Is there really a justification to shield Zakir Naik?

To claim that the Indian government is targeting the controversial preacher due to 'media sensationalising' is essentially to cast the aspersion that the Indian government does know how to govern its country’s security.

COMMENT

Zakir Naik is wanted in India over allegations linked to money laundering and religious incitement. (Reuters pic)

By TK Chua

I have been waiting in vain for someone of substance to give a proper response to Rais Hussin’s piece on “PPBM strategist defends Dr M over Zakir Naik”, but so far there has been none.

If all the news reports and allegations against Zakir Naik are true, what then should Malaysia’s response be to India’s request for his extradition?

Is it fair for Rais Hussin to say that deporting Zakir Naik will subject him to religious persecution in India? There must be a basis for him to say that.

As far as I know, India is a functioning democracy with millions of Muslims as its citizens. In fact, at one time, the president of India was a Muslim. Why would a country like India single out a Muslim preacher for persecution? What benefits would the country gain out of it?

Based on news reports, Naik is wanted by the Indian authorities for specific allegations such as money laundering and religious incitement which is linked to violence. These allegations are very different from religious intolerance or persecution allegedly perpetrated by the Indian government.

If there is a specific request by the Indian authorities for his extradition, should Malaysia ignore such a request? Should he not return to his country to face the allegations and to prove his innocence? What good justification do we have to deny such a request?

To claim that the Indian government is targeting Naik due to “media sensationalising” is essentially to cast the aspersion that the Indian government does know how to govern its country’s security and is acting based on media orchestration.

In whatever ways we look at him, Naik is a controversial figure. Malaysians may be tolerant enough to allow him the leeway to do his comparative studies on religions. But the problem is do we know when the comparative studies end and when the insults begin?

If we have allowed Naik to do what he is doing, would Malaysia allow preachers from other faiths to do the same – debating and then in the process insulting other religions?

For multi-religious Malaysia, I think it is best that we propagate and talk good of one’s religion rather than trying to belittle or condemn other religions in the process.

TK Chua is an FMT reader.