very explicit on this point. According to Bukhari (volume 9, book 88, no. 6922), Islam’s prophet ordered flatly, “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” Also, there is another hadith text that says, “It is not lawful to kill a man who is a Muslim except for one of the three reasons: Kufr (disbelief) after accepting Islam.....” (Abu Dawud). Perhaps the Quran doesn’t explicitly call for apostates to be murdered, but the actions of Mohammed, his example, clearly show otherwise. In addition, all five major schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that a sane male apostate must be executed. A female apostate, it turns out, gets a break. Some schools say female apostates should only be imprisoned for life.
Farouk: Once again, ‘Theantijihadist’ has displayed an ignorance of Islam’s information system. Why does he think the Quran is called ‘the criteria’ This means that all information must be judged accordingly. Even the four Imams of jurisprudence instructed their followers to change their views if evidence comes to light.The fact that there is disagreement about this punishment shows that by the Quranic criteria, this cannot be a punishment from God.And if you feel the Quran implicitly calls for the punishment of apostates, kindly bring forth your evidence. I have written an article about it if you care to answer it.
‘Theantijihadist’: Now, on to Islam’s bloody-minded manual for endless war, the Quran. I submit these Quranic verses for your consideration:
Farouk : Thanks. I will now ask you some questions about these verses you quoted so we can see what you understand by them as compared to what the Quran means by them:
1. Who are ‘al-kafiroon’ in the Quran?
2. In your system of ethos, should an oppressed nation just sit back and watch colonialists come and wipe out their civilisation?
‘Theantijihadist’: I’m positive that Mr. Farouk will argue that these verses are ‘taken out of context’, or aren’t translated correctly, or some other such nonsense. Since I’m just an ignorant infidel, how dare I judge his precious Quran? Well, judge it I do and judge it I will continue to do. And I am not alone in this; that I can promise you.
Farouk: Maybe you should save your dramatic vehemence for a Bollywood film audition. The Quran doesn’t belong to me and you can judge it all you want and I’m sure you will find much relief in identifying a great ‘Other’ for civilisation as Hitler did and the Bush regime does. My intention in pursuing this is to reveal the paucity of your arguments. Here are more questions, for you:
1. Do you feel that the Quran does not deserve to be quoted in the correct manner?
2. How would you respond if I said that the verses you quoted are taken out of context?
‘Theantijihadist’: Mr. Farouk brings up Mr. Hitler, whose tome continues to sell rather well in the Muslim world to this day.
Farouk: Once again, if you pay careful attention, you will find that I condemn evil, no matter who performs it. I have no notions of the so-called ‘Muslim brotherhood’ as an ideology because the Quran talks about the oneness of the ummah of humanity. Hitler, Muslim fundamentalists, and yourself have a commonality in your world-views, which is to write off an entire race of people based on what miscreants from that race have done. Muslim fundamentalists love to quote from the Talmud the way you quote from the Quran so the people you’re ‘anti’ are really your brothers in arms against the whole of humanity.
‘Theantijihadist’: Islam is the religion that justifies in its name some of the most horrible inhumanities imaginable, such as these.
Farouk: I invite the reader to please scrutinise the racist nature of this individual’s discourse. He quotes one man (Ghazi al-Qusaibi) and then proceeds to say ISLAM justifies. In other words, whatever Muslims speak against barbarisms (and be sure that there are many, including myself), ‘Theantijihadist’ chooses not to hear them because it’s not expedient to humanise your enemy. Before the wholesale invasion of the middle east, whether to fulfil a prophecy or just plainly to rob the land and the people, they need to justify that these ‘people’ aren’t really people anyway. ‘Theantijihadist’ has the very same mentality of the perpetrators of Abu Gharib, Haditha , 9/11 and 7/7 which is simply ‘these people are not worth my discerning eye. They are all the same’.
‘Theantijihadist’:As usual, Mr. Farouk plays the ‘race’ card upon anyone that attacks his ‘faith’. So, I’m a racist by attacking Islam, even though “Islam” is not, repeat not, a race (and this even Mr. Farouk freely admits).
Farouk: Racism is not a ‘card’ but a reality. There are noxious, evil individuals who judge an entire pan-race (a collection of races) based on the acts of some of its members. Such individuals assume to take interpretative authority in order to condemn their fellow man. This is how the Bush regime managed to convince the American public that war needed to be waged in Iraq which is basically: people who look, speak and are culturally the same must be the ideologically the same. You’re a racist not for attacking Islam but for condemning an entire civilisation based on your scant (if that) research into the corpus Islamica.
‘Theantijihadist’:Usually, the accusations of being a ‘Nazi’ or ‘fascist’ follow almost immediately before or after we’re called ‘racists.’ It’s all part of the script when Muslims respond to any attacks on their beliefs. And here, Mr. Farouk does not disappoint. Ad hominem attacks do not an argument make. But what else can we expect from the self-appointed defenders of Islam?
