"Allah" Term Fiasco & Why Malaysia Is Not An Islamic State

October 14th, 2013 will be one of the important dates many Malaysians would remember. The Court of Appeal has meted out a landmark decision, prohibiting a weekly named The Herald from using the word “Allah”, which refers to the Muslim God. This judgement, which I believe is endemic to only Malaysia, provokes many to think whether freedom of practising religion really exists.

Flying back in time, the whole “Allah” fiasco erupted in 2007 when the weekly in East Malaysia, was found using the term “Allah” in dictating the Christians’ messiah, Jesus Christ. This was followed by a ban by the Home Ministry which was then led by Tan Sri Hamid Albar, to prevent non-Muslims from continuously using the term. The main concern of such decision by the ministry was to pre-empt any confusion amongst Malaysian Muslims and also to prevent any effort of proselytising the Muslims by any parties, by manipulating the situation.

This however, was met by public furore, especially from the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM). The respective groups demanded that Christians in East Malaysia be allowed to use “Allah” in the Malay-version Holy Bible, the Al-Kitab. Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur later filed a judicial review at the High Court in 2009 on the banning, resulting in a judgement that annulled the Minister’s previous decision.

Later on, on January 5^th 2010, the Home Ministry and the Government of Malaysia filed an appeal against the High Court ruling at the Court of Appeal.

On 2nd April 2011, the Government under the Najib leadership announced a Ten Point Solution to address the Bible issue and other related issues.

The Ten Point Solution is as follows:

1. Bibles in all languages can be imported into the country, including Bahasa Malaysia/Indonesia.

2. These Bibles can also be printed locally in Peninsula Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. This is a new development which should be welcome by the Christian groups.

3. Bibles in indigenous languages of Sabah and Sarawak such as Iban, Kadazan-Dusun and Lun Bawang can also be printed locally and imported.

4. For Sabah and Sarawak, in recognition of the large Christian community in these states, there are no conditions attached to the importation and local printing of the Bibles in all languages, including Bahasa Malaysia/ Indonesia and indigenous languages. There is no requirement for any stamp or serial number.

5. Taking into account the interest of the larger Muslim community, for Peninsula Malaysia, Bibles in Bahasa Malaysia/Indonesia, imported or printed, must have the words “Christian Publication” and the cross sign printed on the front covers.

6. In the spirit of 1Malaysia and recognising that many people travel between Sabah and Sarawak and Peninsula Malaysia, there should be no prohibitions and restrictions for people who bring along their bibles and Christian materials on such travel.

7. A directive on the Bible has been issued by the Ketua Setiausaha (KSU) of the Home Ministry to ensure proper implementation of this cabinet decision. Failure to comply will subject the officers to disciplinary action under the General Orders. A comprehensive briefing by top officials, including the Attorney General (AG), will be given to all relevant civil servants to ensure good understanding and proper implementation of the directive.

8. For the impounded Bibles in Kuching, Gideon, the importer can collect all the 30,000 Bibles free of charge. We undertake to ensure the parties involved are reimbursed. The same offer remains available for the importer of the 5,100 Bibles in Port Kiang, which have already been collected by the Bible Society Malaysia (BSM) last week.

9. Beyond the Bible issue, the Government wishes to reiterate its commitment to work with the Christian groups and all the different religious groups in order to address interreligious issues and work towards the fulfilment of all religious aspirations in accordance with the constitution, taking into account the other relevant laws of the country. In order to bring urgency to this work, in the capacity as the Prime Minister, the representatives of the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM) will be met soon to discuss the way forward.

10. The Christian Ministers in the cabinet will meet on a regular basis with representatives of the various Christian groups in order to discuss their issues and work with the relevant Ministries and myself in order to resolve them. As the leader of this country, the Prime Minister wishes to reiterate the Government’s commitment in solving any religious issues in this country. There is a need to manage polarities that exist in our society to achieve peace and harmony.

It has to be noted that this Ten-Point Solution was offered barely few days before the Sarawak State Election in April 2011. Many quarters denounced the offer, claiming it as an election tactic to woo the vast Christian voters in Sarawak. However, some other parties have accepted the Ten-Point Solution, as a way forward.

And on 14^th October, 2013, the Court of Appeal’s three jurists’ bench quashed the previous High Court ruling, indicating the ban on the Herald from using the sacred “Allah” term to stay. Having read the final written judgements by all three judges, it can be said that the Herald is prohibited from using the word “Allah” in its publications but it was never mentioned anywhere that non-Muslims should also be prohibited from using the term.

Recent press statements from the vocal Home Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi and the Prime Minister himself have indicated that non-Muslims can continue to use the “Allah” term and only the Herald has been banned from utilising it.

Thus, the arising situations have created never-ending confusions. If the Malay-version Holy Bible which uses “Allah” to dictate Jesus Christ is allowed and is legit, then why is the Herald, a weekly for the Roman Catholics in East Malaysia is banned? Why is this disparity?

