Thursday, January 28, 2010

This song should speak to all those Malaysians who are frustrated(like me) of what's going on here. It should stop maybe this song would help.



Imagine lyrics

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
Last week we lost two prominent Malays, one is feared for his temper while one is respected for his abilities. 2 contrasting characters, yet, both are I would consider, Malay Eccentrics or Melayu Lolak. My condolences to their family and my fatihah goes to them and May God almighty keep them with his loyal servants, Amen

No-nonsense Ghazali feared, respected

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 25 — Former Home Minister Tun Muhammad Ghazali Shafie who died at his home in Subang Jaya yesterday was known to be so strict in his work that it earned him the nickname, “King Ghaz”.

Those who knew him, including media reporters who interviewed him, were expected to have enough knowledge when they asked a question on an issue or subject so as not to incur his wrath or displeasure.

This gave many reporters the jitters when interviewing him during their assignments. The late Ghazali had served under four prime ministers beginning with Tunku Abdul Rahman until Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s time.

He was also known internationally when he was foreign minister, besides serving with various international bodies and missions. He famously escaped death in a plane crash in Kampung Janda Baik on Jan 10, 1982 which killed his personal bodyguard and the co-pilot. The incident shocked the nation at the time.

Born in Kuala Lipis on March 22, he received his early education at a number of Malay and English schools in Raub, Kuala Lipis, Bentong and Penjum before studying at Clifford School, Kuala Lipis from 1939 to 1940.

In 1941, he furthered his studies at Raffles College in Singapore before obtaining his LLB (Honours) at University College of Wales and then a degree in international relations from the London School of Economics in 1954.

From 1941 to 1946, he served in several defence forces including the Malayan Volunteer Force and Anti-Japanese Movement.

Ghazali who had worked as a clerk with the Selangor Council, was appointed as Malaya’s High Commissioner to India in 1957 and two years later, was made the secretary-general of the Foreign Ministry.

He was foreign minister from July 1981 to July 1984 and resigned from the post the same month. A highly important task held by Ghazali was as a member of the Cobbold Commission on the formation of Malaysia.

His long service in the Cabinet started in 1970 when he was appointed minister with special functions and a year later was given the additional information portfolio. Sixteen months later, he was made home and information minister and in July 1981, was appointed foreign minister.

After resigning from the Cabinet in 1984, Ghazali held various important positions in the corporate sector and international organisations.

He was chairman of Paremba, Landmark Holdings Bhd, Westmont Bank Manila, the Philippines and Intermega Energy NL, Australia, among others. In the political arena, Ghazali was Kuala Lipis member of parliament, Kuala Lipis Umno division head and Umno Supreme Council member.

He lost in the contest for a party vice-president post in 1972 and 1975. However, he won the post in 1981.

His contributions in other fields included being the founder and president of the National Art Gallery, University of Malaya Governing Council member, National Security Council member, chairman of Institut Teknologi Mara Governing Council, and founding member of the Malayan Forum, United Kingdom.

In sports, he held various important posts including honorary life president of the Royal Selangor Flying Club and president of the Malaysian Amateur Athletics Union (1962-1988). For his contribution in sports, he received the “Tokoh Sukan” Award in 2002.

He was also a respected figure at the international level where he was president of the Asia Conference on the Question of Palestine in 1983, member of the South Commission and chairman of the commission set up to revamp and strengthen the Asean mechanism.

He was also appointed to the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group on South Africa in 1981, member of the Commonwealth Observer Group for South Africa’s general election, member of the observer groups for the general elections in Sri Lanka and Bosnia Herzegovina, as well as chairman of the observer group for the general election in Bangladesh.

The late Ghazali had also been special advisor to the prime minister on foreign affairs and consultant to the World Bank Economic Development Institute.

He received awards from several foreign countries including Singapore, France, South Korea, Iran, the Philippines, Japan, Tunisia, Thailand, Austria and North Korea. — Bernama

'King' Ghaz dies

UPDATED

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 24 — Former Home Minister Tun Ghazali Shafie died at his residence in Subang Jaya this evening.

Aged 88, his death at 7.45pm was confirmed by his granddaughter Farah, when contacted.

Ghazali, who was born in Kuala Lipis, Pahang, leaves behind two sons, Bachtiaer and Sheriffudin.

His wife, Toh Puan Khatijah Abdul Majid, passed away in April 2008.

He has been described as having been one of the most powerful men in the Cabinet of Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak in the early seventies.

He exercised considerable influence in determining Malaysia’s socio-economic development especially in the post May 13 era. As Minister with Special Functions he was responsible for the formulation of the New Economic Policy and Second Malaysia Plan.

In the context of nation-building his central belief was that power sharing is the key to ensuring the stability of Malaysia.

Ghazali also played a pivotal role in charting the course of Malaysia’s foreign policy, first as a senior official at the Foreign Service and later as Foreign Minister — serving between 1970 and 1984.

Even after retiring from active politics, Ghazali continued to engage with the world of international diplomacy.

He presented his ideas and ideals at various gatherings — both local and international — on issues as diverse as global economic challenges, conflict resolution, Asean and the New World Order.

He graduated from the University College of Wales and the London School of Economics.

Singapore leaders praise late Sultan Iskandar

2010/01/23

SINGAPORE: Singapore President S R Nathan said the late Johor Sultan Iskandar ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail was a wise ruler and a patriot of Malaysia.
He said the late Sultan’s warm and personal ties with Singapore and its leaders had helped to promote stability, security and growth for both Johor and Singapore as well as for Malaysia and its people.

In his condolence message on the passing of Sultan Iskandar to Tunku Ibrahim Ismail, the late Sultan’s son who was proclaimed the new Johor Sultan today, Nathan said his father’s longstanding friendship helped to foster and nurture good relations with Singapore leaders and its people and that Sultan Iskandar would always be fondly remembered.

The President said Sultan Iskandar was well known for the care and patronage he bestowed on his people in Johor and in Malaysia as a whole.

In a similar message to the late Sultan’s wife Sultanah Zanariah binti Almarhum Tunku Ahmad, Nathan said Sultan Iskandar’s patronage of many voluntary organisations in Malaysia and his devotion to the people had earned him a place in Johor's and Malaysia's history.

“His encouragement, contributions and passion for his people and his country will always be remembered,” Nathan said.

Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who also conveyed his condolence message to Zanariah today, said during his reign, the late Sultan played a key role in the development and prosperity of Johor for the benefit of his people.

He said Sultan Iskandar's lifelong devotion to Johoreans was repaid by their affection and respect, and as the 8th Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the King discharged his royal duties in the same spirit.

Lee said Sultan Iskandar also played a pivotal role in fostering good relations between Singapore and Malaysia.

“My wife and I personally remember well the many times we received his warm and generous hospitality at Istana Bukit Serene,” Lee said.

As the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Iskandar made a state visit to Singapore in 1988, and his last visit to the city-state was in April 2007 when he received an honorary degree from the National University of Singapore in recognition of his contributions to bilateral ties.

To the new Sultan, Lee said under his father's guidance and attention, Johor's economy had steadily developed, bringing prosperity to the state and improving the lives of his people.

Lee said Sultan Iskandar's dedication and vision had enabled Johor to become the vibrant state that it was today.

The Prime Minister also said the late Sultan also extended a warm hand of friendship to Singapore.
“He believed that as two neighbours, both sides would gain from strong ties and close cooperation,” Lee said.

He said Singapore valued the late Sultan’s efforts to improve their bilateral relationship, and added that Sultan Iskandar would always be remembered fondly as a friend of Singapore. - Bernama


Sultan Iskandar laid to rest (Update)

By JOHOR TEAM


Photo Gallery

JOHOR BARU: Almarhum Sultan Iskandar Ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail was laid to rest at the Mahmoodiah Royal Mausoleum here Saturday.

His body was taken to the mausoleum from Istana Besar in a funeral procession after his son Tunku Ibrahim Ismail was officially proclaimed as the new Sultan of Johor at the steps of the palace.

People from all walks of life paid their last respects to Almarhum Sultan Iskandar from early Saturday morning.

Tunku Ibrahim Ismail and his consort Raja Zarith Sofiah arrived at the Istana Besar at 9.13am.

The Yang Di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin and Raja Permaisuri Agong Tuanku Nur Zahirah paying their last respects to Almarhum Sultan Iskandar.

Streams of VIPs started arriving from 11am to pay their last respects.

Among the first VIPs to arrive at Istana Besar were Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor as well as former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali.

The Yang Di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin and Raja Permaisuri Agong Tuanku Nur Zahirah and Brunei's Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah also paid their last respects to Almarhum Sultan Iskandar.

Also paying their last respects were Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak (third from left) paying his last respects to Almarhum Sultan Iskandar.

Earlier, members of the Johor royal family including Tunku Ibrahim Ismail, carried the Sultan’s body to a dais at the palace at 9.34am.

Tunku Ibrahim Ismail then placed a crown and sword on Almarhum Sultan Iskandar’s coffin followed by a prayer recital (doa jenazah) by Johor mufti Datuk Nooh Gadut.

Johor police chief DCP Datuk Mohd Mokhtar Mohd Shariff said 500 policemen were deployed to control traffic and to provide security for the VIPs.

The Sultan passed away at the Puteri Specialist Hospital here at 7.15pm Friday.

Johor will observe a mourning period of seven days from Friday with all flags in the state flown at half-mast.

Sultan Iskandar

(Redirected from Baginda Almutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail)

In full, Baginda Al-Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail (born April 8, 1932) in Johor Bahru was the eighth Yang di-Pertuan Agong (roughly equivalent to King) of Malaysia from April 26, 1984 to April 25, 1989, and Sultan of Johor.

The eldest son of Sultan Ismail ibni Almarhum Sultan Ibrahim by Sultanah Ungku Tun Aminah binti Ungku Paduka Bena Sri Maharaja Utama Ahmad, the prince was named Tunku Mahmood Iskandar. However, as all other Sultans of Johor with the name "Mahmood" met with an uneasy end, he dropped his first name upon succeeding his father on May 10, 1981.

A controversial figure in Malaysia, Sultan Iskandar has led a chequered life. Appointed Tunku Mahkota or Crown Prince in 1959, he was dismissed from that post in 1961 by his father after being found guilty of assault in the Malaysian courts and sentenced to imprisonment. However, Sultan Ismail relented on his deathbed and restored Tunku Mahmood Iskandar to the succession ten days before the former passed away.

A keen soldier, Sultan Iskandar was often at loggerheads with Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad while he was Sultan of Johor. However, in 1984, upon election as Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Iskandar warmed to his Prime Minister and relationships between the two reached dizzying heights when Mahathir was invested with the first class family order of the crown of Johor, a previously unheard of honour for a commoner.

While Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Iskandar created further controversy by assaulting a golf caddy. A soldier, the brother of the caddy who was badly injured, subsequently ran amok in Kuala Lumpur causing a security scare. The soldier was later arrested and sent to a mental hospital.

His assault on a hockey coach and teacher, Mr Douglas Gomez (d.1999) sparked a constitutional crisis between the government and the Malay Rulers which culminated in the removal of the legal immunity from prosecution of all the rulers in March 1993.

Sultan Iskandar divorced the mother of his Crown Prince, a Cornish lady by the name of Josephine Trevorrow, to marry Tengku Zanariah binti Tengku Panglima Raja Ahmad of the Kelantan royal family. She served as his Raja Permaisuri Agong and is the current Sultanah of Johor.

Sultan Iskandar of Johor dies

JOHOR BAHARU, Jan 22 — The Sultan of Johor, Sultan Iskandar ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail, 77, died tonight after ruling the state for almost three decades.

The Sultan breathed his last at 7.15pm at the Puteri Specialist Hospital after he was admitted to the hospital earlier following an illness.

The death of the sultan was announced by Menteri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman, here tonight.

The ruler left behind his wife, the Sultanah of Johor Sultanah Zanariah and 10 children.

Sultan Iskandar was born in Istana Semayam, Johor Baharu on April 8, 1932, and was made the Sultan of Johor on May 11, 1981.

