DAP organised an excellent dialogue on the above topic. Malaysiakini reported on the standing room-only forum adequately enough through her two reports to give non-attendees a flavor of the forum.
To me, the most pertinent aspect of the dialogue was the presence of Yusri Mohamad, the president of Abim and the head of Badai – a loose coalition group that disrupted the Article 11 forum.
Yusri said that he struggled with the decision to attend the forum. According to him, there were two schools of thought even within Abim as to whether he should participate in such a dialogue. My guess is that to some people within Abim, even their participation in such a dialogue is already a concession. In this case, even talking about Lina Joy with her new name is already a concession. To them, she is still Azalina Jailani and a Muslim until the Syariah Court says otherwise.
Bar Council chairperson Ambiga Srenevasan said in the Federal Territory there may not be the legitimate jurisdiction of a State Enactment to legally decide on the case based on the current Federal Constitution. That, according to Ambiga, is also the same reason why the Bar Council would argue that it is unconstitutional for Lina Joy to \”submit herself to the Federal Territory Syariah Court, even if there is a legal way of doing so.\”
Ambiga believes like Dr Cyrus Das, the former Bar Council chairperson and constitutional lawyer in the Lina Joy case, who had argued, in the now famous interview with the Sun , \”that Malaysians need to remove their blindness of Constitutional illiteracy.\”
Read the Constitution
Ambiga\’s own advice was for every Malaysian to read the Federal Constitution. If they do, as I have done in the past (to be fair I also had the privilege of the late Professor Emeritus Ahmad Ibrahim as my teacher of Constitutional Law), it becomes absolutely clear to one why the supreme law of the land is the Federal Constitution, until it is amended; and why any other law which abrogates the supremacy is in violation; illegal and equally illegitimate; even if passed by all nine State Enactments but within the violation. The same is true, to my mind, of even a Federal Court decision which \”forces Lina Joy to do something that violates the Federal Constitution.\”
The logic is very simple to follow but it is only for those with eyes to see and ears to hear. The Federal Constitution gives and guarantees certain basic rights which is a Constitutional guarantee of civil liberties. One of these rights is freedom of religion for every Malaysian. Now, who are Malaysians? Malaysians are anyone to whom a citizenship certificate is issued based on certain terms and conditions. I in fact have two certificates; one for being born before 1957 and another for being born to citizen parents.
But always, the starting point is our identity card. We get an IC because we have a Malaysian birth certificate (this basic right also includes children of foreigners born in Malaysia). Now, even if the process is almost automatic if you have all the documents; it is a tedious and a precise one. Without a father\’s name in the birth certificate, it may be impossible to register yourself; as David Jeyaraj found out, as reported in the New Straits Times .
Nonetheless, it remains \”a well kept top secret with the bottom leaking\” as to how the thousands and millions of Muslim Filipinos in Sabah have very liberally received the Malaysian Blue ICs offered by the peninsular government; but these were not issued by the Sabah sate authorities.
Agree to disagree
The brilliance of last Thursday\’s dialogue was the fact that \”we could all agree to disagree, including the emotional ones.\” The real beauty of the forum was that even those who \”became emotional, argued so, but declared it is only because they believe what they are saying and not because they want to be emotional about their issues.\”
In my language, they were speaking with both heart and mind. Well done to all who spoke with passion and still did so with decorum and eloquence. That is always true \”charismatic spokesperson-ship.\” To speak with passion about any subject is not at all negative in my dictionary; it is authentic if one is sincere about the words and the speaker means every one of them. And, the audience usually knows. To me, this is better than politicians who speak to the gallery to say only what pleases the crowd. To them, today the sky is green and tomorrow the sky is white. The different shades of little truths confuse more than it informs. Doublespeak.
I left the forum early and was satisfied with what I had heard from all perspectives. I wish Lina Joy could have been there with us to really appreciate the reason we were gathered there. She would have been proud of all of us. Her courage has given all of us the same quality of courage; to speak up for issues that we feel seriously about, even if we have to agree to disagree, agreeably.
For me, as an ardent follower of the Lina Joy case, the icing on the cake was Al Jazeera\’s coverage of the same content but done very cleverly in about 30 minutes. The moderator was very good in keeping the core focus of the issues. For those who missed it, I understand that there are one or two more screening, with one on Tuesday night at 9.30pm.
The consensus view that emerged from that dialogue was that Lina Joy has the freedom of conscience to follow her faith in her heart on the matter. The legalities simply need to follow this reality. Even the director-general of Ikim Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Alatas, although he qualified it somewhat, agreed that Islam does finally give freedom to a believer to follow his or her conscience on the matter. Is that now the final truth on such a matter? Are our learned judges listening? If my son does not want to follow the faith of his father, can I really force him to do so? Can edicts like this work on a matter of the heart and of one\’s conscience?
In Christian theology, there is this one concept of \”free-will\” which God gave to man at creation. That trust of free-will is what we believe has been broken at the disobedience of Adam and Eve at the Garden of Eden. Nonetheless, we believe that fallen man still has that same free-will to either follow God or to turn away from God. The specific reasons and motives for following one teacher or prophet and not another is the nature of the specific theology and doctrines taught by each religion and her followers. We do not need to argue or debate them. It is a matter of faith. We just need to sit up, take note, and set the right and good examples through our lived lives, and if our lives are impressive enough, one day people will ask you for the reasons for your specific faith and actions. Then please take the time to explain all your doctrines and beliefs. And then if they choose to follow your God, may the Lord of the Universe grant you the grace to understand and accept the same. That matter then has crossed over form the realms of the human to the divine or spiritual and it is better for mere mortal men to refrain from entering where, it is said, the angles fear to tread.
Therefore, Yusri Mohamad, I enjoin many others who were glad that you joined our sincere dialogue to discuss and resolve this confusion of the legality of the Lina Joy decision, and the full implications of the decision on all Malaysians of all colours and creeds! We also look forward to your hosting the next such dialogue. My conclusion: Our conscience cannot be moderated or manipulated by humans. Ultimately, it is the domain of Godly intervention and mere mortals should understand and appreciate enough to stay clear, when necessary. God Bless Malaysia.
