Interfaith group deplores Jais raid
Terence NettoPublished: Jan 10, 2014 10:56 AM | Updated: Jan 10, 2014 2:08 PM
Malaysia's leading interfaith council yesterday deplored the raid on the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM), contending that it went beyond the specific article in the federal constitution that barred non-Muslims from proselytising those of the Muslim faith.
MCCBCHST says the raid exceeded the bounds of the federal constitution.
Malaysia's leading interfaith council yesterday deplored the raid on the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM), contending that it went beyond the specific article in the federal constitution that barred non-Muslims from proselytising those of the Muslim faith.
The Malaysian Consultative Congress of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) said after a meeting yesterday that the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department's (Jais) raid and seizure of Malay-language bibles at the BSM premises on Jan 2 was "illegal and void."
The interfaith body noted that the action of Jais, conducted under the provisions of a Selangor State Enactment 1988 (Control of Propagation among Muslims), did not heed the preamble of the same law which states that it was enacted under Article 11(4) of the federal constitution.
The MCCBCHST contended that where there is a conflict between laws enacted at state level and articles in the federal constitution, the latter should prevail because it is the "highest law" in the country.
Section 9
The interfaith body's statement also noted that Jais had conducted the raid under its standard operating procedures (SOP) and had invoked Section 9 of the Selangor Enactment 1988 which bars non-Muslims from use of a slew of terms considered exclusive to Muslims.
The MCCBCHST argued that in relying on Section 9, Jais had ignored the need to read that section together with Article 11(4) of the federal constitution.
It contended that this joint reading was mandated by the judgment in the 2009 High Court case that held in favour of the Catholic Church's publication - The Herald's - right to use the word 'Allah' in their weekly paper.
However, MCCBCHST noted that the Court of Appeal's judgment last September overruling the 2009 High Court decision did not consider this line of argument.
It urged Jais to refrain from abusing its powers on the grounds that no religious body should try to police another religion.
It held that non-interference in the affairs of another religion was a sine qua non of peace and tranquility in a multiracial, multi-religious country.
The Malaysian Consultative Congress of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) said after a meeting yesterday that the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department's (Jais) raid and seizure of Malay-language bibles at the BSM premises on Jan 2 was "illegal and void."The interfaith body noted that the action of Jais, conducted under the provisions of a Selangor State Enactment 1988 (Control of Propagation among Muslims), did not heed the preamble of the same law which states that it was enacted under Article 11(4) of the federal constitution.
The MCCBCHST contended that where there is a conflict between laws enacted at state level and articles in the federal constitution, the latter should prevail because it is the "highest law" in the country.
Section 9
The interfaith body's statement also noted that Jais had conducted the raid under its standard operating procedures (SOP) and had invoked Section 9 of the Selangor Enactment 1988 which bars non-Muslims from use of a slew of terms considered exclusive to Muslims.
The MCCBCHST argued that in relying on Section 9, Jais had ignored the need to read that section together with Article 11(4) of the federal constitution.
It contended that this joint reading was mandated by the judgment in the 2009 High Court case that held in favour of the Catholic Church's publication - The Herald's - right to use the word 'Allah' in their weekly paper.
However, MCCBCHST noted that the Court of Appeal's judgment last September overruling the 2009 High Court decision did not consider this line of argument.
It urged Jais to refrain from abusing its powers on the grounds that no religious body should try to police another religion.
It held that non-interference in the affairs of another religion was a sine qua non of peace and tranquility in a multiracial, multi-religious country.
View Comments0