The Muslim Scholars Association of Malaysia (PUM) should recognise the inevitability of civil society groups taking it to task (Civil Society groups to take PUM to task, Feb 24) for its attempt to take action against six writers.

Instead of claiming its memo was misunderstood (PUM disheartened over criticism, claims its memo was misunderstood, Feb 26), the scholars would do better to understand why they have come under attack by civil society groups.

Civil society groups, which exist to propagate some pattern of life or ideal of conduct that they believe to be objectively valuable, will always champion the right to defend the free space for public discourse and debate.

By claiming the divergent viewpoints of the writers on interpretation of Islam to have disparaged the religion and to use this as a basis to complain to the Council of Rulers in order to cower, intimidate and restrain the writers from further expressing their viewpoints is to attack freedom of thought and expression s prestige, relevance and political influence — indeed survival as a class — within the Malay political culture and polity repose.

PAS' control over Kelantan and Terengganu, its inroads to the Malay heartland of the North and Umno's Islamisation programme and proclamation of its own version of the "Islamic state" underscore the rise of religious consciousness within the Malay-Muslim community over which PAS and Umno compete for legitimacy drawn on religious lines.

Just as the ulama are now reasserting their rise and growing influence due to these developments, one can imagine their chagrin and consternation when writers like Dr Farish A Noor who contend that Islamic discourse is "plastic and open" thereby depriving the ulama their exclusive authority over Islamic discourse, and ultimately their influence and power.

To the ulama, it is not an issue of democracy to whom it holds little relevance. By training and specialisation, ulama do not brook free debate on matters of religion even though religious obligations and moral duties as are propagated by them tend to influence every political, economic, social and cultural issue in the country.

It is, in reality, an issue of influence, power and vested interest, and it is understandable why PUM would seek to take action against the writers.

Although admittedly PUM has the right to complain to the Council of Rulers — the proper and probably only audience available to the ulama within the constitutional framework — it should also bear in mind that our constitutional framework allows the freedom of speech as befitting the multicultural composition of our society in which diversity of viewpoints and tolerance of differing opinions are supposedly valued and upheld.

If PUM does take it upon itself to act on the writers, then it should be prepared to accept criticisms and flak from whatever quarters, and not use the sanctity and prestige of religion to quell criticisms, because all Malaysians — Muslims or non-Muslims alike — have a legitimate interest in the contest of how the soul of Islam would be defined here since it affects everyone, their children's future and the nation.

No matter how much ulama deserve reverence, their vested interest cannot override the larger interest of what is appropriate for the interest of a pluralistic nation like Malaysia in its march to meet the challenges of this millennium.