Setiap Artikel Malaysiawaves ke Email Anda.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Dipersilakan untuk Like Facebook Page T. Besi

Search Malaysiawaves

Friday, May 23, 2008

Is Malaysia Truly A Secular State?

We have heard so much from Karpal Singh and DAP leaders per say about Malaysia's "secular"ness. But can Karpal and DAP be trusted in their judgement?

I have noticed one thing that the word "secular" is NOT MENTIONED at all in our country's constitution. In other words, DAP and Karpal have been going to town by relying on "interpretations" of the constitution rather than anything else.
Even at that, there is no consensus in the interpretation of the constitution of Malaysia (on being secular or not). I, for one, have heard from Constitutional expert like Dr Aziz Bari, which argues otherwise. In fact, Dr Aziz Bari himself insisted that the Malaysian constitution is silent on it's ideology. In other words, the secular nature of the Malaysia Constitution is not decided 100%.

Yet DAP and Karpal goes to town by making such claim without considering other interpretation of the Constitution. I am very sure that Dr Aziz Bari is a bigger authority on the Malaysian Constitution as compared to Karpal SIngh himself.

Furthermore, the article on Malay Special Rights is mentioned explicitly in Article 153 of our constitution (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Malaysia#Article_153).

Yet, DAP seems to resist this article with all their might and power. One cannot help but wonder, what is the DAP real stand?

Is the DAP really sincere about upholding our constitution,? Or DAP (and Karpal Singh) real interest is really to eradicate Malays and Islam from the face of the Malaysian earth?

If the DAP was sincere about upholding the constitution, they will uphold everything in the constitution come what may. And that includes the Malay Special Rights Provision (Article 153) without question?

DAP and Karpal will need to sit down and reexamine their stand. They should be ashamed of their inconsistency and at least apologize to the Malaysian public for their double standard.

Secularism is not in the interest of the Malays and Muslims. Secularism is a dirty word among Muslims, not just in Malaysia but throughout the entire Muslim world. Largely because, Muslims around the world have realized that secularism was actually shoved down their throats by their secular elites, which their respective former colonial masters have trained them to do. In the case of Malaysia, it's UMNO.

After 50 years, Muslims around the world have realized that secularism have destroyed the Muslims and made Muslims go backwards.

But this topic will be dealt with in another article altogether.

Another great topic to dwell is the DAP's assumption that secularism is synonym to tolerance. I shall dedicate a whole topic on this subject.

For now, suffice to say DAP will have to deal with their double standard stand on the Malaysia Constitution issue. My personal belief is that the ideology of the Malaysian Constitution is Malay Supremacy and not Islam or secularism.

NOTE:
Check out my latest pictorial report on "Life in Taleban Country pt 1" and "Life in Taleban Country pt 2"

21 comments:

me said...

"Interests" and "backwards" are relative and subjective terms.

Would love clarification on what you actually mean.

cheers

Anonymous said...

I am curious - exactly how does wanting equality, justice and multiracialism 'destroy' Malays?

Secondly, if the constitution does not mention that Malaysia is not a secular country, it most definitely did not mention that Malaysia is an Islamic country. So how does PAS/ UMNO justify their stand? Shouldn't you bring them to task as well?

The constitution is also purposefully limited when it comes to defining the special position of the Malays. No one questions them as it is written in the constitution. What pisses people off is that it IS NOT mentioned in the constitution that malays need to get 7% off the next bungalow they buy, MBs, PMs, important ministries are to be Malays, education, finances et al need to be heavily tilted to Malays etc etc. So the question now is "What do you REALLY mean by Malay supremacy?

yin & yan said...

MALAYSIA - AN ISLAMIC STATE OF UNITED SULTANATES.

TQ for your posting. This opens up new readings of the sultaniyyah/islamic state.

Malaysia is
an islamic state based on united sultanates.
This is not based on a 5 year system of choosing using boxes. Islam is not to be voted in or out.If one is in power, protect it fisabilillah.

