Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia
No News Is Bad New
Why are the 222 Members of Parliament (MPs) as quiet as a church mouse on the Mufti Bill?
Mufti Bill is about turning Malaysia into an Islamic State?
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 12, 2024: Sabah and Sarawak Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and others opposing the Mufti Bill have expressed their utmost alarm and concern over the continuing federal breaches of MA63 (if valid) and the destruction of MA63 secularism concept.
“We in Sabah and Sarawak strongly oppose the proposed Mufti Bill that seeks to expand the powers of the Mufti in the Federal Territories.
“We firmly reject any move to be ruled by Muftis, as this would effectively sideline the constitutional monarchy, the Madani government, and the secular parliamentary democracy that Malaysia is built upon. Such a change would transform Malaysia into an Islamic state overnight,” they said in a 14-signatory joint statement.
And social activist lawyer Latheefa Koya has come out strongly against the proposed bill governing the office of Federal Territories mufti, saying it would grant far-reaching powers to an unelected official appointed by a minister while dictating the lives of Muslims and how they should practise the Islamic faith.
She also said the bill effectively creates "two chief authorities" for Islamic affairs in the federal territories, a mufti in addition to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King), who is the constitutional head of Islam as well as the federal territories and states without a sultan.
She said by making the mufti the highest authority "next to the Agong", the bill "derogates from the position of the Agong as the head of Islam in Malaysia" as stipulated in Articles 3(5) and 34(1) of the Federal Constitution.
Why then is the so-called Madani Unity Government (UG) led by Malaysia’s 10th Prime Minister (PMX) Anwar Ibrahim rocking the religious and political boats?
Is Anwar a prime minister for all Malaysians in multiracial Malaysia?
No News Is Bad News reproduces below news and articles on the issue:
JOINT PRESS STATEMENT BY SABAH AND SARAWAK NGOs & OTHERS OPPOSING THE MUFTI BILL
11 October 2024
Oct 11
The undersigned NGOs and other signatories jointly express their utmost alarm and concern over the continuing federal breaches of MA63 (if valid) and the destruction of MA63 secularism concept.
“We in Sabah and Sarawak strongly oppose the proposed Mufti Bill that seeks to expand the powers of the Mufti in the Federal Territories.
We firmly reject any move to be ruled by Muftis, as this would effectively sideline the constitutional monarchy, the Madani government, and the secular parliamentary democracy that Malaysia is built upon. Such a change would transform Malaysia into an Islamic state overnight.”
The ongoing violations of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) have reached a critical point, with recent developments such as the recent halal certification issue, the divisive #RUU355 Bill, appointment of halal inspectors and the impending passage of the Mufti Bill 2024.
These measures represent yet more serious breaches of MA63 and have sparked widespread concern among citizens, especially in Sabah and Sarawak.
It is also opposed by Muslim people who are concern that “the Mufti Bill marks a more explicit sectarian turn in the bureaucratisation of Islam since the 2000s, aiming to institutionalise Sunni Ash’arism as the state-sanctioned version of Islam”. The politicisation of ideologies “will foster intolerance and radicalism by promoting dehumanising values and undermining democracy”. (quotes from Competing Sectarianism in Malaysia By Aizat Shamsuddin October 08, 2024) The Diplomat https://thediplomat.com/2024/10/competing-sectarianisms-in-malaysia/ )
These actions constitute direct attacks on the secular system, which was a fundamental guarantee to Sabah and Sarawak when Malaysia and also the Malayan Federation were set up.
The cumulative effect of these breaches highlights a pattern of erosion of the constitutional safeguards that were intended to protect the pluralistic and secular nature of the federation.
Historical Context and Guarantees for a Secular System in Malaysia’s Formation
When Malaysia was set up in 1963 under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), Sabah and Sarawak were promised autonomy and guarantees including protection of their secular and pluralist systems as inducement to give up their demands for real independence. Unlike Malaya, where Islam was the official religion, Sabah and Sarawak were guaranteed the right to maintain their secular identities. It was an agreed term that there would have “no state religion” for the 2 states. This was a key factor in their decision to join Malaya and Singapore to set up the federation. However, over the past 61 years, these promises have been systematically violated.