On Nov 15 1984, he was installed as the 8th Yang di-Pertuan Agong on Nov 15, 1984.

Earlier today, his eldest son, Tunku Mahkota of Johor Tunku Ibrahim Ismail was appointed the Regent of Johor and the sworn-in ceremony was held at the Istana Besar Johor Baharu.

The Head of the Johor Council of the Royal Court, Tunku Osman Temenggong Ahmad, announced that Sultan Iskandar had been admitted to the Puteri Specialists Hospital at 5pm today.

Sultan Iskandar was the third son of the late Sultan Ismail Sultan Ibrahim and the great grandson of the Father of Modern Johor, the late Sultan Abu Bakar.

He received his early education in Johor Baharu, before pursuing his studies in Australia and united Kingdom.

He was also the Colonel-in-Chief of the Malaysian Special Service Regiment (Commando) and was always seen clad in a military uniform during official events due to his passion for military service.

His name was associated with many schools in Johor, as well as sports events like the Iskandar Johor Open Golf Tournament and southern Johor development corridor, the Iskandar Malaysia. — Bernama


Monday, January 18, 2010

A letter to a Muslim friend

JAN 19 — Recently, someone whom I consider a very close and trusted friend, and who is a Muslim, wrote an email to me with a very simple question: “What was The Herald asking for exactly?”

As someone who knew what the issue was from the start, having once been a freelance contributor to The Herald, I gathered my thoughts and spoke to a few relevant people and started writing down the facts of the whole issue.

Instead of the creative and open writing style that is normally employed in any article, I decided to keep it strictly to the point with the facts itself, following the style of a former prime minister whose blog name is one letter short of the anagram for the word “CHEATED”, which is rather ironic since many of us still feel that way over events of the past 28 years.

Anyway, this was my letter to that Muslim friend.

Dear brother Malaysian,

I wish all Muslims (and even some non-Muslims) were like you, stopping to ask what the issue was instead of playing straight into the tactics of people (and some media) who have personal and political agendas. Here are the facts of the issue, which I am sure will answer your question easily.

  1. The Herald has been around for more than 15 years.

  2. The Herald was first published in English only.

  3. By the late 1990s, there already was a Bahasa Malaysia edition, which occasionally contained the term “Allah”.

  4. Upon request, and to meet growing demand, Tamil and Chinese editions were added simply to allow Catholics who were more familiar with those two languages to have their community news and spiritual guidance explained for their better understanding. These editions covered a few pages respectively.

  5. Likewise, the thousands of East Malaysian students in government universities in Peninsula Malaysia, who are active in the Catholic Students Society in their respective universities, had requested to have pages added in Bahasa Malaysia (BM).

  6. These East Malaysians students over the past 15 years were naturally those who were educated completely under the Bahasa Malaysia medium and with little exposure to English (for the majority of them).

  7. In addition to the students, thousands of East Malaysians have been flocking to the Klang Valley for better prospects and simply to “cari makan”, just like other Malaysians from all over the peninsula. Again, the majority would be BM-educated and more comfortable worshiping in Bahasa Malaysia than in English.

  8. Like for the Tamil and Chinese editions, the East Malaysians naturally wanted the Bahasa Malaysia edition to be about their own community news, besides some local and global Catholic church news translated from English to Bahasa Malaysia.

  9. Bahasa Malaysia was, after all, their common denominator, i.e. the national language, propagated by the government themselves over all other languages since the late 1970s (hmmm . . . I wonder who was the education minister who started it all).

  10. The East Malaysians themselves wrote the original content and translated some of the English pages in The Herald to Bahasa Malaysia. One can easily surmise this from the writers’ by-lines as well as from the “Letters to the Editor” in the Bahasa Malaysia edition since its beginnings, around 12 years ago.

  11. If these East Malaysians used “Allah” in their praise and worship all their lives — as did their parents, grandparents and the generations before them — it would only be natural that they would write their articles and reflections, as well as do translations, using the only word they know for the “Lord our God”, the God of Abraham and Moses. The one Almighty God.

  12. The word “Allah” was never and will never be used to refer to Jesus in any Bahasa Malaysia translation. That is one blatant piece of misinformation that so many peninsula Malaysian Muslims have been wrongly led to believe.

  13. When former Home Minister Datuk Syed Hamid Albar imposed a blanket ban on the use of the word “Allah” in The Herald, as well as on imported Christian Bibles and other literature in both print and multimedia formats from Indonesia, the church appealed.

  14. 14. After appeals and all other avenues failed, the Catholic Church had no choice but to go to court because it is a basic deprivation of human rights in not allowing East Malaysian Christians the right to worship God in a manner they have used to worship Him all their lives and for generations past.

  15. The Herald just wants the right for their Klang Valley-based East Malaysian readers to practise their faith, and share their community information, while learning about their own faith, in the only language they share, being as they are from various Bumiputera groups, and as how they have been practicing it all these years.

  16. The Herald is only sold within church grounds, and has also complied with government requests to have “TERHAD (restricted)” and “FOR NON-MUSLIMS ONLY” on the cover, even if it was never to be sold or distributed outside church grounds in the first place.

  17. The greatest lie being repeated over and over again, by ministers, morally-corrupt politicians, some Muslim scholars, some government-controlled media as well as misinformed members of the public is that the church started using the term “Allah” in The Herald since only a few years ago.

  18. The other great lie is that the term is also intended for use in the English edition.

Thanks again for asking your very important question, my brother.

Please do enlighten your fellow Muslim brothers and sisters on how it all started and why it was a non-issue, then made into an issue by the government, and now has become the biggest possible threat to Malaysian unity, peace and harmony, after more than 50 years of independence.

Thanks.

Take care and God bless.

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Yesterday in the evening I was thinking to myself and this morning the same topic keep ringing in my ears. I have the habit to think aloud and also to talk to myself. Sometimes in public places when I go into this mood they think I am mad. But madness and sanity to me lies side by side as it shows in the recent Allah issue. I am happy that I feel I have been validated. I always belief that this country should remain Secular, it irritates and mollify my friends. A Muslim is suppose to make Islam Adddin i.e. it means politics and Islam must be pursued together. Muslims should not divide Siasah or politics from the religion, it is wrong, it is against Islam, it is heretic, a grave Sin. I beg to differ.

I am not against penerapan nilai nilai Islam or installing Islamic values but I am dead set against Islamisation ever since it was introduce by the evil genius Tun Mahathir. The softer approach of Islam Hadhari or Islamic Civilization was something I applauded but as expected shot down by the Evil Genius! But Allah prove once and for all I am right! The views of the traditionalist is so divided that you have Datuk Dr Haron Din and Jakim agreed to the total banning of the word Allah to Dr Mohd Asri and PAS leader stalwart like Nik Aziz who says it is not necessary Hadi Awang gave a political answer as expected!


In conclusion, we can not forbid them to use the word God in themselves, in their worship and their practices, although one purpose and meaning of the original language by us. Adapun menggunakan perkataan Allah oleh mereka terhadap masyarakat Islam untuk menyebarkan agama mereka dengan fahaman mereka, atau menjadikan perkataan Allah sekadar mengubah jenama bagi melariskan barangan dalam masyarakat Islam, tidak boleh dizinkan sama sekali. As for using the word Allah by them against the Muslim community to spread their religion with their ideology, or simply change the word of Allah to popularize the brand of goods in Islamic society, can not dizinkan altogether. Ini adalah kerana menyalahgunakan perkataan Allah yang Maha Suci kepada umat Islam dan bercanggah dengan makna mengikut bahasa yang diamal oleh umat Islam, adalah dikira menodai kesucian dan kemurnian kalimah Allah di hadapan umat Islam. This is due to misuse the word "Glory to God that Muslims and contrary to the meaning of the language according diamal by Muslims, is calculated menodai purity and innocence in front of the word Allah Muslims.”

excerpt taken from http://dppks.blogspot.com

Yes, I agreed totally to it! Because we cannot stop them from using the word but we can regulate them. And I think the former Ministers in charge did well but the evil genius decided to add a prohibition clause to it in 1986, a sly weapon of the wily old fox to appeal to the hawks but never enforce. Surely the Mamak understand this is ultra vires the constitutional guarantee enshrined in the constitution?

I am happy that ever since then, we see leaders from PAS ( although I do not agree with their political views) emerge like Dr Dzukilflee Ahmad and Khalid Samad. We have idiots like Zulkifli Noordin from PKR, Tajuddin Abdul Rahman Datuk from UMNO whose rhetoric should have landed them in Jail for inciting and fanning racial hatred. So there you see it, the public lost confident in UMNO is because of the perceive double standard when it comes to law. Utusan can get away with murder but other papers are ask to toe the line if not they will lose their publication permits! Disseminating of views are perceive as one sided and unbalance. I have not read any malay dailies for ages unless if I need to understand the party wishes or for the daily gossip like all Malays cherish!

The reason for RukunNegara of pledge of the Nation was to remind Malaysians of their duty and in the fourth pledge kedaulatan Undang-undang or the sacrament of the laws,if are not respected and abuse by the establishment, why do we need to support them? If UMNO and BN keep going this way then it is doom, common sense dictate it and sadly many Malays lost their common sense a long time ago. In fact many Malays seem to lost their marbles when it comes to Allah and other issues!

That is the reason why I believe in secularism, if Muslims cannot agreed on one another on things that are khilaf or procedural only, then why do I want to have Islam for Malaysia because what is the face of Islam are we talking about?

Banyak pihak mendesak saya memberikan pandangan tentang penggunaan nama Allah oleh agama lain khususnya agama Kristian di Malaysia ini. Pada awalnya, saya selalu mengelak, cuma memberikan pandangan ringkas dengan berkata: “Isu ini bukan isu nas Islam, ianya lebih bersifat pentadbiran atau tempatan.

Excerpt from Dr Asri ex Mufti of Perlis blog

The issue that plague the Muktazilites and the Sunnis and the Syiah are on Khilaf as far as I know! The Muktazilitte belief in free will but the traditionalist say we do not have free will thus Man can plan but God decides. This issue plague Ghazali that he nearly went mad until he found Sufism that quell his thirst, yet here we are hell bend in dishing out hukum on others. I am call a liberal Muslim, I prefer to be call an enlightened one! I prefer not to judge others for having different views. I belief that Islam encourages pluralism of thoughts for with it we can find knowledge and create new things. And if Muslims hanker for the golden age, than we must let free the mind. The right of ijtihad must be given back to the people, for every muslims is responsible to himself and not answerable to others.

What is wrong if the Syiah belief in Iman Mahdi or the Messiah? It is not about faith but of belief. So what if they add in their syahadah or bai'ath after Muhammad, Ali r.a. And the rest of his son. Does it nullify the Bai'ath or shahadah? If so then Muhammad saw punishment on stoning of adulterers is it not adding on God punishment which only proscribe whipping? God forbid if this is so, you see none of those additions nullify the law or the shahadah because it does not change the material of it. I believe that there is no God but Allah and I believe Mohammad is the messenger of God. Is adding other suffix nullify the Shahadah?

This are all Khilaf, we Sunni have own hadiths and our own school of thoughts. We teach but if they take our teaching and came out with a more progressive one, why punish them? Dr Asri incarceration by the traditionalist spoke volume in my distaste of making Malaysia as an Islamic nation. We have many issues to address, the poverty, the lack of knowledge in the ummah must take precedent. To infuse hatred under the guise of Islam is against what I was taught. I want to see Malays being leaders not being lead, to see them proud, standing among the races of the world. To spoke intelligently and agreed to disagreed, not to be emotive but to colour their actions with sincerity that glows from their heart. Am I asking too much?

Still hopeful for Umno, Malaysia

By Cheong Suk-Wai

KUALA LUMPUR, JAN 12 — Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah has for many years been a voice of reason in Umno, and Malaysia too, and he has always been ready to point out what is not right with the country. He believes that for Malaysia to reform itself, the leaders must show the way.

One of Tengku Razaleigh’s most vivid memories from boyhood is that of following the funeral procession of his father’s Hainanese cook through the streets of Kota Baru, Kelantan.

The cook had died from an infected wound sustained after his employer’s pet tiger swatted his hand while he was retrieving meat from the man-eater’s cage.

Tengku Razaleigh (picture), 72, the scion of Kelantan’s first post-independence chief minister, told this story in his blog recently to stress how well Malaysians of all races used to get along with one another.

The still youthful Kelantanese prince, who is married with no children, was one of Malaysia’s ablest finance ministers. He almost became its premier too, but lost the post to Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad by a whisker in a bitterly contested race for Umno’s presidency in 1987. The old Umno was deregistered after that and Tengku Razaleigh — affectionately known as Ku Li - led Semangat 46 (The Spirit of ‘46) from October 1989 to October 1996, when he rejoined Umno.

Over sweet tea and chocolate chip cookies last Thursday, he told me why Malaysia as it is currently constituted has no future and why it has to change.


Why did the political system work when you were a minister, but not now?

Because there’s so much accent on materialism now that people have lost their moral fibre.


When did Malaysia give way to materialism?

It started with so-called influence peddlers who became commission agents through their connections with party bosses. They acquired bad habits and the people around or below them copied their habits and that soon became part of the culture. Even people in government departments, such as peons, expect something, which is not good.


Why is it that Umno always seems to play the race card when in a tight spot?

Not only the race card, but also the religion card — anything. It’s about putting fear into the minds of the people. And fear that they may lose their positions.


Why do you insist that Umno’s very structure has to change to make Malaysia better?

Because... it’s becoming less democratic. When Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Abdul Razak were the leaders of the country, we sensed that anybody could hope to rise to the top — not that everybody wanted to... There were contests, yes, but they were among friends — but, of course, in politics, there’s no such thing as contests among friends! You have to be ambitious.

The one point I want to stress is that there was comradeship. If you went anywhere and met a fellow party member, you felt he was like your brother.


So what’s changed?

(Those contesting party polls these days) are going in because they want power and because of power, they want money. Their cronies band around them so in return they will be well off. But that’s not politics... If you wallop the country’s resources, that’s not the way to build leadership.


What brought about such a mindset?

I think the patronage system is at fault. You go to villages and encourage people there to work hard and be self-reliant. But you start giving them subsidies. And so the minute subsidies are withdrawn, they find it difficult to make ends meet and, naturally, get angry. I think we have to teach our people slowly so that we all buck up.

The No 1 problem anywhere in the world is poverty. In countries like mine, education, proper nourishment and health care are still wanting. The main means of overcoming poverty is education and ensuring that people earn enough so they don’t expect handouts.


Where would you begin?

The leaders must be disciplined. If they cannot discipline themselves, they cannot discipline the people... I’m not being critical here when I say that Singapore leaders are seen to be very clean people who are leading the way by being hard-working, competent and efficient. Those under them have to emulate otherwise they cannot keep in step with the standards set by their leaders.

If other countries can become developed, why can’t Malaysia? And we are rich compared to Singapore. What has Singapore got?

Our central bank lost RM32 billion (S$13 billion) in six months dabbling in foreign exchange. Where in the world have you heard of a central bank losing over RM30 billion and not going bust? But Malaysia’s so rich, it can support such losses.


What will happen when its oil runs out?

We have not restructured our economy... If we want to provide for the future, we have to choose industries so as to find niches in the market. That’s going to take up to 15 years. Will the resources now supporting us last until then? If we don’t think quickly, a lot of our young will be unemployed.

I think we have depleted a lot of our oil resources which should have been kept underground for the future. Do we need to exploit all that oil?


What of Premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s moves to free the economy of affirmative action requirements?

The New Economic Policy (NEP) ended in 1990, but overzealous civil servants and politicians continued to impose it. Tun Dr Mahathir had thrown the NEP out when he introduced the National Development Policy (NDP) of 1990 and he sometimes implemented the NEP as if it were part of the NDP. But don’t forget that Dr Mahathir was never involved in the formulation of the NEP.


And you were?

Yes, but not directly. It was for a noble cause.


What was so noble about it?

Well, the NEP was to bring everybody together. But people took advantage of it, exploited it and abused it for their own personal, or sectional, gains.


And yet you’re hopeful about Malaysia?

I believe in people. They have faith in themselves, are generally good and can be taught... We as children learnt very quickly, didn’t we?


But as adults?

Quicker still! But the leaders must show the way. I’m not so sure they will. But we’ve got to keep trying.

We hope to push for reforms — not just for Umno — to fight corruption, provide security and make sure that education is reformed so that Malaysians will be more competitive globally.


But they’re losing out already!

Yes, but they don’t feel it yet. They’re always in a state of denial.


Looking ahead to future Umno polls, what are your plans?

It’s too early to talk about that.


If you’re called upon to lead again, would you heed it?

If I could be of use to the party and country, I’m available.


Would you try for the top party post again?

Well, I don’t know about trying again — it’s another three years down the road. But even at this juncture, I’m prepared to offer my services — to serve in, say, an advisory role. But not necessarily for a post in the party.


Why are you still in Umno?

Because I have hope! I believe in what Umno stood for — fair play, justice, equality — not what the present Umno is doing.


But the Umno you believe in is long gone?

Well, the other parties don’t offer much choice either. They’re in disarray and don’t exercise leadership.


Do you regret founding Semangat 46?

Semangat 46 was not founded by me. That’s the propaganda of Umno Baru. It was founded by Tunku. He wanted a new party formed since he, Tun Musa Hitam and I were not allowed to join Umno Baru. Tunku said: “Let’s form a party because otherwise our supporters would go to Parti Islam SeMalaysia.”

I was asked to lead Semangat 46 to bring all these people under one wing. They said: “If Dr Mahathir is prepared to talk to you after a while, you bring everybody together again and become one.” So when we were able to talk, an agreement was reached, we disbanded Semangat 46. It was there not to fight anybody, but to provide a home (for us and our supporters).


Someone once said that it’s better to be the man whom everyone wants as premier than a premier whom nobody wants. What say you?

The position doesn’t matter. What matters is what happens to the people. China had Deng Xiaoping. He was not Communist Party chairman. He was not prime minister. He was not president. But he was able to effect change. And I’d like to do that, if it’s possible. — The Straits Times

Labels:

Saturday, January 16, 2010

This is a posting on the ruling made. I clearly hope my Muslim readers read both the Malay and English version. Again even if i loath Malaysian Insider this news are taken from that website!

Four reasons for controversial ‘Allah’ ruling

By Debra Chong

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 17 — High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan’s controversial ‘Allah’ ruling that rocked the nation over who had rights to the term cited that the Home Minister and government’s actions had been illegal, unconstitutional, irrational and had failed to satisfy that it was a threat to national security.

She also wrote about the apparent conflict in the matter between the Federal Constitution and the various state enactments apart from claims by Muslim groups that the matter cannot be taken to a civil court.

The judge released the written grounds of her Dec 31 judgment late on Friday while the increasingly acrimonious public debate over who has the right to use the word “Allah” continues to rage on.

The Malaysian Insider obtained a copy of her 57-page judgment where the judge lays out the reasons and the laws behind her oral pronouncement.

In laying out her judgment, Justice Lau ruled that the Home Minister and the Government of Malaysia, who were named as 1st and 2nd Respondents respectively, has the discretion under Section 12 of the Printing Presses and Publications Act to issue or revoke a permit to the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur Reverend Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam (the Applicant) to publish the Church’s newspaper, Herald — The Catholic Weekly.

But, she stressed, the respondents had made decisions that were illegal, unconstitutional and irrational when they barred the Catholic newspaper from publishing the word “Allah” in its Bahasa Malaysia section.

The case was brought by the Roman Catholic Church, represented by the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur Reverend Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam on February 16 last year when he filed for a judicial review against the Home Minister for barring it from using the word “Allah” as part of conditions for getting a publishing permit.

Pakiam is officially the Herald’s publisher.

The Home Ministry has successfully applied for a stay of execution in the ruling pending an appeal.

Below are excerpts highlighting the main disputes.

On why the Home Minister’s ban is illegal

“The Applicant submits the 1st Respondent has failed to take into account one or more of the relevant considerations...

1. The word “Allah” is the correct Bahasa Malaysia word for “God” and in the Bahasa Malaysia translation of the Bible, “God” is translated as “Allah” and “Lord” is translated as “Tuhan”;

2. For 15 centuries, Christians and Muslims in Arabic-speaking countries have been using the word “Allah” in reference to the One God. The Catholic Church in Malaysia and Indonesia and the greater majority of other Christian denominations hold that “Allah” is the legitimate word for “God” in Bahasa Malaysia;

3. The Malay language has been the lingua franca of many Catholic believers for several centuries especially those living in Melaka and Penang and their descendants in Peninsular Malaysia have practised a culture of speaking and praying in the Malay language;

4. The word “God” has been translated as “Allah” in the “Istilah Agama Kristian Bahasa Inggeris ke Bahasa Malaysia” first published by the Catholic Bishops Conference of Malaysia in 1989;

5. The Malay-Latin dictionary published in 1631 had translated “Deus” (the Latin word for God) as “Alla” as the Malay translation;

6. The Christian usage of the word “Allah” predates Islam being the name of God in the old Arabic Bible as well as in the modern Arabic Bible used by Christians in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei and other places in Asia, Africa, etc;

7. In Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesia, the word “Allah” has been used continuously in the printed edition of the Matthew’s Gospel in Malaysia in 1629, in the first complete Malay Bible in 1733 and in the second complete Malay Bible in 1879 until today in the Perjanjian Baru and the Alkitab;

8. Munshi Abdullah who is considered the father of modern Malay literature had translated the Gospels into Malay in 1852 and he translated the word “God” as “Allah”;

9. There was already a Bible translated into Bahasa Melayu in existence before 1957 which translation was carried out by the British and Foreign Bible Society where the word “Allah” was used;

10. There was also already in existence a Prayer Book published in Singapore on 3.1.1905 where the word “Allah” was used;

11. There was also a publication entitled “An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine” published in 1895 where the word “Allah” was used.

12. Anther publication entitled “Hikajat Elkaniset” published in 1874 also contains the word “Allah”

13. The Bahasa Indonesia and the Bahasa Malaysia translations of the Holy Bible, which is the Holy Scriptures of Christians, have been used by the Christian natives of Peninsular Malaysia; Sabah and Sarawak for generations;

14. The Bahasa Malaysia speaking Christian natives of Peninsular Malaysia, Sarawak and Sabah had always and have continuously the word “Allah” for generations and the word “Allah” is used in the Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesian translations of the Bible used throught Malaysia;

15. At least for the last three decades the Bahasa Malaysia congregation of the Catholic Church have been freely using the Alkitab, the Bahasa Indonesia translation of the Holy Bible wherein the word “Allah appears;

16. The said publication is a Catholic weekly as stated on the cover of the weekly and is intended for the dissemination of news and information on the Catholic Church in Malaysia and elsewhere and is not for sale or distribution outside the Church;

17. The said publication is not made available to members of the public and in particular to persons professing the religion of Islam;

18. The said publication contains nothing which is likely to cause public alarm and/or which touches on the sensitivities of the religion of Islam and in the fourteen years of the said publication there has never been any untoward incident arising from the Applicant’s use of the word “Allah” in the said publication;

19. In any event the word “Allah” has been used by Christians in all countries where the Arabic language is used as well as in Indonesian/Malay language without any problems and/or breach of public order/ and/or sensitivity to persons professing the religion of Islam in these countries;

20. Islam and the control and restriction of religious doctrine or belief among Muslims professing the religion of Islam is a state matter and the Federal Government has no jurisdiction over such matters of Islam save in the federal territories

21. The subsequent exemption vide P.U.(A) 134/82 which permits the Alkitab to be used by Christians in churches ipso facto permits the use of the word “Allah” in the said publication;

22. The Bahasa Malaysia speaking congregation of the Catholic Church uses the word “Allah” for worship and instruction and that the same is permitted in the Al-Kitab.