But when you fall like melaka 1511, then move on to another place to regroup. That is why melaka restrategised by moving to johor, riau, aceh, pahang and so on.

Islamic amirates/sultanates historically have always been on the move and dynamically. It is organic. Creating new madinahs, decay but regrow in another place. Hence the centres of the muslims have always been on the move. We had it in madinah, iraq, egypt, spanish-andalusia, turkey etc

By tradition and salasilah the sultanates have been around since early melaka until now.In fact the salasilah is even BEFORE Parameswara. Meaning islam came to enhance and continue the hindu/buddhist sultanates but now in the name of islamic sultanates. The good thing is that when the sultans became muslims, the rakyat became muslims too.So there was no need for the rakyat to overthrow the raja based on different religions. Bukankah raja dan rakyat berpisah tiada?

Hence this means kedaulatan kesultanan for thousand of years BEFORE MELAKA is then continued by Baginda Parameswara in the name of Allah and His Rasul saw until now.

Thus the sultan and rakyat chose to continue the contract between the ruler and the ruled - the raja and the rakyat.

So malaysia is not exactly a nation state.It is a united sultanates. Raja berperlembagaan is not the same as the british monarchy and the christian secular state. Christians under pressure from the 'priestly scientists' separated or secularised. In islam the worldly affairs is also an islamic affair.

Again if there is no such thing as a non islamic affair, it means the sultans have always the kedaulatan to rule in ALL affairs in malaysia.

Alhamdulillah we saw it more clearly after PRU12 in Kedah, Perak, Selangor, perlis and terengganu.

As the gist of what Raja Nazrin used to say - raja bukan sekadar simbol negara(maknanya mereka bukan patung negara tapi tunjang negara). Mereka bukan benteng terakhir untuk orang islam dan orang melayu tetapi merekalah tunjang negara yang sebenar.

Raja Nazrin said that sultanates is part of the khaliphate.

To call one is a rakyat then one must have a Raja/Sultan.
At Federal level the united sultanates have the Agong and at state level we have the sultans and raja.

The sultans are authorities of islamic affairs and malay adats.

Is there anything in this world NOT an islamic affair? Hence the sultans with the rakyat together is still perpetuating the sultanates/amirates for the khaliphate in waiting.

Malaysia is special as an islamic state due to the united sultanates and not due to the ballot boxes.

wassalam
Yin & Yan

yin & yan said...

MALAYSIA - AN ISLAMIC STATE OF UNITED SULTANATES.

TQ for your posting. This opens up new readings of the sultaniyyah/islamic state.

Malaysia is
an islamic state based on united sultanates.
This is not based on a 5 year system of choosing using boxes. Islam is not to be voted in or out.If one is in power, protect it fisabilillah.

But when you fall like melaka 1511, then move on to another place to regroup. That is why melaka restrategised by moving to johor, riau, aceh, pahang and so on.

Islamic amirates/sultanates historically have always been on the move and dynamically. It is organic. Creating new madinahs, decay but regrow in another place. Hence the centres of the muslims have always been on the move. We had it in madinah, iraq, egypt, spanish-andalusia, turkey etc

By tradition and salasilah the sultanates have been around since early melaka until now.In fact the salasilah is even BEFORE Parameswara. Meaning islam came to enhance and continue the hindu/buddhist sultanates but now in the name of islamic sultanates. The good thing is that when the sultans became muslims, the rakyat became muslims too.So there was no need for the rakyat to overthrow the raja based on different religions. Bukankah raja dan rakyat berpisah tiada?

Hence this means kedaulatan kesultanan for thousand of years BEFORE MELAKA is then continued by Baginda Parameswara in the name of Allah and His Rasul saw until now.

Thus the sultan and rakyat chose to continue the contract between the ruler and the ruled - the raja and the rakyat.

So malaysia is not exactly a nation state.It is a united sultanates. Raja berperlembagaan is not the same as the british monarchy and the christian secular state. Christians under pressure from the 'priestly scientists' separated or secularised. In islam the worldly affairs is also an islamic affair.