Farouk: No, I am all for criticism of the Quran AND Islam. Questioning leads to thinking and thinking is a good thing. What I am against is the racism against the socio-culture of Islam. THAT is what makes you a racist, the fact that you lump an entire socio-culture, 1.2 billion people whom you’ve never met along with Muslim fundamentalists simply because they share a certain socio-culture. ‘Theantijihadist’: “By their fruits ye shall know them,” says the Bible. And Islam’s bitter fruits are out in the open, for all to see.Farouk: Very good. This now leads to two streams of arguments which I articulate below:
1. The Quran DISSOCIATES those who refuse to follow its instructions. The apostasy law is a refusal of the Quranic injunction of the total freedom of religion. So how can you call the upholders of that punishment as ‘your fruits’ here?
2. Would you call Christian Fundamentalists who blow up abortion clinics as fruits of Christianity? Would you call Mr Baruch Goldstien as a fruit of Judaism? Or the Shiv Sena as fruits of Hinduism? If so, what are you left with? What ideology hasn’t been claimed by evil fanatics and perverted? I have met beautiful people from many backgrounds and some ugly ones too. Is it the background fault or the psychosis of the person himself?To close, I’d like to remind you of the points I hope you’ll address in your next response:
1. Do you acknowledge the existence of divergent opinions in Islam? If so, can you please tell us why you refuse to mention these scholars who REJECT the apostasy law?
2. Do you acknowledge that the Quran has a provision for people who inherit God’s revelation but no uphold it? If so, why do you continue to associate Quranic teachings with the acts of Muslims?
3. What do you mean by ‘virtually every Muslim country’ in numerical terms? Kindly provide evidence to show the ‘overwhelming degree which you stand by?
4. Do you acknowledge that the Quran calls itself ‘the criteria’? If so, please comment on the contradictory information which you have put forth from Sahih al-Bukhari and Abu Dawood?
5. When the Quran calls to fight ‘al-kaafiroon’, who is it referring to?
6. In your system of ethos – which you are employing to judge the Quran and Islam-is it not ethical for people to fight against those who fight them and to fight for people who are calling for help?
7. You claim that there is ‘nothing even remotely from God in Islam’. This statement presupposes that you know what is close to God or Godly. Can you please expound for us what Godliness is?Many thanks for your time. I look forward to your answers.

This article is what Ive been trying to say to the Muslims that if you find fault with other rreligion just like the late Ahmad Deedat did, they can find fault with you. It doesn't matter if they skewered everything up and took every word out of context but it is there and difficult to deny that is why there is no supremacy in any religion but discord if this was let to be debated by insane man of clothes be it Muslim Christians or other faith

03/06: The Anti Jihadist Responds to Mr. Farouk
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
Anti-Jihadist
I’m humbled by the ironic honour of having aroused the indignation of one Farouk Peru. Of all the dozens and dozens of comments left at the original post in question, he has decided to respond at length to mine.Very well; this battle is joined. I will now respond to Mr. Farouk and the various issues/charges he has written about.My response:1. First out the gate, my opponent is correct. Islam is not just the Quran. The Quran cannot be understood in a vacuum. Islam can and must be judged by other sources besides the Quran, such as the Hadith, the actions of its followers, and most of all, the actions of its founder. This range of sources can give critical insight into the worthiness of the ideology that Mr. Farouk holds so dear.2. Mr. Farouk talks about (in his words) the ‘apostasy law.’ This is an interesting euphemism for a barbaric law that calls for the outright murder of people solely on a religious pretext. In a massive ongoing and unchallenged violation of human rights, ‘only’ six Islamic countries officially engage in the execution of apostates. One of these six is Saudi Arabia, the heart of Islam and the location of the two holiest sites to Muslims, and also the home of some of the most revered and highest authorities in Islam. These clerics and other Saudi scholars have always called for apostates to be put to death if they do not recant their kafir beliefs. What a delightful state of affairs this is! As for the other 51 countries in Dar al Islam, it is a fact that apostates in virtually every Muslim country face sanctions of some kind, official and/or unofficial (including Malaysia). These sanctions against apostates range from fines, imprisonment with or without trial, torture, discrimination, forced exile, financial ruin from loss of livelihoods, loss of property, death threats and intimidation. Clearly, being an apostate from Islam in an Islamic state is very dangerous indeed. This universal Muslim persecution of its apostates exists for a reason. The teachings of Islam are very explicit on this point. According to Bukhari (volume 9, book 88, no. 6922), Islam’s prophet ordered flatly, “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” Also, there is another hadith text that says, “It is not lawful to kill a man who is a Muslim except for one of the three reasons: Kufr (disbelief) after accepting Islam.....” (Abu Dawud). Perhaps the Quran doesn’t explicitly call for apostates to be murdered, but the actions of