ROS registration for houses of worship must be strictly complied with

 

RECENTLY, a controversy erupted concerning the application for an escalator to be installed for the Batu Caves temple for the convenience of its devotees.

The application was, however, rejected according to state executive councillor Papparaidu Veraman due to the application being made in the name of an individual and not the temple.

This has led to a dispute, altercations and recriminations between various groups about this issue. Papparaidu had rightly stated that a Registrar of Societies (ROS) registration under the Societies Act 1966 is legally needed by the temple for the application to be processed further for the Selangor government’s assistance.

Some commenters on the issue have asserted that there is not need for registration as the temple is a charitable trust legalised by a court decision in 1935. A famous lawyer had stated that the court decision cannot still be relevant or depended upon as the temple now owns property worth RM2 bil or more.

If it were a charitable trust how did it accumulate so much assets and money when it should be supporting more for causes like education, poverty reduction and healthcare particularly for Malaysian Hindus and generally for Indians.

The houses of worship in the country are registered under various methods and the government has to uniformise the method. A directive should be issued to all non-Muslim houses of worship to register under the Societies Act 1966.

This Act is specifically to ensure proper administration of houses of worship by having AGMs, EGMs, election of office bearers, membership duties and rights, tabling of financial accounts and auditing.

This is the main reason why the hundreds of houses of worship in the country are administered well according to their own constitution to the satisfaction of their members, barring a miniscule few that may have some problems which are referred to the ROS for an amicable solution.

This system is safe and sound to cope with the needs of a diversity of houses of worship in our multi-religious country.

The Act prevents abuses, financial embezzlement, misuse of funds and other issues. Registration with the ROS for houses of worship is easy and beneficial in many ways as it promotes transparency, good governance and accountability. The government needs to be strict on this subject.

Any financial allocations, grants, permission and planning approval for construction of houses of worship, renovations, extensions and others should be approved by the local authorities only if it is supported by an ROS registration.

Every year allocations from the Federal and state governments as well as by MPs and state representatives are handed out to the houses of worship without checking out whether these entities are legally registered with the ROS.

The government has been too lax, even negligent, on this issue and it has led to various problems and confusion. If the government continues approving various annual allocations and other permissions to unregistered houses of worship it is sending a confusing message, which should be stopped immediately.

Whether or not the houses of worship were registered by various decisions of the colonial authorities for worship purposes or to protect the property, all houses of worship should be registered with the ROS to ensure full Malaysianised administration and control.

One can still find some houses of worship fully controlled by their foreign headquarters ,and allowing only minimum involvement by Malaysian members even 68 years after Merdeka.

Now that the ‘escalator’ issue had brought up the matter of the crucial ROS registration to be publicly debated, it is hoped that the government will take the cue and address this lacunae in the laws governing houses of worship.

This will be beneficial to all parties and will ensure a uniform law via the Societies Act 1966 and ROS registration to be applied to all house of worship in our religiously and racially diverse society.

This will mean harmony in religious communities as members of any house of worship can refer any problems to the Registrar’s Office to resolve the matter and prevent disputes, protests, controversies and litigation.

If necessary the Societies Act can be split—one specifically for houses of worship and one for societies.

Some are of the opinion that the title of the Act is ambiguous and misleading. Houses of worship may need a special set of laws different from societies to address problems and issues exclusive to religions and houses of worship.

The Madani government, the Home Ministry, the National Unity Ministry as well as the non-profit interfaith organisation Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoist (MCCBCHST) need to consider this problem seriously and urgently.

It has been 60 years since the ROS Act came into effect and over the decades exposure to various problems, inputs, suggestions and experience should indicate whether there is a need for amendments or additions to the Act.

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.