NOV 27 — The recent suggestion proposed to arm religious enforcement officials is indicative of several things. One of which is the tendency in our country to solve issues and problems through laws and weapons. In short, the easy way out.
Speaking as a member of the constituency whose neck is directly affected by the increasingly oppressive boot of the Islamic religious institutions in Malaysia, I do not want to see a mass of self-righteous and over-zealous officers from bodies such as JAIS and JAKIM running around conducting raids and activities armed with weapons.
I object to this move on two grounds:
Firstly, despite the label “moral police”, we have to remember that they are in fact not police officers charged with keeping the peace and security of society. Their apparent mandate is to safeguard the soul and morals of Malay Muslims.
Should they then be armed while they enforce laws related to morality? I certainly do not think so. What rules of engagement would they follow? How many Muslims do you think are doing the nasty (i.e. having illicit sexual intercourse or watching the Man U vs Arsenal game together) or are committing some alleged moral sin (examples include drinking beer, gambling, buying 4D numbers and sashaying down a runway as a contestant in a beauty pageant) while armed with a deadly weapon?
What possible reason could there be to issue firearms to religious officers as standard issue? What kind of widespread threat is there to moral enforcement officers? Are there firefights occurring during khalwat raids? At what point or threat does an officer draw his weapon? If anything, there have been anecdotal reports of injuries and casualties amongst persons who have tried to escape during these raids.
Remember, these are not individuals who have allegedly committed dangerous crimes such as robbery, assault or armed theft. Most will be persons like Ahmad giving some TLC to his girlfriend while watching the Saturday match or Siti who went to the nearby bar to see what the fuss on drinking beer was about. They are not likely to be armed.
Secondly, the move to arm religious officials is ripe and open to abuse. For a group of individuals and an institution that has by and large rejected the notion and concept of human rights (refer to past and current Friday sermons), they are less likely to adhere to the code of conduct and rules of engagement adhered to by professional police officers which require and imposes upon them the need to respect the rights of the individual, human rights, human dignity and the rule of law. The police may sometimes not like it, but by God, such behaviour is required under the law in Malaysia and they are beholden to it. I am of the firm belief that the ability to carry arms can and will be abused by religious officers. Anybody who believes otherwise is naïve or living in that fantasy where if you have done nothing wrong, you have supposedly nothing to worry about.
Let me be clear, I do not object at the idea of specific individuals who have been threatened with deadly force to then be provided with the means of protecting themselves, including being able to carry a gun. Anybody should be able to do so. However, this should be considered a case by case basis and considered an exception rather than a norm.
Unless there is a specific threat to an individual who is then provided training and licensed to carry a firearm, it is folly to allow this group of individuals to be collectively armed.
The dark clouds of religious tyranny are threatening our country and I loathe the idea that it is bad enough that we allow ourselves to be increasingly oppressed by a minority who feel that they are only accountable to the Almighty and even then only in the hereafter (refer to recent state laws which make fatwas unchallengeable and cannot be questioned or reviewed by any including the courts), arming them will only bring much abuse, suffering and loss of what rights we have as Malay Muslims.
* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.