This term was broken when the Sabah Constitution was amended to make Islam the state religion and the Sarawak Constitution amended to make the Agong the Head of Islam in Sarawak, a change that was never intended when Malaysia was created. These amendments which could only have proceeded with the blessings of the federal government, effectively introduced Islam as an official religion in the states, contrary to the original terms of MA63.
In the 1970s the federal government in breach of UN human rights and international laws and the federal constitution, had initiated population re-engineering of Sabah by flooding it with southern Philippines refugees transforming it into a Muslim majority in Sabah. These changes were not only unconstitutional but also deeply troubling for the pluralistic and secular foundations upon which Malaysia was meant to stand.
The Mufti Bill and Its Far-Reaching Implications
The Mufti Bill, which is set to be passed on 16 or 17 October 2024, is yet another alarming development that further erodes the damaged secular structure of Malaysia. This bill would grant sweeping powers to the Mufti, enabling the issuance of religious decrees that could have significant impacts on both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. These decrees could bypass the authority of Parliament and the courts, effectively placing religious law above civil law. The Mufti could even appoint advisors from outside the federation, allowing external religious influence to shape domestic laws. Muftis have no jurisdiction in Parliament as they are not elected representatives of the people. Elevating their influence would ultimately lead to a situation where "the entire Federation could be ruled by Muftis."
The broad powers of the Mufti under this bill pose a direct threat to the secular system. NonMuslims could be forced to comply with Islamic decrees, further deepening the Islamization and destabilising foundations of the federation. The bill exemplifies how the federal government, particularly under the current Madani administration, has accelerated the process of dismantling the secular foundations of the nation. This trend, which began decades ago, has now reached a critical point where secularism is at risk of being completely replaced by a race-religion apartheid system.
The Violation of the Basic Structure Doctrine and International Law
The secular pluralist system promised under MA63 has been replaced by a race-religion apartheid system embodied by the New Economic Policy (NEP) and the ideology of Ketuanan Melayu. This was never a negotiated item of the Malaysia Agreement.
These developments violate the Basic Structure Doctrine of the Malaysian Constitution, which protects the fundamental pillars of the federation, including secularism and federalism. The imposition of race and religion-based policies not only undermines the Constitution but also breaches international law.
MA63 is an international treaty, and the ongoing violations of its terms—particularly the dismantling of the secular system—render it null and void. The treaty’s core promises, including the preservation of secularism in Sabah and Sarawak, have been systematically violated, giving these states the right to reconsider their position within the federation.
Conclusion: The Right to Self-Determination
We affirm our support for the right of all citizens to freedom of religion and belief, as guaranteed under the terms of MA63. The recent halal certification issue, the divisive #RUU355 Bill, appointment of halal inspectors in government departments and the imminent passage of the Mufti Bill represent only the latest in a long series of breaches of MA63. These actions have fundamentally undermined the secular, pluralist system upon which Malaysia was built.
The violations of the treaty, alongside the imposition of a race-religion apartheid system, have effectively terminated the validity of MA63. The federal government has failed to uphold its obligations, and the systematic erosion of the secular foundation of the nation has breached both the spirit and the letter of the agreement.
Sabah and Sarawak now have unchallengeable legal and moral grounds to assert their right to self-determination. The destruction of the secular system, which was meant to protect the unique status of these regions, has violated their rights under the federation. The allocation of 34.6% of seats in the Dewan Rakyat, a principle rooted in constitutional and historical obligations, was meant to safeguard the interests of Sabah and Sarawak. Yet even this has been undermined, leaving the regions vulnerable to domination by the more populous Malaya.
Given these multiple breaches, it is time for the people and governments of Sabah and Sarawak to reassess the future of Sabah and Sarawak within Malaysia. The erosion of the secular system and the imposition of race-religion policies have fundamentally altered the nature of the federation, and it is now clear that MA63 has been rendered null and void by Malaya’s actions.
We, the undersigned NGOs and other signatories, hereby declare that the Malaysian government’s blatant breaches of the founding principles of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63, if valid) constitutes its unilateral termination. Consequently, we are no longer bound by the terms of MA63. We demand that the Sabah and Sarawak governments immediately defend our rights and pursue our rightful exit from this failed federation without delay.
