policing belief - freedom house

Policing Belief

THE IMPACT OF BlAsPHEMy lAws On HuMAn RIgHTs

A F R E E D O M H O U S E S P E C I A L R E P O R T

57

MalaysiaIntroductIon

DespiteMalaysia’sdemographicdiversity,religiousfreedomandfreedomofexpression are threatened by laws banning blasphemy and other forms of re-ligious insult. In terms of religious affiliation, the national population of 28.3millionis60percentMuslim,19percentBuddhist,9percentChristian,and6percentHindu.1ThemainethnicgroupsaretheMalays(53percent),Chinese(26percent),indigenous(12percent),andIndians(8percent).2Sincethe1970s,the coalition government, led by the United Malays National Organization(UMNO),hasslowlybutsurelypursuedpoliciespromotinggreaterstateinter-ferenceinreligiousaffairs.

UMNOhasraisedtheprofileofShari’a(Islamiclaw)inMalaysianlaw,poli-tics,andsocietytogainsupportamongitsMalayconstituency,whichispredom-inantly Sunni Muslim. Although blasphemy laws exist in both the secular andIslamic legal systems, the adoption of Shari’a statutes and the establishment ofShari’acourtshavebroughtseverelimitstofreedomofexpressionandfreedomofreligion.3TheIslamizationeffortsalsoincludetheestablishmentoftheDepart-mentofIslamicDevelopment(JAKIM),whichmaintainsalistofreligioussectsdeemedunorthodoxor“deviant,”suchasShiaIslam,Ahmadiyya,andtheBaha’ifaith.4Whilechargesofdeviancydonotfallneatlywithinthescopeoftraditionalblasphemyandreligiousinsultlaws,theyareillustrativeoftheMalaysiangovern-ment’sgeneralhostilitytotheexpressionoftheologicaldifferencesordissent,andthenegativeeffectsofthathostilityonhumanrights.

58 policing belief: The impacT of blasphemy laws on human RighTs

Background

ModernMalaysia,whichgainedindependencefromtheBritishEmpirebe-tween1957and1963,isafederationof13states(plusthreefederalterritories),nineofwhicharestillnominallyruledbyhereditarysultans.Beforecolonization,thesemonarchswerethepoliticalandreligiousleadersofindependentMuslimstates.5TheMalaysultanatespracticedShari’aasearlyasthe14thcentury,6butcommonlawwasintroducedunderBritishruleandbecamethemainsystemofjurisprudence,withShari’alimitedtopersonalandfamilymattersamongMus-limsonly.7TheroleofShari’ainmodern,federalMalaysia,withitslargenon-Mus-limminorities,hasbeenhotlydebatedinthepoliticalsphere,oftenbypoliticianscateringtoethnicandreligiousconstituencies.

ReligionandtheStateThoughallethnicgroupsarerepresentedinMalaysianpolitics,UMNOhas

beenthedominantpartysinceindependence,maintainingpowerthroughcoali-tiongovernments.8ItwasinfluentialinthedraftingoftheconstitutionandtheinclusionofArticle3,whichdesignatesIslamasthestatereligionbutdoesnotdeclareMalaysiatobeanIslamicstate,andArticle160,whichdefines“Malay”inpartassomeoneprofessingtheMuslimfaith.9Theconstitutionprovidesforfree-domofreligionunderArticle11,inadditiontootherfundamentalrightsguar-antees.10

Expertshavearguedthat intheearly1980s,UMNOrespondedtoagrow-ingIslamicrevivalaswellasthepoliticalthreatposedbytheoppositionIslamicPartyofMalaysia(PAS)bytakingonamoreIslamicimage.11Asonescholarhasexplained:“UMNO,likeanyotherpoliticalparty,aimsatmaintainingpower.Is-lamizationisaconvenienttooltoachievethisobjective.”12UnderPrimeMinisterMahathirMohamed,wholedthecountryfrom1981to2003,thegovernmentes-tablishedaseriesofprogramsandenactedlegislationthateffectivelycontributedtotheIslamizationofMalaysianinstitutions.Thisprocessincludedexpandedin-fluenceforJAKIMandShari’aingovernanceandthelegalsystem.13Meanwhile,PASmadesignificantgainsinfederalandstateelectionsin1999,takingcontrolofthestategovernmentsinKelantanandTerengganuandworkingtowardtheadop-tionofhududlawsthatwouldimposeShari’apunishmentsforcertaincrimes.14

