IN rejecting the DAP, Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang has displayed his ignorance and failure to comprehend the meaning of secularism.
A quick check on the Internet, the word used within our context simply means “the view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.”
The difference between the secularism in our Federal Constitution and the PAS president’s misguided concept of “secularism” is that the Federal Constitution – while based on the principle of secularism – still upholds Islam as the religion of the federation.
No other religion is excluded from the protection under the apex law; hence non-Muslims like Muslims can continue to exercise the religious practices the way they see fit within the context of their own religions.
If Hadi were given the clearance to form his theocracy based on PAS ideology tomorrow, this country would sink even lower than countries such as Iran and Afghanistan.
When we see a religious cleric like him openly declaring that anyone not voting for PAS will go to hell, we would wonder if Muslims in UMNO and Pakatan Harapan (PH) are either holding a wrong brand of Islam or vice versa.
For this reason, our forefathers who drafted the Federal Constitution foresaw how religion and its many different brands can be divisive; hence the need for the apex law to be more secularist and inclusive than exclusive.
Inclusivity not exclusivity
To begin with, we have to understand that the Federal Constitution has always been inclusive, not exclusive.
In a multi-religious society like ours, this is the best formula in that – while upholding Islam as the religion of the federation – religious freedom of others are not trampled or infringed upon.
Nobody, for example, can tell you that you cannot worship your own God in the way you choose to. The Federal Constitution’s emphasis on secularism, therefore, does not preclude God or religion in the life of the people.
For this reason, our Federal Constitution upholds the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) as the head of Islam, and the Sultans are individually heads of Islam in their respective states.
The Taliban-form of government would never allow a sultan to remain as the head of Islam. We have seen how the Shah of Iran was deposed and replaced by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
According to the Human Rights Watch, some of the worst atrocities happened during the Iran Revolution with Iranian authorities executing “between 2,800 and 5,000 prisoners in at least 32 cities in the country.”
This is why the “secularism” of our Federal Constitution has allowed the people of this country to co-exist together without feeling the threats from each other. There is really no room for bigoted views in the Federal Constitution.
Everyone is under the rule of law in Malaysia. Therefore, the law judges a wrong is a wrong regardless of one’s religious adherence.
Amid all the brouhaha over DAP being labelled a secularist party, we should thank our forefathers for having the wisdom and foresight of what could happen if Malaysia allowed a particular religion or brand of religion to govern the country.
The peace and harmony that the country has enjoyed since its inception in 1963 is based on this joint-agreement and coming together of people of all races and religious backgrounds to form the nation of Malaysia. – June 24, 2023.