End of statement
Endorsed by:
1. Daniel John Jambun – President Borneo's Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)
2. Robert Pei - President, Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand, (SSRANZ)
3. Peter John Jaban - Founder SAS Saya Anak Sarawak (SAS)
4. Mosses Paul Anap Ampang - President Republic Sabah North Borneo (RSNB)
5. Voon Lee Shan - President, Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK)
6. Themothy Jagak Dayak Cultural Ambassador for Gabungan Orang Asal Sabah/ Sarawak (GOASS)
7. Ahmad bin Awang Ali- Pusat Latihan Orang Asal Sarawak
8. Alim GA Mideh - Bulang Birieh Dayak Civil Movement
9. Kanul Gindol Chairman Gindol Initiative for Civil Society Borneo
10. Jovilis Majami President Persatuan pembangunan sosial komunity Sabah (BANGUN)
11. Cleftus Stephen Mojingol President Pertubuhan kebajikan Rumpun Dayak Sabah (PKRDS)
12. Peter John Jaban Publicity and information Chief Sarawak Association for People's Aspirations (SAPA)
13. Michael Jok Secretary General Society for Rights of Indigenous People of Sarawak (SCRIPS)
14. Paul Rajah Legal Adviser Society for Rights of Indigenous People of Sarawak (SCRIPS)
News
New mufti bill unconstitutional, undermines Agong and harms Muslims through government control, says Latheefa
The rights lawyer and former MACC chief urged MPs to overwhelmingly reject the Mufti (Federal Territories) Bill.
October 10, 2024 12:30 PM
Latheefa Koya says a proposed new law on the powers of the FT mufti will effectively bring Muslims under government control.
Lawyer Latheefa Koya has come out strongly against a proposed bill governing the office of Federal Territories mufti, saying it would grant far-reaching powers to an unelected official appointed by a minister while dictating the lives of Muslims and how they should practise the Islamic faith.
Latheefa urged MPs debating the Mufti (Federal Territories) Bill 2024 in the Dewan Rakyat next week to overwhelmingly reject it, and slammed ruling MPs for remaining silent on the issue more than three months after the bill was first tabled in July.
"In this regard, the silence and timidity of the DAP and Sabah and Sarawak MPs on this bill is greatly disappointing. I urge them to act for the good of the people and to uphold the Constitution as they have sworn to do."
Agong undermined
Latheefa said the bill effectively creates "two chief authorities" for Islamic affairs in the federal territories, a mufti in addition to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, who is the constitutional head of Islam as well as the federal territories and states without a sultan.
She said by making the mufti the highest authority "next to the Agong", the bill "derogates from the position of the Agong as the head of Islam in Malaysia" as stipulated in Articles 3(5) and 34(1) of the Federal Constitution.
"The mufti is appointed upon advice of the minister, and therefore the federal government will obtain wide power and authority over every aspect of the religious practices of Muslims in this country once the Bill is law.
"This is not the role envisaged for the federal government under our constitution. It is against the basic structure of our constitution and thus unconstitutional," Latheefa, a rights lawyer who is also former chief commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, said in a statement.
The bill, which is promoted by religious affairs minister Mohd Na'im Mokhtar touches on the role of the FT mufti, the structure of the fatwa committee, as well as committees on astronomy, the sighting of the moon to determine the Islamic calendar and prayer direction (qiblah) among others.
Latheefa said the bill gives unprecedented jurisdiction to fatwas issued by the FT mufti as they would be binding on every Muslim.
"There is no exception or qualification," she said, adding that in contrast, current FT Islamic laws exempt fatwa in matters of personal observance, belief or opinion.
"The edict of a mufti under the proposed Bill is iron-clad and immutable," she added.
Unprecedented powers to control Muslims
She warned that the bill could expand the list of shariah offences under the FT "to cover almost every aspect of a Muslim’s social, economic and political life".
"In other words, any fatwa on any aspect made by the mufti can potentially give rise to an offence under the Syariah Criminal Offences (FT) Act 1997.
"Thus, the bill will lead to the unfettered increase of the types or categories of offences enforceable against Muslims."
