With God on Their Side?

The recent vulgar and uncouth protests against the Malaysian Bar Council's forum on conversion (9 Aug 2008) was troubling. It is even more troubling that the Malaysian government chose to put the blame on the organisers (for breaching "sensitivities") and not on the disrupters of an otherwise peaceful dialogue. Considering the fact that the current government is fast losing ground support and credibility among the populace, it is certain that the tried and tested tactic of pandering to the religious emotions of the masses to bolster support and legitimacy to rule becomes the choice of the present insecure UMNO. But such panderings have its consequences.

It is no longer a balancing game when certain individuals have become bolder and took to the extreme by throwing molotov cocktails and planting kerosene bombs at intended targets to instill fear. Such terrorist acts ought to be condemned as much as we condemn other terrorist acts against and by Muslims elsewhere and in greater scale. But somehow, I could sense that there is lack of response from some (seemingly "moderate") groups/individuals to decry the violent and immature acts of the forum protestors because silently in the hearts, they may have said, "The Malaysian Bar Council deserves it for insulting Islam!"

Yet, these same groups/individuals will be quick to jump up and condemn bombings elsewhere and peddle slogans and cliches on Islam as a peaceful religion! But when it comes to things happening within their own (Malay) society, they are silently partisan to the conservative and fundamentalist elements. By virtue of such individuals occupying influential positions in various mainstream institutions and organisations, their conservative-fundamentalist streak tend to create a perception that the Muslim community is a conservative lot with fundamentalist leanings. This is a dangerous perception that has put a lot of stress and gazing on Muslims in general.

Yet, the fact of the matter is, it is these conservative-fundamentalists who are in the minority and yet attempts to speak for the majority. Their choice of acting loudly and asserting themselves in a vulgar and uncouth manner is to make up for their lack in numbers. It is common across many conservative groups everywhere: If you cannot argue coherently, make a lot of noise to drown your opponent's voice. If you cannot influence the masses through "public reason", use brute force to instill fear and thus earn yourself a place in the negotiation table.

Such tactics are dangerous and tore the very fabric of a democratic society which provides liberty to various groups to engage in productive dialogue and peaceful negotiations. In countries where law enforcement are more efficient and not subsumed under any partisan interest, there is less room for violent or physical protests. The tactic then is different: Cast aspersions on groups and individuals, and character assasinate them! In other words, make them "less of a Muslim" and thus strip them of their legitimacy to speak on Islam - regardless even if they are more grounded in the Islamic traditions than those whose knowledge on Islam does not go beyond the level of a child who is trained only on how to recite verses.

The basic game of these conservative-fundamentalists are, in fact, similar - (1) curtail the freedom and liberty of others to think and express their positions and opinions; (2) instil fear - be it physical or emotional-psychological; and (3) assert one's sole, absolute authority - not based on argumentations but through appealing to one's belonging to a certain class or "priviledged group".

These conservative-fundamentalists will like to think that they are the spokesperson for God and the protectors of Islam. They see themselves as the soldiers of God. But it is timely now to remind them again - as Prof. Khaled Abou El Fadl brilliantly argued and quoted from the Qur'an itself - "...and God knows the soldiers."

It is time the conservative-fundamentalists accept with humility that as much as they want to be on God's side, it is no guarantee that God is on their side. More so when their actions and speech display a plain ignorance of the depth of Islam, and a breach on the ethico-moral demands of the religion.

* PS: Below is a press statement by a Malaysian NGO, Sisters in Islam, condemning the protest against the Bar Council forum.

*****

*SIS statement against the disruption of Bar Council Forum on "Conversion to Islam : Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution:Subashini and Shamala Revisited" held on 9 August 2008.*

Sisters in Islam (SIS) strongly protests the extreme actions by Muslim NGOs and political parties in halting the Bar Council Forum on "Conversion to Islam : Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution:Subashini and Shamala Revisited" held on 9 August 2008.

SIS also strongly condemns the violent actions of throwing Molotov cocktails at the former residence of the President of the Bar Council, now the residence of Dato' Seri Shahrizat Jalil's family, and for the planting of two kerosene bombs in front of the Bar Council office.

Such violent acts only give a bad image of Muslims and Malaysian society surely does not tolerate these extremist or terrorist actions. Government leaders should have helped to allay the fears of Muslims by giving proper explanations to the public.

If the government anticipated any untoward incidents, the government should have taken the necessary measures to ensure the forum could proceed smoothly without any disruptions.

The police should not have bowed to the aggressive tactics that forced for the abrupt termination of a peaceful and mature dialogue.

The Muslim NGOs and political parties that caused the cancellation of the forum should realize that there were many Muslim lawyers and Muslim participants who supported the dialogue and did not regard the forum as insulting or challenging Islam.

The Malaysian Bar Council has duly informed several religious bodies about the forum. In fact, two religious officers – Tuan Dr. Haji Naim Haji Mokhtar (Syarie Prosecutor for federal territory's Islamic Affairs Department & former Syariah High Court judge) and Dr. Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad (Director of the Syariah Law and Political Science Centre / Senior Fellow of the Institute for Islamic Understanding of Malaysia (IKIM)) have initially agreed to be the panelists for the said forum. It was unfortunate that both pulled out at the eleventh hour.

The fact was that based on the programme, three of the five panelists were Muslims.

SIS is of the position that Malaysian citizens have every right to discuss any national laws and policies that affect the rights of the people. In view that the Shamala and Subashini cases impact on the rights of non-Muslim spouses, non-Muslims have every right to discuss how to deal with conflicts in matrimonial and family matters such as divorce, alimony, custody and maintenance.

At the same time, the media reported an inter-faith dialogue organized in Universiti Malaya at the end of July 2008, amongst the government religious agencies, academicians, the Allied Coordinating Committee of Islamic NGOs (ACCIN) and the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity,Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST). Amongst the resolutions was for more dialogues to be held in discussing inter-religious issues in Malaysia including apostasy, conversion to Islam and its impact on matrimonial and family matters such as divorce, alimony, custody and maintenance.

SIS thus is at a loss at to why the government, political parties and the Muslim NGOs did not support the dialogue organized by the Bar Council. SIS is disappointed that political parties which have been championing human rights, the voice of the people and citizens' rights in airing their opinions etc, have obviously failed in practicing what they preach; in fact, they have acted against their own manifesto promised to the people in the last General Elections.

SIS hopes for all parties to respect the rights of all Malaysians in airing their views on issues that affect citizens' rights.