YOURSAY ‘What kind of stupid nonsense is this minister talking about?’
Nancy: 'Burn Bible' speech based on constitution
Kim Quek: Minister in the PM’s Department Nancy Shukri was talking nonsense when she claimed that the exoneration of Perkasa chief Ibrahim Ali is supported by the federal constitution under Article 11, clause 4.
This clause only says that a state government may pass legislation to control or restrict proselytising to Muslims. So, even if there is such a law in that particular state, Ibrahim can only make a report to the authorities for possible action if he has evidence of proselytisation to Muslims (he has none in this case).
But for him to incite others to seize the bibles and burnt them, this is absolutely a criminal offence. Under no stretch of imagination can Ibrahim seek shelter under Article 11(4).
It is hence shocking that leading custodians of law like de facto law minister Nancy and attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail should have come up with such an absurd legal justification to defend an obviously indefensible criminal offence.
This is such a clumsy lie to deny the double standard of law enforcement which is now so pervasively practiced by the BN government that it has made a complete mockery of our rule of law.
MinahBulat: Article 11(4) - “State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Lubuan, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.”
Nancy, look at the constitution. The operative word is to control and restrict the propagation of other religious doctrine to Muslims.
If that person breach the law charged him. How does the threat of burning the Bible come under this article? Can someone in Attorney-General’s Chambers please comment?
Bemman: This is really bizarre coming from a minister. If what she said holds water, it would seem now that the constitution allows anyone to take the law into his own hands in the name of protecting the sanctity of Islam.
If it is true that some Christians are using the Malay and Iban versions of the Bible to proselytise Muslims, produce concrete evidence of this and bring those Christians to book in accordance with the laws of the land.
I cannot see how threatening to burn the Bible is acting in line with the constitution.
Siang Malam: Since when is threatening to burn another religion's sacred/holy books is considered true Malaysian spirit according to the federal constitution? What kind of stupid nonsense is this minister talking about?
Mohican: What I understand from Article 11(4) of the federal constitution is that if a non-Muslim is in breach of the restriction contained therein, then it is up to the appropriate law to punish the offender for such breach and not for Ibrahim Ali to cause a bible-burning incident.
To my mind, Nancy and the AG are struggling to comprehend the true meaning of Article 11(4).
It has always been a mystery to me how some in Malaysia feel honoured and vindicated by the burning of scriptures of their fellow citizens. This is an utterly disgraceful, inhuman and ungodly act. Only Satan wants the Bible burned.
Anonymous #559621903: The constitution would never sanction the burning of bibles. The apex court made a ruling that ‘Allah’ can only be used by Muslims.
However, the court did not suggest anything be done to the bibles that may already carry the contentious term. The attempt to burn the bibles was entirely that of Ibrahim's own enterprise and the home minister should re-look the possibility of charging him.
Fairnsquare: There was no propagation of Christianity to Muslims as the bibles were intended for the bumiputera Christians of East Malaysia. The threat by Ibrahim Ali was to incite the Christians and this is against the constitution and is seditious.
Nancy, do not underestimate the intelligence of the rakyat. Let us not try to justify an unfair action. We must be fair in excecution of the law and not selectively. Selective persecution cannot be justified.
Can we expect a fair execution of the Sedition Act if we are not able to replace it. Is this too much to ask from the government?
Anonymous #40112563: We should be careful that in our eagerness to be fair, we inadvertently support the continued existence and use of the Sedition Act.
Ibrahim Ali should be held accountable using other laws (which are not arbitrary but well defined), which would give him a chance to defend himself just as we would want it for all the others who are currently being investigated or already charged under the Sedition Act.
We should be focused on getting the Sedition Act repealed. Maybe the churches can sue him for defamation or criminal intimidation?
Imanust Nais Yalam: I feel so grateful today. Thank you Sarawakians, for producing such talented ministers like Nancy Shukri and thank you again for voting her into power. Don't you all just love that it is now constitutional to burn bibles?
I am just waiting for the day she declares the Guru Granth, Baghavad Gita and Diamond Sutra to join the burn list.
Onyourtoes: Nancy, you are talking nonsense again. Was there any evidence that the Malay bibles were used to propagate Christianity to Muslims?
If there was no evidence, how can Ibrahim justify the burning of bibles was said in defence of Islam as stipulated in 11(4) of the federal constitution?
CQ Muar: Who is the real culprit who jeopardise harmony and hurt the feelings of others all along, Nancy? Are you so short of memory and myopic?
Please don't say things to qualify and justify your statements or arguments - be honest with yourself and the rakyat.
Kangkung: Everyone has to "calm down and refrain from making statements that can jeopardise harmony and hurt the feelings of others" except for the Perkasa leader.
Nancy, would the Umno government and the AG’s Chambers be so kind if a non-Muslim had made a similar threat to burn the Quran?
SusahKes: Remember the line from MAD magazine - "Contribution by the usual gang of idiots"? My thoughts exactly when I read of Nancy's response.
AG, your turn to explain ‘okay to burn Bibles’