The bill, Latheefa said, will "give power to the government through the mufti to control or police every aspect of the life of Muslims in this country", including on matters of dress and food.
"No government should have such powers over its people in a democracy, purportedly under the guise of religion."
She said the bill allows the mufti to issue fatwas on his own initiative.
"This is a blank cheque given to the mufti, who is an unelected official, to govern and direct the lives of Muslims."
Latheefa also questioned the provision for a Muslim representative of the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) to sit on the fatwa committee, saying that it is against Article 8 of the Constitution for religious preferences to apply to such positions involving AGC.
"It is also plainly absurd, as the Bill itself will be debated and voted upon by non-Muslims MPs in the Dewan Rakyat as well as Muslim MPs."
News
FT Mufti Bill will turn M’sia into Islamic state overnight - groups
Published: Oct 11, 2024 5:15 PM
The Mufti (Federal Territories) Bill 2024 would turn Malaysia into an Islamic state overnight, several groups from East Malaysia claimed today.
According to Borneo Post Online, 14 Sarawak- and Sabah-based groups also said that the bill violates the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and constitutes a direct attack on the nation’s secular system.
“We in Sabah and Sarawak strongly oppose the proposed mufti bill that seeks to expand the powers of the mufti in the Federal Territories.
“We firmly reject any move to be ruled by the mufti… -mkini
Fears over Malaysia’s secularism as cabinet pushes bill to boost muftis’ power
The bill aims to grant these Islamic leaders powers to issue legally binding rulings without parliamentary oversight
Published: 6:00pm, 11 Oct 2024
Lawyers, Islamic leaders and secular groups in Malaysia have raised alarm over a new parliamentary bill that they say will enforce a rigid Sunni orthodoxy on Muslims and threaten the country’s multicultural make-up.
The Mufti Bill 2024 aims to redefine the role of muftis – Islamic leaders who advise on religious matters – and grant them powers to issue legally binding fatwa, or religious rulings, without parliamentary oversight.
The bill, which has the backing of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and will be debated next week, requires the mufti to follow the Shafie school of Sunni Islam, which is the officially sanctioned interpretation of the state religion.
It has sparked concerns of an infringement of the religious freedoms of Muslims who follow other Islamic sects.
On Friday, a coalition of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) issued a statement rejecting any move to be “ruled by muftis”, calling the bill unconstitutional.
“This would effectively sideline the constitutional monarchy, the government, and the secular parliamentary democracy that Malaysia is built upon,” the group said.
Malaysia’s PM Anwar Ibrahim at the Asean summit in Vientiane on Wednesday. Anwar supports the proposed Mufti Bill. Photo: EPA-EFE
“Such a change would transform Malaysia into an Islamic state overnight.”
Introduced to parliament in July, Religious Affairs Minister Mohd Naim Mokhtar on Friday confirmed that the bill would be debated in the coming Parliament session from Monday.
“This has been approved by the cabinet,” Mohd Naim said.
With Anwar’s ruling coalition enjoying an unassailable two-thirds majority in parliament, the bill is set to pass into law.
While Malaysia is officially a multi-religious and secular nation, Islamisation has steadily increased since the 1980s, gradually blurring the lines between religion and state.
Despite religion being a state-level matter under the constitution, the federal government has increasingly taken an active role in Islamic matters.
Comprising secular Borneo-based rights groups, the NGO coalition argued that the broad powers of the muftis under this bill would directly threaten the separation of state and religion and affect non-Muslims who could be forced to comply with Islamic decrees.
People buy food from street vendors for fast-breaking meals at a Ramadan bazaar in Kuala Lumpur. Photo: Getty Images
The rising Islamisation of Malaysia has worried more non-Muslims, who make up 36 per cent of Malaysia’s 34 million population, despite constant reassurance from the government.
A Chinese lawmaker recently faced fury after speaking out against a suggestion to make halal certification mandatory for all restaurants in the country instead of the current voluntary method.
In Terengganu, which voted the Islamist PAS into all seats in their state assembly, a Chinese temple was recently banned from having female singers perform at its jubilee celebration.
Lawyer Latheefa Koya warned that the Mufti Bill was a “clear and present danger” to Muslims’ rights to practise their religion freely without interference from the government or unelected religious officials.
