Federal Court must grant Catholic Church leave to appeal against Allah ban, say lawyers

A decision by the Federal Court will bring closure to the controversy on the use of the word Allah by non-Muslims, say lawyers. – May 7, 2014.Lawyers have urged the Federal Court to grant the Catholic Church leave to appeal against Putrajaya's ban on the use of the word "Allah" as the religious rights of non-Muslims have been restricted by the Barisan Nasional government.

They pointed out that the Federal Court, as the ultimate interpreter of the Federal Constitution, should allow the church's appeal and make a stand on the Allah issue to bring closure to the contentious case.

The lawyers also urged the Federal Court not to go the way of the the High Court which on Monday had refused to hear a complaint by Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) against the Home Minister over the seizure of religious books containing the word "Allah".

In rejecting SIB's leave for a judicial review, High Court judge Datuk Zaleha Yusof had said that she was bound by the decision of the Court of Appeal on October 14 which had ruled that "Allah" was not an integral part of the Christian faith.

The lawyers said the apex court should seize the opportunity to provide leadership and live up to its role as the ultimate interpreter of the Federal Constitution and other laws.

They said the debate on the matter would never end and opposing groups would hold on to their views on whether the use of the word Allah was the exclusive right of Muslims in this country.

On March 5, a seven-man bench had heard the church's leave application to appeal against the Court of  Appeal ruling but had deferred its decision indefinitely.

Lawyer Abd Shukor Ahmad said there was a possible remedy in Parliament after the Federal Court had made known its stand on the controversy.

"The apex court must take the bull by the horns and decide the matter on merit," Shukor said, adding that he was of the opinion the lawyers for the church had satisfied the requirement to obtain leave.

He said the constitution was a living document and a fresh interpretation, in line with human relationship in Malaysia, was urgently needed.

"The judges must breathe life into the constitution or else it will remain a dead letter of the law," Shukor said.

Shukor said he was aware that the seven-man bench needed time to deliberate on the leave application but "nine weeks were too long a delay".

"Even under the court's practice rule,  judges are given only eight weeks to write their grounds of judgment," he said.

Another lawyer Syahredzan Johan said the Federal Court should hear the church's appeal as larger issues of constitutional importance were at stake.

"The Court of Appeal ruling was confined to a challenge on whether Putrajaya could stop the publisher of the Herald from using the word Allah but the outcome went beyond that," he said.

He said the High Court had adopted the binding precedent that the word could not be used in any publication.

Syahredzan said based on the Court of Appeal ruling, the 10-point solution endorsed by Putrajaya in 2011 to allow Christians to use the Alkitab in their religious practices, among others, had no legal basis.

"The 10-point solution had no standing and is now subservient to the Court of Appeal ruling," he said.

Just before the Sarawak elections on April 16, 2011, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had sent a letter to the then chairman of the Christian Federation of Malaysia Bishop Ng Moon Hing stating that the Alkitab could be used nationwide and not confined to Sabah and Sarawak.

Lawyer R. Kenghadharan said the Federal Court's decision, either way, would bring closure to the matter and put a cap on racial and religious tension which had been escalating over the past one year.

"The last one year has also made Malaysians become tolerant to criticism. The Federal Court just has to expedite hearing the appeal," he said.

While Kenghadharan held the view that Malaysia was a secular state and that the constitution protected the religious rights of non-Muslims, he said it would all depend on how the Federal Court interpreted the constitution.

In October, a three-member bench led by Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali – which allowed Putrajaya's appeal to ban the Herald from using the word "Allah" – said there was a 1986 directive by the Home Ministry that prohibited non-Muslim publications from using four words: "Allah", "Kaabah", "Solat" and "Baitullah".

Apandi, in his judgment, said the reason for the prohibition was to protect the sanctity of Islam and prevent any confusion among Muslims.

He also said that if the word was allowed to be used by Christians, it could threaten national security and public order.

Furthermore, the court said the prohibition was reasonable as the word "Allah" was not an integral part of the Christian faith and practice.

The decision sparked an outcry among Christians and other non-Muslims in both the peninsula and Sabah and Sarawak.

The church had submitted 26 questions on the constitution, administrative law as well as the power of the court to allow the home minister to ban the use of a theological word.

Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria , Tan Sri Raus Sharif, Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin, Tan Sri Richard Malanjum, Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar, Datuk Zainun Ali and Datuk Jeffrey Tan Kok Hwa were on the bench to hear the leave application

Meanwhile, SIB had in 2007 mounted a legal challenge after their religious publications for children were seized by the Customs at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) in Sepang.

They sought to quash the minister's decision to prohibit the importation and withhold the delivery of the Sunday School publications on grounds that he had acted unconstitutionally, erred in law and acted without jurisdiction.

Next week, another High Court in Kuala Lumpur will rule whether Sarawakian Christian Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill's legal challenge against the minister for the seizure of eight Christian CDs from her at LCCT had any legal basis.

The CDs, which Jill Ireland had bought for her own personal use during a trip to Indonesia, bore titles such as "Cara Hidup Dalam Kerajaan Allah", "Hidup Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah" and "Ibadah Yang Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah".

Putrajaya is relying on the Court of Appeal ruling to say that the minister had acted based on national interest.