Mohammed, his example, clearly show otherwise. In addition, all five major schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that a sane male apostate must be executed. A female apostate, it turns out, gets a break. Some schools say female apostates should only be imprisoned for life.3. Now, on to Islam’s bloody-minded manual for endless war, the Quran. I submit these Quranic verses for your consideration:Everything Those Infidels Have Everywhere In the World Already Belongs to the Muslims; Take ItQur’an 33.27 And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things.Qur’an 21:44 Do they see Us advancing, gradually reducing the land (in their control), curtailing its borders on all sides? It is they who will be overcome. About Those Annoying Non-Believers (Infidels, Pagans, Jews, Christians, etc.)Qur’an 9:123 “murder them and treat them harshly” Qur’an 3:56 “As for those disbelieving infidels, I will punish them with a terrible agony in this world and the next. They have no one to help or save them.”Qur’an 8:12 cp. 8:60 “Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers”; “smite above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them”Qur’an 2:191 “...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them”And Terrorize and Terrorize Those InfidelsSura 3:151 Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers for that they joined companions with Allah for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the fire; and evil is the home of the wrong-doers!Sura 8:60 Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power including steeds of war to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides whom ye may not know but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah shall be repaid unto you and ye shall not be treated unjustly.I could go on, but you can see the entire list here. There are hundreds more verses just like these. I’m positive that Mr. Farouk will argue that these verses are ‘taken out of context’, or aren’t translated correctly, or some other such nonsense. Since I’m just an ignorant infidel, how dare I judge his precious Quran? Well, judge it I do and judge it I will continue to do. And I am not alone in this; that I can promise you.4. Mr. Farouk brings up Mr. Hitler, whose tome continues to sell rather well in the Muslim world to this day. Herr Hitler was also a good friend of the Mufti of Jerusalem, and of course the instigator of the (first) Holocaust. Iran, a Muslim religious dictatorship and friend of Malaysia, has repeatedly stated its wish to destroy the ‘Zionist entity’ and is diligently working towards the development of weapons that will make the next Holocaust possible. Of course, these developments don’t seem to concern Muslims very much—instead, they are much more likely to fly into a murderous rage over some cartoons.5. Islam is the religion that justifies in its name some of the most horrible inhumanities imaginable, such as these:In Saudi Arabia:• Women must cover themselves from head to toe in public or else. • Non-Islamic religious teachings or places of worship are not allowed. • The possession of alcohol is punishable by death. • The hands of thieves are amputated.In Iran:• Do not take pictures of regime property or else. • Members of the Baha'i faith are openly discriminated against. • Adultery is punished by stoning to death. • Homosexuals are publicly hanged.Ghazi al-Qusaibi, the former Saudi ambassador to London and currently a senior minister in the Saudi Government, says “flogging, stoning, and amputations are, in Muslim eyes, the core of the Islamic faith.”Call me judgmental if that pleases you, but these actions don’t seem like very ‘godly’ to me. How can any amount of (alleged) Islamic charitable works make good horrors such as these? And how many Muslims dare criticize these actions of their fellow co-religionists like the ones listed here? Do you condemn these actions, Mr. Farouk? The silence is deafening.6. As usual, Mr. Farouk plays the ‘race’ card upon anyone that attacks his ‘faith’. So, I’m a racist by attacking Islam, even though “Islam” is not, repeat not, a race (and this even Mr. Farouk freely admits). Is fascism a race as well? Plus, he thinks I actually want Muslims to have or enforce their barbaric apostasy laws. Wow, what a novel argument for an esteemed scholar like Mr. Farouk to present! Why not just accuse me of supporting various Islamic terrorist attacks like Bali, London, Madrid, 9-11, etc. etc while you’re at it. Cognitive dissonance on an epic scale.7. Usually, the accusations of being a ‘Nazi’ or ‘fascist’ follow almost immediately before or after we’re called ‘racists.’ It’s all part of the script when Muslims respond to any attacks on their beliefs. And here, Mr. Farouk does not disappoint. Ad hominem attacks do not an argument make. But what else can we expect from the self-appointed defenders of Islam?I think that about covers my rebuttal of Mr. Farouk’s rebuttal. And yes, I’ve perused Mr. Farouk’s websites, which proclaim to the skies that Islam is supposedly all about freedom. So, if Islam is supposed to be all about ‘freedom’, why are the Muslim countries among the least free in the world? Why do Muslims demand freedom for themselves and deny it to others? Why have the shariah courts of Malaysia, over 50 years, only allowed one person to officially leave Islam (and a dead woman at that)?“By their fruits ye shall know them,” says the Bible. And Islam’s bitter fruits are out in the open, for all to see.

this is a good article. It reflects the fear of the Malays and why Lina Joy decision is highly emotive to them.