“It will give power to the government through the mufti to control or police every aspect of the life of Muslims in this country,” Latheefa said in a statement on Thursday.
“No government should have such powers over its people in a democracy, purportedly under the guise of religion.”
PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang arrives in Marang, Terengganu, during the 2022 general election. Photo: AFP
The bill has also drawn criticism from the president of PAS, Abdul Hadi Awang, who has argued that restricting Malaysia to one school of Islamic thought contradicts the broader spirit of Islam.
“It is only said that Islam needs to be the state religion,” said Abdul Hadi, who was the deputy president of the World Muslim Ulama Union and a proponent of Muslim unity.
Sunni Islam comprises four major schools of thought: Maliki, Hanafi, Shafie, and Hanbali. The Shafie school, which follows the teachings of 9th-century scholar Imam Al-Shafie, is widely practised in Malaysia, Indonesia, Yemen, and parts of the Horn of Africa.
Following a close election in 2022, Anwar’s government has been accused of shifting toward conservatism and further Islamisation to appease the majority Malay Muslim voters, many of whom supported PAS in recent elections in what has been termed the “green wave”.
Anwar, who founded the Malaysian Islamic Youth Movement (ABIM) in his youth, maintains close ties with Islamic scholars and figures worldwide. - South China Morning Post
ASEAN Beat | Society | Southeast Asia
Competing Sectarianisms in Malaysia
A new bill seeks to tighten Islamic orthodoxies, imperiling the country’s reputation for religious tolerance and inclusion.
By Aizat Shamsuddin
October 08, 2024
The Putra mosque in Putrajaya, Malaysia.
Credit: ID 19470987 © Radzian | Dreamstime.com
In July, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s Unity government, through Minister for Religious Affairs Mohd Na’im Mokhtar, introduced the new Mufti Bill for the Federal Territories. The bill, the next reading of which is expected in Parliament later this month, has raised concerns about growing sectarian competition among Malay elites.
The bill is contentious for several reasons. It requires the Federal Territories Mufti, who advises the king and federal government on religious matters, to strictly follow the Sunni denomination, specifically the Ash’ari creed and Shafi’i jurisprudence, while granting the Mufti qualified immunity from legal action.
This sectarian provision sidelines a wide range of alternative Muslim jurisprudences, including Maliki, Hanbali, and Hanafi that are widely practiced elsewhere, as well as sects like Salafism, Shiism, and other non-denominational forms of Islam, despite their presence in Malaysia and recognition in some parts of the Muslim world. Furthermore, legal immunity for the Mufti reflects an undemocratic move to shield a religious figure from legal accountability, positioning the Mufti above other public officials.
This shift toward theocracy in Malaysia is not unprecedented. Dr. Maznah Mohamad’s book, “The Divine Bureaucracy and Disenchantment of Social Life: A Study of Bureaucratic Islam in Malaysia,” underscores the rapid bureaucratization of Islam during from the 1980s onward. Driven by substantial public funding, religion has now infiltrated every aspect of public and private life. However, the Mufti Bill marks a more explicit sectarian turn in the bureaucratization of Islam since the 2000s, aiming to institutionalize Sunni Ash’arism as the state-sanctioned version of Islam.
Competition Among Malay Elites
To grasp the motivation behind the bill, it’s essential to understand the sectarian competition among Malaysia’s Malay-Muslim elites.
First, within political factions, the bill reveals how religious elites under the Anwar-led Unity government, guided by the minister for religious affairs, a former Sharia chief judge of Malaysia, are proactively advancing the Sharia system through new legislation.
This push comes from pressure by far-right factions, particularly the Perikatan Nasional (PN) opposition, led by the Malaysian Islamist party (PAS). They accuse the religious elites of Anwar’s Pakatan Harapan-Barisan Nasional coalition of colluding with a liberal-leaning, pro-Chinese coalition. Recent high-profile federal court rulings – such as the Nik Elin case that annulled provisions in Kelantan’s Sharia Enactment on 16 moral offenses, the Iki Putra case that overturned Selangor’s Sharia Enactment’s provision on anti-sodomy, and the Loh Siew Hong case that annulled the unilateral conversion of children to Islam – have intensified perceived threats to the Sharia system and fueled this legislative drive. The strategy seeks to consolidate support from religious elites, bureaucrats, and conservative Muslim voters.
