I refer to the statement by Ridhuan Tee wherein as reported in Free Malaysia Today (June 10, 2016) that he said that it is the right of the Muslim community for the government to spend MCA members’ tax money to build mosques and suraus as it is provided in the Federal Constitution.

With this statement, it is then concluded that Ridhuan Tee agrees that MCA is not an “anti-Islam” party because when MCA members submit themselves to the Federal Constitution, they also recognise Article 3 which declares that “Islam is the religion of the Federation.”

As citizens of the Federation of Malaysia, MCA members themselves uphold the constitution and hence Ridhuan Tee is totally correct here. By submitting to the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, hence Ridhuan Tee should not label MCA as “anti-Islam” in the first place.

Again Ridhuan Tee was right again when he mentioned about “rights” in in the Federal Constitution. He should then realise that the enhancement of the Syariah Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 contravenes with the spirit of the Federal Constitution ie Article 8 which guarantees that all Malaysians are equal in the eyes of the law.

It is just pure simple logic if one submits to the Federal Constitution, then one should not even allow it to be contravened in the first place.

On his last paragraph that Tunku Abdul Rahman’s speech is non-binding, it is with much regret that if a prime minister’s speech in Parliament is non-binding then what is binding? When Tunku made announced in Parliament on May 1, 1958, “Saya ingin menjelaskan bahawa negara ini bukan sebuah negara Islam seperti yang difahami secara umumnya; kita hanya menyatakan bahawa Islam hendaklah menjadi agama rasmi Negara,” he was responding to the query brought from the floor and the press and hence, responded it swiftly in accordance with the Federal Constitution.

Perhaps Ridhuan Tee should relook at the time and place, and circumstance when Tunku made the remarks. I had never questioned the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation. In fact, I grew up in a Malay Muslim town in the 1980s and 1990s. I have more Malay Muslim friends than Chinese friends. MCA refutes Ridhuan Tee’s “anti-Islam” label on us and urge him to stop calling MCA thus as he mentioned in his first statement.

Questions were also posed to Ridhuan Tee, with so many social ills in Kelantan, what can he suggest to improve the situation rather than just focus on the enhancement of Act 355 because current laws are sufficient to address the current social ills.

And, please do not shift the goal post because what was refuted was his statement profiling MCA as “anti-Islam” and once again, by him saying there are provisions in the constitution to follow, then when MCA disputed him, our party’s aim to safeguard Article 8 of the Federal Constitution is not wrong at all and is correct in its place.

CHRIS DANIEL WONG is Bangsar MCA Youth chairperson and MCA Religious Harmony Bureau secretary.