The Muslim Scholars Association of Malaysia (PUM) today launched another salvo against the Bar Council telling it not to interfere in Islamic matters and called for the amendment of the Legal Profession Act to prevent the council from airing its views on the matter in future.

PUM stresses that the Bar Council not interfere in Islamic matters as it is the purview of the various state Islamic departments and the Conference of Rulers, said PUM president Abdul Ghani Shamsuddin in a statement.

In the strongly-worded statement, PUM also called on the government to take drastic measures against the Bar Council.

PUM calls on the government to amend the Legal Profession Act to prevent the Bar Council from issuing statements concerning Islam, it said.

PUM is against the freedom of expression supported by the Bar Council if it includes any individuals or organisation that are non-Islam speaking as they like on Islamic matters, stressed Abdul Ghani.

Bar Council human rights committee chairman Cecil Rajendra, writer and academic Dr Farish A Noor, lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Human Rights (Suhakam) Commissioner Zainah Anwar and Dr Patricia Martinez from University Malaya were severely criticised by PUM for their alleged disparaging remarks about Islam during the Festival of Rights function co-sponsored by the Bar Council on Dec 8 last year.

Bar Council chairman Mah Weng Kwai had issued a statement on Monday stating that Cecil had never criticised the religion. He also said the views expressed during the function were that of the speakers and the Bar Council was not part of a conspiracy to attack Islam.

PUM rapped

PUM had also submitted a memorandum to the Conference of Rulers urging that action be taken against Farish, Malik, Patricia, Zainah and others which include the Sun columnist Akbar Ali and academic Kassim Ahmad

Last month, PUM lodged a report with the National Fatwa Council against Farish and The Edge business weekly. It claimed Farish had belittled the Prophet and the ulama in an interview published by the weekly.

PUM itself became a target of criticism when civil society groups, opposition parties and prominent individuals attacked its stance as being against the tenets of the freedom of speech and expression.