Tag Archives: JAIS

G25: “Some Ulama Consider Khalwat Raids Un-Islamic”

In its article, “Khalwat Raids Make Malaysia Tougher Than Saudi Arabia”, Free Malaysia Today (FMT) wrote:

The way Malaysian religious authorities are policing khalwat (close proximity) is beyond anything in Saudi Arabia or other Gulf States today, warns a leading NGO. – FMT

FMT was reporting on comments made by G25 adviser Tan Sri Mohd Sheriff Kassim, “in response to the recent death and injuries of two policemen who jumped from buildings to escape raids by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais).”

Birds of a feather flock together, like the G25’s spokesperson Dato Noor Farida Ariffin, Tan Sri Mohd Sheriff Kassim is also against khalwat raids.

Below are my answers (in blue) to FMT’s article (in red) regarding this issue.

G25 adviser Mohd Sheriff Kassim points out that even Saudi Arabia, the country which is home to Islam’s holiest site, has issued stern guidelines to limit the powers of the moral police to harass and arrest Muslims.

“The instruction is that the moral police should not take the law into their own hands and instead, it should advise those committing offences under the morality laws to change and repent,” he said In a statement today.

I cannot comment on the laws of Saudi Arabia because

  1. I have not studied the laws of the country

  2. I respect and do not want to interfere with the laws of the land.

But even if it is true that they do not implement such laws, as a sovereign country, we have our own constitutional rights to implement our own laws.

Anyway, if G25 adviser thinks that Saudi Arabia is doing a better job in dealing with Syariah offences, then G25 must fight for our country to follow the laws of Saudi Arabia, which means implementing the Hudud laws in our country.

 His comments were in response to the recent death and injuries of two policemen who jumped from buildings to escape raids by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais).

As policemen, they must know the laws and their rights, so if they chose to jump from the building in order to escape, the fault is theirs and it is not JAIS’ fault.

Would G25 blame the police if a burglar chose to jump from a building in order to avoid being arrested by the policemen who are carrying their duties? 

Just two months ago, Jais introduced a mobile phone app, called “Hotline Jais”, for people to report religious offences, including khalwat.

It is a good move by JAIS to use updated technology so that it is easier for the public to report religious offences in order for us to take care of our Muslim community.

Sheriff added that Malays who visited or lived in Arab states have not come across any country where so-called moral police raid private homes.

If we must follow the laws of Saudi Arabia, we must change our Federal Constitution and implement the Hudud laws.

He also pointed out that some ulama consider khalwat raids un-Islamic as it gave the impression that the religion used only punishment to uphold morals.

Khalwat raid is one of the ways to prevent the religious offence of khalwat and the Islamic authorities have their Standard Operating Procedure that must be followed by their enforcement officers conducting the raids, only liberal ‘ulama’ would declare that our khalwat raids are un-Islamic; not the real ulama of Ahli As-Sunnah Wa Al-Jamaah.

Khalwat raids also tended to target the lower-income group as the “rich and powerful” had more resources to “get away with bigger sins”. Sheriff noted that khalwat laws could be easily exploited by a person’s enemies to “settle a score”.

G25 adviser has made a very serious allegation which I hope he has the proves to support it, and it is the duty of G25 to make police reports as soon as possible regarding this matter.

“Our authorities should learn from the failed experience of dictatorial regimes which criminalised personal thoughts and behaviour to discourage individualism and promote mass obedience to the state ideology,” he said.

What does khalwat raid have to do with “dictatorial regimes which criminalised personal thoughts and behaviour to discourage individualism and promote mass obedience to the state ideology”?

Islamic matters are not political matters and it is stated clearly in our Federal Constitution that the YDP Agong and the Royal Rulers are the Head of Islam, so the above statement is a malicious distortion of the truth and a humiliation to the Royal Rulers.

Article 3(2) of the Federal Constitution:

In every State other than States not having a Ruler the position of the Ruler as the Head of the religion of Islam in his State in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution of that State, and, subject to that Constitution, all rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers enjoyed by him as Head of that religion, are unaffected and unimpaired; but in any acts, observances or ceremonies with respect to which the Conference of Rulers has agreed that they should extend to the Federation as a whole each of the other Rulers shall in his capacity of Head of the religion of Islam authorize the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to represent him.

