Acting Prime Minister and Home Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi should be commended for revoking the ban imposed by the Home Ministry o­n the Iban-language Bible, Bup Kudus , after meeting church leaders o­n the issue.

However, having said that, it is most disappointing that the home minister has stated before the meeting that the "ban would be lifted if the ministry was satisfied with the arguments put forward by the Iban community in appealing against the ban."

Instead, what Abdullah should have done is to direct the lifting of the ban immediately, not just o­n the Bup Kudus but also o­n the other 13 Christian publications in Bahasa Malaysia due to the lack of natural justice and a blatant disregard of the right of Christians to practice their faith freely as provided for by the Federal Constitution.

Besides, most Malaysians are generally proficient in Bahasa Malaysia, and Malaysian Christians should have free access to read and be informed about their faith even in the national language.

The government is being insensitive in the first place to the feelings of Christians in classifying their holy book as "undesirable publication and publication prejudicial to public order" and not having prior consultation for example, with the Christian Federation of Malaysia, in respect of the said Prohibition Order.

Islam has already been recognised as Malaysia's official religion, and the Federal Constitution

guarantees the right of freedom for all citizens to practice and propagate their religion. That freedom however is subject to another clause stating that laws "may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam."

This provision seems to provide the authorities with a loophole, for example by identifying publications they claim would cause confusion among Muslims. The word that causes concern is "Allah". It's the word Muslims use for God, but the Arabic word pre-dated Islam and is also used by Christian Arabs when referring to God - despite the considerable differences in the Judeo-Christian and Islamic conceptions of God.

It is simply wrong for individuals to claim monopoly over certain words - terminology or language doesn't belong to any particular religion. It should be universal property. To say that the Iban-language Bible must use some other word to describe God is not the point of argument and doesn't hold water. Shall we then ban the English version of the Quran because it uses the word Allah and not the word God? What about the other teachings of the Quran in English? The use of different languages for all publications, including those of a religious nature, should be encouraged to promote greater understanding.

Language is universal to all peoples irrespective of race or religion. Translations are meant so that all can understand in their own native language. I'm sure all Malaysians, irrespective of race or religion, are mature enough to make their own choice. We should be prepared to discuss issues openly in whatever language. After all, language is o­nly a medium of instruction.

If the government is worried that some Muslims may be confused, it is the government's responsibility to address the problem through educational programmes aimed at Muslims - not choosing the easy way out by banning Christian books based o­n words used. This instance should be seen as reflecting a typical Malaysian mentality - if you can't win them, ban them.

In a multi-religious society like ours, it is important for the government to go through a process of what we call "natural justice" - the right to be heard. It should by all means have consultation or dialogues with the respective religious representatives concerned before making any prohibition decision over questionable materials affecting their religious rights.

It is hoped that such an insensitive first hand decision by the Home Ministry should not be repeated in future. The ban of the other 13 Christian books should also be immediately lifted by Home Ministry, based o­n the above reasons for the lack of "natural justice" in hearing the other side - in this case the respective Christian organisations opinions - before coming to a decision.