“The Applicant further submits that none of the above-mentioned factual considerations were ever disputed or challenged by the 1st Respondent as factually incorrect. I am incline to agree with the Applicant as the response of the 1st Respondent to the factual averments is a feeble denial in paragraph 41 of the Affidavit of the 1st Respondent which reads “Keseluruhan pernyataan-pernyataan di perenggan-perenggan 50, 51 and 52(i)-(xxii) Affidavit Sokongan Pemohon adalah dinafikan...” (Emphasis added)

“Therefore I find the 1st Respondent in the exercise of his discretion to impose further conditions in the publication permit has not taken into account the relevant matters alluded to above, hence committing an error of law warranting this Court to interfere and I am of the view that the decision of the Respondents dated 7.1.2009 ought to be quashed,” she ruled.

On why the Home Minister’s ban is unconstitutional

Justice Lau also said the applicant’s grounds for the reliefs of certiorari and declaratio is premised on the unconstitutional acts and conduct being inconsistent with Articles 3(1), 10, 11 and 12 of the Federal Constitution...”

“Applying the principles enunciated in Meor Atiqulrahman Ishak (supra) to the instant case, there is no doubt that Christianity is a religion. The next question is whether the use of the word “Allah” is a practice of the religion of Christianity. In my view there is uncontroverted historical evidence allueded to in paragraph 52 (i) to (xxii) alluded to above which is indicative that use of the word “Allah” is a practice of the religion of Christianity. From the evidence, it is apparent the use of the word “Allah” is an essential part of the worship and instruction in the faith of the Malay (Bahasa Malaysia) speaking community of the Catholic Church in Malaysia and is integral to the practice and propagation of their faith.

“The next consideration is the circumstances under which the “prohibition” was made. The circumstances to my mind would be the factors which the Respondents rely on to justify the impugned decision which have been alluded to in paragraph 9(i) to (ix) above.

“As to the ground in paragraph 9(i) in my judgment, this is unmeritorious for the reason which has been dealt under the issue of whether the use of the word “Allah” endangers public order and national security. As to the ground in paragraph 9(ii), (iii), (v) and (ix), I have shown unchallenged evidence that there is a well established practice for the use of the “Allah” amongst the Malay speaking community of the Catholic faith in Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak and the origin of the word and its translation...

“Considering all the factors, in my judgment, the imposition of the condition in the publication permit prohibiting the use of the word “Allah” in the said publication, “Herald – the Catholic Weekly” pursuant to the 1st Respondent’s exercise of powers under the Act contravenes the provisions of Articles 3(1), 11(1) and 11(3) of the Federal Constitution and therefore is unconstitutional,” she added.

On why the Home Minister’s ban is irrational

“The Applicant challenges the impugned decision under this head of irrationality/ Wednesbury unreasonableness which applies to “a decision which is so outrageous in its defiance of logic or of accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it...”

(a) It is utterly irrational and unreasonable on the part of the Respondents on the one hand not to prohibit the congregation of the Catholic Church to use the word “Allah” for worship and instruction in their faith and in the AL-Kitab and on the other hand to state that the same word cannot be used in the said publication which serves to assist these persons in their worship and provide a medium of instruction in their faith and to disseminate news and information (see paragraph 52(xxii) of Applicant’s Affidavit).

(b) It is also utterly irrational and unreasonable on the part of the Respondents to require the Bahasa Malaysia speaking congregation of the Catholic Church to use another word to denote the Bahasa Malaysia word for “God” instead of the word “Allah” when such is and has always been the word used for the word “God” in the Catholic Church and throughout the Bahasa Malaysia speaking community of the Church in Malaysia...

“In relation to the 2 additional grounds mentioned in paragraph 17.1 above, the Respondents responded —

1. Merujuk kepada perenggan 20 Afidavit Sokongan Pemohon, Responden-Responden menegaskan bahawa Pernyataan YAB Perdana Menteri tersebut yang telah dikeluarkan melalui media cetak “The Star” pada 20/4/2005 adalah amat jelas mengarahkan agar di kulit “Bible” dalam versi Bahasa Melayu dinyatakan secara jelas bahawa ianya bukan untuk orang Islam and ianya hanya dijual doi kedai-kedai orang Kristian. Walau bagaimanapun saya sesungguhnya mempercayai dan meyatakan bahawa kenyataan media yang dirujuk itu adalah berhubung dengan Al-Kitab (Bible) sahaja dan tidak relevan kepada isu permit Herald – the Catholic Weekly yang mana syarat yang dikenakan adalah amat jelas dan perlu dipatuhi oleh Pemohon (paragraph 22 of the 1st Respondent’s Affidavit); and

2. the circulation of the Al-Kitab vide P.U.(A) 134 dated 13.5.1982 was made subject to the condition that its possession or use is only in churches by persons professing the Christian religion, throughout Malaysia.

“I find the 2 additional grounds submitted by the Applicant in paragraph 17.1 above to be of substance. It is to be noted that a common thread runs through like a tapestry in the Respondents’ treatment of restricting the use of the word “Allah” which appears in the Al-Kitab are (i) that it is not meant for Muslims; (ii) to be in the possession or use of Christians and in churches only. In fact, these restrictions are similar to that imposed as a second condition in the impugned decision save for the endorsement of the word “Terhad” on the front cover of the said publication. Relying on the chapter on maxims of interpretation at paragraph 44 p.156 of N.S Bindra’s Interpretation of the Statute, there is a maxim “Omne majus continet in se minus” which means “The greater contains the less”. One would have thought having permitted albeit with the usual restrictions the Catholic Church to use the word “Allah” for worship and in the Al-kitab, it would be logical and reasonable for the Respondents to allow the use of the word “Allah” in the said publication drawing an analogy by invoking the maxim “The greater contains the less”. Indeed I am incline to agree with the Applicant that the Respondents are acting illogically, irrationally and inconsistently and no person similarly circumstanced would have acted in a like manner...

“I find there is merit in the Applicant’s contention that when viewed on its merits, the reasons given by the Home Ministry in the various directives defies all logic and is so unreasonable,” Justice Lau wrote in her judgment.

On the seeming conflict between the Federal Constitution and the state enactments to control and restrict the propagation of religious doctrine among Muslims

She also wrote that, “Pursuant to Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution, ten States have enacted laws to control and restrict the propagation of religious doctrine or belief among Muslims. The laws are –

(i) Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1980 (State of Terengganu Enactment No.1/1980)

2. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1981 (Kelantan Enactment No.11/1981)

3. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1988 (Malacca Enactment No.1/1988)

4. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1988 (Kedah Darulaman Enactment No.11/1988)

5. The Non Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment 1988 (Selangor Enactment No.1/1988)

6. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1988 (Perak Enactment No.10/1988)

7. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1989 (Pahang Enactment No.5/1989)

8. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Enactment 1991 (Johor Enactment No.12/1991)

9. The Control and Restriction (The Propagation of Non Islamic Religions Amoing Muslims) (Negeri Sembilan) Enactment 1991 (Negeri Sembilan Enactment NO.9/1991); and

10. Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Religious Belief and Doctrine which is Contrary to the Religion of Islam Enactment 2002 (Perlis Enactment No.6 of 2002)

“It is not disputed that s. 9 of the various State Enactments provide for an offence relating to the use of certain words and expression listed in Part 1 or 11 of the Schedule or in the Schedule itself as the case maybe of the State Constitutions and which includes the word “Allah”. Further, all these State Enactments are made pursuant to Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution which reads “State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.” (Emphasis added)...

“Mr Royan drew to the Court’s attention (i) that Article 11(4) which is the restriction does not state that State law can forbid or prohibit but “may control and restrict”; does not provide for State law or for any other law to control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing a religion other than Islam...

“I find there is merit in Mr Royan’s submission that unless we want to say that s.9 is invalid or unconstitutional to that extent (which I will revert to later), the correct way of approaching s.9 is it ought to be read with Article 11(4). If s.9 is so read in conjunction with Article 11(4), the result would be that a non-Muslim could be committing an offence if he uses the word “Allah” to a Muslim but there would be no offence if it was used to a non-Muslim. Indeed Article 11(1) reinforces this position as it states “Every person has the right to profess and practise his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it”. Clause 4 restricts a person’s right only to propagate his religious doctrine or belief to persons professing the religion of Islam. It is significant to note that Article 11(1) gives freedom for a person to profess and practise his religion and the restriction is on the right to propagate.

“I find Mr Royan’s argument is further augmented by the submission of Mr Benjamin Dawson, learned Counsel for the Applicant which I find to be forceful stating that this rule of construction is permissible in the light of the mischief the State Enactments seek to cure and the provision has to be interpreted to conform to the Constitution. … For completeness I shall now spell out the preamble in full “WHEREAS Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution provides that State law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam. AND WHEREAS it is not desired to make a law to control and restrict the propagation of non-Islamic religious doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the religion of Islam.” (Emphasis added) …

“Applying the said test to the factual matrix of the present case the Court has to bear in mind the constitutional and fundamental rights of persons professing the Christian faith to practise their religion and to impart their faith/religion to persons within their religious group and in this case, the Catholic Church comprises a large section of people from Sabah and Sarawak whose medium of instruction is Bahasa Malaysia and they have for years used religious material in which their God is called “Allah”; for that matter there is a large community who are Bahasa Malaysia speaking from Penang and Malacca. On the other hand the object of Article 11(4) and the State Enactments is to protect or restrict propagation to persons of the Islamic faith. Seen in this context by no stretch of the imagination can one say that s.9 of the State Enactments may well be proportionate to the object it seeks to achieve and the measure is therefore arbitrary and unconstitutional.

“As to the concern of the Respondents there is no guarantee that the magazine would be circulated only among Christians and it will not fall into the hands of Muslims, I agree with Mr Royan there is no requirement of any guarantee be given by anyone in order to profess and practise an even to propagate it.

“In my view if there are breaches of any law the relevant authorities may take the rleevant enforcement measures. We are living in a world of information technology; information can be readily accessible. Are guaranteed rights to be sacrificed at the altar just because the Herald has gone online and is accessible to all? One must not forget there is the restriction in the publication permit wich serves as an additional safeguard which is the word “TERHAD” is to be endorsed on the front page and the said publication is restricted to churches and to followers of Christianity only,” she added.

On the claim that the Home Minister’s ban was to safeguard public security and order

“There is merit in the Applicant’s argument that the Respondents in paragraph 45 of his Affidavit (also in paragraphs 6, 25 and 46) sought to justify imposing the condition in purported exercise of his powers under the said Act on a mere statement that the use of the word “Allah” is a security issue which is causing much confusion and which threatens and endangers public order, without any supporting evidence. A mere statement by the 1st Respondent that the exercise of power was necessary on the ground of national security without adequate supporting evidence is not sufficient in law....

“I find there is merit in Mr Dawson’s argument that the Court ought to take judicial notice that in Muslim countries even in the Middle East where the Muslim and Christian communities together use the word “Allah”, yet one hardly hear of any confusion arising (see paragraph 52(xix) of the Applicant’s Affidavit which is not rebutted). Further, I am incline to agree that the Court has to consider the question of “avoidance of confusion” as a ground very cautiously so as to obviate a situation where a mere confusion of certain persons within a religious group can strip the constitutional right of another religious groiup to practise and propagate their religion under Article 11(1) and to render such guaranteed right as illusory,” Justice Lau said.

On claims from the Muslim groups that “Allah” cannot be challenged in court

On this, she wrote, “I had on 31.12.2009 dismissed the applications of the Majlis Agama Islam (MAI) of Wilayah Persekutuan, Johore, Selangor, Kedah, Malacca, the MAI and Adat Melayu Terenggganu and MACMA to be heard in opposition under O.53 r.8 of the RHC (It is to be noted that the MAI and Adat Melayu Perak and MAI Pulau Pinang did not file any applicatio under O.53 r.8). That being the case, their submission contending the issue of whether any publication in whatever form by a non-Muslim individual or body or entity that uses the scared word of “Allah” can be permitted in law is one that is within the absolute discretion of the Rulers and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) (in respect of Penang, Malacca, Sabah, Sarawak and the Federal Territories) as the respective Heads of Islam and is therefore non-justiciable is irrelevant at the substantive hearing of the judicial review application and need not be considered by this Court.