Article 3(3) of the Federal Constitution:

The Constitution of the States of Malacca, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak shall each make provision for conferring on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong the position of Head of the religion of Islam in that State.

Since G25 wants us to follow Saudi Arabia, G25 members must start fighting for our country to implement Hudud.

Related Posts:

MMO Did Not Apologise For Boo Su Lyn’s Seditious Article

Malay Mail Online (MMO) columnist, Boo Su Lyn wrote a seditious article, “Abolish Federal Constitution’s Article 11(4)” last Friday, October 2, 2015. (Please click here for the article)

Anyway on October 7, MMO retracted the seditious article and wrote that it apologises “to anyone who may have been offended by it”.

It is very interesting to see that MMO retracted the article a day after the ruling by the Federal Court on the case of Azmi Sharom challenging the constitutionality of the Sedition Act.

Any way MMO is defending the writer:

“The writer wishes to point out that she is aware of the sensitivities in Malaysia regarding the topic of religion. She has no intention of insulting Islam.”

I do not understand how could MMO wrote that the writer has no intention of insulting Islam.

In the article which was deleted by MMO on October 7, not only did the writer insult Islam but she took the liberty to interpret the Islamic law in her own way when she is not even a Muslim.

“In Ezra Zaid’s case, Muslims, like other Malaysians, may have freedom of expression, but there are a string of state laws, as empowered by Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution, that do not allow Muslims to publish books that are deemed unIslamic.” – MMO.

By saying that “there are a string of state laws, as empowered by Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution, that do not allow Muslims to publish books that are deemed unIslamic”, she is questioning the decision made by MAIWP and JAIS as the religious authorities that Irshad Manji’s Allah, Liberty and Love is contrary to the Islamic law.

The writer also wrote:

“Who decides whether a particular book is “unIslamic”? That would be the state religious departments.” – MMO.

What right has a person of another religion to question and interfere in matters regarding Islam, the religion of the Federation?

Of course, it must be the Islamic religious departments that decide on matters regarding Islam and not a person of another religion like the writer.

Boo Su Lyn also wrote that:

“It’s unclear if the Selangor Islamic Religious Department or the Federal Territory Islamic Affairs Department (in Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz’s case involving the same book), had actually read Allah, Liberty and Love, or if the religious authorities merely opposed the book simply because the Canadian author Manji is a lesbian.”- MMO.

What a malicious statement!

Is Boo Su Lyn saying that she understands Islam better than MAIWP and JAIS and that the Islamic authorities are unprofessional in doing their duties?

Furthermore, is the writer trying to violate the Article 11(3)(a) of the Federal Constitution by interfering into the rights of the Muslim authorities to manage its own religious affairs?

Article 11(3)(a) states:

Every religious group has the right— to manage its own religious affairs

In its Apology and Retraction article, MMO did not even mention that Boo Su Lyn made a public statement against Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act which restricts anyone to question the four sensitive issues of the Federal Constitution.

Boo Su Lyn wrote that Article 10(4) that prohibits a person from questioning Part III (citizenship), Article 152 (national language), Article 153 (special position of the Malays and of Sabah and Sarawak natives) and Article 181 (rulers’ sovereignty) should also be abolished so that there can be public discussion on what she wrote as “these so-called “sensitive” issues.”

Article 10(4) is protected by Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act:

“A “seditious tendency” is a tendency— to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.”

She even questions Article 153 that against Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act by writing:

“It also allows state-sanctioned discrimination against minority groups, with no avenue for victims to seek redress as they’re not even supposed to question the so-called “sensitive” matter of Malay privileges.” – MMO.

Apart from condemning and calling for the Article 10(4) to be abolished, Boo Su Lyn did the same to the Article 11(4) when it has nothing to do with her and the fact that she has no rights to interfere in the matters of Islam (Article 11(3)(a)).

What is her intention to ask for the Article that protects Islam, the Religion of the Federation as stated in the Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia to be abolished?

Without Article 11(4), the Rulers cannot ‘restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam’.

Article 11(4):

“State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.”

By calling for the Article 11(4) to be abolished, Boo Su Lyn is also challenging the Article 3(1) for disrupting “peace and harmony” of the relationship between the Muslims and people practicing other religions.

A very senior lawyer, Professor Dato’ Naser Disa explains that the words, “other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation” means that people from other religions must practise their religions in peace and harmony with others from different religions especially Islam, which is the religion of the Federation of Malaysia.