The efforts under Mahathir also brought Muslim religious figures into thegovernment, introduced Islamic banking and insurance systems, and codifiedShari’aatthestatelevelbyenactingstatutesestablishingShari’acourts.15JAKIM,

a fReedom house special RepoRT malaysia 59

established in1997, “actively interpretsand implements Islam inMalaysiaandhaswidelybeenacceptedasanappropriateauthority.”16Accordingtoitswebsite,JAKIMisresponsibleforformulatingpoliciesfortheadvancementofIslamicaf-fairs,streamlininglawsandregulations,andenforcingmechanismsoflawsandadministrativeprocedurespertainingtoIslamicaffairs.17Itisalsothebodythatdraftsguidelinesonwhatconstitutes“deviancy,”18monitorsreligiousgroups,andmaintainsthelistofbannedsects.

UMNO’sIslamizationdrivehasexacerbatedcommunaltensionsandresultedinoutbreaksofviolence.19Sincethe2008generalelections,inwhichtherulingcoalitionlostconsiderablegroundtooppositionparties,UMNOhasundertak-eneffortstoreinindivisiverhetoric,mostnotablythroughtheadoptionofthe“1Malaysia”concept,which“emphasizes‘acceptance’amongthevariousraces…so that all of them live as the people of one nation.”20 However, long-standingcommunalriftsarenotsoeasilymended,aswasseeninJanuary2010whenriotsbrokeoutoveracourtrulingthatallowedaRomanCatholicperiodicaltousethewordAllahtorefertoGod.Moreover,lawsthatpunishblasphemyanddeviancyremainineffectandcontinuetoworkagainstethnicandreligiouspeace.

DualLegalSystemMalaysiahasatwo-tracklegalsystemconsistingofcivilorsecularlaw,based

on English common law, and Shari’a. While the Shari’a system was previouslysomewhatinformalandsubordinatetothecivilcourtsystem,todaythetwooper-ateinparallelwithrespecttohierarchy,asthegovernmenthassteadily“upgrad-ed”thestatusofthestate-levelShari’acourtsystems.ThejurisdictionofShari’acourtsextendsonlytoMuslimsandtheirfamily,personal,andreligiousconcerns.Thecivil lawapplies tobothMuslimsandnon-Muslims.Asnotedabove,bothsystemscriminalizeblasphemy.

Shari’aisadministeredexclusivelyatthestatelevel;allofMalaysia’s13statesandthefederalterritorieshaveadoptedtheirownShari’acriminalstatutesandestablishedcourtstoenforcethem.21Thestatutesvaryfromstatetostate.InsomestateswherePAShasbeeninpower,suchasKelantan,Perlis,andTerengganu,punishmentsforviolationsofShari’acanbeparticularlyharshandincludecaningandstoning.Inotherplaces,suchas thefederal territories,punishmentsrangefromfinestoseveralyearsinprison.22Allstateshavesomereligiousenforcementofficers,rangingfromfiveinPerlisto122inSelangor,whoworkwiththestate-levelpolicetoensurethatShari’aisnotviolated.23Inaddition,IslamicReligiousCouncilsineachstatearetaskedwithoverseeingtheenforcementofShari’a.


ApostasyTheShari’aoffenseofapostasyexistsonlyatthestatelevelinMalaysia.People

accusedandconvictedofapostasyarerequiredtorepent,andeveniftheydoso,theycanbesentenced to imprisonment forup tofiveyears,dependingon thestate.24InKelantanandTerengganu,thosewhorefusetorepentforapostasycanbesentencedtodeath.25

