Will Johor Islamic Religious Dept be investigated?

“As a Muslim, I am not proud of this. For me, Islam is about being fair. And it’s not fair if one of the parents changes the religion of their child without the other parent’s permission. Don’t do to others what you don’t want others to do to you.”

- Said in March 2022 by former law minister now ambassador Nazri Abdul Aziz.

While most people are jubilant that former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak lost his review at the Federal Court, many like-minded people were observing the escalation by the forces of the religious fascist in this country.

The allegations made by activist Arun Dorasamy against the Johor Islamic Religious Department are another example of how non-Muslims are slowly, inevitably having their rights eroded by the proxies of the deep Islamic state.

In 2014 when the case of S Deepa first saw light, Nazri said this of the police's ”mistaken assumption” for not retrieving the kidnapped child: “It is a civil law marriage, it is the civil court, we must respect the civil court’s ruling. They have the jurisdiction. The High Court judge’s ruling was correct. The police shouldn’t allow him to get away with kidnapping the child.”

Proponents of unilateral conversion have relied on the theme of religious and racial supremacy in support of this agenda and have twisted the Constitution of this country and played up racial and religious sentiments to bolster their arguments.

They have relied on the state security apparatus (which is supposed to be secular) to enforce their will contrary to the rulings of civil courts and have had the overt approval of the ruling hegemon to carry out this agenda, all the while promoting the idea of a “moderate” Islam.

There is nothing moderate about unilateral conversion. When people ask me, why I am so “obsessed” with “Islam” and why I consider this issue the existential threat facing this country, I ask them to think about this for a moment.

When you convert a child unilaterally to Islam, you are denying that child the right to choose his or her religion. Faith by fiat is what I call it, with the onerous obligation that comes with state-sanctioned religion.

This non-Muslim child is suddenly converted, thus becoming a Muslim and thus subjected to Islamic laws, and the narrative that only Muslims are subject to Islamic laws is exposed for the lie that it is.

Keep in mind in 2016 when there were efforts made to address this issue, then Islamic affairs minister Jamil Khir Baharom claimed in his written parliamentary reply that “any legislation to ban unilateral conversion is unconstitutional”.

Former law minister Nazri Abdul Aziz

PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang thundered “PAS is of the view that the overall implications which may arise from (amendments to) Act 164 is very serious, namely on rights of Muslims to practice their religion and defend their faith with no interference from any parties, as enshrined under the Federal Constitution.”

The Johor Islamic Religious Department is alleged to have taken photographs and video recordings of the woman and her children. The fact that these photographs and videos were illegally taken is just one of the issues (if true) that needs to be addressed.

Who has access to these photographs and videos? What purposes do these photographs and videos serve? As someone familiar with the tradecraft of such operations, I assure you that the intention is mala fide, coercive and intended to be used for propagandistic purposes.

This woman claims to be a practising Hindu, which is open to dispute and resolution by the civil courts.

Why does the state department harass her for not wearing a tudung in her own house and ask her children what they know about Islam? The answer is simple. This is pure intimidation.

Here we have a branch of government, illegally taking photos and videos and threatening a citizen of this country in her own house because she is instituting legal proceedings which have far-reaching implications.

This is also to build a counter-narrative which would be used by the political apparatus to justify compliance.

And that is the crux of the matter. What this woman and the other defendants are doing in court will have far-reaching implications for the Islamic bureaucracy in this country.

Legal endeavour

Keep in mind that there is a concerted effort by the Islamic bureaucracy to proselytise, especially vulnerable people. There are converted preachers who attempt to solicit conversion by extolling the virtues of a state-sponsored religion while denigrating the religions they were a part of before their conversion.

And let’s not forget, the malice involved in a parent unilaterally converting a child, especially in custody disputes. Whenever this happens, the religious department steps in.

In other words, the religious authorities, either state or federal, are enabling malice and illegality all in the service of religious supremacy.

You can see how pervasive this is when, in the Loh Siew Hong case, the mufti of Perlis stepped in and for all intents was attempting to hamper the civil process with the aid of the religious bureaucracy and even the state security apparatus.

Loh Siew Hong

This brings us to an important point. Even if the litigants are successful in their legal endeavour, will the state security apparatus play its part in recovering kidnapped children? So far this has not been the case.

Part of the reason is that the state security apparatus is mired in the kind of religiosity that was the agenda of the deep Islamic state, which Umno enabled for years.

Remember, we have factotums from the religious bureaucracy in every civil institution in this court. The chickens are merely coming home to roost.

If these brave Malaysians succeed, they would have won a moral victory because I am sceptical if the apparatus of the state would enforce any such decision.

However, this would anger the religious extremists in this country, who would no doubt use the decision as a galvanising force to usurp legitimate democratic processes.

I would argue that what these brave citizens are doing is probably one of the most consequential measures for ensuring the rights of non-Muslims in the country.

They are doing it with no help from the political apparatus, even though there were many, especially in DAP, who were on the side of these people before they assumed power in Putrajaya.

Various state religious departments will be joining forces in an attempt to disrupt and hamper the secular civil process. The forces arrayed against these litigants are awesome in both malice and power.

What we are witnessing out in the open has been going on for decades, which is why there is this fear in the majority community.

I am sceptical that the allegations against the state religious department will be investigated. Even if these allegations are investigated, would you believe the findings of such investigations?

Here is the thing: While Nazri may not feel proud of unilateral conversion, there are far too many who feel that this is a desideratum of their religion. - Mkini

---

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.