31/05: Lina Joy - a 'lose-lose' story
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
KTemoc Konsiders
If you’re a subscriber to malaysiakini as I am, you can’t avoid reading about the Lina Joy case and sensing a range of emotions emanating from its pages.Religion is such an emotive subject thus one shouldn’t be surprised to feel those human expressions of their inner feelings brought to the public gaze – of frustration, elation, sadness, quiet lamentation and embarrassment, depending on which side you are on, and your personal values and conscience.The story of apostasy is not a topic that can be discussed without heated arguments – note the use of the words ‘discussed’ and ‘heated arguments’, because that’s the inevitable progression of intellectual dissection of a situation where the sovereignty of religion is perceived to be threatened.Though the Federal Court, as reported by malaysiakini, ruled by a 2-1 decision that jurisdiction of the Lina Joy case remains with the Syariah court, her avenue of appeal to be recognised as a non-Muslim is not yet closed as she still can appeal to the Syariah Court.Of course non-Muslim supporters of Lina Joy baulked at the very thought of her going to the judgement of the Syariah Court, but as it is the only legal avenue left for her, I would urge her to consider it. What is there to lose anyway?The current legal predicament confronting Lina stems back to some twenty years ago, when a Malaysian Muslim (or was one) by the name of Abdul Rahim, a teacher, challenged the syariah court’s power to prosecute him. He said he was no longer a Muslim as he was practising the teachings of Qadiani, a Muslim sect in Punjab, India, founded by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.Now, the teachings of this sect had been declared as deviant by the Malaysian Fatwa Council, therefore Abdul Rahim argued in court that if he was following a deviant religion, surely he must no longer be a Muslim and not under the jurisdiction of the syariah court.After hearing the teacher’s case, syariah court judge Sheikh Azmi Ahmad ruled that the syariah has jurisdiction over him as the fatwa (religious edict) alone did not necessarily render him an apostate. But Abdul Rahim took the matter to the civil High Court which granted him a decree that he was no longer a Muslim and therefore not bound under the syariah court.Needless to say, the ruling caused a big panic among the Muslim community because it meant that any Malaysian Muslim could just leave Islam by looking for and then following a sect pronounced as deviant by the Malaysian Fatwa Council.The Mahathir government had the Constitution amended to include an additional clause, namely Article 121(1)(A), which states that the civil court has no jurisdiction on syariah matters.This has come to bear on Lina Joy’s case, though of course I am aware that in Lina’s case, she was challenging the NRD’s regulatory powers to denote in her IC that she is a Muslim and then refusing to remove that religious status when she demanded it. I would 't be surprised that indirectly that legal constraint has been influential.There’s no point in cursing or blaming the court nor wringing our hands in woe in sympathy with Lina. The fact that it was a 2-1 decision of the Federal Court, which while not satisfactory to Lina’s supporters, nonetheless showed that the hearing was as best as one could obtain in the face of Article 121(1)(A).While I am not always a supporter of PAS, I believe that Dr Siti Maria Mahmud who is PAS women’s wing leader, lamented the blunt truth when she said: “The damage is done. Ultimately, I don't think there was a victory for either side.”Yusri Mohamad, the president of Abim actually provided some good advice that those who are “aggrieved in any way” with any part of the existing [Islamic/Muslim] arrangement to “choose other, less confrontational and controversial approach towards change and reform”.He said: “We believe the court procedure is an unhealthy one because such issues should be avoided (at the courts) as all confrontational approaches should be shunned,” he said when contacted.”“We also plead that those hoping for an opposite outcome to reconsider their position and to consider modifying their expectations to suit what is good and more sustainable considering our realities.”He expressed what Dr Siti Maria Mahmud had expressed, that the decision should not be a perceived as a victory for Muslims and a loss for non-Muslims.He concluded: “It is our belief that it is wrong for us as Muslims and Muslim associations to tolerate any injustice in the name of Islam.”I did wonder whether Lina Joy could have resolved her predicament in another way. Once the case is taken to court, it's showdown at OK Corral with the inevitable win or lose outcome. Out in the open, in public gaze, there won't be any room for compromise or nifty manoeuvring by both sides.Quiet negotiations or behind closed door appeals would be better. In this, I am also aware that the general Muslim community has an existing suspicion and rejection of multi-religious bodies or councils, So what would be the best forum or body for people like Lina Joy to lodge her personal difficulties, to seek a solution to her confusing religious status?I would invite Abim to propose a solution if the courts are to be avoided. I would agree the non-court avenue potentially has the most favourable outcome for people like Lina.Not withstanding the legality of her religious status, Lina Joy is in reality a person who no longer wishes nor practises Islamic tenets. Nonetheless I hope she will lodge her appeal to the Syariah Court, and dare hope that the Islamic bench shares Yusri Mohamad’s personal conviction of a compassionate and just Islam.

Lina Joy was denied her rights to practice her own faith by the Civil Courts. I reserve my comment but the last article republish here I concurs with. Here is also a 'childish debate' with a pompous and pedantic Singaporean Malay whom I detest. It is some in malay enough to say it is vulgar on my part but someone must say it
Dear Malaysians and RPK,
I have read about the outcome of the Lina Joy case. I guess that this is a major victory for those who use religion to seek power. Why ? Because this case is definitely not about faith. It is about power. The power of the majority to impose its will upon others. Of what use is the faith of someone who is compelled by legal force - to utter the Syahadah? Is that what the Prophet and his Companions would have wanted? Is that what God wants? For someone to believe in Him only because he or she is legally forced to do so? Is hypocrisy caused by compulsion in matters of religion - a respectable way forward for Malaysia's Muslims?At times like these - I am so very glad that I am a Singaporean. It seems that one can only find justice in Non-Muslim countries. Where is the Muslim community in Malaysia headed? I guess they must answer that question for themselves. As for Lina Joy - well - I am sure that she and others like her will eventually migrate.Perhaps Malaysia is not concerned about her brain drain. After all - Malaysian clerics have often put down the importance of the rational mind when confronted with their interpretations of Revelation. Which brings me to this point - as a scientist, I believe in the scientific validity and accuracy of the theory of Evolution.Can Malaysia's religious officer's interfere in Singapore's jurisdiction to accuse me of apostasy? Can a a Muslim Biologist in Malaysia declare his or her support for Evolution? But so what I suppose. After all Malaysia does not need Biologists nor scientists etc., etc. Malaysia only needs Article 153 and Article 11. Well done my fellow Malaysian Muslims. And good luck to Malaysia. Bueno suerto!