Again if there is no such thing as a non islamic affair, it means the sultans have always the kedaulatan to rule in ALL affairs in malaysia.

Alhamdulillah we saw it more clearly after PRU12 in Kedah, Perak, Selangor, perlis and terengganu.

As the gist of what Raja Nazrin used to say - raja bukan sekadar simbol negara(maknanya mereka bukan patung negara tapi tunjang negara). Mereka bukan benteng terakhir untuk orang islam dan orang melayu tetapi merekalah tunjang negara yang sebenar.

Raja Nazrin said that sultanates is part of the khaliphate.

To call one is a rakyat then one must have a Raja/Sultan.
At Federal level the united sultanates have the Agong and at state level we have the sultans and raja.

The sultans are authorities of islamic affairs and malay adats.

Is there anything in this world NOT an islamic affair? Hence the sultans with the rakyat together is still perpetuating the sultanates/amirates for the khaliphate in waiting.

Malaysia is special as an islamic state due to the united sultanates and not due to the ballot boxes.

wassalam
Yin & Yan

Anonymous said...

Yes because we have civil court. If it wasn't all the court would be syariah and using hudud law.

Anonymous said...

It is apparent that you and people like you intentionally omit "...and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak..." in your insistence of the Special Right issue contains in Article 153. Self interests? I guess so. Remember, the natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak are not necessary muslims.

Anonymous said...

In which way multiculturalism will 'eradicate' the Malays?

Tulang Besi said...

I don't think the issue of multiracial is an issue here.

THe point of the article is to show that Malaysia is not a secular state.

Tulang Besi said...

Another myth: Secularism is equal to religous tolerance.

We can then appoint Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot etc as the father of tolerance, then.

ckm38 said...

So you travel a lot, when are you coming back to the 21st century.

I would like to show you how the Islamic countries of the 21st century are doing.

And to show you that Malaysia actually has 11 million or 40% non-muslims people staying in the country.

Or does that matter to you?

Tulang Besi said...

ckm38,

The entire muslim world are ruled by secular elites and they are using religion for their own liking.

Anonymous said...

Why do you continue to want special rights for your race? Can you not compete on equal terms? Do you have no concept of equality?

Nicholas-Y said...

anonymous,

the values and culture the malays have are not conducive in the capitalistic system.

think of it as though their hands are tied by culture. sure, they need affirmative action but the government should also put in more effort to promote enterprise.

if things were equal, there would be one race controlling the economy and it would breed more racism.

that being said...affirmative action in my view should only apply to education for the malays. affirmative action in other sectors would only reinforce their non-capitalistic values and culture.

An income threshold should also be applied to curb misuse and abuse of affirmative policies.

Great nations or people always rise higher in the face of hardship and adversity.

L_J said...

Brother, you are right the world “secular” is not mentioned in the Federal Constitution (FC). But it was explicitly used in the various commissions which preceded and, indeed, drafted the FC; and subsequently, by the Supreme Court and at least 2 former PMs. Forget Karpal & Kit Siang, the words of those people and institutions mentioned above are sufficient to convince me of the intent and purpose of the FC; and that is that, at bottom, the FC was contemplated from day one to be based not on any religion – and, therefore, Malaysia is not theocracy – but on the Constitution itself and, therefore, to any fair minded person who understands the English language properly (without agenda), the FC can reasonably be thought to be “secular”.

But I would say this, as I recently did elsewhere:

“On the question of the secular nature of the Constitution, the answer is not to rub the noses of Muslims by declaring that the Constitution is secular, suffice it to say – as indeed Pak Lah himself once said – that the Constitution is neither Islamic (because the supreme law is the Constitution itself and not the Syariah or whatever) nor fully secular (if for no reason other than the fact that the Constitution has so much to say about Islam & Islamic laws). What that message signals is the truth that the Constitution is not Islamic.”