“I adopt the following responses of the Applicant contending the application is justiciable and I am of the view there is substance –

1. the Federal Constitution and the State Constitutions clearly provide that the Rulers and the YDPA as the Head of Islam in the States and the Federal Territories have exclusive authority only on Islamic affairs and Malay customs;

2. subject to Articles 10 and 11 of the Federal Constitution, the control and regulation of all publications and matters connected therewith are governed by federal law namely the Act and only the Minister for Home Affairs is involved in the implementation and enforcement of its provisions. Under this Act, only the Minister can decide what is permitted to be published and in this regard the Rulers and the YDPA have no role whatsoever under the scheme of this Act;

3. the present judicial reiew is not a judicial review of the decision of the Rulers or the YDPA as Head of Islam concerning the exercise of their duties and functions. It is only a judicial review of the 1st Respondent’s decision to impose a prohibition on the use of the word “Allah” by the Applicant in a publication. Since the Rulers or the YDPA cannot make any decision in respect of any publications and matters connected therewith, the issue of non justiciability does not arise.

On what the Court really ordered

She also listed out the orders from the court in the landmark case, “ In conclusion in the circumstances the Court grants the Applicant the following order:

1. an Order of Certiorari to quash the decisio of the Respondents dated 7.1.2009 that the Applicant’s Publication Permit for the period 1.1.2009 until 31.12.2009 is subject to the condition that the Applicant is prohibited from using the word “Allah” in “Herald – the Catholic Weekly” pending the Court’s determination of the matter;

2. Jointly the following declarations:

(i) that the decision of the Respondents dated 7.1.2009 that the Applicant’s Publication Permit for the period 1.1.2009 until 31.12.2009 is subject to the condition that the Applicant is prohibited from using the word “Allah” in “Herald – the Catholic Weekly” pending the Court’s determination of the matter is null and void;

(ii) that pursuant to Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution the Applicant has the constitional right to use the word “Allah” in “Herald — the Catholic Weekly” in the exercise of the Applica’ right that religions other than Islam may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation;

(iii) that Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution which states that Islam is the religion of the Federation does not empower and/or authorize the Respondents to prohibit the Applicant from using the word “Allah” in “Herald — the Catholic Weekly”;

(iv) that pursuant to Article 10 of the Federal Constitution the Applicant has the constitutional right to use the word “Allah” in “Herald – the Catholic Weekly” in the exercise of the applicant’s right to freedom of speech and expression;

(v) that pursuant to Article 11 of the Federal Constitution the Applicant has the constitutional right to use the word “Allah” in “Herald — the Catholic Weekly” in the exercise of the Applicant’s freedom of religion which includes the right manage its own religious affairs;

(vi) that pursuant to Article 11 and 12 of the Federal Constitution the Applicant has the constitutional right to use the word “Allah” in “Herald — the Catholic Weekly” in the exercise of the Applicant’s right in respect of instruction and education of the Catholic congregation in the Christian religion.


Govt okays ‘Allah’ for East Malaysian Christians

By Adib Zalkapli

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 15 – The government today said that it allows the use of the word “Allah” by East Malaysian Christians when referring to God in the Malay language.

The apparent concession is seen as a damage control move as Christians in the states of Sabah and Sarawak primarily conduct church services in the Malay language.

In an interview with a Kuching-based daily, The Borneo Post, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz (picture) said the word has been used traditionally in the two states and that the local Muslims are used to the practice.

The daily is circulated widely in the two Christian-majority states.

“Christians in Sarawak and Sabah need not worry over this issue because it is a common tradition there. I have been to an Iban church service and I heard the word “Allah” used there,” he reportedly said.

The “Allah” row started in 2007 after the Home Ministry invoked a 1986 Cabinet directive banning non-Muslims from using certain Arabic words when it refused to renew the publication permit of the Catholic tabloid, Herald.

The Catholic church later challenged the government’s decision and on Dec 31 last year, the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled that the Herald has the right to use the word “Allah” for its Malay edition.

Another legal battle over the word “Allah” is also expected, as a Sarawakian Christian, Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill had earlier this week challenged the seizure of religious compact discs containing the word “Allah”, which took place in 2008 at the Sepang airport’s low cost carrier terminal.

Nazri’s pledge, which was front-paged by The Borneo Post today, comes just about one year before Sarawak is scheduled to have its state election.

The current state assembly’s term expires in mid-2011.

“Muslims here in Semenanjung cannot accept it as ‘Allah’ was never used in Christian preaching until recently and they questioned the motive behind the substitution of ‘Tuhan’ for ‘Allah’,” said Nazri in justifying the ban in the Peninsula.

“It is clearly stated in our constitution that no other religions can be propagated to Malay Muslims and this article has been enacted in all the states in Malaysia where the Sultan is the Head of State … so this excludes Federal Territory, Penang, Malacca, Sarawak and Sabah,” he added.

The daily also quoted Nazri to have said that the series of attacks against the houses of worship has proven that the government was right in its decision to restrict the use of the word.

“Banning the use of ‘Allah’ by Christians was a pre-emptive move to stop outbreaks of religious violence in the nation,” he reportedly said.

Nazri also drew a parallel between the “Allah” dispute and the ‘cow head protest’ in Shah Alam last year, against the relocation of a temple in the Selangor capital.

“Take for example, there is no law in the country that states stepping on a severed cow head is wrong but when a group of Malays did that in their protests against the building of a Hindu temple we hauled them up and charged them because that act was disrespectful to the Hindus,” he reportedly said.

Sabahans are fed-up, no more compromises — Ronnie Klassen

JAN 15 — The Federal Government has failed miserably in addressing the Allah issue and more seriously the arson attacks on churches and recently a Sikh temple. Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has said the situation was under control and the attacks were isolated incidents. How stupid does Hishammuddin thinks Malaysians are, eight Churches and a Sikh Temple vandalised, and he blatantly says it’s only isolated cases and under control?

Barisan Nasional component parties should now re-examine their position and their coalition status with Umno. The Christian Community of Malaysia are currently under siege by unscrupulous arsonists out to create disunity among peace loving Malaysians.

Is Clarence Bongkos Malakun a Christian?

The President of the Council of Justices of the Peace, Datuk Clarence Bongkos Malakun has urged Christians in Sabah to make a compromise for the sake of national peace.

He is urging Christians to drop the word “Allah” in Malay-language services and Malay-language Bibles. He said that though this has been the practice for so long in Sabah, for the sake of peace, Sabahan Christians should abandon it, as this has caused anger to a certain section of extremist Muslims in Malaysia.

It is so easy to call for compromise. Sabahans have compromised for too long on many things since the state merged with Malaya, Sarawak and Singapore to form Malaysia. We had to compromise on language, education, natural resources etc. Finally we have someone who is asking us to compromise on the way our Christians practice the religion.

I question the intention of Clarence Bongkos Malakun. Perhaps he thought it was noble of him but then it seems only noble to him. A local daily reported Malakun as saying “many fellow Christians would disagree and perhaps start to condemn me” but “if we are really true Christians, we should be forgiving, reasonable and peace loving people”. It is my honest belief that through this very statement he has already condemned himself. But allow me to ask him, “Do you in the first place have the Christian credibility to ask Sabahans to drop the word Allah?”

Clarence Malakun should first examine himself as a Christian and whether he has breached the Catholic faith. Was his call in his personal capacity or a stooge of the Government or as a Christian? If his call was as a Catholic, then he has no local standi, having broken the most sacred sacrament of the Church. Marriage is a sacrament that is indissoluble. Once a marriage has been consummated, it endures until one spouse dies. The Church does not issue divorces or recognize divorces issued by other institutions.

My advice to Malakun is to do some soul searching and seek forgiveness from God, for you do not qualify to give any advice.

As a Justice of Peace, and more so as the head of the Council of JPs (MAJAPS), Datuk Clarence should seek Peace in the name of Justice or seek Justice in the name of Peace.

Failing this, he should hold his peace and not make things worse.

Sabahans’ tolerance has reached its limits.

Why should Sabahans be the one who have to compromise all the time? When was the last time the Federal Government made a compromise? We had to compromise on petroleum, allowing Petronas the glory of our oil and in return a miserable 5 per cent royalty.

We are now asked to compromise on religious freedom, even though the founding fathers of Malaysia guaranteed it for us. Where do we draw the line? The Muslim’s in Malaysia, particularly Sabah are not confused and have no qualms over the Christians using the word Allah. Our Muslim brothers and sisters have outgrown the hoodwinking of the government for too long. Umno just can’t come to terms on the gospel truth that they have lost the support of the Malays. Umno is in total denial of this fact.

There have been just too many compromises. The problem is that Sabahans have made the compromises, but the government keeps demanding for more and more. When will it ever stop? Today, Christians in Sabah might have to drop the usage of Allah because they burned churches. What about tomorrow? What if they demand Sabahan Christians stop displaying crucifixes outside churches? What if they demand that churches stop ringing bells? What if they demand more and more things which would altogether wipe out the Christian faith and identity?

Are we going to compromise and keep on compromising? — advocateviews.blogspot.com

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

An Almighty headache — The Malaysian Insider

JAN 9 — When it comes to referring to the Almighty, what's in a name?

One kind of everything to some people, and another kind of everything to others.

Confused? That's what happens when everyone wants everything.

To both Muslims and Catholics, Allah or God means the supreme creator, basically the being behind the world's and humanity's existence — whether you believe or otherwise.

So why the big brouhaha among Muslims when it comes to Catholics using the name Allah to refer to their version of God?

To make some semblance of sense of it all, the clock needs to be turned back to some four decades from now, to the time and place where the name Allah was first used in Malaysia in the Kitab Injil, which is the Bible's translated name.

The situation first took place in Sabah and Sarawak (though the progression could differ between both states) some time in the 1970s when the demand grew for Catholic mass to be said in Bahasa Melayu (or Bahasa Malaysia, whichever suits your personal taste).

The demand was there because while English still figured strongly as a medium for communication at the time, having entered the union of Malaysia with Semenanjung Malaysia and Singapore meant conforming to the same education system.

Which meant Malay began to take precedence as the preferred form of communication.

This was especially so in the rural areas of the Land Below the Wind, and likewise for the Land of the Hornbills, and with a large population of Catholics speaking Malay it only made sense to say mass in Malay.

The situation created a standoff between the Catholic Church and the authorities of the day, who for whatever reason could not agree to allowing the church to translate the Bible into Malay.

What actually transpired is not clear, though armchair historians claim that this lead to underground tactics by the church to reach the masses and alleged arrests of clergy and their supporters by the authorities in response.

What is clear is that eventually after some years of subdued bickering, both sides came to a compromise — the church agreed at the time not to translate the Bible, and the authorities allowed the Kitab Injil to be imported from neighbouring Indonesia.

Which in turn got Catholics started on using the name Allah, since the Indonesian Kitab Injil used the name quite a fair bit in its translated form.

Bearing in mind the compromise, it not only meant the top guns came to a consensus, it brought an equal acceptance from both Muslims and Catholics that Allah is a favourable term for their respective versions of God.

It also helped that Catholics, and Christians in general, took up the larger piece of the religious pie in both states at the time.

The use of the name Allah by Catholics is widely accepted in Sabah and Sarawak simply because it was part of a very practical need for them to practise their faith in a common language that all devotees could understand.

On top of that, the local lingo in both Sabah and Sarawak is peppered with terms that traditionally only Malays and Muslims would use in Semenanjung Malaysia.

A fine example — give a piece of shocking news to any Sabahan or Sarawakian, regardless of race and creed, and it would not be surprising to hear them exclaim "Astaga!", short for astaga-firul-azim.

So everybody figured it's not such a big deal for everyone to use the name Allah to talk to God. It is after all a name for the Almighty.

Conversely, the history of the Catholic Church in Semenanjung Malaysia using Malay as a medium to say mass did not develop in the same way it did in Sabah and Sarawak.

The church itself would be the best reference to determine the exact period Malay masses started picking up in Semenanjung Malaysia, but what is sure is that it was to fulfil a demand from — you guessed it — Sabahans and Sarawakians.

