Judiciary missed golden chance to show fairness
YOURSAY 'It didn't have courage to allow an important national issue to be heard.'
'More battles to come,' Muslims warned
Malaccan: It is sad the Federal Court did not have the courage to even give an opportunity for an important national issue to be heard and clarified. It abdicated its duty when it found the process in the Appeals Court to be technically correct.
Is this all the Federal Court is now - an inspector of technicalities and issuer of excuses? Is it not imbued with a higher purpose? I believe Muslims mourn along with Christians and believers of other faiths today, for an injustice the world injures all.
Of course, some Muslims will rejoice but they do so not because Islam is defended - for Islam never forbade the use of ‘Allah’ - but because these Muslims have little faith and their insecurity requires such injustice to others in order hold steady what little belief they have.
Today weak Muslims won and believing Muslims are left to wonder along with Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, etc, as to where this nation is heading to.
But the struggle for righteousness goes on. It can never stop. It must not.
Proarte: Allowing the appeal would have been the only logical decision. The 'Allah' issue has brought Malaysia into international disrepute as it has exposed the racism, religious ignorance and bigotry of the Malaysian government.
The federal constitution guarantees freedom of worship and the right of non-Muslims to practise their faith in peace and harmony. Barring Catholic weekly The Herald from using the word ‘Allah’ in their publication for internal circulation contravenes constitutional guarantees.
The judges should know that the Quran explicitly says Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same God. Surely the Quran should be the final authority and not Umno or PAS.
The judges therefore should conclude that there are no valid grounds to prohibit the use the word 'Allah' when it is used by Christians to address their God.
Arab Christians have worshipped 'Allah' long before the advent of Islam. Furthermore, Munsyi Abdullah, 'Father of Malay literature' more than 150 years ago translated the New Testament (Injil) into Malay and used the word 'Allah' for God.
Are judges really going to allow banning the work of our own Muslim literary giant, thus calling into question his famed scholarship in Islam, Malay and the Arabic language?
The earliest known New Testament which was translated into Malay 400 years ago also used the word 'Allah' for God. Arab Christian traders used the Arabic Bible which for more than 1,400 years has invoked the name 'Allah' in the text.
Negarawan: The Federal Court bench should have been made of equal numbers of Muslim and non-Muslim members. The fact that the majority of the members are coming from one religious group shows an element of bias is very likely.
It is a big disappointment for non-Muslims as a whole, as the constitution guaranteeing freedom of religion has not been respected and upheld.
Christians in Sabah and Sarawak are the most affected and need to think deeply not only about their freedom of religion, but also whether the 1962 point of agreement has been breached.
Point 1 says, "While there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no state religion in North Borneo, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present constitution of Malaya should not apply to North Borneo."
Anonymous_40f4: Whether it was one judge or seven judges, it was not going to make any difference. We could have easily predicted the verdict.
Ksn: If the Federal Court has an independent stand on the law, neither for nor against any religion, it should allow the original High Court decision to stand.
It should decide that it is futile, not worthy of any religion in opposing any word that any religion wants to use. It is just a word for ‘God’.
BernieBaby: A close friend of mine is visiting from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia where he is a key member (architect) of their New Metro Rail-Bus Architecture team.
He says that in Saudi, he can use the word 'Allah' freely and the Arabs are happy to hear non-Muslims use Arabic words. They shake their heads when they hear that in Malaysia, non-Muslims can't use these Arabic words.
Indeed, this issue would not fly even in Saudi Arabia.
Peacemaker: The Malaysian judiciary has missed a golden opportunity to showcase its impartiality and the axiom that "the judicial robes changeth the man".
The judiciary also scuttled a chance to display the cogency and depth of its intellectual and judicial reasoning to support or dismiss the Court of Appeal judgment.
All in all, it was a missed chance all round.
Anonymous_4048: It's very sad to read that any individual elected and appointed to run Malaysia is making decisions with a myopic vision. Don't they know the decisions to be made have to consider the citizens in Sabah and Sarawak as well as citizens of other religions?
I do understand the need to uphold one's religion but not at the sacrifice of others' beliefs.
Making a ruling for one's own religion is alright, however when regulations cross the boundary of one's religion and affects negatively on the religions/beliefs of others, the only result is the unwelcome dividing of the nation.
Well Thats Fantastic: Why do modern governments feel the compulsion to restrict? Government should be about protecting the people from harm, not being concerned with the symantecs of the words we use.
Screw this government and everything they think they stand for. I'm a Muslim and I reject this ruling.
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 .
For more news and views that matter, subscribe and support independent media for only RM0.36 sen a day:
Subscribe now