In the ruling of the case of Kalimah Allah, the Federal Court judge Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali wrote that:

“It is my judgment that the purpose and intention of the 29 insertion of the words: “in peace and harmony” in Article 3(1) is to protect the sanctity of Islam as the religion of the country and also to insulate against any threat faced or any possible and probable threat to the religion of Islam. . It is also my judgment that the most possible and probable threat to Islam, in the context of this country, is the propagation of other religion to the followers of Islam. That is the very reason as to why Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution came into place.”

It is unconstitutional for Boo Su Lyn to write untrue and seditious statements about Articles 10(4) and 11(4) to justify her call for the Articles to be removed and a person who questions the four sensitive issues mentioned under Article 10(4) can be charged under Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act.

However, regarding the malicious article, MMO wrote:

“Malay Mail Online also has no intention of insulting Islam or any religion, and is withdrawing the said article and apologising in the hopes of avoiding any such perception.”

So, we can clearly see that:

  1.  MMO does not think that the seditious and malicious content of article is wrong.

  2. It is not wrong for a non-Muslims to take the liberty to interpret Islam the way they wish and to interfere in the Islamic matters.

  3. It is not seditious to question Article 153 and the other sensitive issues protected by Article 10(4) . 

  4.  MMO did not apologise and withdrawing the article because it is wrong and seditious.

  5. MMO took the action only because, “in the hopes of avoiding any such perception.”

  6. MMO is actually supporting Boo Su Lyn’s article that maliciously insulting Islam and the Islamic authorities and condemning Article 10(4), and saying that she is right.

  7.  It is the readers with “such perception” who wrongly think that the article insults Islam.

My conclusion is, MMO and the writer find there is nothing wrong with the article that not only insult and humiliate Islam but has gone against Articles 3(1), 10(4), 11(3)(a), 11(4) and 153 of the Federal Constitution and Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act.

The Sedition Act must be used to stop people from challenging the law and the Federal Constitution and to protect the peace and harmony of our beloved country.

NGO Islam Desak JAIS Tidak Pulangkan Bible Yang Dirampas

SHAH ALAM, 16 Jun (Bernama) — Kira-kira 100 Badan Bukan Kerajaan (NGO) Islam hari ini mendesak Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) tidak tunduk kepada arahan kerajaan Selangor yang meminta jabatan itu memulangkan semula 300 naskhah Bible dalam bahasa Malaysia yang dirampas pada Januari lepas.

Pengerusi Pembela-pembela Islam Malaysia (Pembela) Hafiz Nordin yang mewakili gabungan kira-kira 100 NGO itu berkata ini berikutan naskhah Bible tersebut mengandungi kalimah Allah yang dilarang penggunaannya oleh kaum bukan Islam di negeri ini.

“Tidak perlu dipulangkan kitab Bible yang dirampas itu kerana kitab itu bercanggah dengan titah Sultan Selangor dan fatwa negeri ini yang melarang kaum bukan Islam menggunakan kalimah Allah dalam kegiatan agama mereka,” katanya dalam sidang media di sini, Isnin.

Khamis lepas, Menteri Besar Selangor Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim dalam satu kenyataan mengarahkan JAIS memulangkan semua kitab tersebut kepada Persatuan Bible Malaysia (BSM).

Arahan itu dibuat berikutan Peguam Negara Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail memaklumkan tidak ada sebarang pendakwaan akan dibuat berhubung kes rampasan Bible dan kes itu ditutup.

Abdul Gani berkata naskhah Bible yang dirampas itu adalah himpunan buku Taurat, Zabur dan Injil yang merupakan buku asas penganut agama Kristian.

Selain Pembela, gabungan NGO itu turut diwakili Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa), Persatuan Pengguna Islam Malaysia (PPIM) dan Yayasan Dakwah Islamiah Malaysia (Yadim).

Related articles:

Small Fire Broke Out In MAIS Headquarters


Kenyataan Media NGO-NGO Berhubung Kenyataan Yang Dibuat Oleh MKPN Berkaitan Rampasan Bible oleh JAIS



Selasa 05 Rabi’ul Awal 1435 / 07 Januari 2013

Kami mengecam keras kenyataan yang dikeluarkan oleh Majlis Konsultansi Perpaduan Nasional (MKPN) yang mengadakan perbincangan semalam mengenai isu kalimah ALLAH dan perampasan bibel versi Bahasa Melayu oleh JAIS baru-baru ini.