With tons of job and study opportunities, the population of youths from both states grew exponentially in the Klang Valley and other development hubs in the peninsula, and being so used to having mass said in Malay, they requested for it and the church obliged.

But the situation differs in that while Muslims in Sabah and Sarawak rank as a large minority, the Catholics form a small minority in Semenanjung Malaysia.

And with that distinct difference in societal make-up comes a different set of challenges.

Islam had established itself as the religion of choice in the 12 states of Semananjung Malaysia since the time of the Malaccan empire in the 1300s, giving it far more precedence than Catholicism and Christianity on a whole.

And that's a lot longer than the time either religion had reached the shores of Sabah and Sarawak.

So understandably, the generations of Muslims in Semenanjung Malaysia would have a very personal attachment to the name Allah as possibly the most widely used out of the Almighty's 99 names listed in the Quran.

That very fact puts the whole uproar over the use of Allah's name by the Catholic Church in Semenanjung Malaysia into perspective.

It's perceived as one religion disregarding the centuries-old, god-given right of another religion to exclusively call their God by a specific name.

But to simply pass a blanket ruling, say for example, to ban the use of Allah by Catholics, across the eastern and western divides of Malaysia would be naive at best.

In history, in culture, even in ethnic make-up, Malaysians in the East and West are so different that unless it is the leaders of both religions who decree, any single decision would only serve to perpetuate ignorance and distrust among the faithful.

In matters of spirituality, it should never be left to the courts or the mob to decide what the next step should be.

As there are many straight-thinking individuals, very few can truly claim to be theologians or ulamas.

This is where the full brunt of responsibility falls on the religious leaders. It is these very religious leaders who are responsible for this mess.

So naturally, it should be left to them to work it out.

The Lundayeh, Lunbawang and Allah — Amde Sidik

JAN 9 — Let me share my experience about a group of people who are not permitted to use word “Allah” in their prayer book.

Until a few days ago it has been a yo-yo kind of decision by the Home Minister with regard to the law on the issue. Now the law is back to square one, from allowing with condition to not allowing at all until the court decides otherwise.

I’m not arguing about the legality of it since the case is pending judicial review, I’m merely talking about the people, who I have known for a long time now.

The people that I’m talking about are the Lundayeh from Sabah, and the Lunbawang from Sarawak; the two are actually of the same ethnic community, but called by two different names in these two different regions. I won’t mention other ethnic communities here, who share the same predicament.

The Lundayeh aren’t permitted to use word Allah in their prayer book because they are Christian; if they are allowed to use word Allah it’s going to confuse the Muslims. That’s the reason given by the then-Home Minister Datuk Syed Hamid Albar.

The Lundayeh are followers of Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB), a relatively new Christian group in Sabah and Sarawak started by the Evangelical Mission. It was earlier called the Borneo Evangelical Mission (BEM).

Hudson Southwell pioneered the mission with two friends from Melbourne, Australia who landed in Kuching from Singapore in 1928. He met Rajah Brooke, the Sarawak Rajah, and in that same year he was given permission to establish this mission.

By the 1960s Bahasa Malaysia was not only the official language of Malaysia, but also the only language widely spoken throughout Borneo Island, thus in the mid-1960s, BEM changed its name to Sidang Injil Borneo, or SIB.

By the late 1950s and early 1960s, the religion quickly spread throughout the Brunei Bay region (southwest Borneo) and it found its way into Sipitang district, Lawas and Limbang in Sarawak.

To make the work easier, which is only logical, the Lundayeh preachers concentrated in converting their own ethnic group first before heading elsewhere, for example, to the interior of Sabah, to Kota Marudu and Kudat.

When I was a child I used to hear my Lundayeh relatives joke of how unsure they were about their newly adopted religion, because prior to the 1920s most Borneo people who lived in the interior were animists, and the Lundayeh were in the same category not until the late 1950s.

My guess why they hang on to this religion is, first, there is a need for religion, and second, may be in view of the silence in our Federal Constitution as to the fate of those who wish to practice no religion compelled them to have one.

SIB preachers trained in various places in Sarawak; they also have training institutions in Kalimantan, Indonesia.

On graduation preachers are called gembala; linguistically they are very fluent in Bahasa Indonesia. Thus in their holy book the terms their used are very similar to the Malay Muslim way of saying, like, dosa, syurga, neraka, roh, kiamat, and so on.

During my school days especially living in boarding school in the 1970s, many of my Lundayeh schoolmates, who were also my relatives and cousins, used to hide their prayer books (they also called it Bible) under their pillows or elsewhere in the cupboard. I used to sneak a look at the pages and it wasn’t difficult to read because it was all written in Bahasa Indonesia, when compared with the Quran, which is all in Arabic.

In that Bible, it mentions the word Allah in numerous accounts. And very many other similar terms used like, for instance, the opening remark, “Dengan nama Allah yang pengasih dan penyayang” (In the name of God, the Gracious and the Merciful).

One of my Lundayeh relatives, a teacher, could write beautiful Jawi. He could even read and pronounced the ayats in the Quran easily, except, just like me, he had no inkling about their meaning.

We, of the same age group and the same background, except different religions, found no difficulty in adopting and understanding each other. Honestly no questions asked, consciously or unconsciously. We would ask funny questions, like, what would happen when we die, will we meet somewhere, after all we are relatives, and we shared our thoughts about death because we all knew there was hell waiting for the unrepented.

The Kadayan likewise have always been close neighbours with the Lundayeh, so too the Murut Tagal, Kelabit in Sarawak, and Brunai (the Malays of Brunei); at one time, everyone except the Brunai were called Orang Darat — people of the interior.

My grandfather is Lundayeh adopted by a Kadayan family, he became a Muslim; he married my grandmother, a Kadayan from Sarawak. See how close I we are!

I say this just in case someone doubts how much I know about the two ethnic communities.

In Sipitang district, the Lundayeh intermingled with the Kadayan and Brunai ever since time immemorial, and lots of intermarriages have taken place over the centuries.

One can hardly recognise them based on appearance and complexion, whether one is Muslim or not, even the names sound very much Muslim, Yusuf, Aini, Musa and so on.

But the modern names for Lundayeh very much sound Western, such as George, Hendricks, John and so on, but their last names can be classical, like Labo, Balang, Singa, Agong, Selutan, Pengiran, and so on. My younger brother, a few of my first cousins and I too have our own Lundayeh name but I would rather keep it secret for now.

Not long ago if one went to Lawas, Sarawak, one would find my Lunbawang relatives wearing songkok; those who are not familiar with the place thought they were Muslims but they were not.

But my question really, why is it as time goes by religion becomes a sticking point to our harmony in this country? Political leaders are so bogged down about it when 50 years ago it was non-issue. I’m very doubtful as to the ability of our leaders on both sides of the South China Sea can manage our multiracial country.

Now, the obvious, all matters pertaining to religion, race, immorality and integration issues are started in the peninsula. The issues are blown out of proportion; in one day things can turn upside down because some mad politicians have no better thing to do than create havoc and pollute people’s mind.

Our political leaders are squabbling over issues which I consider time and energy wasting when they should be resolving the country’s economic problems — unemployment, rising cost of consumer goods, bad roads, toll hike, illegal immigrants in Sabah, so on and so forth.

There is an urgent need to change the dilapidated brains if our country is to survive for another 50 years. And we are not only talking about improvement but an extra ordinary leapfrog achievement, otherwise we are neither here no there. — mysinchew

"Christians won't stop using Allah"

14 Jan 10 : 8.00AM
By Ding Jo-Ann
dingjoann@thenutgraph.comdingjoann at thenutgraph dot com
THE attacks on Malaysian churches were a shocking way to start 2010. The unprecedented violence made headlines internationally as the foreign media pulled apart Malaysia's carefully constructed image as a moderate Muslim nation. Following the attacks, there have been calls for Christians to drop their claim to refer to God as "Allah" for the sake of national harmony.


Metro Tabernacle Church in Kuala Lumpur was attacked on 8 Jan 2010 (Pic courtesy of Sivin Kit)

But should Christians back down on calling God "Allah" when they have been using "Allah" for centuries? How do Christians feel in the wake of the attacks? How should they respond?
Council of Churches of Malaysia Youth Moderator and executive council member Chrisanne Chin and Bangsar Lutheran Church pastor Rev Sivin Kit shared their views with The Nut Graph on 11 Jan 2010 in Petaling Jaya. Kit is also co-initiator of Christian advocacy website The Micah Mandate.
TNG: Why do Christians have to use "Allah" to refer to God in Bahasa Malaysia? Why can't it be substituted with "Tuhan"?
Sivin Kit: It's historically evident that Malaysian Christians have been using "Allah" to refer to God in our Bible translations and publications since before Independence. From the perspective of Bible translation, it is consistent with translation methodology and principles for "Allah" to be translated as God in Bahasa Indonesia and Bahasa Malaysia. For Sabahan and Sarawakian Christians, referring to God as "Allah" is part and parcel of the fabric of their faith life.
What is your response to the suggestion that "Allah" be used by Christians only in Sabah and Sarawak, but not in Peninsular Malaysia?
Chrisanne Chin: That's not viable. East Malaysians come to Peninsular Malaysia to study and work. They ask for Bahasa Malaysia church services because that's the language they're comfortable with. They also use their Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesia bibles which translate God as "Allah".

Kit (Courtesy of Sivin Kit and Ong Eng Jee)
Kit: Once we go down that path, it will raise the question of what 1Malaysia really means. Christians in Peninsular Malaysia and East Malaysia referring to God in different ways creates an awkward situation. It does not solve the problem. In fact, it would create even more confusion.
In the light of the attacks on churches, do you think Christians should compromise on using "Allah"?
Chin: I don't think churches are intimidated, I don't think they're going to stop using "Allah". It's just part of language. Ibans call God "Allah Taala", it's part of the Iban language. You can't say it's Indonesian. It's not. How can you tell an indigenous Malaysian not to use his [or her] own language? It's a little bit ridiculous.
Kit: I think that the Christian community, and specifically the Catholic Church, is under a lot of pressure to back down. If the attacks are indeed linked, and if Christians stopped using "Allah" because of them, we would be legitimising these attacks. We would be saying this method is the right way to resolve problems. This would be sending the wrong signal. The threat of violence is not the way to pressure any particular group. We need to rise above this and intensify our efforts to sit down together and work towards a solution.
How would you advise Christians to respond to these attacks?
Chin: No need to panic, don't be intimidated ... We need to pursue what's right. If we talk about justice, mercy and righteousness — this is the path we have to take. This opens a path to dialogue with our Muslim brothers and sisters. Christians have to rise above violence and show leadership on how to pursue this issue.
Kit: For Christians, this is an opportunity to draw spiritual resources from their faith traditions. That will help us to be firm and yet gentle in our engagement, even with those who disagree with us. This is a very important opportunity for us to really engage at a deeper level, of really respecting and understanding where each of us is coming from.

Syed Hamid Albar
What would you like or expect from the government?
Chin: Go back to the status quo [when Christians used "Allah" freely]. We didn't start this. It was (then Home Minister Tan Sri) Syed Hamid Albar who made that ruling in 2007 to give Herald a tough time, which has [escalated] to what it is now. He also flip-flopped on the issue.
We need good, strong leadership from the government. Be firm, don't politicise "Allah" for the sake of Umno. Set up an interfaith commission. Allow scholars, mufti, pastors and priests to talk. It will be a good way to help educate people about how to think through and solve problems.
Kit: The government must go beyond superficial band-aid approaches. I would expect the prime minister to immediately meet church leaders and also other [religious] leaders. I also expect the government to initiate dialogues where the facts of this matter can be presented to those who have strong opinions against it.
There have been groups that were involved in the [8 Jan 2010] protests that say they want to help to protect churches. We would prefer that zeal to be transferred towards coming and sitting down at the same table to talk about this. So that they hear from us directly and understand our point of view, and not depend on misinformation from Utusan Malaysia, for example.
A private interfaith dialogue has been mooted by the government to resolve the issue. Will that work?
Kit: The problem with closed-door dialogues is it gives people a sense of secrecy and lack of transparency in the discussions. There's a hunger for more openness. This would also be an opportunity to be bipartisan. The dialogue should include key non-governmental organisations (NGO) and Pakatan Rakyat leaders. This is a chance for the government to show leadership that goes beyond personal politics.
We should have an open and public dialogue for awareness and education where the official representatives of faith communities can state their positions.