Now, you said “Furthermore, the article on Malay Special Rights is mentioned explicitly in Article 153 of our constitution”. Brother, don’t bluff! The words “Malay Special Rights” are found no where in Article. It is a myth created by UMNO and you are falsely perpetuating it. Is the passing of falsehood allowed is Islam? I don’t think so. So please do not pass falsehood in future.

But I would say, as – again – I recently did elsewhere:

“In the FC there is no ideology of “Malay Supremacy” whatsoever, but Malays & the natives of Sabah & Sarawak are afforded of extra “protection” because of their “special position”. There is, of course, no such as “special rights” or “special privileges” of Malays in the Constitution – as anyone who has read the Constitution knows - but that for a while (after Merdeka in 1957) Malays et al should be protected as children ought to be, until they reach adulthood. If I were Malay I would be insulted by this, but alas I am not Malay.

However, I suspect that many well-educated, well-read, well-travelled and accomplished Malays (like, say, Tun Hanif Omar), increasingly feel insulted by the apparently never-ending gravy train that is the NEP, which suggests that the Malays will forever be children in need of continuous protection or if they have attained legal age, they are somehow permanently disabled or handicapped as are the blind, lame, deaf, dumb or the mentally challenged!”

Faham?

LJ

L_J said...

Bro,

As a follow up to my last posting (June 2, 2008 6:04 PM), may I add the following:

Indeed, the protective nature (the word used is “safeguard”) of Article 153 towards Malays et al, is similar to the protective nature of help which any decent society ought to render to the handicapped and disabled. The blind, lame, deaf, dumb or the mentally challenged have no RIGHT to demand help from society. It is a privilege, a benefit, a concession, a favour and a dispensation provided to Malays et al by the Federal Constitution (FC), so that they can be helped purely based on their race without such help being in contravention of the fundamental right of every Malaysian citizen – under the FC (see Article 8) – to be free from racial discrimination (a fundamental right enshrined in the FC)

So the Fundamental Rule and Norm (under the FC) is non-discrimination (on racial and other grounds), and one Exception is that Malays et al can be given a leg-up because they were born Malays et al (and so, in a sense, regrettably (and I am sorry to say so so crudely), inherently weak – like, say, prematurely born babies – very much like the Negros of the US or the “untouchables” Dalits of India) and regarded as in need of a leg-up.

This is how it was pre-1969 and that is the way it constitutionally ought to be. Even prior to 1969 Malays enjoyed such privileges, benefits, concessions, favours and dispensations; but they were in “reasonable” proportions (as, indeed, stipulated under Article 153). But the violent overthrew of the pre-1969 status quo, meant that the Exception became the Rule, in explicit perversion of the FC.

But what could anyone do? The Malays held the gun – as they still do – and it is difficult debate in the face of the barrel of a gun!

What has changed? Good Muslims & Malays – educated, accomplished, read, travelled and most of all with a Muslim conscience – have seen the light and can no longer stomach the injustice that UMNO Malays/Muslims have perpetrated on this country and are willing to be counted. They are still a minority but their voices are strong, loud and clear!

LJ

Anonymous said...

I read with interest your views - I assume that Malay superamacy means 'Ketuanan Melayu' Surely if you are Tuan the flip side of that 'coin' is serf/slave/servant (pick your choice!). Is that what that to be the fate of non-Malays? I am a fifth generation Malaysian - is that to be fate of my children and theirs and all others who follow. At least IDI AMIN did not sprout 'mealy' mouth platitudes about being a KIND master - he told the British shove off will all the immigrants they brought over. UMNO and all Malay nationalists should have the guts to do just the same not this sham of 'truly asia'. You have to be a non Malay to understand the 'slow death' inflicted by the UMNO regime upon non Malay citizens of the country. You have be a non Malay to understand how pseudo Malays and their like go on to hold positions of enormous power and use Malay nationalism to hang onto power and plunder the nation. 'Ketuanan' has long past its 'sell by' date - discard it - for the health, wealth, peace and prosperity of the nation are in peril!

