Can the attorney-general (AG) propose to paint “our God-provided air into green, or with any other colour when he so chooses to?” This column therefore contains my thoughts and reactions to the new bill to be tabled by the government in Parliament.
With that intent, I would like to declare that the AG is the chief culprit of the so-called ‘design flaw’ in the current proposal to “change Islamic Administration in the Federal Territory”. And consequentially, I deplore the bill as not only false theology but also with very poor in strategic intent. Let me explain.
False theology
The federal constitution declares of itself that it is the supreme law of this nation-state; that we call Malaysia. Now, does this word, “supreme” have an ambiguous meaning? Does not supreme mean exclusive jurisdiction of the federal constitution upon this nation?
How then can, the AG’s Office or AGC, design and develop a bill that undermines this very provision, other than by pure intentions and clear motive to mislead or deceive? I am sorry but as a former public servant, I know the basis of laws of the federation and the limits to which public servants can redefine these laws or by-laws to run smack against the constitution.
I remember drafting the Matrade and the SME Development Corporation Bills, when I was with the International Trade and Industry Ministry (Miti). While the Miti officers were responsible for
the contents of the legal intent for the areas of our jurisdiction related to industry development, ts consistency with the constitution and the other laws of the federation, were the explicit
responsibilities of the AGC.
So, my question to the AG: why is this inconsistency with the constitution of the federation now allowed? And, why is the deputy prime minister (DPM) using current court misjudgements as his argument; when the constitution is being violated? Is Umno above the constitution? Are we allowing a new false theology about the nature of our sovereign nation-state? Do we not know the real meaning of our Rukunegara when it states that we believe in God.
Yes, while we believe in “selectively digging up the Allah issue” and creating a furore over it, we do not have any qualms about abusing the federal constitution which defines itself as supreme? Neither is this the first time the AGC has done so?
The last time was when the AGC drafted and declared by mere fiat of human intervention that in Malaysia, our Merdeka-driven federation of three states into Malaysia. Therein, the two of the Borneo states which do not regard Islam as the “religion of their state” was forced to do the same. I am talking about Article 121 (1A).
Now, by sheer fiat of backdoor interpretation of the same supreme constitution, the AGC is trying again to undertake a sleight of the hand, and to confuse the Malaysian peoples, inconsistent with the very provisions of our Rukunegara.
I declare these “intentions mischievous” and demand that the AG resigns for this abject failure and I propose that even the PM should not protect and preserve the failure of this man. He has lost all legitimacy and credibility and does not protect the same constitution he has promised to serve.
Wrong strategy
In 1997 when the Multimedia Ministry under the leadership of its secretary-general Nuraizah Abdul Hamid, for the first time ever designed and developed our Multimedia Convergence Acts, they did it with a lot of transparency and complete openness, inclusive of the community of actors and players within that new and yet to be defined industry.
Therefore, I find it unacceptable that in 2013, and after the the 13th general election, when the government has 51 percent of the participative votes against them, for the AG to support and table such a “mischievous bill” within the first sitting of the new Parliament. What are the real motives? Or, is this Umno’s backdoor way for their no-challenge to leadership agenda?
Moreover, I notice that a number of ministers, including the home affairs minister, who should have nothing to do with this bill, are “scrambling to defend the indefensible.” Let me explain why.
Throughout the general election period of the last 4 years, PM Najib of 1Malaysia has gone around the country “nurturing all the pains and hurts of all the non-Muslim communities and often spending millions to appease their hurt and anger.”
For example, I even just heard that the PM’s Office has given the Indian community of Sungai Petani RM1.5 million for the Gandhi Memorial Building Fund two days before the GE. Now, does that not have anything to do with the anger and hurt of Indian fathers (or mothers) who convert to Islam for personal reasons of their own, and then declare that the children (minors) are also Muslim?
Moreover, on May 5 the same people of Sungai Petani rejected all these false promises and still voted in the opposition candidate and incumbent, YB Johari Abdul.
So, why is the AG not clear about the real issues affecting the Indians and others affected by this ‘Ketuanan Agenda?’ And why is the AG trying to destroy the historic national unity of multiethnic appreciation within this country?
Moreover, as he is also a Sabahan, has not the AG alone done enough damage by closing one eye on the abuse and misuse of the different federal ministries to cheat Sabahans by awarding good federation ICs to the wrong people in Sabah?
The AG must resign
How can the AG frame a whole new bill for the Federal Territories on Islamic Administration, when the very territory is in fact an afterthought, and not an original state? Is he aware that the law now also covers Sabah, by way of Labuan?
Worse still, how can he “deviously change the definition of the word ‘parents’ which has already been clearly and unambiguously defined by the constitution and her precedent laws?” Finally, how can he design this law without proper and appropriate consultation with the “same religious communities’ whom the PM has tried so hard to appease?”
Moreover, after this GE when 51 percent of us voted against the federal government, can the AG, as an agent of the executive, be so insensitive to ignore the feelings of the majority of us over this single but important and very legal issue and violate the constitution? Is it not also theoretically plausible that this bill was not properly tabled with the full consensus especially by the whole cabinet?
How is it now that both MIC and Gerakan opposes this bill, and worse still, how can even the Bar Council point out the inconsistencies in the bill with the federal constitution which is supreme?