Chin
Chin: If they are genuine about interfaith dialogue, it shouldn't end with just dialogue. There should be an interfaith commission or council. Make it open, clarify the purpose and objectives and what they're trying to establish. There shouldn't just be talk to placate people, and that's it.
Kit: People may actually be more worried about conversion rather than the use of "Allah" by non-Muslims. There have been comments, for example, on the intent and the motivation to maintain the use of "Allah" among Christians. If this is the case, we need to be able to discuss the conversion issue, which is separate from the use of "Allah". This goes all ways, whether it's Muslims converting to Christianity or vice versa. If there is suspicion and unhappiness on the part of either party, we need to talk about it openly and work towards some form of relating to each other.
Are the attacks and the angry responses to the 31 Dec 2009 High Court decision an indication that the relationship between Muslims and Christians has deteriorated in Malaysia?
Chin: I don't think so. I don't think all Muslims share the same thinking. I think Muslims and Christians still love and respect each other and this has just been exploited by some groups to the country's detriment. We have to see ourselves first as Malaysians and work together. After 50 years of independence, it's about time Christians and Muslims get together to talk openly about what really bugs them.
Kit: On the surface, it may appear to be a setback. Unfortunately, many may not be aware of the good relations between Muslims and Christians and people of other faiths. There have been encouraging signs such as interfaith forums organised in universities and between different faith-based NGOs.
Many Muslims actually spoke out to reject and condemn the violence. Over 120 groups, including Muslim groups, signed a joint statement within 24 hours condemning the attacks. These incidents have shown a greater willingness to improve on our relationship. I do not want to deny that there are still certain quarters who may lack contact with each other. This is an important call to wake us up, and it applies to Muslims and Christians alike.

Johor church ninth hit

UPDATED
By Syed Jaymal Zahiid
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 14 — The St Elizabeth Catholic church in Kota Tinggi, Johor, was vandalised this morning, with red paint splashed on its walls. This makes it the ninth church hit by firebombs, arson attempts or vandalism in the past week.
Kota Tinggi OCPD, Osman Mohamamed Sebot said the attack was discovered by church authorities at about 8.30am this morning. A police report was subsequently lodged.
“The damage is minor. The paint was splattered at the front part of the church and also [on] partial parts of the entrance door,” Osman told The Malaysian Insider.
“We will step up security measures and increase patrolling time around the area to try and prevent similar incidents from recurring,” he said. Osman stressed that the police would launch a thorough investigation.
He also urged members of the public with relevant information to come forward and assist the police in their investigation.
Osman said the police should not be blamed for the continuing attacks.
“We cannot say that, [as] the attack is done by a third party. But we will try our best to beef up security. We would also need cooperation from the church and other parties,” he said. Before today’s incident, eight Christian churches and a convent school in Selangor, Perak, Malacca, Negri Sembilan and Sarawak had been hit so far in the attacks following the Dec 31, 2009 High Court decision allowing the Catholic Church’s Herald to use the word “Allah.”
On Tuesday, a glass sliding door to the entrance of a Sikh Temple in Sentul here was found cracked from a barrage of stones, making it the first non-Christian house of worship hit since the controversial landmark “Allah” ruling.
The Sikhs also use the term to describe God in their Punjabi language and had unsuccessfully sought to be part of the Roman Catholic Church’s legal suit to use the name, a move that has sparked the anger of Muslims in Malaysia who claim it is exclusive to them.
So far, no one has claimed responsibility for the acts of violence and the authorities have urged the public not to speculate over the attacks.
The worst hit church so far has been the Metro Tabernacle church here, which had its ground floor gutted last week.
Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has said the situation was under control and the attacks were isolated incidents.
He also vowed to use the Internal Security Act (ISA), which allows for detention without trial, against those who stoke religious tension.
Yesterday, Deputy Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar revealed that police now have a lead on the “physical attributes” of the suspects in last Friday’s firebombing attack on the Metro Tabernacle Church in Taman Desa Melawati here.


Break-in at Herald lawyers’ office

Fernandez speaks to the press outside the law firm. — Pictures by Choo Choy May

UPDATE 2
By Debra Chong
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 14 — The law firm of two lawyers acting for Catholic newspaper Herald was found to have been broken into early this morning.
The law firm of Fernandez and Selvarajah is located on Jalan Yong Shook Lin, Petaling Jaya, in a row of shop houses opposite the Civic Centre and about 10 minutes’ walk from the police district headquarters.
Lawyer Derek Fernandez was the first of the firm’s three partners to arrive at the crime scene at about 8.15am, when he alerted the police through his handphone.
“This is a staged robbery,” he told reporters while waiting for the police investigating officer (IO) in a handphone shop downstairs.
The firm occupies the second and third floors, above the handphone shop and a tuition centre. Only the main office on the second floor was ransacked. The perpetrators failed to break the padlock on the third-floor grille.
“It appears some documents are missing,” he said. But he said he was unsure which exactly, as he has not stepped inside the room yet.

Police look for clues outside the law firm.

Fernandez suspects it may be related to the “Allah” court case, which is being appealed by the Home Ministry. “The handphone shop downstairs was not touched. It was a very professional job,” the lawyer added.
A close-circuit television (CCTV) camera on the first floor, which was put in a few years ago to monitor the staircase was sprayed over with black paint.
A laptop belonging to the firm’s female partner was also taken.
“I think they believe my laptop contained information on the church case,” said the woman lawyer, who declined to give her name.
“It does but not the main part,” she disclosed when asked.
S. Selvarajah, who completes the partnership, told reporters the firm’s safe was also forced open and some documents which were kept there were also taken. He added that the firm did not keep any cash inside the safe.
This is not the first time the 13-year-old law firm has been burgled, Selvarajah said when asked.
The first time was some seven to eight years ago, he said, before grilles and padlocks were added to enhance security.
The firm set up at its current premises in 1996.
This morning’s break-in was first discovered by the firm’s receptionist, when she arrived at 7.55am.
Declining to be named, she told reporters she noticed a rag lying on the floor when she was opening the ground floor grille.
Selangor CID deputy chief ACP Khaw Kok Chin said police were on the case and would take down statements from six people who hold keys to the office.
“We will investigate all angles,” Khaw told reporters at the scene when asked if there may be a link to the court controversy.
Several churches in the country have been attacked in the past two weeks, including with petrol bombs, since the High Court ruled that the church had the right under the federal constitution to publish the word “Allah” in the Christian sense.
Islamic groups, however, claim the word is reserved for Muslim use.
The Home Minister has appealed the court decision.


Raja Nazrin minta umat Islam padam kontroversi sebelum merebak

IPOH, Jan 14 — Raja Muda Perak Raja Dr Nazrin Shah hari ini menyeru umat Islam supaya berusaha memadamkan segera perkara-perkara kontroversi di peringkat awal supaya tidak merebak hingga boleh mencetuskan konfrontasi.
“Perkara-perkara berunsur kontroversi tidak harus dipandang kecil malah hendaklah dipadamkan segera di peringkat awal dari dibiarkan merebak,” titah baginda ketika merasmikan persidangan ke-169 Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Melayu Perak (MAIAMP) di sini hari ini.
Baginda bertitah bahawa sejarah membuktikan bahawa peperangan dan pertentangan bermula dari perkara-perkara kecil di mana perkara-perkara yang bersifat kontroversi sangat mudah menjemput reaksi yang akan menambah jurang salah faham malah berpotensi mencetuskan suasana konfrontasi.
“Sedarilah bahawa api yang besar lagi memusnahkan bermula dari bara-bara kecil yang gagal dipadamkan. Kembalikanlah minda untuk mencapai kejayaan sejati yang tidak menjejaskan keharmonian insan dan perpaduan warga dari sifat tidak mahu berganjak semata-mata untuk mempertahankan ego masing-masing yang akhirnya mengakibatkan kesemua pihak menanggung rugi,” titah Raja Nazrin.
Menurut baginda, Islam adalah agama perpaduan dan perpaduan adalah faktor yang sangat diutamakan.
Perpaduan merupakan elemen untuk menjamin hubungan antara insan dapat berlangsung secara harmoni dan ia akan dapat dicapai melalui sifat persefahaman dan saling menghormati, titah baginda.
Raja Nazrin bertitah bahawa perkara-perkara yang boleh meningkatkan persefahaman wajar disuburkan dan perkara-perkara yang boleh menimbulkan persengketaan hendaklah dielakkan.
Baginda juga mengarahkan MAIAMP membuat analisis lengkap tahap pencapaian tahun lalu dengan melakukan bedah siasat secara jujur untuk menerima hakikat kelemahan yang berlaku sepanjang 2009.
“Kesalahan dan kesilapan tidak harus cuba dilindungi kerana tindakan cuba menutup kesalahan dan kesilapan akan memberikan petanda salah yang akan menggalakkan berlakunya kesalahan dan kesilapan lebih besar,” titah baginda. —
Bernama


Muhyiddin tidak akan benarkan isu kalimah ‘Allah’ berulang lagi

OXFORD, Jan 14 — Timbalan Perdana Menteri Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin berkata beliau tidak akan membenarkan isu penggunaan kalimah Allah oleh bukan Islam berulang lagi pada masa depan.
“KIta tidak akan membenarkan sesiapa untuk memainkan isu ini (pada masa depan),” katanya ketika menjawab soalan daripada hadirin selepas menyampaikan syarahan bertajuk “Islam dan Cabaran Kritikal di Malaysia yang mempunyai Pelbagai Agama” di Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies (OCFIS) di sini.
Kata beliau bekas perdana menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad pernah menyebut bahawa proses perundangan bukan jalan penyelesaian terbaik bagi masalah itu dan mungkin ada cara lain.
“Saya setuju setakat peringkat tertentu, apa yang penting ialah untuk menangani keadaan. Beberapa perkara yang telah berlaku telahpun berlaku dan kita berharap ia tidak akan berulang lagi pada masa depan,” katanya.
Katanya beliau menerima sejumlah besar mesej daripada kawan bukan Islam di Sabah dan Sarawak yang menyatakan bahawa ada penganut Kristian yang berkata bahawa banyak pekara yang berlaku tidak akan berlaku pada awalnya “jika kita, penganut Kristian menyatakan tidak akan menggunakan kalimah Allah.”
Ini adalah kerana di Malaysia dan banyak tempat lain di dunia dan di semua negara Islam, Allah adalah satu-satu Tuhan bagi orang Islam, katanya sambil menambah kata bahawa “jadi kita tidak boleh samakannya kepada Tuhan dalam anutan lain ataupun dalam Kristian kerana mereka mempunyai konsep Triniti yang berbeza.”
“Ada banyak perbezaan, saya tidak mahu pergi lebih jauh di dalam isu ini. Saya fikir kita perlu menangani isu di tanah air dengan cara yang kita hadapi di tanah air kerana ada aspek-aspek tertentu dalam kehidupan, budaya, tradisi dan hormat menghormati antara satu sama lain dan kita gunakan itu kepada kekuatan kita.
“Saya fikir kita dapat menanganinya dan Insya-Allah perkara-perkara yang telah berlaku tidak akan berulang lagi,” kata Muhyiddin.


