“Islam Ibarat Pokok Jati – Tinggi, Teguh dan Terampil…”

Last Friday, as we stopped at the North-South Expressway Seremban rest area’s Petronas station on our way to Tangkak, we coincidentally met Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah, the person whom I really respect and admire.

I have always wish to talk to Datuk Mohd Noor, whose judgement in the high profile High Court case of Meor Atiqulrahman bin Ishak & Ors v Fatimah Sihi & Ors[2000]  1 MLJ 393 is very important as one of the judicial precedent in interpreting the Article 3(1) that places Islam as the religion of the Federation.

Excitedly, I took the opportunity to tell Datuk Mohd Noor that I am a great fan of his and how I admire the powerful words he chose that not only are poetic but more importantly had precisely interpreted the Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution which enshrines Islam as the religion of the Federation.

Datuk Mohd Noor said that I should not only be interested in the case but also must have the interest in the field.

In the judgement of Meor Atiqulrahman bin Ishak & Ors v Fatimah Sihi & Ors[2000]  1 MLJ 393 , Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah stated:

“Pada pendapat saya “Islam ialah ugama bagi Persekutuan tetapi ugama-ugama lain boleh diamalkan dengan aman dan damai” bermakna Islam adalah ugama utama di antara ugama-ugama lain yang dianuti di negara ini seperti Kristian, Buddha, Hindu dan selainnya. Islam bukan setaraf dengan ugama lain, bukan duduk berganding bahu atau berdiri sama tegak. Ia duduk di atas, ia berjalan dahulu, terletak di tempat medan dan suaranya lantang kedengaran. Islam ibarat pokok jati – tinggi, teguh dan terampil. Jika bukan sedemikian Islam bukanlah ugama bagi Persekutuan tetapi adalah salah satu di antara beberapa ugama yang dianuti di negara ini dan setiap orang sama-sama bebas mengamalkan manamana ugama yang dianutinya, tiada lebih satu dari yang lain.”

Hence, the judgement of  Meor Atiqulrahman bin Ishak & Ors v Fatimah Sihi & Ors had nullified the claims that Malaysia is a secular state made by some groups of people who either do not understand the Federal Constitution or doing it with the intention of confusing the people.

These groups of people usually misquote Tun Salleh Abbas’s words in the judgement of the Supreme Court decision of Che Omar Che Soh v Public Prosecutor (1988) 2 MLJ 55 to prove their case; when Tun Salleh did not say that Malaysia is a secular country in the judgement of the said case.

I had quoted this case so many times to prove that Malaysia is not a secular country:

  1. Apabila Buku Teks Undang-Undang Tidak Berperlembagaan
  2. Menjawab “Jika Islam Boleh, Kenapa Kristian Tidak Boleh”
  3. The Constitutionally Illiterate Tawfik Tun Dr Ismail
  4. Boo Su-Lyn Supports Nanyang’s ‘Monkey Act’
  5. Grow Up, MCA!
  6. SUARAM Man Questions “Belief in God”
  7. Lagi Usaha Parti Pembangkang Menipu Umat Islam
  8. The Court Of Appeal Recognises SOGI Rights?
  9. Seminar Islam dan Isu-Isu Hak Asasi Manusia
  10. Gobind Singh: Malaysia Is A Secular State – Another Fairy Tale?

Please click the photos for larger images:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.