The posturing by Islamists reminds me of a defenders wall outside the penalty box, where footballers stand shoulder-to-shoulder with their hands covering their groin. What makes this a comical sight in the Malaysian political pitch is that the ball is actually out of play.

Recently, the Muslim fundamentalists went into yet another huddle. Their 'Islam under attack' battle-cry featured Federal Territory Gerakan this time as the antagonist. The skirmish though was a non-starter as the Chinese-dominated party's state chief Datuk Dr Tan Kee Kwong was clearly nowhere near the goalpost.

On April 1, significantly Fools Day, Tan made some remarks about the Perak mufti Harussani Zakaria during the Gerakan convention. On April 7, he released a press statement: "I humbly and sincerely apologise for the remarks." What need Islamists fear from a purported opponent who eats humble pie? It's hardly the tough guy diet of raw eggs and red meat, is it?

As for Tan's sincerity, the Gerakan chief says one thing and barely a week later, apologises for it. Which are we to believe, the man in Week 1 or Week 2? What's the dictionary definition of 'apology'? Oxford has it as 'to say one is sorry for having done something wrong or for upsetting somebody'.

Most visibly upset by Tan's remarks was PAS. The PAS back-up squad (not even its first 11) charged into the field and Gerakan collapsed at the first tackle. The non-Muslim electorate at whom Tan's political gambit was aimed would do well take the measure of both parties through this telling episode.

PAS' red hot rage is an accurate reflection of its constituency's groundswell of anger. You can read online the strong and incendiary sentiments of the grassroots in PAS organ Harakah; the Islamist party has spoken steadfastly for them. Meanwhile the rest of us who do not have any political affiliations might say to Barisan Nasional (BN) non-Muslim parties: don't play politics if you can't play ball.

Now, about saying sorry ... "During the press conference [on April 1], Tan raised his concern over non-Muslims being made to attend syariah court proceedings and called on the authorities to take action against persons spreading rumours though SMSes which created religious tension and specifically mentioned the case involving Harussani," reports the Sunday Star. [Writer's note: The Sunday Star's April 8 article headlined "FT Gerakan chief apologises for remarks on Perak mufti" is sourced from national news agency Bernama and its fifth paragraph reads: "An English daily had erroneously reported (April 2) that the FT Gerakan had passed a resolution calling for the removal of Harussani over the spread of a baseless SMS which alleged that seafarer Datuk Azhar Mansor had renounced Islam." Could Sunday Star be unaware that the unnamed 'English daily' originating the erroneous report was its own weekday edition The Star?]

With this apology, we can take it that Tan is regretting his April Fools escapade. So voters thinking about giving him and his party their mandate should not expect him to raise similar concerns in future, like what police action, if any, has been taken against the SMS sender(s) and the unruly crowd that laid siege to the church.

Furthermore, Tan in expressing his apology explained that the remarks were made in his 'personal capacity'. Bearing in mind that he was speaking as state chairman to journalists at an important and official party function, this to me is disingenuous. Nonetheless, we shall take him at his word. If readers find themselves in any position at all to endorse Tan remaining in public office, please remember that he is inclined to speak only in his personal capacity. He may not presume to speak for you in his official capacity.

Speaking in his personal capacity then, Tan's call on the authorities for action carries about as much weight as that of any other private citizen. Speaking in his personal capacity, Tan's talk is no more than for the edification of himself and his Gerakan cohorts. Press coverage for a national audience was therefore wasted on him.

Gerakan: going nowhere

Outgoing Gerakan president Dr Lim Keng Yaik in a press conference at his party HQ said in conjunction with Tan's press release: "I hope with this statement and clarification, the issue is closed and that the people would not take it out of context."

Will boiling issues go away just because Lim hopefully twitters 'case closed'? PAS is incensed at the call to sack Harussani, viewing it as a challenge to Islam, and is emboldened by winning this round. I have a few questions and I would appreciate being enlightened. Is the office or person of Perak mufti mentioned anywhere in the Quran or Sunnah? Is Harussani appointed by God or man? Could not some other ulama (say one nominated by PAS) do a better job as mufti of Perak and in promoting better inter-faith relations?

When there was an outcry here against Pope Benedict over his gaffe, did PAS consider criticisms of the pontiff an attack on Christianity? Mind you, the pope has far more relevance in terms of global numbers and centuries of tradition to Catholics than does the mufti relative to Perak Muslims.

In what way can Tan's (now recanted, I presume) remarks be viewed as meddling in Islam? He did not touch on Islamic tenets or practices or any other pillars of the faith. He merely called for Harussani, a controversial ulama, to be 'removed'.

In any case, aside from the bogey that the country's non-Muslims, especially Chinese, are out to undermine Islam, that aahh, 'cukup sensitif' hot potato, the Malay special position also came into play. PAS youth exco uztaz Ridhuan Mohd Nor invoked playing with fire and May 13, and Harakah reports that a representative of PAS Youth Selangor called (echoing Umno's on race) to 'bathe in blood' in the defence of Islam.

Each Malay ruler is the head of religion in his state, and the hiring and firing of the mufti is the Sultan of Perak's prerogative. Given that Sultan Azlan Shah was once Lord President the highest ranking judge in the land who better to petition for a fair hearing? That is if Tan or Gerakan FT had ever been serious in the first place about going the whole hog.

The Sultan of Selangor earlier gave the rakyat cheer when he decisively intervened in the case of disgraced Klang councilman Zakaria Deros, taking action when the prime minister and chief minister twiddled their toes. Our hereditary rulers may yet be an effective counterbalance to incompetent elected and appointed representatives the politicians.

Making a case

Gerakan as a component of a supposedly multi-racial government is within its rights to urge a review on Harussani in the interest of national harmony, just as it is fully the mufti's right to refute any charges made. (Why not? Presidents of the USA have faced impeachment hearings.)

Gerakan could have humbly and sincerely requested the Sultan to activate a mechanism whereby Harussani could be brought before a closed door fact-finding royal commission or panel of inquiry. Otherwise Harussani is guilty of nothing until the burden of proof has been met. Hence PAS is technically correct in taking Tan to task for calling for the mufti's sacking, which is jumping the gun.
Has Tan or anyone else fishing the non-Muslim vote bank convincingly shown that the mufti's pronouncements or actions are incompatible with the high office he holds? As it stands now, I don't see that Harussani has a case to answer as no champions of non-Muslim rights whether in his 'personal capacity' or BN party capacity has been willing to press any concrete charges on Harussani's unfitness for office. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And at the rate it is going, I doubt FT Gerakan would be able to even get the supervisor of a local pizza parlour suspended a week, should the entire central committee come down with food poisoning after a timid nibble of mouldy bread and stale cheese.

The mufti's platform to 'purify' Islam from liberalism and pluralism may not sit well with progressives, and his popularity rating among some rivalling that of the Member of Parliament from Jerai but these public perceptions remain just that. Implicating Harussani in a nasty event is not enough to impute disrepute if the allegations are not backed up.

I don't care to go into what the mufti did or did not allegedly do. It would suffice to simply refresh readers' memory on the unfounded SMS rumours which raised temperatures the issue initially called to attention by Tan. Last November, a Muslim mob laid siege to the Church of Our Lady Lourdes in Silibin, Ipoh where about 100 Indian children were taking their Holy Communion. This was upon the mistaken belief that it was Malay youths who were about to be baptised.

Mariner Azhar Mansor, a household name for his yachting feat, was accused of apostasy (becoming Christian) in the widely circulated SMS call-to-arms, as well as said to be leading the church ceremony. That too many Malay-Muslims are so easily misinformed and overly reactive then and now is a legitimate cause for worry especially when the rabble rousers turn around and astoundingly claim it is Islam that is under attack.

Consequent to the Ipoh incident, Azhar held a press conference (PC), flanked by the religious advisor to the prime minister and the Umno executive secretary, to dispel the rumours. [Below, transcript of the PC translated from Malay by The Sun Online.]

Q: After so many days, people are wondering why you have not declared that you are still a Muslim?

A: I cannot control other people's perception.

Q: Are you a Muslim?

A: My mindset is trained differently. As a sailor, my stand is, I am a person who wants to know what is in front of my eyes and in my hands. What others want to say about me, I cannot control.

Q: But you can use this opportunity to declare that you are still a Muslim! Just say yes or no.

A: Then we can go back? I also want to know what else you want to know from me.

Q: It is just whether you are a Muslim or not.

A: That's it?

Q: Before this we heard from a third party, so now we want to hear it from you.

A: I have never applied to renounce Islam. And I have never thought about doing that. [Please read in full Azhar's reply here]

Q: The perception still persists because in the recent press statement there was nothing from you to say you are still a Muslim. That is what people want to know.

A: If I say that, if I say I am a Muslim from the very beginning, you mean that's the end of the story?

Q: Yes. That's it. Another thing, can you say the Kalimah Syahadah now? Everyone will keep quiet after this.

As a man who successfully sailed solo in the high seas, one would expect Azhar to possess strong nerves and this he demonstrated by holding his own under the indecent badgering. The exchange excerpted above is illustrative of the frighteningly dogged and dogmatic mindset of a constipated collective.

Even so, the dare to recite the Kalimah Syahadah by those still unsatisfied after his explanation, and just to placate the public gallery, was nothing short of insolence. Azhar, to his credit, refused to pick up the gauntlet, adding even his own father has never required such an act of him and that the recitation is already a part of the everyday Muslim prayer.

Isn't the affirmation of faith a meaningful covenant between an individual and God, and to recite it at whim and on demand only trivialising this solemn bearing of witness? When certain groups abrogate unto themselves the authority to decide which among their fellow Malay be true Muslims, what else would they usurp that belongs to God's reckoning? How far and how much further unchecked will these people go in their moral policing? Where will it end?

Not everyone is an Azhar Mansor and with his public standing. I shudder to think of the insolent browbeating and even outright intimidation that ordinary people Muslim and of other religions alike are subjected to by these posses of Islam's protectors. As to the multitudes chanting 'Islam under attack', the event at the Silibin church which could have potentially sparked public disorder, to an impartial observer indicates the contrary it was the Christians who were 'under attack'.

What becomes of the rest of us and our breathing space with these Malay-Muslim vigilantes on the prowl? Can you think of anywhere else in the world where a man has to hold a PC under duress to declare to the whole country his religion?

The question I'm addressing readers is this: Do we leave it to BN politicians out to score points and nothing beyond that (as their recent track record would imply) to ameliorate our present situation, and pray hard, real hard, they deliver? Or do we ourselves urgently need to become a part of the civil liberties movement because it is our public living space yours and mine that is at stake?