Everyone, may it be Muslims or non-Muslims, should understand that no one should or can be forced to refrain from using “Allah”. Even in Sikhism, the term “Allah” is mentioned 46 times in its much-revered holy scripture, “Guru Granth Sahib”. Arabs, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, have been using the term for centuries. And the case is the same for the East Malaysia’s Christians. Citizens in Selangor, a state in Malaysia, have to say the word “Allah” each and every time the state anthem is sung as the line goes “Allah lanjutkan usia Tuanku” which literally means, Allah lengthens the life of His Majesty.

Clearly, the debate on whether the term “Allah” is exclusive to only Muslims will be never-ending. But, bearing in mind the need to provide the freedom of practising a religion, such issue should be avoided. However, having said that, non-Muslims should never misuse the situation to confuse or proselytise the faithful of Islam.

Is Malaysia an Islamic country?

I’ve never wanted to argue on Malaysia’s status as a secular or an Islamic state, hitherto. However, seeing several public figures using this case as their point to defend the prohibition of “Allah” term, I felt compelled to voice my stand.

Malaysia is a secular state, NOT an Islamic state. But, definitely, never take my words for it. There are reasons why Malaysia can never be said as an Islamic country.

To the uninitiated, the role of proposing a draft of the Federal Constitution was carried out by the Reid Commission, which serves under Her Majesty, the Queen of Britain. Originally, Article 3(1) which elaborates that Islam is the religion of the Federation was not mentioned in the proposed draft.

However, the insertion of Article 3(1) came about after objections, negotiations, discussions and consensus between all the stake-holders, including from various racial and religious groups. It came about by the White Paper known as the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals 1957.  Paragraph 57 of the White Paper reads as follows:-

57. There   has   been   included   in   the   proposed   Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practice his own religion and the right to propagate his religion, though this last right is subjected to any restrictions imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.

This particular White Paper has again been noted in the grounds of judgement by Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali, one of the jurists in the appeal hearing of the “Allah” term at the Court of Appeal.

The role of Islam was meant to be ceremonial as in the coronation of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and others. Our founding fathers, most particularly, Tunku Abdul Rahman has never mentioned about Malaysia being an Islamic state in his speeches or even in during his tenure as the first prime Minister.

Then, how did this started to happen?

The Pan-Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) has always been advocating for the formation of an Islamic state if the party is elected to govern the Federal Government. This political party is largely seen as promoting the values of Islam, as a whole by many quarters.

In 1999, the Barisan Nasional government under the helm of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad suffered severe blow in the general election which saw the State of Terengganu falling in the hands of the PAS state government. The reason highlighted by many analysts has indicated that many Malay Muslims in Malaysia, particularly in the State of Terengganu, are seeing PAS as the true beholder of Islamic values rather than Barisan Nasional, the ruling Federal Government.

Thus, to recapture the attention of the Malay Muslim electors, Tun Dr. Mahathir in 2001, has “declared” Malaysia to be an Islamic state to show Barisan Nasional’s determination in upholding the Islamic virtues. This, however, is illegitimate as it contradicts with the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals 1957 which is based on consensus amongst various stakeholders.

Having said this, I wish to reiterate that Malaysia is a secular state and should remain so, forever. Making Malaysia an Islamic state due to the concern that Muslims form the predominant population here, simply does not hold water.

P/S: Only you and I need religions, the country needs none.

Goods & Services Tax (GST); Why Malaysia Needs It

This article is specifically written to address the recent statement by Malaysia’s Leader of Opposition, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim that the opposition pact, Pakatan Rakyat may resort to protest if a new taxation regime, Goods and Services Tax (GST) is to be introduced in Budget 2014, later this month.

This new form of tax in Malaysia has drawn much attention from many quarters, particularly experts and politicians regarding the pros and cons that may be contributed if this tax is to be implemented. The idea of GST in Malaysia has emerged even in 1990s, but discussions and public outcry have put off the implementation until this very moment.

Even in Japan recently, public outcry was evident when its hawkish Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe announced that the consumption tax will be revised from 5% to 8% as part of his “Abenomics”; a slew of measures to help Japan recover from economic slowdown and deflation.

 GST has been touted by many as one of the best ways to sustain the nation’s financial stability. But then again, what is GST?

GST or also known as value-added tax (VAT) taxes on consumption. This means, the more you consume, the more you will have to pay. GST can be classified under the cluster of indirect taxes and if it is to be implemented in Malaysia, the jurisdiction to collect this tax will be under the Royal Customs Department. Globally, around 146 nations are noted for implementing GST as one of the tax regimes. The percentage of GST varies amongst countries, from as little as 5% to as high as 50%.

Why is GST important?

