Laws of no practical use – Ravinder Singh

The retired Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah who had in May 2013 warned the Chinese of a Malay backlash for betrayal against Barisan Nasional (BN) has now warned that the Muslims and Christians must understand the law before debating the word Allah. 

He has given a list of words that non-Muslims are prohibited from using. Among them is one word that I can't help but have to use when I am buying KTM Komuter tickets to one destination in Kuala Lumpur. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of other non-Muslims are in the same position. Not only that, the word appears in the birth certificates and identity cards of a few thousand non-Muslims as well. The word is Wahyu.

Wahyu is the name of a large housing estate in the Batu 5, Jalan Ipoh area - Taman Wahyu. There is now a KTM Komuter station also known as Taman Wahyu. So if I cannot use the word Wahyu, how do I buy a Komuter ticket to this station? Then what happens to the word in the addresses of the residents of Taman Wahyu, most of who are non-Muslims?

Then, if I am talking to an elderly Malay man who has gone for Haj and returned, can I no longer address him with respect as Tuan Haji? I have always believed that addressing such a person as Tuan Haji is a very respectful form of address, but now I am told that I am prohibited by law from using the word Haji.

How do I discuss a fatwah with a Muslim friend if I cannot say the word fatwah?  If someone asks me about a beautiful structure that happens to be a Syariah court building, can I not use the word Syariah to tell him it is a religious court of the Muslims? The word Syariah should be on the building for all to see too.

I also read news and articles written in Malay. So what do I do when I see any of these words in what I am reading? In hotel rooms one sees the word Kiblat.  Are these rooms out of bounds to non-Muslims? When a mufti says it is legitimate to call for the blood of those organising 'Turun' (price reduction) campaigns, non-Muslims cannot say the word Mufti when talking about it.  

Considering all these down to earth everyday matters, the laws prohibiting non-Muslims from uttering about 40 Arabic words does not seem logical. It does not seem to be of any practical use. Then what could its use be? How is it to be enforced such that no non- Muslim ever mentions any of these words - have some tiny wireless microphones embedded in their lips and an army of monitors snooping on them 24/7?   

If we go back just a little in history, we see that this same judge had at a forum on May 12, 2013 reportedly accused the Chinese of plotting to "seize political power" from the Malays, despite already having benefited economically from the "Malay's hand of friendship".

"For the Malays, the 'pantang larang' (taboo) is to be betrayed, because when they are betrayed, they will react and when they react, their dendam kesumat tiada kesudahan (wrath will be endless).

"When Malays are betrayed, there is a backlash and the Chinese must bear the consequences of a Malay backlash," he was quoted as saying on independent news portal Malaysiakini at the forum titled "GE13 post-mortem: Muslim leadership and survival" organised by the UiTM Malaysia Alumni Association and Gabungan Melayu Semenanjung.

So are the reactions of Jais in seizing the Bibles, the demonstrations with banners asking whether people want another May 13, the putting up of provocative banners in front of churches and throwing of molotov cocktails into a church compound, the fear-mongering around the use of the word Allah, etc. the "dendam kesumat” that the judge had spoken of? He may not have intended to give licence for the "dendam kesumat" to be released with impunity. But there are racial and religious extremists and bigots in society and they seem to have taken the judge's words as a licence to raise religious and racial tensions by releasing their "dendam kesumat".

The BN's Chinese or Malay tsunami did not come about overnight. It had been losing support little by little in certain areas for the past three decades or so. Hence the necessity for the EC, as openly declared by its former chairman, to shift goalposts (gerrymandering) to ensure BN victory. The BN had also to put in contingency plans in case gerrymandering alone became insufficient to preserve its unbroken rule.

Just like buying submarines. Not that they were required for action immediately, but for any contingency in the future. Similarly, I believe enacting the laws prohibiting non-Muslims using the 40 Arabic words were a contingency plan to help in the political arena if BN's survival became critical. If not, why was the use of these words never an issue before BN's poor showing in the 2008 elections? And these laws or enactments were made not long before this.

If the use of these words by non-Muslims is not a political issue, or not an Umno's survival issue, but purely a religious issue, then it could be resolved by referring it to the highest international Muslim tribunal on religious matters (if there is one as some other religions have). Such tribunals are usually located where the religions originated. 

As it is, Najib has snubbed the whole Muslim world's strong criticism of the prohibition on non-Muslims using the word Allah. This confirms it is not a religious issue but a political issue, as strictly according to Islam, anyone can use this word.

The BN considers itself a feudal lord that feeds the rakyat, (and lately with all manner of 1Malaysia goodies like BR1M, etc.) and the rakyat should not bite the hand that feeds them. What BN cannot stomach is the fact that despite throwing so much money around before the GE13, its overall popularity dropped further. For the BN, this was a betrayal of the master by its servants; this was a betrayal of the generous, caring, loving BN.

So, are we in a democracy or a feudal-o-cracy? The former respects people's wishes and the fact that changes in government are healthy, the latter demands people's undivided loyalty upon pain of physical pain and brands any changes as abhorrent disloyalty.