Dalam kenyataan yang disampaikan oleh Pengerusi MKPN Tan Sri Samsudin Osman seperti yang dilapurkan oleh media cetak dan elektronik termasuk media portal dan siber, MKPN dipetik sebagai mengkritik JAIS atas alasan kononnya tindakan JAIS itu adalah satu ‘blatant disregard for the agreed 10-Point Resolution‘ yang kononnya dikeluarkan oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan dan dipersetujui oleh pihak kristian.

Kami mengecam tindakan dan kenyataan MKPN itu atas alasan-alasan berikut:

  1. Pihak JAIS langsung tidak dipanggil menghadiri mesyuarat tersebut, atau diberi peluang memperjelaskan tindakan mereka atau membela diri mereka. Pada kami ini adalah satu pencabulan hak asasi dan pelanggaran prinsip keadilan sejagat (natural justice) yang tidak sepatutnya dilakukan oleh sebuah badan yang ditubuh untuk tujuan memupuk perpaduan nasional;

  2. Tindakan JAIS adalah dalam menguatkuasakan peruntukkan undang-undang jenayah iaitu Seksyen 9 Enakmen Pengawalan Pengembangan Agama Bukan Islam 1988 yang berkuatkuasa didalam Negeri Selangor. Seksyen tersebut dengan jelas melarang penggunaan beberapa kalimah termasuk kalimah ALLAH dan menjadikan pelanggarannya suatu perlakuan jenayah;

  3. Tindakan JAIS bukannya merampas bibel versi Bahasa Melayu per se, tetapi merampas penerbitan yang melanggar Seksyen 9 tersebut, iaitu disyaki mengandungi perkataan-perkataan yang dilarang penggunaannya termasuk kalimah ALLAH. Ini adalah satu kesalahan jenayah yang, jika cukup bukti, boleh dikenakan tindakan pertuduhan jenayah di Mahkamah Jenayah sivil;

  4. Oleh itu, tidak timbul soal JAIS harus berbincang atau berunding dengan mana-mana pihak yang disyaki melakukan suatu perlakuan jenayah. Sebagaimana agensi penguatkuasaan yang lain, tugas, tanggungjawab dan bidang kuasa JAIS adalah untuk menguatkuasakan undang-undang dan mencegah sebarang perlakuan jenayah;

  5. Sama juga seperti agensi penguatkuasaan yang lain seperti polis dan lain-lain. Contohnya pihak polis tidak menahan sesebuah kenderaan per se, tetapi menahan kenderaan itu kerana disyaki membawa dadah. Adakah perlu diwajibkan pihak polis berunding dengan pemandu tersebut sebelum mengambil tindakan? Namanya pun agensi penguatkuasaan, maka tindakan JAIS menguatkuasakan undang-undang adalah dalam bidangkuasanya dan menjadi tanggungjawab dan kewajipan yang harus dilaksanakan.

  6. Sekiranya mana-mana OYDS (Orang Yang Di Syaki) atau OKT (Orang Kena Tuduh) merasakan mereka mempunyai pembelaan dalam mana-mana prosiding pertuduhan jenayah, maka mereka mempunyai hak mengemukakan pembelaan tersebut didalam Mahkamah dalam prosiding tersebut. Tidak timbul soal hak asasi dan hak membela diri mereka dicabuli atau dilanggar!

  7. Berkaitan 10-Point Resolution yang dijadikan sandaran oleh MKPN, ianya sudah dihujahkan di Mahkamah Rayuan dengan panjang lebar dalam isu kalimah ALLAH. 10-Point Resolution itu adalah berkaitan dengan soal kemasukan dan pengimpotan bibel versi bahasa Melayu kedalam negara ini. Ia langsung tidak menyentuh dan tidak ada kena-mengena dengan isu kalimah ALLAH.

Sebagai pihak yang berbidangkuasa didalam hal-ehwal impot-ekspot dan perdagangan antarabangsa, Kerajaan Persekutuan berhak memberi kelonggaran atau syarat kepada mana-mana pihak yang mahu membawa masuk atau mengimpot apa juga barangan daripada luar.