1    (1)    The non-inclusive taxation system

Malaysia’s current personal income tax needs more scrutiny in order to enhance its efficiency. Through the de facto taxation system, only 1.7 million Malaysians out of the 13 million people workforce are registered to pay the personal income tax. Approximately, only around 1 million Malaysians, however, are actually paying the tax as the rest are excluded through various tax deductions. This essentially means that a miniscule 3.51% of the entire population is contributing to income tax which plays a major role in raising the direct taxes contribution. This clearly indicates that, the current tax regime is simply narrow-based and unsustainable in the long run. Taxes play a significant role in providing financial means for the nation’s development.

Thus, apart from direct tax, indirect taxes collections have also to be boosted for better revenue generation. Statistics has shown that indirect taxes contribution has fallen in 2011 (17.6%) and further in 2012 (17.2%). This indicates the pressing need for GST implementation. Moreover, Malaysia’s highest individual income tax bracket of 26% compared to the highest tax bracket in the corporate tax rate of 25 % compels the spark of debates on the efficacy of our tax regime. Many pushes for reduction in personal income tax to increase the population’s disposable income. This is understandable and can be achieved if GST is implemented. The government will be forced to reduce the personal income tax rate as high individual income tax and GST, together will be financial burden on the citizens.

2    (2)    Over-dependence on natural resources

Contributions to the government’s coffer have largely depended on natural resources-based industries, namely the timber and oil and gas (O&G) extraction sectors. Especially, after the inception of PETRONAS in 1974, the state-owned petroleum company, the national revenue has been largely derived from the profits of this establishment (which is also famously noted as one of the New Seven Sisters). Official statistics have shown that around 40% of annual PETRONAS’s revenue is used for the nation’s expenditures. Such high dependence on hydro-carbon receipts cannot be justified and the revenue should be put to a better use. 

Taking Scandinavian countries like Norway and also the world’s second biggest oil producer, the Saudi Arabia as examples, a huge percentage of their oil revenue is channelled into their sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). These funds are later used to invest domestically and internationally to generate more profit. As a result, Norway’s and Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth funds are amongst the biggest in the world. Technically, huge proportion of oil revenue is funnelled into these SWFs to establish financial backing for future generations. It is a common knowledge that these now-bountiful resources are doomed for depletion. Natural resources should not only be limited for the current generation’s use but also for the upcoming ones’.

As for Malaysia, there is a fund called “Kumpulan Wang Amanah Negara” in which small proportions of oil revenue is channelled into. Hitherto, PETRONAS has only contributed around 100 million per year compared to its tens of billions of profit. It is only starting from two years back, PETRONAS has voluntarily agreed to increase its contribution to RM 1billion per annum. Yet, by comparing this miniscule amount to its mass profit, definitely more proportion can and should be contributed to the fund. If this is made possible, Malaysia’s SWF could emerge as one of the world’s biggest fund and will be ultimately beneficial in long term.

3    (3)    Budget deficit

Malaysia has been registering budget deficits for the past 16 consecutive years, starting from the 1997 East Asian financial crisis. The nation’s expenditure has always been higher than its revenue for this duration and has caused the government to borrow from many sources. This has translated into high amount of national debt-to-GDP which currently stands around 53%, nearing the minimum threshold of 55%. If the national debt-to-GDP hikes above the threshold, it will send alarming warning to many quarters, regarding Malaysia’s risk in controlling debt. Such situation might even cause the Big Three ratings agencies to reduce Malaysia’s investment ratings. This later will force reduction in foreign investment.

Thus, in order to combat budget deficit which currently stands at 4.5%, the government needs to generate more revenue and the introduction of GST is very much timely. GST is capable in generating more revenue to the government’s coffer and this has been proven by many economists, both domestically and internationally.

How GST functions?

            I opine, to solve this state of problem, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) has to be implemented. Currently, Malaysia is in use of another tax regime, Sales and Services Tax (SST). To the uninitiated, there are clear distinctions between GST and SST.

For example, Sales and Services Tax (SST) are taxed on every stage of sale. Let’s say, in the case of a bread loaf (just an example as Malaysia does not produce wheat, the raw material for bread), the wheat producer, the bakery, the bread wholesaler and lastly, the consumer will be paying the sales tax.

However, in GST, only the end-user; the consumer will be the one paying the tax.

Then, wouldn’t this mean the government’s revenue will be reduced if only the end-user is paying the tax? No! This is because GST is broad-based and will cover almost all goods except for zero-rated goods (essential items such as rice, sugar, etc.). Thus, it paves way for more revenue generation.

            With the implementation of GST, more Malaysians are entitled to pay taxes indirectly. This way of taxation is just and capable of eliminating “free-rider” mentality amongst the Malaysian masses. In comparison with the current system, GST paves way for a broad-based taxation system. However, due to misconceptions and rumour-mongering amongst the uninitiated, the disapprovals for GST implementation have grown louder. Thus, an independent laboratory analysing on the impacts of GST should be established, encompassing local and foreign experts for broader views and opinions.

