THE Indian community is shocked and hurt at the accusation by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim that the Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman temple is illegal.
This is a claim without any foundation or knowledge about olden land matters in the Malaysian context. Does the prime minister know that most of the Malay kampungs and settlements started off without any legal foundation but were legalised over the decades?
This was a customary practice which became legal over time. Malay settlers who began their settlements usually near good agricultural lands or rivers did not go straight to the land office to get permission.
The usual way was for the settlers to start the villages and over time when the settlement became permanent the land was surveyed and legalised.
There was no proper legal system for land ownership and mere occupation or permission was enough.
It is ironic that Malay settlements and kampongs could acquire traditional status and become legal over the decades and issued titles but Hindu temples started more than a century ago are deemed illegal! Why do the administrators have two standards?
The reason why most non-Muslim houses of worship are without a legal title is due to the undeniable fact that the government and district and municipal administrations usually refuse to approve them despite consistent and numerous attempts.
The authorities reject the applications and how do you get land titles when the authorities adamantly refuse to approve them?
In some case top politicians and ministers need to get involved for the issuance of land titles especially for Hindu temples.
During the colonial days churches received some privileges concerning land, planning and construction, and after Merdeka approval for mosques could be easily procured and all assistance was provided from surveying to issuance of land title.

Temples did not get these privileges and had a hard time applying for the land titles. These houses of worship are forced to remain without a title—or in PMX’s word, “illegal”.
The colonial administration permitted the Masjid India temple to cater to the large number of Indian workers engaged in construction and infrastructural works.
The permission given by the British authorities was enough for that time and this permission could be converted to a temporary occupation licence (TOL) and subsequently a leasehold if there were no problems with the land.
This is how most of the Hindu temples began in the estates, railway reserves and Indian settlements. They can become legalised over the decades just like the traditional Malay kampungs and acquire a legal status.
During British times the land was cleared first or buildings constructed before they were surveyed and issued a proper title, which was a practical step those days.
For example when plantations were opened for rubber, oil palm, coconut or coffee the land was cleared usually by setting fire to the jungle especially during the dry weather or by felling the trees in the impenetrable equatorial jungle.
Once it was cleared, only then a proper survey may be done to ascertain the acreage. This was how land titles and land tenures started during the British era when there were no modern surveying equipment or methods.
This land tenure system became the foundation and was followed by the Malaysian government after Merdeka.
Everyone needs to know that there was no perfect land tenure system under the pre-colonial system nor was there one during the British days.
The post-Merdeka governments need to take cognisance of this important fact before declaring any dwellings especially houses of worship as illegal.
The historical and legal background are murky and therefore these should be given the benefit of the doubt and an attempt should be made to legalise the houses of worship under the present circumstance and laws.
V. Thomas is a Focus Malaysia viewer.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.
- Focus Malaysia
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.