  1. Dan sebagaimana dalam soal kemasukan dan impot-ekspot barangan luar kedalam negara ini, ianya wajib mematuhi undang-undang negara. Dan undang-undang negara melarang penggunaan beberapa kalimah dan perkataan tertentu dalam mana-mana penerbitan termasuk kalimah ALLAH. Maka membawa masuk atau mengimpot mana-mana penerbitan yang mengandungi perkataan atau kalimah yang dilarang adalah prima facie satu pelanggaran undang-undang yang boleh dikenakan tindakan termasuk merampas bahan penerbitan itu dan dikenakan pertuduhan jenayah di mana-mana Mahkamah Jenayah sivil;

  2. Selanjutnya, 10-Point Resolution tersebut hanyalah dasar dan polisi Kerajaan. Mana-mana pihak yang mempunyai sedikit asas pengetahuan perundangan akan sedar bahawa dasar dan polisi Kerajaan tidak boleh melanggar, bercanggah atau bertentangan dengan mana-mana undang-undang negara. Dan jika ianya bercanggah, bertentangan atau melanggar mana-mana undang-undang negara, ianya tidak terpakai dan tidak boleh dikuatkuasakan.

Kami kesal melihat pihak MKPN seolah-oleh tergesa-gesa dan gopoh dalam menangani isu ini. Mengapa pihak MKPN tidak memanggil semua stake-holder dan pihak yang berkepentingan untuk memberi penjelasan atau hujah masing-masing sebelum MKPN membuat sebarang keputusan?

Apa yang kami khuatirkan ialah kelak nanti timbul persepsi seolah-olah MKPN dipenuhi oleh golongan tertentu yang mewakili suara kumpulan tertentu dan sekadar menjadi mouthpiece kepada pihak berkepentingan.

????????????????????????Jika persepsi ini berlaku, maka tanggungjawab legal dan moral MKPN untuk menjadi sebuah badan tanpa kepentingan bertujuan untuk mencari kata sepakat dalam mencapai dan memupuk perpaduan nasional dan keharmonian antara pelbagai agama dan kaum akan gagal; malah sebaliknya akan dilihat lebih mengeruhkan keadaan lagi.

Pada kami MKPN telah gagal dalam menjalankan tugas dan tanggungjawabnya secara matang, profesional dan berhemah dengan mematuhi lunas-lunas hak asasi dan prinsip keadilan sejagat (natural justice).

Mengapa isu ini langsung tidak dilihat dari perspektif umat Islam? Apakah umat Islam di Malaysia ini sudah tidak ada hak dalam mempertahankan aqidah dan hak asasi kami untuk menganut, mengamal dan melaksanakan agama Islam dengan aman dan harmoni sebagaimana yang diperuntukkan oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan?

Apakah umat Islam di Malaysia sudah tiada hak didalam negara yang menjadikan Islam sebagai agama bagi Persekutuan?

Satu perkara yang perlu kami tegaskan ialah kita tidak pernah menghalang umat kristian untuk menganut, mengamal dan melaksanakan kepercayaan mereka. Malah kita berbangga Malaysia sebagai sebuah negara umat Islam merupakan antara negara yang mengamalkan sifat toleransi agama dan kaum yang sangat tinggi, dan begitu akomodatif terhadap agama dan bangsa lain walaupun kita menjadi tunjang pemerintahan sejak zaman Kesultanan Melayu sehinggalah era pemerintahan moden ini.

Dan antara rahsia besar pengekalan keamanan dan keharmonian serta perpaduan unik ialah kerana sikap umat Melayu-Islam yang cukup bertolak ansur dan toleran.

Oleh itu kita berharap tidak ada mana-mana pihak yang cuba mengambil kesempatan menguji kesabaran dan sikap toleran umat Melayu-Islam, terutama dalam hal berkaitan bangsa Melayu dan agama Islam. Kerana tiap kesabaran ada hadnya; dan mencabul dan menghina agama Islam dan bangsa Melayu adalah sempadan yang rapuh yang memungkinkan pelbagai perkara berlaku.

Oleh itu kita memberi amaran kepada semua pihak supaya bersikap rasional dan matang dalam menjaga keharmonian antara agama dan perpaduan nasional yang telah kita bina begitu lama. Jangan sampai ianya tercemar dek kerana nafsu dan keghairahan segelintir antara kita yang tidak langsung mengerti untuk menghormati sensitivit dan hak orang lain.