Adding to the tension is the divisive #RUU355 Bill, which seeks to expand Sharia criminal jurisdiction nationwide and impose harsher punishments. This bill continues to gain momentum under Anwar’s administration.
Second, religious factions, particularly muftis and bureaucrats, are locked in a power struggle, exposing the deep-seated sectarian rivalry between dominant Ash’ari factions and minority Salafi factions, despite the fact that both belong to Sunni Islam. This long-standing intra-faith divide continues to shape Malaysia’s Muslim majority.
The Mufti Bill received strong backing from 12 state Muftis and support from pro-Ash’ari networks, including the Association of Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah (Aswaja) and the Sarawak Scholars’ Association (Ittihad).
In contrast, Perlis, a known safe haven for Salafism, opposed the bill. Salafism thrives there due to the influence of Mufti Asri Zainal Abidin, a leading Salafi advocate. He draws support from the state’s monarchy, local politicians, mosque networks, and foreign Salafi patrons, including the controversial exiled preacher Zakir Naik.
Despite internal divisions between quietists influenced by Saudi Salafis and modernists aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, Salafi factions united against the bill. Prominent Salafi figures like Mufti Asri Zainal Abidin, UPSI lecturer Rozaimi Ramle and Fathul Bari Mat Jahya, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO)’s chief for Kangar city of Perlis, have led the resistance. While these factions often clash over political issues, they recognize that the Mufti Bill, which applies to federal territories, could set a precedent for other states, curtailing their influence nationally. Ironically, though Salafis framed their opposition as a defense of “freedom of thought,” their main concern remains preserving their own sectarian power.
Ash’ari elites, educated mostly at local universities and Egypt’s Al-Azhar, see Salafi scholars, many of whom have received Saudi-funded education, as a direct threat. During the Global War on Terror in the 2000s, numerous Malaysians benefited from Saudi scholarships to study in Saudi institutions. Upon returning, they introduced a puritanical approach that condemned Ash’ari practices as un-Islamic and claimed deviations from the original teachings of the Prophet Muhammad and his early companions. For Ash’aris, this threatened their existing hegemony over Malaysia’s religious institutions and the conservative Muslim life rooted in Ash’ari tenets.
In response, Ash’ari authorities have sought to restrict Salafi influence by preventing their entry into the religious public service, denying them preaching licenses, and even jailing figures like Singaporean Salafi preacher Rasul Dahri. Ash’ari-led institutions also demonize not only Salafis but also Shia, Ahmadis, and liberal Muslims through sermons, textbooks, fatwas, and criminalization.
Yet, Salafis have successfully penetrated Perlis, educational institutions, Malay political parties, and online dakwah or religious preaching platforms like ProMediaTajdid and Ilmu Salaf, branding themselves as “reformists” and attracting newly devout generations. Former Prime Minister Najib Razak further facilitated the spread of Salafism, seeking religious legitimacy through alliances with quietist Salafis, known for their loyalty to the ruling government, and with Saudi patrons amid the 1MDB corruption scandal.
Third, pro-Ash’ari lobbyists have long worked to embed Sunni Ash’arism into national security policies, even before the drafting of the Mufti Bill. Their influence has entrenched a focus on Salafism as the primary source of radicalization in the security sector. For example, this has led to the frequent confiscation of Salafi literature, branding it as subversive, and promoting Ash’ari doctrines in the rehabilitation of terrorist prisoners. Aswaja leader Zamihan Mat Zin and pro-Ash’ari academics from local Islamic universities have spearheaded these deradicalization efforts.
While Salafism’s links to terrorist groups are a legitimate concern, politicized religious ideologies like Ash’arism still foster intolerance and radicalism by promoting dehumanizing values and undermining democracy. In Malaysia, Ash’ari fatwas restrict traditional Malay practices like Mak Yong and participation in non-Muslim ceremonies or at worship places, and actively persecute religious minorities, intellectual dissenters, women, and members of the LGBTQ community. These practices blatantly violate basic human rights and constitutional values. Ash’ari proponents cannot claim higher moral authority in combating radicalization.