Sincerely,
Dr Syed Alwi
Dear Malaysians,
Thank you for your kind praises. Sometimes I wonder what these extremists think - does God need the faith of those who are compelled to believe ? Is that any kind of faith in the first place ?I for one - do NOT believe that Islamic teachings require Muslim apostates to be compelled to return to Islam. That is not faith - that is a power game. Them versus Us. The power of the Muslim majority imposing its will upon others.What I see happening in Malaysia is that her Malay-Muslims are beginning to resort to compulsion in many matters be it political or even religious. Not a good sign.......We live in turbulent times and Islam is certainly THE controversial issue of our times.Its just sad to see Malaysia slide into some kind of Talibanesque Fascism.....
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
31/05 13:22:12
Kepada A1,
Hukum murtad ada beberapa - ianya masalah khilafiah. Apakah kamu berpegang terus kepada ijtihad abad ke 10 Masehi ?Bagi saya sudah tiba masanya untuk buka pintu ijtihad semula. Kita tak boleh membuta tuli main ikut ijtihad zaman abad ke 10.Yang nyata ulama Malaysia tak mahu bertanggungjawab. Mereka mahu ikut sedap mulut. Apakah Lina Joy tak boleh migrate ke Singapura ? Apakah kalau dia mengucap Syahadah kerana terpaksa pun - kita terima keIslaman nya ?Apakah Islam tu - hidung tak mancung pipi ter-sorong sorong ? Lina dah tak nak Islam - takkan nak main paksa dia masuk Islam semula ? Apakah iman tu boleh main paksa paksa ?Sudahlah Malaysia - yang nyata kamu semua terlalu fanatik hingga tak kena tempat. Akhirnya kamu juga yang binasa. WassalamDr Syed Alwi
31/05 17:06:01
Kepada Malaysian semua,Saya dah puas belajar Islam. Soalnya sekarang ialah - persoalan murtad dalam Islam. Tidakkah ia suatu perkara khilafiah ? Apakah kita di masyarakat majmuk ASEAN dalam abad ke 21 - masih tertakluk dengan ijtihad abad ke 10 ?Bagi saya - sudah nyata bahawa pintu ijtihad harus di buka semula. Nampaknya kes bersangkutan hal agama berlaku hampir setiap hari di Malaysia.Tapi ulama Malaysia - seolah olah masih hidup di Baghdad abad ke 10.Sorry my friend - tapi ini zaman Sains & Teknologi. Dunia telah berubah. Masalah khilafiah perlu di lihat dari sudut yang baru. dari kacamata abad ke 21. Dari segi masyarakat majmuk. Dari segi Maqasid dan sebagainya. Kita tak boleh main ikut buta tuli ijtihad abad ke 10. Buruk padahnya.Bagi Lina Joy - dia hanya perlu migrate ke negeri lain. Tapi bagi Malaysia ? Habis imejnya ! Ulama Malaysia seolah olah tinggal di negeri Arab. Sudah lupa bahawa ASEAN tu bukan Timur Tengah.Fikir masak masak dulu.......WassalamDr Syed Alwi
31/05 20:16:40
Dear Malaysians,
Let me send a clear message to Malaysians of all colours. I am not here to gain popularity among Malaysian Chinese and Indians - but Malaysian Malays must understand that the time has come for a review of the 10th century ijtihad on various aspects of the Syariah. Not a day passes without a religious controversy in Malaysia. Its time Malaysia got its act together.....Developments in Malaysia have an impact on ASEAN. Here in Singapore - Malays generally understand the limitations that multi-culturalism imposes upon Islamic ideals.We know where utopian ideals end and where reality begins. Of what use is it to be so proud of the Malay language ? HOW MANY SCIENTIFIC BOOKS AND REPUTABLE JOURNALS ARE WRITTEN IN MALAY ? You answer that question. As for Special Rights - well - we would rather stand on our own 2 feet. We pride in walking without the tongkat or wheelchair. Sure - we are not as rich as Malaysian Datuks and Tan Sri's - but our corruption index is certainly better than Malaysia's. Of what use is it to be rich and shouting Islam - when the money you earn is dirty money ? No - I have no more doubts whatsoever - the Malaysian dream among many educated Malays in Singapore is OVER. We no longer look towards Malaysia. Its time Singapore Malays aimed at Australia and the good ol US of A. I mean - this whole thing about religion in Malaysia is absolutely ridiculous. How can you be a technological power-house if you are so hung up about religion ? Its almost as if one is dealing with a society stuck in the 10th century ! With each passing day - my attachment to Malaysia drops even further. Maybe thats why the Tunku kicked Singapore out. 15 years ago - I had my