Should the Attorney-General have objected to the 1988 Enactment’s impact on non-Muslims？

Question

Accepted Answer

The Attorney-General's Office Did Not Object to the 1988 Selangor Enactment

The Attorney-General's office did not raise objections to the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment when it was passed in 1988, despite its potential to affect the constitutional rights of non-Muslims. This 1988 Enactment, which was supported by UMNO and MCA at the time, provides the legal basis for actions such as the raid on the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM). The core of the controversy lies in the interpretation and application of this Enactment concerning the use of certain words, including "Alkitab," within Christian texts.
Legal Basis for the 1988 Enactment

The Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment was enacted in 1988, a period when both UMNO and MCA were part of the ruling coalition in Selangor. This state-level legislation grants powers to religious authorities like the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) to conduct raids and investigations. The Enactment has been cited as the justification for JAIS's actions, including the seizure of Bibles from the BSM premises.
Constitutional Rights and Religious Practice

A significant concern raised is the potential conflict between the 1988 Selangor Enactment and the constitutional rights of non-Muslims to practice their religion freely. The Enactment's provisions, particularly those related to the propagation of non-Islamic faiths among Muslims and the use of specific religious terminology, are at the centre of ongoing debates. The Federal Constitution, however, guarantees the right to practice one's religion, leading to questions about the validity and scope of such state Enactments.
Historical Context of Religious Laws in Malaysia

The passing of the 1988 Enactment occurred within a broader historical context of religious regulations in Malaysia. While the Federal Constitution upholds freedom of religion, various state enactments and federal laws have been introduced over the years to manage inter-religious relations and prevent the perceived proselytisation of Muslims. The debate surrounding the Alkitab and the use of specific terms highlights the complexities and sensitivities inherent in these regulations.
The Role of the Attorney-General

The role of the Attorney-General (A-G) in reviewing legislation for constitutional compliance is crucial. The absence of an objection from the A-G's office at the time of the 1988 Enactment's passage raises questions about the initial assessment of its impact on non-Muslims' religious freedom. Subsequently, the A-G's office has indicated that there is no case against the BSM concerning the seized Alkitab, suggesting a divergence in legal interpretation or a shift in stance on the matter.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Should the Attorney-General have objected to the 1988 Enactment’s impact on non-Muslims？

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends