Father Lawrence Andrew, the editor of Christian weekly Herald, believes that it will be "difficult to get a fair and impartial hearing" with regards to the Allah controversy.

He is also perplexed as to how the government could obtain a date for the hearing of a stay execution on the high court ruling within 24 hours of filing an appeal.

suicide series 211209-241209 father lawrence andrew 02In a statement, he said there were no grounds for any urgency other than the claim that some people are unhappy and protesting against the court decision.  

The Home Ministry filed the application with the Kuala Lumpur High Court Registry this morning.

The matter will be heard tomorrow before High Court Judge Lau Bee Lan.

Yesterday, the ministry lodged an appeal with the court of appeal against the ruling.

On Dec 31, Justice Lau ruled that pursuant to Articles 11 and 12 of the federal constitution, Herald had the constitutional right to use the word 'Allah' in respect of instruction and education of the congregation in the Christian religion.

She also said that pursuant to Article 11(4) of the federal constitution, it was an offence for non-Muslims to use the word 'Allah' to Muslims to propagate the religion but it was not an offence for non-Muslims to use the word to non-Muslims for the purpose of religion.

Actions to create fear

Meanwhile, Andrew also revealed that the Herald website has come under attack.

"In the days following the brave decision of the high court, our website has been hacked three times with malicious profanities being displayed," he said.

Furthermore, he said police reports were lodged against the Herald even though the court had decided that the publication had a constitutional right to use the word 'Allah'.

"No action had been taken against those who lodged police reports against the decision of the high court. Various newspapers were allowed to attack the court decision with one mainstream paper even having the audacity to make references to the burning of the churches in India so as to cause fear to us.

"All of this has been done within the knowledge of the government and yet no action has been taken against these people in what amounts to a contempt of court, intimidation and the making of subjudice comments on matters which the court had decided on and are pending appeal," he said.

"We believe these actions (are designed) to create a climate of fear and a perceived threat to national security so as to pressure the court in reversing its decision," he added.