YOURSAY ‘Going round and round to solve a problem... and still can’t find the answer.’

 

Speaker agrees Malaysia is not secular

                             

Malaccan: I don't expect much of Dewan Rakyat speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia. He is not a statesperson so it’s not fair to compare him to the likes of Selangor assembly speaker Hannah Yeoh .

 

However, has he not even read the statements on what the Reid Commission had said? It says clearly that nothing in the clause on Islam as inserted into the constitution should be read as the nation not being secular.

 

In short, it was and is the nature of the country to be secular. Of course this is my observation, and I am not an authority on this, but for the purpose of this forum, the House speaker spoke idiotically.

 

Tan Kim Keong: Mr Speaker, Article 4 if the constitution stipulates that the constitution is the supreme law of the land. And the law is secular, not based on a certain religion. So this country is a secular state. These are facts, not my interpretation.

 

Appum: Another first for Malaysia. Dewan Rakyat speaker overrules the Federal Court. So that makes Pandikar the highest authority in the nation.

 

Gerard Lourdesamy: The speaker is right but the Federal Court has decided that Malaysia is not an Islamic state since it is governed by secular laws. The speaker did not make a ruling that Malaysia is an Islamic state.

 

As far as Sabah and Sarawak are concerned, they are secular states because in the Malaysia Agreement both states opted not to have an official religion but recognised Islam as the religion of the federation.

 

This position changed in Sabah in 1972 when Islam was made the religion of the state but Sarawak's position remains unchanged as it is a Christian majority state.

 

RR: If it is not a secular state, does not mean it is an Islamic state? All countries use a prayer or ceremony related to a religion or religions for official functions.

 

In Malaysia, since it is majority Muslim nation, Islamic prayer is used at such functions. This does not make Malaysia an Islamic state when even Turkey or Indonesia with a much larger Muslim population is a secular state by declaration.

 

David Dass: The Cobbold Commission carried out a referendum in Sabah and Sarawak as to whether they wanted to merge with Malaya to form Malaysia. Among the concerns they had were the provisions relating to Islam as the religion of the federation.

 

That resulted in the 18/20 point agreements, the first clause of which recognises the Christian majority in both states and says that Islam would not be the religion of Sabah and Sarawak.

 

We have a federal constitution which declares itself as the supreme law of the federation. All our rights as citizens devolves from the constitution. In addition, religious freedom is guaranteed and all citizens are declared to be equal before the law.

 

Successive prime ministers and courts in Malaysia have reaffirmed the secular nature of our constitution.

 

Dr Mahathir Mohamad did say that we were considered an Islamic country for the purpose of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC). He also said that no constitutional amendments were required. Why is there this confusion ?

 

Rightan: We may not be secular, but certainly we are circular. Going round and round to solve a problem which was created by some idiots and still can’t find the answer.

 

Vijay47: Pandikar, thank God that in announcing that Malaysia was not secular, you put in a caveat explaining that your statement was only your interpretation and not that your "opinion is an authority".

 

You thus imply that your opinion, based as it is only on "your interpretation", is somehow authoritative enough to be binding in Parliament.

 

Since you were armed only with your opinion which you readily or even proudly admit is not founded on anything substantive, why did you not open the motion to discussion in Parliament so that all facets of the issue would be explored?

 

But I must add, Pandikar Amin, that you truly reflect the quality of your position.

 

Odin: Pandikar, soldier on with your assertion - of which you have described as your personal interpretation due to your lacking of bollocks.

 

Get your Umno colleagues to make the same assertion one after another over the next few weeks. The result will be very interesting to watch. Now, get on with it.

 

CHKS: The speaker is just trying to twist and turn. That's not the definition of the secular we are talking about here.

 

Malaysia is not the secular nation in that sense of without an official religion, but neither is Malaysia an Islamic nation. That's what the speaker avoided saying.

 

Casey: In Che Omar Che Soh, the five-member bench of the Supreme Court, held that:

 

1. The term 'Islam' or 'Islamic religion' in Article 3 of the Federal Constitution in the context means only such acts as relates to rituals and ceremonies; and

 

2. During the British colonial period, through their system of indirect rule of secular institutions, Islamic law was rendered isolated in a narrow confinement of the law of marriage, divorce and inheritance only.

 

It is in this sense of dichotomy that the framers of the constitution understood the context of Islam in Article 3.

 

Saying by the way, then Lord President Salleh Abas observed that: “..if it had been otherwise, there would have been another provision in the constitution which would have the effect that any law contrary to the injunction of Islam will be void... Far from making such provision, Article 162, on the other hand, purposely preserves the continuity of secular law prior to the constitution.”

 

Indeed, Malaysia is not the peculiar secular democracy, for many countries today that are secular in practice may have legal traces of established religion that it embraces. Secularism could indeed co-exist with some degree of official religiosity.

 

In the United Kingdom, for example, the head of state is still required to take the coronation oath swearing to maintain the ‘Protestant Reformed Religion’ and preserve the established Church of England.

 

Similarly, it also maintains the positions of the 26 Lords Spiritual in the House of Lords who are the senior clergymen of the Church of England.

 

But all that doesn't mean that the United Kingdom is not a secular state.  

 

Anonymous #41463424: While Malaysia is arguing about race and religion day in, day out, other neighbouring countries are busy building their economies.

 

No wonder, we fall behind even though we are one of the richest countries with vast natural resources.       

 

Rightan: If the minister/speaker said that we are not secular, then at least also say that we are not Islamic to be consistent.

 

To only say one half of the truth and omit the other equally important half is an act of irresponsibility.

 

To say the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth is a hallmark of any man with integrity.

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .