Even Batu Caves statues illegal if cross considered propagation to Muslims, lawyers say

© Provided by The Malay Mail OnlineKUALA LUMPUR, April 21 ― Claiming that an openly-displayed cross was considered proselytizing to Muslims would mean all non-Muslim religious symbols must be banned, said lawyers critical of the Taman Medan church protest.

Constitutional lawyer New Sin Yew said the church in Taman Medan, Petaling Jaya, which was forced to take down a cross from its facade after residents in the Malay-majority area protested on Sunday, has the right to put up the religious symbol as an integral part of their Christian faith.

“It’s absurd to suggest that putting up a cross is a form of propagation to Muslims,” New told Malay Mail Online.

“Houses put up crosses and altars for their religious practice and beliefs. If putting up a cross is a form of propagation, then no one will be allowed to put up any religious symbols anywhere anymore,” the lawyer added.

To illustrate, he said iconic structures such as the Lord Murugan statue at Batu Caves and the statue of Kuan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy in Buddhism, at the Kek Lok Si Temple in Penang that would be prohibited.

Article 11 of the Federal Constitution states that everyone has the right to profess, practise and propagate their faith, but state and federal law may restrict the propagation of other religions to Muslims.

Local daily The Star reported yesterday Taman Medan residents as claiming that the church’s cross challenged Islam and could influence younger minds; the cross was removed several hours after the protest.

Civil liberties lawyer Syahredzan Johan said the legality of the church displaying a cross on its building depends on whether approval was obtained from the Petaling Jaya City Council, but stressed that it cannot amount to propagation of the Christian faith to Muslims.

He said that according to the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988, propagation offences require more than merely placing a religious symbol.

“There must be the element of persuading, influencing or inciting a Muslim to change faith for it to be an offence under the Selangor enactment,” Syahredzan told Malay Mail Online.

He also denounced as “absurd” the protesters’ claim that the church cannot put up the cross because it is located in a Malay-majority area.

“The rights of minorities cannot be subjected to the whims and fancies of the majority,” said Syahredzan.

“How many Christians must there be in an area for it to be acceptable to place a cross? 10 per cent? 20 per cent? 30 per cent? Any number one comes up with will be arbitrary, and in any event, Christians are a minority everywhere in Malaysia.

“The claim that the cross will influence Muslims has absolutely no basis. It’s quite insulting to Muslims, actually, as if our faith is wafer thin that any exposure to non-Islamic religions will destroy it,” the lawyer added.

Lawyers for Liberty co-founder Eric Paulsen urged authorities to protect minority rights and to uphold the principles of non-discrimination and equality, failing which Malaysia’s democracy would amount to the “tyranny of the majority”.

“Using the [Taman] Medan protesters’ absurd logic, Muslims in Myanmar and Sri Lanka would also have to be subservient to the rights of the majority Buddhists,” Paulsen toldMalay Mail Online.

“This is of course wrong and unacceptable as under a democracy, the rights of all citizens must be protected equally irrespective of the numerical strength,” he added. -MM