KUALA LUMPUR, April 19 — Putrajaya needs to revisit the policy of inculcating 10 universal Islamic values that were supported by Malaysians of all walks of life as a means to return the country to its intended path guided by the Federal Constitution, a group of civil society leaders and former senior civil servants said.
The group, which calls itself the 40 Concerned Malaysians, said there is little that is left of the policy that was introduced in 1982 as the country today faces “bureaucracy-driven ‘Islamisation’” that now shakes the very foundations that the country was built on.
“Of these 10 values — trust, responsibility, honesty, dedication, moderation, diligence, discipline, cooperation, honourable behaviour and thanksgiving — what remains of the policy today is the single value of moderation under the concept of Islam Wasatiyah,” the group said in an open letter.
“Even that value of moderation is ignored by certain quarters including political leaders who espouse sectarian views to suit their audiences,” they added, insisting that the country’s constitutional history states that Malaysia is a secular nation with Islam as the religion of the Federation.
Among the signatories of the letter include former Sabah state secretary Tan Sri Simon Sipaun, former Court of Appeal judges Datuk Mahadev Shanker, Datuk V C George and Datuk KC Vohrah, Malaysian Bar past President Datuk Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari and former Sabah state attorney-general Datuk Stephen Foo Kiat Shin.
The group claimed there is “mounting disquiet” over the aggressive expansion of religious bureaucracy at both federal and state levels and the increased posturing of “extremist individuals and groups” riding on the trend.
They argued that this should not be the case in a country that adopted a doctrine of “civil national legal order which is religion neutral” and not a theocratic state that prescribes religious law as the supreme law of the land.
“Lip service and pious platitudes acknowledge the supremacy of the Constitution as the nation’s supreme law. At the same time, diktats of the religious bureaucrats are given an overarching significance over the Constitution.
“This has eroded public confidence in the national legal order and in the administrators and the adjudicators of this order.
“Legislation needs only pass the test of constitutionality. But these are now subject to the scrutiny of religious bureaucrats who can impede the implementation of such laws,” the group said in their letter.
The group took the example of the Domestic Violence Act 1994, which they claimed was rendered unenforceable for nearly two years, and the failed law reform initiative to preserve the status quo of the rights of parties arising out of one spouse in a civil marriage converting to Islam upon the dissolution of their marriage.
They also noted with “grave concern” the apparent increased marginalisation of non-Muslims, their beliefs and practices as a result of the growing trend of “Islamisation”, stressing that it undermines Malaysia’s long-held claim of being a model moderate nation “where Islam co-exists harmoniously with other religions in a multicultural society”.
“Let there be a recommitment to the genuine pursuit of the 10 universal values which will be fully supported by all Malaysians and which will make Malaysia a good and great nation.
“Let our leaders, be they from the legislative, executive or judicial arms of governance with the undivided support of all patriotic Malaysians, uphold their oath of office to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution,” the group said.
Last December, an influential group of retired Malay senior civil servants dubbed G25 issued a strongly worded open letter calling on Putrajaya to review Shariah criminal offences and to assert the supremacy of the Federal Constitution over Islamic state laws in the country.
The group, dominated by some of the country’s most senior-ranking civil servants who have since retired from duty, expressed its dismay over the unresolved disputes on the position and application of Islamic laws in Malaysia, which it said reflects a “serious breakdown” of the division of powers between the federal authority and the states.
