Is this the kind of promised 'good quality of life' and 'protection' that Islam Hadhari advocates?
PM Abdullah Badawi's recent speech at Meiji University, Japan:
16. At the national level, we call this approach Islam Hadhari. The approach is a reminder to Muslims, and a revelation to non Muslims, that Islam in reality is a religion which is tolerant, progressive and peace loving. It is meant to enable Muslims to know the appropriate method of practising the religion as a way of life in these modern times. It exhorts them to be innovative, creative and relevant in this day and age of science and technology. Abiding by the principles of Islam Hadhari would add value to the human capital and would enable them to become more valuable assets to the society...Can Islam Hadhari be consistently portrayed by the state? I pray and beg the PM to look into this. This is the time when Islam Hadhari DEMONSTRATES its alleged potential. Is Hadhari as good as our PM promotes? Can it delivers as it promises?
18. At the international level, we offer Islam Hadhari as Malaysia’s contribution towards a better understanding of Islam by all concerned, that is by both Muslim and non Muslim societies and peoples. Islam Hadhari advocates good governance. It calls for putting into practice, among others, justice, freedom, love of knowledge, balanced development, a good quality of life for the people, protection of minorities and moral integrity. Islam Hadhari is a demonstration that the teachings of Islam can be used to develop contemporary models of governance and social change that are based on the needs and aspirations of ordinary Muslims. It is a call to apply the deepest wisdom of Islam to find solutions to present day problems. [emphasis added]
Secondly the chief justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim's claimed that, “To say that she [Lina Joy] is not under the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court – because she no longer professes Islam – is not appropriate” [emphasis added]. He says that it is logical for one who wants to walk out from a religion to first obtain permission from the religion. So if Lina were to change her religion on her IC, she needs to first get an approval from her ex-religion.
That's the logic of our chief justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim. I think the chief justice took matters onto his own personal logic too much. It is clearly stated in Malaysia's constitution:
Article 11. Freedom of religion.
(1) Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion... [emphasis added]
Here, we can see 2 things:
1) The chief justice seems to not follow the constitution!!! It's a grave example shown by the chief justice himself. If the chief justice can DISOBEY the constitution, follow his own logic (his own whims and fancies), and still warming his chief justice's seat, why should we, the chief citizens, obey the constitution and disregarded when we follow our own whims and fancies logic?
2) If the federal court does not grant the right for its citizen to profess and practice his religion, the federal court fails to treat citizen as a 'person'. That means the federal court DOES NOT recognise Lina Joy as a person!! Outrageous!!
The federal court and the chief justice had just violated Malaysian and International Law!
Since Article 11 states everyone has the right to profess one's religion, then on what basis allow the chief justice to claim that 'profession' is not legitimate indication (his term: appropriate) for one to claim one's religion?