Anonymous said...

If you get your facts right, 3 of our previous prime ministers have affirmed malaysia's status as a secular democracy. Further reiterated in a court ruling in 1988. Constitutions have loopholes, Malaysia's ain't spared. Interpreting a constitution ain't just plain reading and merely surface translation. We're supposed to catch the essence of what our forefathers envisioned when drafting this constitution instead. And it is an accepted fact that the Alliance Front then in the 50's did not plan for a theocratic state. Tunku Abdul Rahman stressed on several occasions on the need of a secular democracy considering the plurality and religious diversity of Malaysia. Also that, Islam (as a state religion) can coexist with a secular government.

1.You mentioned secularism as a dirty word. For heaven's sake, do you even know the philosophy of this entire ideology in the first place?? It is noble in the sense it promotes religious liberty and equality. It does not sponsor any religion as because to give all religions a level playing field to preach and if Islam is all benovolent as mentioned then the local majority shouln't have a thing to worry about.

2. You also mentioned that secularism halts muslims progress. I'm merely a freakn' 15 year old, and damn you're so wrong. Turkey for one example is the epitome of a successful secular muslim nation. Its people enjoying standards of living double that of Malaysians. Secularism does not halt Islamic progress as religious organizations are free to preach at their own will albeit with zilch government funding!

Anonymous said...

To anonymous...
It depends on your worldview. Because you're still young you should really take your time and learn...If you judge from terms of luxury,etc..than you should review yourself. If that is success in your opinion..That's fine by me. But personally, have a look at the simplest example,US...betcha dont know that despite their wealth they are facing lots of troubles because yeah, think it for yourself.. LIve in that country and proceed with your so called "smartness" and you may make benefits for others by posting your life there somewhere so that people would take some lessons...

schoolboy95 said...

You have really definitely never heard Lord Denning and his works. Fundamentally, he states that laws are not to be construed blindly in words but rather an effort to interpret the essence of what the drafter of the constitution. It seems fairer and more justified as words can only do so much in conveying human messages. Hence, interpretion is better and more impartial.

For example, if a person made a will stated specifically " i want to pass on my wealth on to my wife after i died" He loved his wife endlessly. but somehow the marriage was null and hence technically she ain't his wife. the question now is whether she should get her money. If strictly interpreted, no she shouldn't. but a rather pragmatic approach is rather to catch the orignal intentions of the draftor of the will and yes he wanted to pass on the wealth to his wife. so yes she should."

Anonymous said...

to anonymous

You're trying to say that materialism is not a yardstick for success right? I take it that your point for contention is the deplorable moral state of US youth.
Yes i agree with you that a pious society is a cleaner one, generally speaking. That ain't the point, but whether for that is it worthy for us to compromise religious equality and right to conduct is another? Everyone subscribe to different faiths, how can you put on religion atop another and coerce others to believe the values you do, that's moronic. There's nothing perfect in this world, but we're trying to get pretty darn close.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for an idea, you sparked at thought from a angle I hadn’t given thoguht to yet. Now lets see if I can do something with it.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

ARiF merupakan jentera utama Harapan Baru di dalam membantu kelancaran gerakerja semua peringkat.

Kami ARiF Melaka memerlukan sumbangan dan bantuan kewangan daripada tuanpuan untuk kami melakukan gerakerja berkenaan. Oleh kerana kami masih baru, sumbangan diperlukan untuk menampung kos pakaian, membeli peralatan komunikasi, peralatan lalulintas dan sebagainya.

Kami amat berbebsar hati jika tuan/puan dapat menghulurkan sumangan kepada kami. Segala sumbangan diserahkan kepada pemegang amanah ARiF Melaka.

MOHD AZWAN AHMAD
a/k Maybank : 104013154427

Hantarkan makluman bank-in melalui SMS/WA ke 016-981 1315 (H.ANUAR)

Semuga Allah membalas segala jasa baik tuan/puan semua.