NOVEMBER 16 — I refer to the statement by Datuk Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, the President of Persatuan Peguam Muslim Malaysia that pluralism and liberalism are “jenayah pemikiran” or “thought crimes” that can be prosecuted in the Shariah and civil courts.

This statement is reckless. The Shariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997, the Syariah Criminal Offences (Selangor) Enactment 1995 and their equivalent in all other state syariah enactments do not list “pluralism” or “liberalism” as a crime per se.

Zainul’s reliance on Sections 5, 7, 13 and 14 of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Selangor) Enactment 1995 as a basis of his statement is misleading. None of the provisions cited by him make any express mention of the words “pluralism” and “liberalism.”

To the contrary, the Rukun Negara which was gazetted on August 31, 1970 as the National Policy recognises that Malaysia is a plural society and must ensure “a liberal approach to our rich and diverse cultural traditions.”

The official website of the Department of National Unity and Integration sets out the explanation to the Rukun Negara, on the topic of pluralism and liberalism which can be summarised as follows:

Just Society

A just society that is free from oppression caused by a person to another.

Liberal Society

A liberal society in which the society are free to choose religion, customs and culture of their own.

Progressive Community

A progressive society which stays abreast with the progress of science and technology by each group handling their own affairs.

Freedom of speech, expression and belief are fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 10 and 11 of the Federal Constitution. There have been prosecutions by the religious authorities like the case of the late Malay intellectual Kassim Ahmad which was eventually quashed by the superior Courts.

The prosecution against SIS Forum (Malaysia) is not for “pluralism” or “liberalism” but for an alleged breach of a fatwa. That case is still pending before the High Court after the Federal Court directed a retrial.

The fatwa in question is being challenged for being in contravention of, among others, Article 10 and 11 of the Federal Constitution which provide for freedom of speech and freedom of religion. It is not appropriate to cite that case as being a case on “pluralism” or “liberalism.”

Shariah and Malay intellectuals should refrain from making sensational statements that do not represent the correct law that may unnecessarily alarm society and paint a negative image of Islam.

* Rosli Dahlan is a lawyer

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.