THE Catholic Church finally had its day in open court to defend its right to the use of the word “Allah”, arguing Dec. 14 banning its usage to refer to the Christian God was unconstitutional. Months of legal arguments in the judges’ chambers and frequent disruptions by major Muslim groups had held back the court proceedings from happening sooner.
Counsel for the Catholic Church, which publishes a weekly paper called Herald, argued that the Home Minister had gone against the Federal Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, when he introduced new conditions banning the use of the word “Allah” to mean any God other than the Muslim God.
Under section 12 of the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Home Minister, who has full discretion in issuing a publishing licence and may place certain conditions to prevent abuse, had overstepped his power.
The team of five lawyers, led by Porres Royan, highlighted that the Federal Constitution protects the fundamental rights of religious minorities in Malaysia to carry out their worship freely, according to a report from Kuala Lumpur by the Malaysian Insider.
In Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution, Islam is acknowledged to be the official religion of the country, but at the same time, other religions can be practised in peace and harmony, said Porres.
The senior lawyer added that other parts of the Federal Constitution support the law equally, namely Article 11(3)(a) which states that every religion has the right to manage its own affairs, Article 10(1)(a) which guarantees freedom of speech and Article 8(1) which notes that every citizen is equal in the eyes of the law and entitled to equal protection under law.
Porres also noted that Christianity pre-dates Islam and made references to several early English-Malay versions of the Bible, including one by renowned Malay scholar Munsyi Abdullah who in 1852 filled in the word for God in the Christian sense as “Allah”.
Porres said several states had passed a law to “control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine among persons professing the religion of Islam” but had been misread to “criminalise” the use of the word “Allah” by non-Muslims.
“Even if section 9 is valid, the use of the word ‘Allah’ by one non-Muslim or by a person professing a non-Islamic religion to another cannot by any stretch of the imagination amount to the propagation of a religious belief or doctrine among persons professing the religion of Islam,” he said.
“In the case of the Herald, Herald is a propagation of the Catholic Church meant for Christians and is not meant for persons professing the religion of Islam.
“In fact, the second condition imposed by the minister, that is endorsing the word ‘Terhad’ and that only distribution is in churches.
“It must mean there is no propagation among persons professing Islam,” the lawyer stressed.
The Home Minister’s decision seems to turn guidelines for getting a publishing permit into a rule by which it may shut down and shut out bodies which publish dissenting views.
Influential Muslim groups, such as the state Islamic councils for the Federal Territory, Selangor and Penang among four others and the Chinese-Muslim association, which had been kicked out of the fight between the Herald and the Home Minister by the High Court previously, returned Dec. 14 in another bid to stop the suit.
They put in a fresh application to be made parties jointly with the lawyers for the home minister before High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan in her chambers this morning, which delayed the hearing from taking place in open court for almost two hours.
According to the church’s counsel, the judge said she would reserve judgment on the Muslim groups for later.
Hearing will resume with submissions from senior federal counsel for the Home Minister after the lunch break.
Senior federal counsel from the Attorney General’s Chambers, Datuk Kamaludin Md Said, argued that the church has no right to sue the home minister after it had applied for and received a publishing permit when it knew fully there were conditions attached.
“Condition is part and parcel of the permit, which is in Form B. Permit without condition, is not a permit,” Kamaludin said.
He added that the home minister also has the right to add on or change the conditions at any time and permit-holders are forced to accept those new terms and conditions wholesale.
Pointing to Section 13(a)(1) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act, he told the court it was an “ouster clause” which protects the home minister’s decisions from being challenged in court.
Fr. Lawrence Andrew, Editor of the Herald
“You cannot challenge the condition. You can only challenge if the minister refuse to grant permit,” the government lawyer said.
“If minister refuses to grant permit upon application or subsequently revokes or suspends permit, then there is issue, meaning it can be challenged,” Kamaludin said.
He also claimed that the Printing Presses and Publications Act was among several laws provided for by the Federal Constitution to control the amount of “freedom” stipulated under Article 10, when countering the church’s argument that the minister had acted unconstitutionally.
On the same score, the court must reject the church’s claim that the state propagation enactments were “unconstitutional”.
“You cannot come to court and happily say Section 9 of state enactments is unfortunate. There must be some reasons for why such laws were enacted,” Kamaludin said.
The anti-propagation law was meant to “avoid creating confusion and misunderstanding” among the majority Muslim Malaysians who have grown up knowing the term “Allah” to be exclusive to their community.
He noted that Muslims all over the world – regardless of their language background – used the term “Allah” as a “special name” to refer to “the one and only God” and described the church’s argument as “perverse” because in Islam, unlike Christianity, there is no alternative name.
“The applicant’s submission that ‘Allah’ is ‘God’ and ‘Tuhan’ is ‘Lord’ is perverse,” the senior federal counsel said.
Kamaludin dismissed the church’s stress on the historical significance of Christians in the country and region using the word “Allah” long before Muslims did as “not relevant” and added that there was no proof today the word was still being used in its original context among Malaysian Christians.
But he may have gone too far when he tried to counter the widespread use of Arab Christians who also use the word “Allah” to refer to their God.
Kamaludin claimed that Arab Christians believed that God was one, unlike Malaysian Christians who subscribe to the “trinity” concept of “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost”.
Lawyers for the church appeared so stunned speechless by Kamaludin’s claim, they could only shake their heads in disbelief.
Meanwhile, the Bernama news agency, said in its report that the publisher of Herald, cannot challenge the home minister’s prohibition on the use of the word “Allah” in its publication.
Its report said Senior Federal Counsel Datuk Kamaluddin Md Said told the court the home minister had the power to impose such prohibition as condition to be attached to the permit issued under the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984.
“A permit granted under the act must have a condition. The condition is part and parcel of the permit and it cannot be read separately, and you have no choice but to comply with it,” he said.
“Therefore, you cannot challenge the condition imposed by the minister on the permit. You can only challenge if the minister refused to grant a permit.”
On Feb 16, Archbishop Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam (photo left), as publisher of Herald, filed an application for a judicial review to seek a declaration that the decision by the home minister was illegal and that the word “Alla” was not exclusive to Islam.
The home ministry had approved Herald’s publication permit on Jan 7 with conditions that the usage of the word “Allah” was prohibited and the word “Limited” (Terhad) must be endorsed on its front page, to mean that the Catholic weekly must be circulated only to Christians.
The minister prohibited the usage of the word “Allah” on the grounds of national security and to avoid misunderstanding and confusion among Muslims.
Kamaluddin, in his submission today, said the word “Allah” was exclusive to Islam as it was a “special name of the Muslim God”. Therefore, its sanctity must be protected.
“In our country, if one refers to Allah or mentions kalimah Allah, it will bring to one’s mind that it refers to the god for Muslims. Kalimah Allah is sacred to the Muslims and put at the highest position, and its sanctity must be protected,” he said.
“The usage of kalimah Allah as an interpretation of the word God may cause confusion, religious sensitivity and disharmony between the Muslims and the Christians,” he said, citing Quran verses on “Allah” which means “God the Almighty”.
The hearing before Justice Datuk Lau Bee Lan continues.
Related articles:
Tue, Dec 15, 2009
News & Views, OPINION