Ikim to host talk on non-Muslim use of‘Allah’

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 14 — The Institute of Islamic Understanding, Malaysia (Ikim) will hold a muzakarah pakar or expert discussion on the disputed use of the word “Allah” by non-Muslims and seek a solution to it on Jan 21.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Dr Mashitah Ibrahim said the closed-door discussion would be a most suitable platform to find an amicable solution to the issue compared to an open forum.
“So, I hope the relevant quarters will take this opportunity to deliberate and resolve the religious issue,” she said after presenting certificates and diplomas to 371 graduates at the 7th convocation ceremony of the Baitulmal Professional Institute (IPB), here, today.
Mashitah, however, said the public should also realise that the issue of the use of the word “Allah” by Catholic weekly Herald, would also have to be resolved in courts.
“The case started at the court, hence it will end at the court. We urge everyone to understand and realise this,” she said.
On the 12 resolutions by 70 Muslim non-governmental organisations which included calling on the Conference of Rulers to intervene in resolving the issue so as to protect the faith of Muslims and to preserve religious harmony, Mashitah said the NGOs’ initiative was for a concerted stand on the issue.
She said the planned muzakarah should also indicate to the other communities that the Muslims were sensitive over matters involving religion.
“This matter should be viewed seriously by the Herald. I hope the issue will be resolved amicably,” she said.
On another matter, Mashitah said the Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council had increased allocation for IPB from RM8.5 million in 2008 to RM12 million in 2009 to increase the number of Muslim professionals. — Bernama

‘Allah’ feud won’t affect investment, says major fund manager

Onlookers gather as police inspect the damage on the Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Petaling Jaya on Saturday. — Reuters pic

PETALING JAYA, Jan 14 — A report by Bloomberg quoting investment fund manager Templeton Asset Management says that the recent arson attacks on Christian churches won’t deter fund managers from putting money in the country. “We are quite positive about Malaysia, we just opened an office and we believe there are great opportunities going forward,” Templeton chairman Mark Mobius, who oversees US$33 billion (RM112 billion) in emerging markets funds, told Bloomberg yesterday. “The attacks are minor incidents that were taken care of by the leadership and don’t pose any big problem.”
The report also noted that the benchmark FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI Index is almost unchanged since the first incidents broke out on Jan 8, and is up 1.5 per cent for the year.
It also quoted Nicholas Zefferys, president of the American Chamber of Commerce Malaysia, however as saying that the attacks on non-Muslim religious places of worship will batter perceptions of the country and pose challenges in branding the country.
Malaysia is struggling to move up the economic value chain and the attacks have come at a difficult time for the country which is perceived to be lagging behind more dynamic regional economies such as Singapore and Indonesia in terms of investor interest.
In terms of the economic outlook for Malaysia, this year, the Bloomberg report quoted senior Asia economist at HSBC Holdings in Singapore, Robert Prior-Wandesforde, as forecasting 6.8 per cent growth this year.
“In terms of fundamentals, Malaysia is pretty well placed to do well because the regional and world trade cycles have turned,” Prior-Wandesforde said. “This will be a mirror image of 2008-2009 when one of the most open economies it suffered the most.”
Nine Christian churches and a convent school in Malaysia were hit by a string of attacks following a Dec 31, 2009 High Court decision allowing the Catholic Church’s Herald publication to use the word “Allah” which raised tensions among many Muslims. A Sikh temple was also attacked by a barrage of stones which cracked a glass door at its entrance.
The Sikhs also use the term to describe God in their Punjabi language and had unsuccessfully sought to be part of the Catholic Church’s legal suit to use the name.
The law firm of two lawyers acting for Catholic newspaper Herald was found to have been broken into early this morning.
Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has said the situation was under control and the attacks were isolated incidents.
Yesterday, Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar revealed that police now have a lead on the “physical attributes” of the suspects in last Friday’s firebombing attack on the Metro Tabernacle Church in Kuala Lumpur.

Allah’ not only word banned

Umno Selangor members protest the ‘Allah’ ruling outside the Istana Kayangan in Shah Alam last week. — Picture by Jack Ooi

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 14 — “Allah”, which is Arabic for God, is not the only word prohibited for use in a non-Muslim context.

In the case of the Catholic newspaper Herald, it is barred from using three other words: Kaabah (Islam’s holiest shrine in Mecca), Solat (prayer) and Baitullah (House of God).

Father Lawrence Andrew, the weekly paper’s editor, told The Straits Times yesterday that the four words were listed in the guidelines issued to the Herald in 2007. The Cabinet decided on the prohibited words in 1986.

The Herald does not use the three latter words, but ran into problems with the Home Ministry for using “Allah” to refer to the Christian God in its Malay-language publications.

Last month, the High Court set aside the government ban on the use of “Allah” by non-Muslims. The court decision outraged many Muslims and was followed by a series of arson attacks on churches.

The ban is not limited to those four words. Malaysian states have enactments listing more Arabic or Malay words as exclusive to Islam.

The New Straits Times yesterday published a list of 25 words that cannot be associated with any religion other than Islam in Pahang. The list is found in the Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non-Islamic Religions Enactment 1989. Also banned are 10 expressions with Islamic origins, such as Subhanallah (Glory be to God) and Alhamdullilah (Praise to God).

Pahang’s Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council deputy president, Datuk Seri Wan Abdul Wahid Wan Hassan, said the law had been in force since 1990.

Syariah Lawyers Association deputy president Muhammad Burok told The Straits Times that all states have similar enactments, with their own lists of banned words.

“It’s not uniform, some have more words than others,” he said.

He pointed out that the enactments had been in force before the Herald controversy surfaced. The Herald’s problems began in 1998, four years after it started publication. It was told not to use the word “Allah”, but following an exchange of correspondence, there appeared to be a compromise by the government.

Father Lawrence said the newspaper had had no problem renewing its annual permit until 2006, when there was a delay. In 2007, it was told that the use of “Allah” and the other words was banned. — The Straits Times

Mature Malaysians stem further tension as ‘Allah’ feud rages

Angry protests shunned by the majority. — file pic

By Syed Jaymal Zahiid

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 14 — While the recent attacks against churches and the raging debate over the “Allah” issue have sparked fears about the fragility of religious and race relations in the country, there is a clear absence of the kind of tension that could potentially tear the country apart.

Most Malaysians appear to have confidence in the sanity of the majority and believe that the police will act decisively.

Khairul Azman Muslim, a 36-year-old civil servant, is one of the many Muslim Malaysians who are deeply affected by the ongoing debate over the “Allah” issue between the country’s Muslims and Christians.

Khairul is “profoundly” upset by the High Court ruling that allowed a Catholic weekly to use “Allah” in its national language edition.

“Memang la kita maghah (of course we are upset),” he said in a thick Kedahan accent. But his despair does not extend beyond words: “Tapi toksah dok buat kalut, ada cagha betui. Protes-protes ni tak baguih untuk ekonomi, kalu buat nanti, la ni, sapa yang susah? (But there is no need to make trouble. All these protests are not good for the economy. If we do all this, who will suffer?)”

Despite vigorous attempts by some from the far-right to fan the fire further, the likelihood of violent clashes remains slim. Political observers believe the easy access to accurate and reliable information has allowed Malaysians of all races to tackle sensitive issues maturely and pragmatically.

“Yes, Malaysians are more mature now compared to 20 years ago,” Ibrahim Sufian told The Malaysian Insider. Ibrahim is the director of Merdeka Center, an independent polling house.

“The current generation is a generation that has faced many challenges and they are also more exposed to information and with this, can think more pragmatically,” he added.

The space to express opinions such as through popular social networking websites like Facebook has “uncapped the pressure valve” and allowed the public to vent their anger through a “dialogue”-oriented channel.

Ibrahim also noted that since the 2008 general elections, the “political evolution” has developed so rapidly that Malaysians are somewhat “de-sensitised” and “would take a few steps back before getting excited over an issue.”

His views are shared by Khoo Kay Peng, an independent political analyst with a local think tank, who said that Malaysians now have more access to information.

“Information say, 20 years ago, was tightly controlled and the only source came from government-linked mainstream media,” he said, adding that this is one of the factors why Malaysians could be easily swayed by communal issues and politics of religion.

The calm demeanour and unthreatening language and gestures by politicians on both sides of the political divide are likely to have helped ensure the generally calm response from ordinary Malaysians.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was also quick to condemn the attacks on the Churches as “heinous”. Other leaders from the party who are known for their right wing views have also blasted the attacks.

Reconciliation and peace was also the order of the day with several Islamic NGOs, despite earlier protests against the “Allah” issue, quickly offering to guard the churches from attacks.

However, Khoo said the reconciliatory undertone of Najib’s and other Umno leaders’ language should not absolve the prime minister from his responsibility.

For Khoo, Najib should be held responsible for the attacks on the Churches.

“Yes the language has been calming and it did help defuse the tension a bit but Najib should have shown more leadership by not allowing the protests,” he said, suggesting the tacit backing of the demonstrations led to perception that Umno had fanned the flames which led to the attacks.

A total of 54 Islamic NGOs held nationwide protests outside mosques after Friday prayers last week.

Najib allowed the demonstrations to proceed amid fears it may have led to violent clashes on a larger scale.

No untoward incident took place, however.

Public Journal (also called official gazette and official diary) is applied to the record, day by day, of the business and proceedings of a public ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_gazette

Public Journal (also called official gazette and official diary) is applied to the record, day by day, of the business and proceedings of a public body.

In some countries, the publication in the official journal is a condition for the law to come into effect (known as publication in the official journal). A public journal is not necessarily released into the public domain.

Show cause letter by the Malaysian government

The Herald was issued with three warning letters before a show cause letter was sent to its publisher on July 16, 2007. A Home Ministry official told the The Sun the first warning letter was dated March 10, 2007, with the second on March 16, 2007, and the third on July 1, 2007. The official said the Herald did not print out its printing number properly and carried articles that were contrary to its publishing permit. The Catholic Herald may have its permit suspended if it goes ahead and publishes an editorial on the Permatang Pauh by-election. An official with the Malaysian Home Ministry's publication control and al-Quran text division said this was because an editorial on the by-election was a topic under current affairs and politics. [4] Che Din Yusof, of the government's Publications Control and Al-Quran Texts Unit said that the "reminder" was not a show-cause letter, per se, but was issued because the newsletter "focused on political issues on Anwar Ibrahim." [5]

Malaysia's government has accused the Christian newspaper of breaking publication rules by running articles deemed political and insulting to Islam, and warned it of stern action. The reprimand underscores the tenuous position of minority religions in multi-ethnic Malaysia amid a growing number of interfaith disputes. Christians, Buddhists and Hindus complain that their rights are being undermined by government efforts to bolster the status of Islam, the country's official religion. [6][7]

The Herald had come under scrutiny for alleged repeated breaches of its permit conditions, and came out strongly in defense of itself. The Herald had assured the Malaysian Home Ministry that the authorities had nothing to worry about as the weekly was targeted at Catholics and not the general public. Its editor, Father Lawrence Andrew, said Herald had never gone beyond issues of religion in its publications. "The editorial is only asking people to pray for a just and fair by-election. Can't we Christians ask fellow Christians to pray? Is that against the law?" He also said "We comment on issues. The Pope comments on issues. It's normal for us to have an ethical interpretation" of current events and politics, Andrew said. "I don't think we were in any way going against the type of content we have chosen." [8] "In our reply to an earlier warning letter from the same person ... we remarked that the Home Ministry had not defined the concept of religion in the application form for the renewal of printing permit, nor is there a definition of religion found in the Federal Constitution," wrote Father Lawrence Andrew, the editor of the publication, in an editorial. "So we asked them to point out where we had gone wrong. We are awaiting their reply." He defended the article, saying it does not degrade Islam or any other religion. "The article was an ethical analysis about the world after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center towers." [5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_v._The_Herald

On February 26, 2009, The Herald got permission to use the word Allah on its masthead, provided it clearly states that the magazine is 'For Christians only'. This was stated in the recently gazetted Internal Security Act signed by the Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar on February 16.[17] However on February 28, 2009, the Home Ministry rescinded the government gazette that allowed conditional use of the word Allah in Christian publications. The government's decision to ban the use of the word Allah in The Herald remained in force until the court decided otherwise. [

On the ruling by the Malaysian government on February 27, 2008, The Herald's editor stated that the controversial ban on the word Allah to mean God for non-Muslims is still in place. Father Lawrence quoting a letter dated February 16, 2009, said that the printing, publishing, sale, issue, circulation and possession of any document and publication relating to Christianity containing the words Allah, Kaabah, Baitullah and Solat were prohibited unless on the front cover of the document and publication are written with the words "FOR CHRISTIANITY" in font type Arial of size 16 in bold.[16]

http://islamic-world.net/islamic-state/malaysia.htm