The Malaysia Islamic Development Department (Jakim) could consider filing a libel suit against lawyer Eric Paulsen, who issued an offending statement on his Twitter page relating to Islam that angered Muslims in this country.

Senior lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun said Jakim could file the lawsuit for defamation or libel over the words used by Paulsen, which in their common or ordinary meaning, accused Jakim of being involved in terrorism, extremism and jeopardising racial tolerance (through its Friday sermons).

Mohd Hafarizam, who has been handling many libel suits, said in protecting the sanctity of Islam - besides prosecuting the offenders for incitement against or insulting Islam - libel action could be taken to serve as a lesson for those who made such libelous statements and for others as well.

"All stakeholders, which include the government, the opposition, civil society and the people at large should be more responsible, aware and sensitive of religious issues and sensitivities.

"A law, no matter how sophisticated or encompassing it is, will have no meaning if it is not respected," he told Bernama when asked about the recent statement against Jakim over its Friday sermons by Paulsen, who is the executive director of Lawyers For Liberty.

On Jan 9, Paulsen had posted on his Twitter page, "Jakim is promoting extremism every Friday. Gov't needs to address that if serious about extremism in Malaysia."

The posting was, however, removed following strong criticism from various quarters. Paulsen was subsequently arrested by police in Brickfields and investigated under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948.

On Jan 14, Bukit Aman CID director Mohmad Salleh said the investigation papers on Paulsen's case would be handed over to the Attorney-General's Chambers soon, following his release on police bail after being remanded for two days.

Mohd Hafarizam said an amendment to the Sedition Act - by including provision for the protection of the sanctity of Islam - must be done fast, as the misdeed of insulting Islam to incite had become increasingly rampant.

'Many acts still that can be amended'

He said there were still many acts that could be considered for amendments like the Penal Code to prevent irresponsible parties from issuing sensitive statements against any religion.

"Nevertheless, what we ultimately want to achieve is everlasting racial and religious harmony and tolerance. This requires strategic implementation encompassing all - Parliament, the executive, judiciary, police, academia and the people."

Mohd Hafarizam also suggested intensified efforts by Jakim and other related government agencies to create an extensive and deeper understanding of Islam, not just among Muslims, but people of other religions as well.

He said this was not against the law as the federal constitution did not prohibit any giving of explanations or exposure to Islamic teachings.

The Council of Professors' head of the governance, law and public administration cluster, Prof Dr Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmod, said the lawsuit could be filed by Jakim if it was convinced there were elements of libel in Paulsen's statement against the agency relating to Islam.

"He was detained and investigated under the Sedition Act. Therefore, his statement would have created hatred against the government and racial animosity," he noted.

Nik Ahmad Kamal added that as currently, there was no specific provision in the Sedition Act to deal with insults against the Islamic religion to incite, such provision needed be included fast in the Act, which could even strengthen it.

He said for the offence of insulting a religion or disrupting religious harmony, the Sedition Act provided for a fine or jail term of up to two years upon conviction, while Section 298A of the Penal Code provided for a stiffer penalty of two to five years' jail.

He cited the case of controversial couple Alvin Tan and Vivian Lee who were charged under Section 298A of the Penal Code for mocking Muslims in the month of Ramadan.

- Bernama