This sectarian-based security approach is fundamentally flawed. It unfairly targets groups based on stereotypes while ignoring more pressing threats, such as the rise of far-right extremism, which has eroded national unity and deepened distrust in state institutions, particularly under the Unity government.
Main Leaders Want Different Things
Despite their political differences, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and Hadi Awang, the leader of PAS, have both called for a closer examination of the Mufti Bill. As global Islamist figures, they promote taqrib, a vision aimed at bridging sectarian divides within the Muslim ummah. This agenda has gained traction, particularly in light of Israel’s brutal attacks in response to the Hamas attacks of October 7, which have worsened the plight of Muslims in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria.
Both leaders regularly engage with Muslim figures across sectarian lines, including controversial figures from Hamas, the Egyptian and Turkish Muslim Brotherhood, and Iran’s Shia leadership. Hadi’s recent meeting with Iranian clerics and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps emphasized his established ties with Shia leaders. However, this outreach is not about inclusiveness; Hadi’s rhetoric remains deeply marked by anti-Western and “anti-infidel” sentiments, while his party aggressively pushes for ethno-religious dominance and espouses anti-minority sentiment domestically.
Anwar’s administration must confront, not ignore, this growing sectarian competition. After his first release from prison, Anwar endorsed the Amman Message in 2005, alongside prominent Malaysian figures like former UMNO youth leader and Health Minister Khairy Jamaluddin. This historic agreement, supported by global Muslim leaders amid Al-Qaeda’s threats, recognizes all Islamic sects, including Shia, and forbids the excommunication of Muslims.
Anwar’s Unity government must also embed non-sectarian values into its domestic policies. Malaysian Muslims are not a monolithic group, and the nation’s broader society is even more diverse. With strong parliamentary backing and a positive economic outlook this year, the government is well-placed to enact laws that embrace this diversity and address underlying challenges. Islam, as the country’s official religion, should be promoted as a universal value that protects diversity across sects and communities. Religious institutions must also uphold higher standards of inclusivity and accountability, operating within democratic processes like all other public institutions.
The growing threat of sectarianism in Malaysia
The Saudi-Iranian rivalry is raising sectarian tensions in Malaysia and threatening its security.
Julia Roknifard is the Director of Foreign Policy at EMIR Research, a Kuala Lumpur based think-tank.
Published On 25 Jul 201925 Jul 2019
While the majority of Malaysia's Muslim population is Sunni, the country also has a small Shia community of 250,000 [File:AP Photo/Vincent Thian]
When the new Malaysian government came to power in May 2018, it made several moves indicating that it would not pursue a policy of favouring one foreign power over another, especially in the Middle East. The new leadership was eager to assert that they will allow neither Riyadh, nor Tehran, to drag Kuala Lumpur into their regional squabbles. But just over a year later, it appears the desired balance has proved impossible to maintain.
The recent escalation of tension between Iran and its American and Arab adversaries has stirred sectarian sensitivities not only in the region but also miles away in Southeast Asia, and caused Malaysia, a country with a predominantly Sunni population of 31 million, to once again get sucked into the foreign rivalries.
Back in 1996, the Fatwa Committee for Religious Affairs in Malaysia issued a religious opinion recognising Sunni Islam as “the permitted form of Islam” in the country and branding Shia Islam as “deviant”. In doing so, it prohibited the Shia Muslim community, which has around 250,000 members, from spreading their beliefs and allowed Malaysian security forces to raid Shia gatherings.
During this time, calls for the eradication of Shia Islam became a regular component of Friday sermons in many Sunni mosques and persecution of Shia Muslims became commonplace across Malaysia.
By outlawing Shia Islam – the dominant religion in Iran – Malaysia aligned itself openly and firmly with Tehran’s main regional rivals, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. This, in turn, encouraged the anti-Shia prejudices of the public and allowed sectarian tensions to fester among the general population. It also enabled the spread of Saudi Wahhabist beliefs among Malaysian Muslims.
