MIC deputy president Datuk Seri M. Saravanan raised a valid concern in urging Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to halt the trend of labelling Hindu temples as “illegal” simply because their locations are deemed contentious.
Similarly, the Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) executive director Zaid Malek called on the government to stop using the term “illegal” when referring to Hindu temples situated on disputed land.
Unlike Saravanan, however, Zaid went further by directly blaming the government and relevant authorities for the emergence of this controversy.
Zaid argued that the issue of so-called “illegal” temples would not have erupted if Anwar had not prematurely claimed success in relocating the 130-year-old Sri Dewi Pathrakaliamman temple in Kuala Lumpur to make way for the Masjid Madani.
This action has triggered a dangerous narrative, leading to even a hospital authority in Taiping lodging a complaint over a nearby temple’s existence by branding it “illegal.”
It has become painfully clear that the recent relocation exercise has opened the floodgates for Hindu temples – many of them over a century old – to be conveniently labelled as “illegal”.
Forgetting history
The relocation of the Sri Dewi Pathrakaliamman temple stands as a turning point with Anwar having to take full responsibility for this decision, especially as it was facilitated by sycophants within MIC, DAP and PKR.
By overseeing and endorsing the forced relocation, Anwar has significantly compromised his image as a leader for all Malaysians.
Despite assurances of a new site for the temple, it was evident that Anwar sided with majoritarian religious and cultural interests, undermining the deep historical and spiritual significance of the temple.
The MIC – once the principal political voice of Malaysian Indians – publicly supported the relocation. However, private expressions of dissent within the party sharply contrasted with its public stance.
MIC had a duty to manage temple-related issues more effectively. Had it demonstrated the political will, many so-called “illegal” temples could have been regularised over the years.
That said, the primary responsibility lies not with MIC but with the federal and state governments as well as municipal authorities.
These institutions failed to allocate land and recognise the heritage value of these temples, thereby allowing the “illegal” label to persist. The onus is on them to right this historical wrong.
Managing fall-out
Compounding the issue are certain self-proclaimed religious authorities from the majoritarian community who demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding – or worse, deliberate ignorance – of the historical context behind Hindu temples in Malaysia.
Many of these temples were established during the colonial era, long before the introduction of the Torrens System of land registration, Malaysia’s independence, the establishment of the Kuala Lumpur City Council or the eventual sale of the land to entities like Jakel Trading Sdn Bhd.
The term “illegal” when applied to these temples is not rooted in legality but in narrow, divisive political and religious agendas. It is a label weaponised to delegitimize a community’s heritage and identity.
Tragically, the careless and politically charged use of the word “illegal” in reference to the Sri Dewi Pathrakaliamman temple has now emboldened others to apply the same label elsewhere.
Anwar may have initiated this crisis – intentionally or otherwise – but the question remains: how does he intend to manage the growing fall-out?
If left unaddressed, this issue risks spiralling into a national crisis of identity, governance and religious harmony. – April 23, 2025
Former DAP stalwart and Penang chief minister II Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy is chairman of the United Rights of Malaysian Party (Urimai) interim council.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.
Main image credit: MALAYSIA PROBLEM (@Malaysia_Problm)
