Can the moderates fight back?

While the protestors outside the recent Bar Council's forum to discuss issues regarding religious conversion may have achieved their short-term objective of stopping the forum, their actions may have just provided the spark needed for moderate Muslims to fight back.

Most of the comments and columns featured in newspapers and in the blogosphere in the aftermath of the protests were of the opinion that the whole episode was a step back for the democratic process in Malaysia.

While the actions of the unruly protestors and the one or two individuals who managed to get inside the forum venue were indeed disgraceful and reprehensible, the reactions to these actions were actually a positive indication that some things have changed for the better.

It is unlikely that there would be a repeat of the Apcet II conference (left) where Umno Youth leaders and members disrupted the forum by throwing chairs and tables. (The leader of that mob, Saifuddin Nasution, now PKR's MP for Machang subsequently apologised for his role in that incident). This time, the furthest a protestor got was to grab a microphone to shout some incendiary remarks.

Also significant was the fact that the most prominent politician involved in this whole fiasco, Zulkifli Noordin, PKR MP from Kulim-Bandar Baharu, was soon reprimanded by leaders within his own party, most notably PKR deputy president Syed Husin Ali. While Zulkifli said that he was protesting the forum in his capacity as a leader of Pembela, a group set up by Muslim lawyers as a counter to the 'liberal' Bar Council, that excuse was not sufficient to spare him the ire of Syed Husin.

But perhaps the most significant by-product of the protestors' actions was to galvanise the moderate Muslim voices against such actions. Moderate Muslim voices in Malaysia have not always had an easy time speaking their mind.

They face constant criticisms from the more conservative voices who seek to muzzle their views. They have to face a constant barrage of accusations and insults including sometimes being labeled as 'kafirs' or infidels and so on. But in regard to this incident, they have the majority of public opinion on their side.

The actions of the protestors juxtaposed almost perfectly with the actions of the organisers and participants of the forum. It was clearly explained that the forum's purpose was to discuss the problems faced by non-Malays after they, or their spouses, had converted to Islam and not to touch on the much more sensitive issue of Malay converts out of Islam.

Furthermore, many Muslim representatives were invited to speak at this forum although two representatives – one from the Federal Territories Islamic Department (Jawi) and another from the Institute of Islamic Understanding (Ikim) – pulled out at the last minute.

Who were really insulting Islam?

It was not as if the organisers had put this event together to 'insult' or 'criticise' Islam. To most reasonable observers, including some who might not agree with the views of the Bar Council, it was a genuine attempt to have an open and honest discussion over very tricky but important issues.

Juxtaposed against this was the actions of some of the protestors (including Zulkifli) who wanted to 'storm' the building to disrupt the forum and the words of one particular protestor who grabbed the mike only to ask the Chinese and Indians in the audience to 'go to hell', it is easy to see which side seemed more reasonable to the public, even to those who might be sympathetic to the views of the protestors.

The blogosphere erupted almost immediately after the news of the forum's premature ending was reported. A cursory Google blog search of words such as 'Bar Council', 'GPMS', 'Zulkifli Nordin' would find a list of entries mostly critical of the actions of the protestors.

Farish A Noor's witty response on why a certain pig does not want to return to China was perhaps the most widely referenced article in regard to the events at the forum.

In contrast, there were few if any leaders coming out to support the actions of the protestors. The conservatives, not being able to take the moral high ground, found it impossible to defend the actions and words of the protestors who made their way into the forum's venue.

To be fair, some of the protestors were better behaved than others. The PAS-led contingent were more restrained and had not intention of 'storming' the building in contrast to the GPMS Umno-linked group who, together with Zulkifli, were much more willing to up the ante, so to speak.

While the Bar Council is not likely to organise such a forum again, which would please many of the protestors, the actions of the protestors have undoubtedly galvanised the moderate Muslim voices and their allies, who will feel that they have more of the public opinion on their side when they raise their objections against the views of the conservatives.

Perhaps the best way to sum up the moderate and more reasonable view in discussing these tricky issues is to quote Dr Mehrun Siraj, a law lecturer from the International Islamic University, who reprimanded those who wanted to disrupt the protestors by saying this - "Open discussion is the way to discuss the issues between Muslims and non-Muslims. Don't insult Islam." We concur.

ONG KIAN MING is a PhD candidate in political science at Duke University and OON YEOH is a writer and new media analyst. You can listen to both of them discuss this topic in their Realpolitik podcast.

Previous Realpolitik podcasts