While the implementation of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) remains our primary focus, recent political and policy developments in Malaya necessitate an urgent discussion within Sabah to reinstate complete freedom of religion in the state.
Throughout 2025, we witnessed a relentless surge in racial and religious rhetoric from Malaya-based parties like Umno, Bersatu, and PAS.
Unfortunately, the Madani government is not exempt from this trend when the push for the Mufti (Federal Territories) Bill 2024, which may be re-tabled this year, is a major red flag.
Critics have argued that if passed, non-elected officials will have the power to issue fatwas that carry the force of law.
Proponents of the bill will argue that it will not affect Sabah, but history has shown us that federal laws will eventually “creep” into Sabah.
We have seen this before with the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment 1991 (passed by the Sabah state assembly on Dec 23, 1991), which significantly expanded syariah jurisdiction in the state.
What went wrong?
The concern by critics on the matter is justified - the bill, once passed, may exacerbate the “administrative Islamization” already faced by non-Muslim Kadazan, Dusun, and Murut (KDM).
Many of our KDMs with Muslim-sounding names or the “bin/binti” suffix will find themselves trapped in legal limbo and eventually deplete their finances for unnecessary court proceedings.
Civil courts may now feel even more compelled to defer to rigid fatwas, making the recent landmark judgment by Celestina Stuel Galid - which allowed Abdul Manap Bakusai @ Abu Bakar and three others to rectify their MyKads to reflect their Christian faith - perhaps the last of its kind.
We now must ask: where did we lose our way?
Perhaps we should go back to Sept 25, 1973, when the Sabah State Constitution was amended (Enactment No 8 of 1973) to designate Islam as the state religion.
I believe this matter, which had been discussed by Nazim Ganti Shaari of the Law Department of UiTM Malacca, was a direct departure from the assurances given by the British before the formation of Malaysia.
In the British Parliament, Nigel Fisher, the then under-secretary of state for the colonies, stated in his debate that: “Although Islam will be the religion of the federation, there will be no state religion in the Borneo states.”
This guarantee was explicitly a fundamental condition for Sabah and Sarawak to agree to form the federation; otherwise, it would not have been raised in the British Parliament.
Therefore, we must now also question why our own state assembly would enact a law that contravenes the very spirit and intent of MA63.
Sabah must remain secular
So while we demand the federal government to respect and implement MA63, we must also look in the mirror.
Perhaps it is time to consider the “basic structure doctrine” as stated by Nazim to nullify constitutional amendments enacted by a temporal legislature that destroy a constitution’s permanent features - in this case, Sabah’s status as a state with no official religion.
As the minister in charge of Sabah and Sarawak affairs, Mustapha Sakmud, has welcomed town hall sessions for MA63, I urge him to include the 1973 enactment on the agenda and allow non-Muslim religious bodies and church councils to provide their input in the session.
It is my personal opinion, which I believe is shared by many in Warisan, that Sabah must remain secular and pluralistic.
Our founding forefathers did not agree to form Malaysia for the purpose of building a specific race or religion, but to build an economically prosperous nation for all, especially our own state.
If we want others to truly honour MA63, we must start by restoring the religious safeguards that we ourselves transgressed. - Mkini
CHRISTOPHER MASUDAL is Warisan strategic communications director.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.