Catholic weekly Herald given leave
May 5, 2008
I was in the Kuala Lumpur Court Complex in Jalan Duta this morning for another matter.
Spoke to one of the Herald lawyers who confirmed that Justice Lau Bee Lan had this morning given the Herald leave to commence judicial review proceedings for :-
1. a declaration that the decision of the Internal Security Ministry (ISM) to prohibit Herald from using the word ‘Allah’ in its publication is null and void;
2. an order to quash that decision of the ISM; and
3. an order that the Herald may continue to use ‘Allah’ in its publication until final determination by the court on this matter.
For the benefit of those who have no idea what this morning’s decision means, here goes.
This morning’s decision means that the judge has formed the view that Herald’s application is not frivolous and warrants a full hearing where the judge will take full arguments from both sides on the issues relating to the reliefs sought by Herald.
In other words, this matter is far from over. It has just started.
Herald will now have to file its judicial application, parties will file and exchange affidavits whereafter the court will hear arguments.
And we will await another decision.
My immediate thoughts.
Place such issues before a judge who will not allow personal beliefs to interfere with his or her application of the law to the facts and more often than not, justice will be done.
Let’s just hope that this brave judge will not now be made the subject of a hurried transfer order!
November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am
I am impressed with the following paragraph quoted by Sultan Azlan Shah of Perak during his opening speech of the 14th Malaysia Law Conference :-
“ In a multi-racial and multi religious society like yours and mine, while we judges cannot help being Malay or Chinese or Indian; or being Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu or whatever, we strive not to be too identified with any particular race or religion – so that nobody reading our judgement with our name deleted could with confidence identity our race or religion, and so that the various communities, especially minority communities, are assured that we will not allow their rights to be trampled underfoot.”
So, all judges should live up with such spirit.
A true Malaysian,
I may be mistaken, but I think that quote is properly credited to Tun Suffian.
May 5, 2008 at 12:49 pm
[...] Haris Ibrahim’s thoughts : My immediate thoughts……post continues after [...]
May 5, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Yes, I have just prayed for the judge. God, protect her from harm. Grant her the bravity to stand firm for justice. God, in times of judicial rots, You must do a total transformation. Amen!
May 5, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Thanks Haris for explaining the legal jargon. Yes, let’s wait and see what will happen; not to the case but first to the judge! As Malaysian history tells us, we will hear of some transfer before the case can be heard. That’s to Malaysia Boleh.
May 5, 2008 at 2:01 pm
it looks like our malaysian court is going to be the laughing stock to the world again – because this is kind of ridiculous – in the first place for the government to ban herald from using the word allah. allah does not belongs to malaysian muslim exclusively, why shouldn’t herald be allowed to use it?
the whole world knows allah does not belongs to malaysia and yet they (m’sia gomen) are fighting for it not to be used by other faith – that is the ridiculous part.
May 5, 2008 at 5:32 pm
My immediate thoughts, whatever the outcome, those UMNO racists will not leave the issue to rest. If the judgment is for (in favor of Herald), they will find some other abusive means to intimidate further, but if it is against, they will be emboldened to strike harder and farther. So, before the hallelujahs, be realistic and know who can protect your constitutional rights to practice your religions FREELY.
toyolbuster,
Only we can protect our constitutional rights.
We, all of us together.
That means if your rights are infringed, I react to that infringement as if it was against my rights.
If RPK’s liberty is deprived, it must be as if mine and yours were deprived.
That is the only real protection we have.
May 5, 2008 at 7:48 pm
The appealants only need Farish Noor for thier first and last witness.
But really, to me this is really a question of linguistics. I am no expert. But I would imagine Tuhan to be the Malay word used in a more universal kind of way. However, considering the Malay Bible used in Malaysia is the Indonesian Bible where Allah has been used since the first translation, I guess we are stuck with Allah. Poor chap. Must be pretty confused!
May 5, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Haris,
This would be one of the bench mark cases in Malaysia and i hope it doesn’t just get swept under the carpet as all other supposed to be benchmark cases in the past. It’s redemption time for many. I hope the judge stays too.
An interesting a piece by Karim Raslan (http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?file=/2008/4/22/columnists/ceritalah/21019279&sec=Ceritalah)that caught my attention of late:
“…Umno and its leadership are just not seeing the value of adopting a broader, non-communal approach. The party is seemingly trapped in the stranglehold of arrogance and rent-seeking that cost it so many votes.
In light of this, one wonders if a defeat on the scale that the Kuomintang suffered will be the only thing that can truly shake up Umno.
Is it possible that the strong medicine the party needs to save itself is a good four or five years in the Opposition benches?…”
I’m still hoping…
cheers
May 6, 2008 at 8:44 am
The matter of the usage of the proper name Allah to refer to God has its basis in custom, tradition and convention. In Arab speaking countries Allah is God but in Malaysia Allah is God to Muslims. This is because everyone else refer to their God by their own proper name be it Buddha, Krishna, Ganesh, Jesus or whatever else name. While there may be nothing legally wrong with using the name Allah in a local Christian publication it may cause much anger among Malay Muslims because they, like myself see it as a way of confusing some Muslims. You are free to laugh at this suggestion and you can even snort and say – ‘So you Muslims so stupid ahh?
Well maybe we are, maybe we are not but I feel this sis something worth defending. Just as you feel it is worth fighting for…
Please don’t be calling people names just because they feel this is something worth defending because this subject cuts across a very sensitive nerve among many Muslims in this country. We let the courts decide and we keep the racist remark to a minimum
Shamsul,
I agree that there is no room for racist remarks in this discussion.
I am, however, unable to go along with your take that ‘Allah’ is the monopoly of the Muslims in Malaysia.
If an individual who does not belong to any orthodox faith but believes in God chooses to call God ‘Allah’, what licence does any Muslim have from Allah to forbid that individual addressing God as Allah. If Muslims believe God ought properly to be addressed as ‘Allah’, what is their foundation for forbidding an individual addressing the very God they claim to believe in?
Think about it.
May 6, 2008 at 11:43 am
I think it is a sensible judgement to allow both side to present their points than a hurried ‘close case’ that government wanted. This is a democratic country and executive decisions should be challengeable. IF not, any ministers can just cakap and everybody is to follow. That sounds like a semi dictatorship.
May 6, 2008 at 8:52 pm
When Constitutional Rights are hammered by Judges and Lawyers, will any lawyer dare to fight?
A Plaintiff in a Defamation case dragged the provide of Suggested Statement of Facts & Issues for over 2 years with the help of Defendants’ Lawyers.
Order was given by court for Categorizing Bundle of Document and identifying which articles to raise the claim as they were not in the bundle.
A “new” judge came in and ignored the previous order and silent to the only issue raised by the Plaintiff who asks to trial if the documents were defamatory.
The Defendants’ lawyer being paid not attending court nor updating the Defendants nor attending to matters.
The Defendants were chased out of the office of the Lawyer calling the Police when the lawyer had not done his jobs and even refused to provide a copy of document shown to the Defendant minutes ago.
Next visit to the Lawyer’s office to get chop and signed on the xxth reminder, the clients was chased out of the office by violence, assaulted and battered.
The Defendants were asked to do their work and proceed and the Plaintiff to file the bundle without categorizing and missing of the article.
The defendants are threatened with 035 r 7,etc, if do not proceed (without the lawyers)!
Should this be the type of Justice in Court?
But finding reliable lawyers seems to be getting star from the sky!