Just when we thought Malaysia is moving towards a new chapter and age where citizens are free to air their views in a peaceful and civilised manner, we appear to be taking a step backwards.
I am talking about the Article 11 Forum. Article 11 is an umbrella body of 13 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) which had held forums in Penang and Johor Bahru recently. The topic for discussion in the Johor Bahru forum was "Freedom for All". For a more detailed view of what was discussed and transpired during the meeting, read this report by Serene Ong from the Malaysian Bar who was present in the meeting.
It was a victory for freedom in this country of some sorts. A group of people were given the right to meet and discuss "sensitive" issues in a civic and matured manner. Police permits are hard to come by for such meetings on "sensitive" issues. Whilst there were a group of demonstrators outside the hotel calling for an end to the discussion, freedom won in the sense that the police allowed them to demonstrate peacefully.
The interesting part to note is that Sisters in Islam (SIS) is part of this 13 NGOs and had the maturity to discuss issues relating to the legal position of muslims in the Civil Court and the Syariah Court vis a vis the Federal Constitution. These women ought be commended for their maturity in handling such issues tactfully, with an open-mind and being able to agree to disagree where views differ. Some of the speakers are muslims too.
In today's news headlines, the Prime Minister of Malaysia Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi informed that Article 11 forums to discuss inter-faith issues must be stopped immediately because they are deemed to cause tension in our multi-religious society. Following the UMNO Supreme Council's meeting wherein the council had expressed utmost concern over the inter-faith issues being discussed, Pak Lah (as he is fondly known) was further quoted to have said "If possible, such discussions should not be carried out at all. It has passed the stage where it is worrying all of us. The Government will monitor the situations and developments."
Taken from his press statement, it paints a picture that Malaysians are not capable of having a rational discussion with one another without threat of tension. What tension was he talking about? He must obviously be referring to violence. Mere words alone does not break bones. If there is a threat of violence, which may have been the justification for the call to Article 11 to stop the roadshows, what steps had been taken to arrest such threats of violence?
We must not remain on cloud 9 thinking that everything is hunky-dory in Malaysia especially where matters of faith and ethnic relations are concerned. There is much dissatisfaction amongst the citizens of the country on the lack of freedom to express their views.
Though I may not agree with some views, I would not be stupid enough to start picking up a stick or samurai sword to attack those people whose views are different from mine. Rather, one should try to understand the alternative views canvassed so that one can emphatise with their position and background as well as whatever constraints they may be living in. By understanding, we can learn to adjust our lifestyle, demands and expectations to live harmoniously with one another.
I for one, do not understand why some muslim brothers / sisters find it totally unacceptable to discuss about their religion as against mine. How am I suppose to understand if proper and rational discussion is not allowed? And how are they expected to understand my beliefs and my predicaments? How does a discussion threaten Islam as a religion? The Almighty God does not need men to defend Him for He is omnipotent. I am sure they would agree with me that God is omnipotent.
If freedom to discuss issues in a civilised manner is curtailed in the interest of some with veiled threats to disrupt national unity (whether in the form of threats of violence or actual violence), then the country is taking a further step backwards in the quest for deeper understanding between the multi-ethnic multi-religious people of this country.
I am talking about the Article 11 Forum. Article 11 is an umbrella body of 13 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) which had held forums in Penang and Johor Bahru recently. The topic for discussion in the Johor Bahru forum was "Freedom for All". For a more detailed view of what was discussed and transpired during the meeting, read this report by Serene Ong from the Malaysian Bar who was present in the meeting.
It was a victory for freedom in this country of some sorts. A group of people were given the right to meet and discuss "sensitive" issues in a civic and matured manner. Police permits are hard to come by for such meetings on "sensitive" issues. Whilst there were a group of demonstrators outside the hotel calling for an end to the discussion, freedom won in the sense that the police allowed them to demonstrate peacefully.
The interesting part to note is that Sisters in Islam (SIS) is part of this 13 NGOs and had the maturity to discuss issues relating to the legal position of muslims in the Civil Court and the Syariah Court vis a vis the Federal Constitution. These women ought be commended for their maturity in handling such issues tactfully, with an open-mind and being able to agree to disagree where views differ. Some of the speakers are muslims too.
In today's news headlines, the Prime Minister of Malaysia Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi informed that Article 11 forums to discuss inter-faith issues must be stopped immediately because they are deemed to cause tension in our multi-religious society. Following the UMNO Supreme Council's meeting wherein the council had expressed utmost concern over the inter-faith issues being discussed, Pak Lah (as he is fondly known) was further quoted to have said "If possible, such discussions should not be carried out at all. It has passed the stage where it is worrying all of us. The Government will monitor the situations and developments."
Taken from his press statement, it paints a picture that Malaysians are not capable of having a rational discussion with one another without threat of tension. What tension was he talking about? He must obviously be referring to violence. Mere words alone does not break bones. If there is a threat of violence, which may have been the justification for the call to Article 11 to stop the roadshows, what steps had been taken to arrest such threats of violence?
We must not remain on cloud 9 thinking that everything is hunky-dory in Malaysia especially where matters of faith and ethnic relations are concerned. There is much dissatisfaction amongst the citizens of the country on the lack of freedom to express their views.
Though I may not agree with some views, I would not be stupid enough to start picking up a stick or samurai sword to attack those people whose views are different from mine. Rather, one should try to understand the alternative views canvassed so that one can emphatise with their position and background as well as whatever constraints they may be living in. By understanding, we can learn to adjust our lifestyle, demands and expectations to live harmoniously with one another.
I for one, do not understand why some muslim brothers / sisters find it totally unacceptable to discuss about their religion as against mine. How am I suppose to understand if proper and rational discussion is not allowed? And how are they expected to understand my beliefs and my predicaments? How does a discussion threaten Islam as a religion? The Almighty God does not need men to defend Him for He is omnipotent. I am sure they would agree with me that God is omnipotent.
If freedom to discuss issues in a civilised manner is curtailed in the interest of some with veiled threats to disrupt national unity (whether in the form of threats of violence or actual violence), then the country is taking a further step backwards in the quest for deeper understanding between the multi-ethnic multi-religious people of this country.