Riyadh’s influence over Malaysia and the public’s anti-Shia sentiment increased further in 2009 when Najib Razak became prime minister and began cosying up to the kingdom. In the 2010s, anti-Shia sentiment in Malaysia reached its peak as a result of the Syrian civil war, which was often inaccurately presented in the public sphere as a clash between Sunni and Shia forces. The media, even public-owned channels, would often demonise the Shia community, spreading false information about their practices and accusing them of conspiracies.
In 2016, activist Amri Che Mat was forcefully disappeared in the northern state of Perlis after he had been accused of “spreading Shia beliefs” by a local mufti. Recently, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) concluded an investigation which found that “agents of the state” carried out the enforced disappearance.
Malaysia eventually also got involved directly in one of the Middle Eastern conflicts with a clear sectarian dimension. In 2015, Najib joined the Saudi-led coalition fighting the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen and sent Malaysian troops without obtaining prior approval from the cabinet.
Deep-rooted sectarianism
The political tide started to turn when the 1MDB scandal toppled Najib’s government. Riyadh was accused of not only playing a role in the scheme, but also helping to cover it up.
When Pakatan Harapan (PH), the coalition headed by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, came to power in May 2018, it immediately demonstrated that it has no interest in siding with Riyadh and Abu Dhabi against Tehran by shutting down the Saudi-backed King Salman Centre for International Peace (KSCIP) and pulling its troops out of Yemen.
With these two groundbreaking moves, the members of the new government made it clear that they were recalibrating Malaysia’s foreign policy – as they had pledged before their ascent to power – and were stepping out of Riyadh’s zone of influence.
Despite the new government’s best efforts, the anti-Iranian sentiment in Malaysia has proven too strong to beat. Even though Malaysian public was made aware of Saudi Arabia’s role in the country’s corruption scandal, its ever-improving relations with Israel, its role in the Yemen war, and its attempts to whitewash China’s persecution of the Uighurs, they have refused to see beyond the sectarian propaganda they have been fed for decades and reasses their support for Riyadh or their blind condemnation of anything related to Shia Islam or Iran.
Efforts to address sectarianism in the country repeatedly fell on deaf ears, and at times even faced threats of violence. On July 10, for example, a seminar on sectarianism organised by the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies, a Kuala Lumpur-based think-tank, was called off over a bomb threat made on an anti-Shia group on social media.
The Facebook group named Gerakan Banteras Syiah (an Anti-Shia Movement), where the bomb threat was made, had over 19,000 followers at the time of writing and it is only one of the dozens of Malaysian social media pages dedicated to anti-Shia hatred.
Earlier in May, members of a charity group which distributed leaflets in Kuala Lumpur on the life and deeds of Hussain, the grandson of Prophet Mohammed, were accused of trying to spread Shia Islam. Although they were reportedly Sunni, they told local media that they had received threats of violence online.
Instead of taking measures to guarantee the security of the group, the Malaysian police said it will work with religious authorities to stop them, demonstrating that it embraced the sectarian beliefs of the general public.
Some mainstream Malaysian media organisations have continued to demonstrate similar biases. They also favour Saudi Arabia over Iran in their coverage.
In late April, for example, Malaysia’s Defence Minister Mohamad Sabu made a working visit to Iran, but the story barely received any coverage other than short, matter-of-fact reports. And when an Iranian delegation visited the Malaysian Parliament on July 4, some media outlets reported on claims that the visit was proof of Shia Islam “spreading its wings to the Malaysian parliament“.
Meanwhile, the local media widely covered Malaysian Sultan Abdullah and Foreign Minister Saifuddin Abdullah’s July visit to Saudi Arabia. Many media reports on the visit even mentioned the “special relationship” and “fraternal bond” between the two countries.
No matter how much Malaysia’s new government tries to stay out of sectarian squabbles in the Middle East and to focus on its policy towards Japan and China, the country’s demographic make-up, and the Middle Eastern powers, which view it as an important ally and a lucrative market, pull it back in.
If the new government fails to send a clear message to both Riyadh and Tehran that it would not be part of their cold war and take swift action to end sectarian sentiments of the population, Malaysia may pay the price and become a new front line for sectarian confrontation.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
No comments:
Post a Comment