Freedom of religion is a fundamental right that should be upheld in theory and practice. However, in Malaysia, this right seems to exist only on paper. In the following essay, we will delve into the controversial topic of religious practice in Malaysia, particularly focusing on the state's implementation of Islam and its impact on social cohesion and the fundamental rights of individuals. This essay aims to challenge the status quo and provide constructive criticism for the betterment of Malaysia, without undermining the essence and sanctity of Islam.
1. Religion as a means of discrimination
The historical legacy of British divide-and-conquer tactics has left the Malay community economically disadvantaged. Affirmative action policies towards the Malays were introduced to address this disparity, but their implementation has been problematic. The constitution's definition of Malay includes practicing Malay culture, speaking the Malay language, having one Malay parent, and most importantly, being Muslim. This poses a problem for individuals of other descent who were affected by the British legacy but unable to be considered Malay/Bumiputera simply because they are not Muslim. It is unjust that individuals who are born into poverty within other communities are unable to access the same benefits and opportunities as Malays, forcing them to abandon their religion and culture via inter-racial marriage to improve their socio-economic status. Such example, are the Peranakan communities, who have lived long enough to be distinguishable from the Chinese or Indian migrant at that time but still not qualified for the native status.
While some argue that their communities, which are generally more affluent than the Malays, should help those in need within their own community, this argument is divisive and ignores the fact that all Malaysians, regardless of race, should receive support from a government that represents a multi-racial Malaysia. The existence of separate communities responsible for helping their own perpetuates division and highlights the failure of the government to ensure equal distribution of wealth and resources. This institutionalized racism perpetuates the divide-and-conquer strategies employed by the British colonialists.
Furthermore, individuals who convert to Islam solely for the purpose of accessing benefits and privileges previously denied to them undermine the intended distribution of these benefits. This manipulation of religion for personal gain further discriminates against others who are equally deserving of assistance.
2. No freedom of practice for Muslims
Muslims in Malaysia face restrictions on their religious practice that are not imposed on individuals of other faiths. From birth, they are required to adopt specific naming standards to distinguish them from individuals of other beliefs. In some states, they are compelled to attend religious schools and obtain religious certifications. Moreover, the law mandates that Muslims can only marry individuals of the same religion, and all family disputes must be settled according to sharia law, denying them the option to seek justice in civil courts. While this may be acceptable for those who choose to define justice through the lens of sharia law, it deprives non-practicing Muslims of the freedom to settle family disputes according to their own beliefs.
Some aspects of sharia law in Malaysia are outdated and provide inadequate protection, particularly to women. For example, the minimum age for marriage is lower for Muslim women in certain states, which affects Muslim women's access to education and perpetuates inequality. Additionally, strict state enforcement of certain aspects of Muslim life, such as alcohol consumption, khalwat (close proximity between unmarried couples), and intercourse outside of marriage, infringes on individuals' right to privacy and freedom of religious practice. While these actions may be forbidden in Islam, state scrutiny should have limits to respect individuals' privacy rights. Moreover, certain sharia laws are misogynistic, imposing harsher punishments on women compared to men. For instance, in Perlis, only women caught in khalwat have to be placed into rehabilitation homes, while men are not subjected to the same punishment. Such discrepancies perpetuate gender inequality and violate the principles of justice and equality.
The establishment of sharia law is not inherently problematic as long as it is subject to democratic processes. The power to write sharia laws should lie with elected state assembly members who are accountable to the people. The role of the ulama in the state Islamic councils should be advisory rather than granting them the authority to write laws. Otherwise, Malaysia would cease to be a democratic country and become a theocracy.
In a country with freedom of belief and religious practice, everyone should have the right to practice their religion according to their own beliefs. State interpretations of Islam should not be enforced upon the Muslim community against their will. Plus, expenditure for enforcing the state's interpretation of Islam would be better used for other agencies that can improve public living conditions, such as programs that can enhance the local community's economy.
3. Religious moral standards and their impact on other beliefs
Controversial issues such as concerts and attire in Malaysia arise when certain political parties attempt to impose their moral standards on the general public. They mistakenly assume that their moral standards should apply universally, regardless of diverse beliefs. While Muslims have the right to express their views on moral standards, they must also respect the rights of individuals from other faiths to live according to their own moral standards, which are protected by criminal law.
Attempting to regulate the activities of non-Muslims based on one's own moral standards is undemocratic and infringes upon religious freedom. Changes in moral standards must undergo a democratic process that involves consensus among Malaysians of all races. As long as a set of moral standards does not infringe upon the rights of the majority, individuals should be allowed to live according to their own beliefs, protecting freedom of expression.
4. Appeal to God argument inhibits modernity
Many Muslim-majority countries around the world have adopted more modern approaches to traditional Islamic views in order to keep pace with the modern world. They have lifted bans and regulations to promote economic prosperity and social justice. Moderation (wassatiyah) is a principle that allows Muslims to adapt to modernity while upholding traditional Islamic values that safeguard the integrity of society. However, in Malaysia, there are still those who reject this principle, equating any change in the Muslim lifestyle with infidelity. Such extreme views are not only dangerous but also divisive, as they create a sense of superiority over those who do not adhere to their outdated lifestyle.
Certain rules in Malaysia are outdated and unjust. For example, allowing underage girls to marry and unregulated polygamy are practices that should be reconsidered. These rules from the Quran should serve as guidance but not as strict requirements. Just as driving at maximum speed is allowed but not always advisable, adhering to specific religious rules without considering societal changes may lead to negative consequences. We should aim to establish limits that modernize our society and protect the rights and well-being of individuals.
An argument often used to resist change is an appeal to God, as if any deviation from traditional views is against the will of God. However, we must question until when we will continue to appeal to God to protect our self-interest. In the examples mentioned, both regulations benefit misogynistic men and perpetuate gender inequality. We should not rely on divine justifications to preserve traditional interests but instead think rationally and adapt Islamic teachings to the modern world. Islam brings value to humanity by allowing Muslims to shape the world through their philosophy, not through strict literal interpretations.
In conclusion, Islam has the right to determine the behavior of its believers, but its practice in Malaysia poses challenges. The practice of religion should not infringe upon the freedom of religion for both Muslims and non-Muslims. Muslims should be able to practice their religion without undue scrutiny, and they have the right to access a modern lifestyle. Non-Muslims should be free to live according to Malaysian moral standards while determining their own lives and governance. Democracy should prevail over undemocratic attempts by interest groups, be they extreme clerics or nonchalant anarchists. In multi-racial Malaysia, built upon the fundamental human rights of religious freedom, living a moderate life is essential. Let us strive for a Malaysia where these principles are upheld and religious freedom is respected.