doubts about the kicking out of Singapore from the Federation. But today - I am absolutely happy that Tunku did what he did in 1965.I do not want my children to grow up in a 10th century society. Singaporeans may holiday in Malaysia and Malaysia can get a lot of tourist dollars from Singapore. But don't dream that we want to come back to Malaysia. Its OK just to visit Malaysia for a few days.Thats why I oppose the IDR thing. Because the Malaysian Malay does NOT want Singapore to get involved. For me - tak join your IDR pun tak apa. Buat apa ? Asyik bergaduh. Buat cekik darah sahaja. Its better that Singapore does NOT get involved in Malaysia. Better. Thats why we go for New-water. Minum air najis pun tak apa - asal jangan balik ke Malaysia. We treasure our freedom. Lets get this straight once and for all - we do not want you. Frankly if I were Lee Hsien Loong - I would turn down the IDR offer. Duit belum masuk - Malaysian Malays sudah bising. Tak payahlah nak jadi ShenZhen. After all Singapore pun BUKAN Hong Kong. Simpanlah you punya Jalan Wong Ah Fook di JB tu. Kita pun tak ingin !No hard feelings my ASEAN neighbour !Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 00:37:46
Kepada A1,
Apakah mahkamah Syariah akan akur kepada permintaan Lina Joy ? Yang nyata mahkamah Syariah sering menolak permintaan sebegitu. Yang nyata ada setengah negeri di mana pemurtadan orang Islam boleh di kenakan hukum penjara. Apakah ini bukan suatu pemaksaan yang di lakukan secara halus ?What are you talking about ? It is a crime to apostasise according to the Syariah Courts !
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 00:45:12
Kepada A1,
Apakah hukum bunuh murtad tu - satu hukum Tuhan ? Atau kah ianya hanya ijtihad ulama salaf berdasarkan iklim sosial mereka di abad ke 10 ? Dan jika mahkamah Syariah terima permintaan Lina Joy - sanggupkah kamu berlapang dada menerima nya ? PEMBELA amacam ? Sanggup terima jika mahkamah Syariah kata Lina berhak murtad ?Jangan jadi munafik - jawab secara terus terang. Bagi saya - Lina patut migrate sahaja....Clean solution.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 01:03:57
Kepada A1,
Kalau begitu - jelas sekali Malaysia tiada kebebasan agama. Jangan mengaku ada freedom of religion di Malaysia. Kerana erti kata kebebasan beragama tu works both ways. Orang boleh masuk Islam dan orang pun boleh keluar Islam. Its a two way street brother ! Dan jangan tuduh saya mengapi api kan keadaan wal-hal PEMBELA dan penyokong mereka sampai duduk luar mahkamah tunggu pengadilan dari hakim. Saya tak pernah nak mengapi api kan keadaan. Bukan saya yang berkhemah di luar mahkamah seperti PEMBELA............RegardsDr Syed Alwi
01/06 01:28:21
Dear A1
Saya pun begitu juga. Maaf jika terguris di hati. Memang saya seorang yang outspoken yang mahu melihat keadilan. Saya juga seorang Muslim yang mahu kan Islam di hormati ramai. Tapi caranya bukan dengan memaksa dan sebagainya. Manusia akan hormati Islam jika Ummahnya kuat dan maju. Bukan dhaif dan di belenggu fikiran jumud. Tak apalah - at least kita gentleman juga.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 01:52:37
Kepada A1,
Jika Ummah maju dan makmur - apakah akan ada ramai yang mahu murtad ? Fikirkan lah...Kita tak boleh lawan isu murtad dengan menggunakan cara paksa dan kasar. Sebaiknya isu murtad di tangani dengan memajukan dan memakmurkan Ummah. Apabila Ummah sudah numero uno - maka itu isu murtad akan hilang begitu sahaja. Siapa yang mahu ikut suatu golongan yang dhaif, miskin dan jumud fikiran ? Orang semua mahu ikut yang best ! Di sini letaknya penyelesaian isu murtad...Sekali lagi - kita bermaafan untuk kebaikan semua. Tak guna bergaduh di antara jiran..
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 02:04:50
Kepada
wanbozo & streptoPergi tanya mufti mufti Malaysia. Pergi tanys PAS. Apakah masalah murtad tu bukan suatu masalah khilafiah ? Hanya pandai cari fatwa dari Internet ! For goodness sake - go and ask your Malaysian ulamas and even Yusuf Qardhawi on IslamOnline - what is the hukum for murtad. Saya cabar awak. Do it if what you say is true !Dan kepada strepto - agaknya Ummat Islam masih mundur kerana orang seperti awak yang dimana ilmu hanya dalam ilmu Islam. Yang lain ilmu tak penting. Jikalau Islam megandungi semua ilmu - kenapa umat Islam mundur ? Pasal belajar kat Kelantan agaknya !
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 23:01:52
To all Malaysians,Allow me to categorically say this - over my dead body will I ever accept an Islamic State within ASEAN. Come what come may and let go the dogs of war - but I will never accept an Islamic State in ASEAN. There is no doubt whatsoever that ASEAN must remain secular in view of the geopilitical realities we face.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
01/06 23:29:48
My Comment

Welcome back Dr Syed Alwi a lover of Lee Kuan Yew and definately a traitor to the Malay race. A Doctor of letters not of Medicine, and now presribing medicine to the Malays in Malaysia albeit a Singaporean. Are you Syed Jumaat or a real Syed, The indians Muslim trying to be more holier than thou sometime name their friday born son by adding the prefix Syed, Like Munsyi Abdullah another malay traitor these guys are pompous and pedantic. Come let us duel as before, by fist by words by facts anytime, anyday. Name it, we could do the old way by guns, by swords or as true Malay by Keris. But as you know Man of letters are cowards, they talk about Article 153,they also have article 152 here in toto:
Minorities and special position of Malays152. —
(1) It shall be the responsibility of the Government constantly to care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore.
(2) The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays, who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language. Muslim religion153. The Legislature shall by law make provision for regulating Muslim religious affairs and for constituting a Council to advise the President in matters relating to the Muslim religion.
Official languages and national language153A. —
(1) Malay, Mandarin, Tamil and English shall be the 4 official languages in Singapore.
(2) The national language shall be the Malay language and shall be in the Roman script: Provided that —
(a) no person shall be prohibited or prevented from using or from teaching or learning any other language; and
(b) nothing in this Article shall prejudice the right of the Government to preserve and sustain the use and study of the language of any other community in Singapore.
Yes the National Language is Malay by golly! yet go to any Singaporean,accept singing the National Anthem they can't read and write Malay! Heck Singaporean can't even read and understand the National Language! Oh my God! What Farce! And look at what it says without exactly stating it, the Malays are Muslims, yet, look how Singapore treats the religion of Islam, you can't even hear the Muezzin callings!Nothing is done to protect the religion and the special position of the Malays!!!! Not one iota in modern and breezy Singapore but it is in the constitution. At least in Malaysia we take pride in our constitution and try to interpret the articles and principle of it the best that we can.We do have warts but it is our warts, we don't need Singaporean to tell us what's wrong with our country since his is much worse!!! So Dr Syed Alwi let's go for it, I challenge you as before my number is 019 569 4011!! Call me lah kalau berani!!!!!
31/05 23:20:09
burn22 betul cakap you, that is the whole gist of the issue. She still a malay and a muslim until she is declared not so by the Syariah Court. In the meantime since the inclusion of Article 11(2) this ruling must be abide. As being put in detention most readers do not understand not all states have detention centres, Wilayah perseketuan where Lina Joy resides do not have one. She is only subjected to counselling. Apasalah nya biarlah orang melayu cuba nak save soul dia bukan kena dera pun tapi kalau dia masih insist insyallah dibolehkan why nak kepoh2.Rwoo tentang bang tu I understand tapi kalau ia menganggu pergi lah jumpa bilal suruh dia perlahan sikit dengan cara baik jangan pulak nak bersifat garang nescaya pasti dia dengar dan mahu tolak ansur. Itulah Malaysia bukan Singapura durjana. Hampar nak tahu dalam forum Dr Syed Alwi yang gatal ni cuba nak miang dengan perempuan,kena ban!!! Orang macam ini hamapr nak dengak, atas botak bawah serabut, pi lah dekat sini baca sendiri http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1200&PN=0&TPN=3 Ini semua keturunan musyi Abdullah hang tengok nama bapak dia takda syed pun? Dia mengaku islam tapi bukan melayu, ajak lawan terketak ketak, belum lagi dihamput nescaya terberak!!! Readers please understand to give comments by all means but if you are an outsider and you smell my shit(but at least my stool is pejal compare to yours yang berair) and complain about it and thumb your nose at it ,it is still my shit not yours, so you are a shithead!!! of the highest degree.
01/06 19:35:46
As for apostasy according to our brilliant Dr who seem to believe that what he say is true, death is the penalty for them, pls go here http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1200&TPN=1 maaf the issue is still being debated. To the conservative yes, but it is not the correct 'law' it is disputable. Jadi Dr ni bodoh ye!! tolol pulak? Baik hisap susu botoi lagi!! pandai bagi hukum! Poodah
01/06 19:42:39
khilafiah ke tidak ke the point is the death penalty on apostasy is debateble please readers go this link and find out yourself who speaks with a fork tongue, luckilly I am not of Indian blood nescaya kepala I musti goyang http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_251_300/is_killing_an_apostate_in_the_is.htm and the grand iman of alazhar herself sheikh tantawi expressly say that the death penalty for apostate is wrong please go here http://www.sunnah.org/history/Scholars/mashaykh_azhar.htm yes I do cut and paste but at least I do not be definate about any descision made because it is debatable. Qardhawi is a conservative Ulama, he has his opinion. Dr Asri the mufti of perlis is to me an elightened muslim as compare to Harusaani of Perak and the list goes on. The crux of the matter is the jurisdiction of the Courts,how much we can decry in this case apostasy or murtad case is under the realm of the syariah court. although it might be sad or to those so call liberal muslim but as long as the perlembagaan says so, it remain so!Tentang fundemental rights to, no where in the world is there absolute rights given to an individual, there always have been law which curtail this fundemental rights. Ingat rukun negara keluhuran perlembagaan jangan jadi Singapura perlembagaan mereka macam toilet paper saja, boleh lap najis Dr Syed!Official language 4 tapi kalau you tulis pada kerajaan dia tamil atau melayu tak di terima! Apa guna official language kalau jabatan kerajaan tak terima pakai, hanya Ingeriss atau Mandarin! Akuni kan Bozo bukan Dr tapi at least I do my homework sebelum menyebut sayonara pada malaysia. And good luck to Malaysia. Bueno suerto!Hei Syed budak penakut marilah debat biar RPK jadi saksi dan moderator tengok sapa betul!!!!Jangan tulis sepanyol kalau takreti, aku ni hanya tahu melayu saja maklum Bozo!
