A controversy is raging over the right to discuss religion following the memorandum sent by the Muslim Scholars Association of Malaysia (PUM) to the Conference of Rulers seeking action to be taken against several writers and publications who were alleged to have insulted Islam.

The memorandum claimed that the writers and publications humiliated Islam and belittled Prophet Muhammad and the ulama ( religious scholars) in their writings.

It sparked reactions from moderate groups and individuals who felt that PUM was trampling on the people's right to discourse on religion.

The culmination was a public forum entitled "Freedom of Expression in Religion" jointly-organised by seven non-governmental organisations and a call for more inter- and intra- faith discussions.

About 80 people turned up for the forum held at the Bar Council Auditorium today. One pertinent issue raised was whether different opinions in religious matters could be considered a 'crime' as PUM had called for punitive measures on those deemed to have dissenting views from the Muslim scholars body's.

More discussions

The speakers, Dr Chandra Muzaffar, Prof Shad Faruqi, Dr Chris Boey, Dr Yeoh Seng Guan, K Haridas, A Sivarasa and Ustaz Uthman Muhammady were unanimous on the need to hold more dialogues to discuss the freedom of expression in religion.

They also agreed that mutual respect and understanding is important for discussions on religious matters.

Central to PUM's displeasure were articles by writers such as Dr Farish A Noor who, citing from another author, wrote that Prophet Muhammad was regarded as a tribal leader and had sexual relations with 13 other women, including a slave called Rayhana who remained a non-Muslim.

Another writer Akbar Ali wrote that ulama were incapable of rational thought while the Bar Council's human rights sub-committee was accused of attempting to topple Islam in the country when they came to Farish's defence following PUM's uproar over the piece.

Uthman, a distinguished fellow of the Malaysian Institute of Islamic Understanding, took time to explain about the PUM controversy based on what transpired at a forum organised by the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia last month.

He said Farish had apologised for what was actually an omission on his part of the actual context for his remarks about the Prophet Muhammad which eventually led to his article being criticised as an insult to Islam.

Uthman said he understood why the PUM sent a memorandum to the Conference of Rulers as a last resort after a series of events failed to elicit any explanation from the parties concerned.

Be constructive

"However, my appeal to religious scholars here is to refrain from doing what their counterparts in other countries do — slugging each other instead of complementing each other's work in constructive religious discourse.

"We should look for an avenue of mutual cooperation to bridge the cultural and religious gaps in a multi-ethnic society like ours," he said, adding that Farish had also not set out to interpret the Al-Quran.

Uthman said dialogues should be encouraged in order for Asian culture to meet on common values so that people do not become morally and spiritually bankrupt.

Lawyer Sivarasa said he was troubled by the fact that the PUM was quick to call for those whose views they found 'offensive' to be jailed.

Acknowledging that a slur on a religious personality is taken very personally, especially in developing countries, Sivarasa said that is why the articulation of duties and responsibilities was important so that a line can be drawn for freedom of expression.

"To me, the line is clear. When certain remarks incite racial or religious hatred, that's where the freedom of expression stops.

"But the real sting in the memorandum was the call for criminal action to be taken against the writers. Does Farish, for example, have to be jailed for saying certain things about Islam?

"There must be a way for public discourse to be conducted. We need to work out how our society should deal with remarks which are more serious than those by these writers," he said.

International Movement for a Just World president Chandra, in his overview, said the important first step is the way religion is understood.

Dangerous trend

He said the PUM's call for criminal action for divergent views is a "very dangerous trend", as in Pakistan where religious pronouncements are issued for any comments which scholars think disparage Islam.

"It is clear that both the 'offensive' statements used by the PUM were taken out of context and Farish should have explained that in detail. But should legal/criminal action be taken for this?

"It is dangerous to react by criminalising every comment made. Instead, Muslims should be open to criticism and public discourse as was previously practiced by the clerics and intellectuals."

The speakers agreed that clerics should not be treated on the same level as the sacred personalities of the respective religions like Prophet Muhammad or Jesus Christ, and that they should be open to public scrutiny and criticism.