Sekian terima kasih


  1. Pertubuhan Muafakat Sejahtera Masyarakat Malaysia – MUAFAKAT
  2. Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Negara – PERKASA
  3. Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan Pembela Islam – PEMBELA
  4. Persatuan Peguam Muslim Malaysia – PPMM
  5. Jalur Tiga – JATI
  6. Peguam Pembela Islam – PPI
  7. Institut Pemikiran Tradisional Islam – IPTI
  8. Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia – ISMA
  9. Pertubuhan Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah Malaysia – ASWAJA
  10. Persatuan Pengguna Islam Malaysia (PPIM)
  11. Persatuan Angkatan Islamiah Malaysia (P.A.I.M.)
  12. Persatuan Belia Islam Nasional (PEMBINA)
  13. Pertubuhan Professional Muslim (Pro-Muslim)
  14. Persatuan Nur Alamiyyah
  15. International Muslim Consumer Association (IMCA)
  16. Pertubuhan Kebajikan Darul Islah Malaysia (PERKID)
  17. Persatuan Jaringan Kaseh Ixora Putrajaya (JKIP)
  18. Gabungan Bela Hak Insan Pinang (GABUNGAN)
  19. Badan Anti IFC (BADAI)
  20. Sekreteriat Dakwah Pulau Pinang (SDPP)
  21. Raudhatul Huda Pulau Pinang (RH)

DAP vs Tan Sri Khalid And His Aku Janji

During the sworn in ceremony as the Menteri Besar of Selangor on May 14, 2013, Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim gave his pledge on 10 Aku Janji or undertakings including:

  1. To uphold the Rukun Negara or National Principles and preserving and protecting the sanctity and supremacy of Islam as the religion of the state.

  2. To abide by the sovereignty of the institution of the Malay rulers defend it from any irresponsible quarters and to carry out his duties with integrity, responsibility, trustworthiness, honesty and sincerity.

  3. To obey and follow the Sultan of Selangor’s orders or directions.

  4. To protect the Malay privileges and the legitimate interests of other communities as enshrined in the federal constitution and the Formation of Selangor Government Laws 1959.

  5. To put the people first so long as it did not affect the interests, stability, prosperity and security of the state; preserving good relations with the federal government and other states in the federation; ensuring racial unity by stressing on goodwill and cooperation between the communities.

Then the Allah issue was brought up again:

(Please click here to read more about the issue)

Malaysian Insider - Kami akan terus guna kalimah Allah di gereja Selangor, kata paderi|Dec 27 2013

Have all these people of Selangor forgotten that the Sultan of Selangor had made a decree and the Malaysian Court of Appeal has ruled that in Malaysia, Allah is the proper name for the Muslim’s God and cannot be used as a common name to translate the gods of other religion?

But Selangor’s DAP’s and PKR’s leaders and even some of PAS’s leaders had rudely made statements against the Sultan’s decree and after JAIS’s operation regarding the matter, they want Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim to go against the Sultan’s decree and to punish JAIS!

Why can’t they all learn to be good and fair citizens and obey the rules?

For example, DAP’s Hannah Yeoh, the Speaker and a member of the Selangor State Assembly made lots of statements regarding this matter which do not respect the Sultan of Selangor’s decree, Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988,  and Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

I wonder if Khalid Ibrahim would obey Hannah Yeoh.

And another three DAP’s assemblymen even want to make changes to the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988 as reported by Malaysian Insider:

“Three Selangor assemblyman have called for a state law passed during the Barisan Nasional rule to be amended to ensure non-Muslim rights are protected as guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.State assemblymen Yeo Bee Yin, Rajiv Rishyakaran and Lau Weng San, representing the state constituencies of Damansara Utama, Bukit Gasing and Kampung Tunku respectively, said they would propose the changes to be made on the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988, at the next state assembly sitting.”

I wonder if the Selangor’s Menteri Besar will obey DAP’s orders.

So far Tan Sri Khalid has not taken any action to stop DAP from making all kinds of statements against the Sultan of Selangor’s decree.

Has Tan Sri Khalid forgotten the 10 Aku Janji or undertakings that he plegded on May 14, 2013?

Photo from Jinggo Fotopages

Photo from Jinggo Fotopages

But if he ignore Hannah Yeoh and other DAP’s leaders, DAP, PKR and PAS leaders will surely won’t be happy with him; and may cause them to force Tan Sri Khalid to resign his position as the Menteri Besar.

But how about the undertakings that he pledged?

An honest man will keep his words and will not betray the pledge that he made.