02/06 12:03:55
31/05: Key to the highway: interfaith issues......gimme a break!
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
A Voice
Biggies has compiled the news nicely for us on the Federal Court's rejection of Azlina's application. Refer here and here.I love to write on it at length (but not in mood yet) on this Azlina Jeilani and various Islam bashing issues (but claimed not to be so and merely) camouflaged (as I see it) as a civil liberty issue. This bloody apostacy and interfaith issues are just pure humbugs!If she wants to convert out, get the clearance from Syariah Court. Thats the rule. Abide by it! They say follow God rule. She is baptised already, so Syariah court doesn't apply?In the case of Muslim women under detention at a faith rehabilitation centre that married a Hindu and have kids, they say its inhuman to deny her to her family. She is a Muslim, isn't it? Now its humanitarian issue?Suzy Teo converted to Islam below legal age but met Islam's baligh and berakal age. Lost in the court for she is a minor. No to God's law but court's law? Where is it about her freedom to profess her chosen religion?IFC not adjudicatory but the fine line says the state has to listen to their recomendation. What the f**k these lawyers think we are? Stupid? Blind?All these Xenophobic prick with hidden hands working in concert! If these are private issues, why is the American based Beckett's funding her defense and expensive legal team? Why is some I called certain deviant Muslim groups getting Konrad Adreneur Foundation's funding and assistance? Why is Singapore sympathiser New Straits Times and Sun giving much voice to those super liberal Muslims and refuse the right of replies by progressive and more authoritative Muslim groups? However, I am not without compassion. The Subashini's case is a tragedy. I felt the husband or precisely the ex-husband lacked finesse. Why did he force his faith on the kids? Preach it to them with kindness and wisdom. Anyway, this is a family matter, sort it. Why revert to lawyers?The way I see it. All this interfaith issues are tragedies we inherited from the colonial legal tradition. If as Malik Imtiaz says, secular court is superior to the syariah court, he should be reminded that the syariah court exist more than 460 years ago here. Respect that! We have to find resolutions to this differences. Legal avenue is not a solution for it is adversarial. Forcing a choice only makes one side happy. Whoever lawyers claim they are embracing humanity are just hogwash. They only love a good fight! They are the ones who created all these interfaith quarells, be them Muslims or otherwise. Political approach will not make it any better. The might is only right. Anyway politician have no balls to takeup a sensitive issue like this. The opposition would perhaps liek to take it up but its more for political mileage.Lets return society's problem back to society for resolution. Let the conversant "man of cloth"s sit together to resolve it. They are all good people. I hope the men and women of religion resolve it amicably and consistent with each other's faith. There should be a way and a way must be found.Too much excitement today and of late. I need a break and some stuff to do. Off Terengganu way...
This press release speak volumes of the issue

01/06: Press Release by Muslim Professionals Forum
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
It is with a sense of relief that we learned of the long-awaited Federal Court decision on the Azalina Jailani (Lina Joy) case. We would like to congratulate the judges who have exercised their wisdom and courage to come to a decision on such a controversial issue under the intense glare of the international and local media, alongside that of interested observers from across the spectrum of human rights and religious organizations.We laud the Federal Court’s decision - upholding that of the Court of Appeal and the High Court - that the jurisdiction to change the religious status of a Muslim properly belongs to the Shariah Court.For many of us this is clearly an issue of administrative procedure. However this has unfortunately been championed into a cause célèbre for the complete secularization of Malaysian society and to undermine the position of Islam in this country by turning it into a Human Rights issue – that of religious freedom under Article 11, in its wake generating unhealthy tensions between Muslims and non-Muslims.For Muslims to feel euphoric that Islam has finally triumphed is also misplaced. This is not a battle between Islam and the rest. It is simply restoring things in their right place, of respecting the separate jurisdictions of the Shariah and Civil courts in accordance to Article 121(1a), and of adhering to procedures.In our enthusiasm to champion religious freedom, let us not turn our backs on these mechanisms and institutions that have held together our complex society and the source of our much praised religious harmony.
Dr. Mazeni Alwi
ChairmanMuslim Professionals Forum