Through this laboratory, the best percentage of GST should be decided together with its impact on the economy as well as the consumers. It should be noted that while there are countries imposing up to 50% of GST, nations like Canada only imposes 5%. A well desired and accepted rate should be on average if compared with our current sales tax of 10% and service tax of 6%. And at the same time, the rate should not burn a hole in the consumers’ pockets. Keeping that in check, essential items should be exempted to protect the lower-income group.

Only after well-preparation and research into the manners of implementation, the public should be educated through various feasible and friendly means like social media, on the growing necessity of GST. After all, the longevity and success of this tax regime depends on the public acceptance.

            Hypothetically, it is becoming more apparent that our taxation system is in need of a revamp. A transition to the Goods and Services Tax will boost the national revenue, better if this attempt is coupled with continuous rationalisation of subsidies and improving leakages in the government’s finance due to corruption and red-tape. A well-planned roll-out of GST shall project better revenue-generation in the government’s financial “assessment card”.

P/S: It has to be noted GST can also cause rise in goods’ prices. But, whether this will cause severe inflation or otherwise, largely depends on the Government’s manner of implementation. 

The United States and the Government Shutdown

Simply mind-boggling! The world’s biggest economic juggernaut is now, in shutdown mode!

Starting on 1^st of October 2013, the Obama administration has been forced to announce a government shutdown until a budget is hopefully approved by the Congress, sooner or later. Around 800,000 federal government employees were forced to go on unpaid holiday until a date to be announced later. Most government offices and departments, including tourist hotspots were shut following the budget impasse.

How did it start?

Government shutdown is not something new in the United States. 17 years ago, during the Clinton administration, the government was forced to shut its operations down as the result of a gridlock amongst the Congressmen in approving the budget. The United States’ fiscal year ends on 30^th of September every year and annual budget for the upcoming fiscal term has to be sanctioned by the Congress before it. In 1996, disagreement on the need to further extend the duration of Medicare, a federal government-funded health programme for the elderly and disabled citizens, brought the nation to experience entire government shutdown except for certain critical departments such as the police force.

Now, 17 years later, in the presidency of America’s first Afro-American president, history has repeated itself. The Republicans demand for the Medicare or also dubbed as “Obamacare” to be delayed by a year for the budget to be approved. But, the White House has been firm that any action seeking to delay Obamacare will be vetoed by the President himself.

The structure of the Congress itself has made any concrete decision-making on the new budget gruelling. The lower chamber of the Congress (House of Representatives) is controlled by majority Republicans while the upper chamber (House of Senate) is dominated by the Democrats. Unwillingness of both parties to tolerate in achieving a consensus will prove to be detrimental to the nation’s development. Until the moment this article is written, the Tea Party faction of the Grand Old Party is insistently, calling for the delaying of Medicare whilst the Democrats are seeking to lift the debt-ceiling now set at US$ 16.7 trillion.

Debt and More Debt!

Believe it or not, the United States is infamously known for its hefty debt which is now threatening its economic survival. To be precise, during the reign of George Bush Jr. (2000-2008), America has gone on a spending spree, emphasising on military spending in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. With expenditures spiralling beyond national income, Washington D.C. was forced to deal with the threats of “fiscal cliff”, a term coined by Mr Ben S. Bernanke, the outgoing Federal Reserve chairman and sequester cuts all within the past two years. Even worse, all these occurred in the midst of the United States recovering from the 2007 Great Recession.

Looking at America’s debt-ceiling of US$ 16.7 trillion, it clearly indicates a worrying status quo. Rather than formulating to bring down the sky-rocketing debt, the representatives in Congress are keener in raising the debt-ceiling. To the uninitiated, “debt-ceiling” refers to the limit of amount of debt allowed to be borrowed by the US government. In previous occasions, the Congress has managed to raise the debt-ceiling higher to avoid from defaulting on its borrowings.

Actually, if worse comes to worst, the US government can print more greenbacks (US dollars) to repay its escalating debt as most international debts are dealt in the US’ currency denomination. This, however, will have other devastating effects on the economy as a whole such as depreciation of currency value and etc.

To date, it has been five days of government shutdown and still counting. The worst is expected to be experienced by October 17^th, where the Congress has to ultimately decide to solve this budget deadlock, otherwise will plunge the United States into debt-default. However, from the accounts of experts and the President himself, the Congress is expected to raise the debt-ceiling -again- to “save” the Uncle Sam’s nation. GOD, when will ever these people learn?

P/S: America can no longer afford having feuding Congressmen, failing to approve a budget. Many people especially civil servants, are struggling to make ends meet, unlike the members of the Congress who still get paid regardless of government shutdown!