EmergencyLawEmergency law-enforcement powers associated with the colonial-era fight

againstleftistinsurgentsweremadepermanentthroughthepassageoftheInter-nalSecurityAct(ISA)in1960.TheISAprovidesfordetentionwithoutwarrantortrialforaninitial60days,butthehomeaffairsministercanextendthedetentionforanindefinitenumberoftwo-yearperiods.(Thehomeaffairsministerhassimi-larauthorityundertheEmergencyOrdinance,whichwasoriginallyissuedinre-sponsetoraceriotsin1969.)TheseexpansivedetentionpowershaveexacerbatedtheabuseofMalaysia’sblasphemyandotherreligiousinsultlaws.Asoutlinedbe-low,peopleaccusedofreligiouscrimes,andindeedofdefamationorcriticismofgovernmentofficialsorpolicies,havebeenarrestedanddetainedundertheISA.26

Bl asphemy l aws

Blasphemyandreligiousinsultsareprohibitedinboththestate-levelShari’astatutesandinfederallaw.Atthefederallevel,SectionXV(Articles295–298A)oftheMalaysianPenalCodeaddressesreligiousoffensessuchasdesecratingaplaceofworship,disturbingareligiousassembly,andtrespassingonburialplaces.27Ar-ticles298and298Aprohibit“utteringwords,etc.,withdeliberateintenttowoundthereligiousfeelingofanyperson,”and“causing,etc.,disharmony,disunity,orfeelingsofenmity,hatredorill-will,orprejudicing,etc.,themaintenanceofhar-monyorunity,ongroundsofreligion.”28Notably,thelawsinSectionXVdonotspecifyanyparticularreligion,indicatingthatallreligionsinMalaysia(asidefromthosethathavebeenbannedbyJAKIM)arenominallyprotectedfromblasphemyorinsult.

Blasphemyand insultingIslamspecificallyareprohibitedat thestate level.Forexample,accordingtoSectionIIIoftheShari’aCriminalOffencesAct1997(No.559)oftheFederalTerritories:


7.Anypersonwhoorallyorinwritingorbyvisiblerepresentationorinanyothermanner—(a)insultsorbringsintocontemptthereligionofIslam;(b)derides,apesorridiculesthepracticesorceremoniesrelatingto

thereligionofIslam;or(c)degradesorbringsintocontemptanylawrelatingtothereligion

of Islam for the timebeing in force in theFederalTerritories,shallbeguiltyofanoffenceandshallonconvictionbeliabletoafinenotexceedingthreethousandringgitortoimprisonmentforatermnotexceedingtwoyearsortoboth.

8.Any person who, by his words or acts, derides, insults, ridiculesorbringsintocontempttheversesofAl-QuranorHadithshallbeguiltyofanoffenceandshallonconvictionbeliabletoafinenotexceedingfivethousandringgitortoimprisonmentforatermnotexceedingthreeyearsortoboth.29

TheShari’acriminalstatutesofotherstatesincludesimilarprovisions,thoughthepunishmentsandthedegreeofenforcementofthestatutesvaries.Thesestat-utesarebroadinscopeandaddressarangeofotherShari’aviolations,whichinsomecasesfallundertherubricof“insultingIslam.”

IncompatibilitywithInternationalLaw

Lawsatboththefederalandstatelevelscontravenehumanrightsnormsandplaceunduelimitationsonfreedomsofopinion,expression,religion,andbelief.TheShari’astatutesinparticularimposestrictregulationsonspeechandbehavior,andviolationscandrawharshpunishments.Moreover, thefederalandstate laws lackclarityastowhatkindofspeechisprohibitedaswellassafeguardstopreventabusiveorselectiveapplication,leadingtodiscriminationagainstcertainreligiousgroups.

Malaysiahasneithersignednorratifiedseveralcorehumanrightstreaties,in-cludingtheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(ICCPR)andtheUNConventionAgainstTorture.30However,inMay2010,MalaysiawaselectedtotheUNHumanRightsCouncil.Aspartofthecampaigningandelectionpro-cess,thegovernmentpledgedto“strengthencapacitiesforimplementationandenforcementforhumanrightsconventionswhichMalaysiaispartyto,alongsidereconsideringofinstrumentswhichithasyettoaccedeto.”31AsamemberoftheHumanRightsCouncil,Malaysia isobligedtorobustlyupholdandprotecttheglobal human rights norms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of HumanRights,32manyofwhichareviolatedinpracticewithinitsbordersasaresultofthe


blasphemyandreligiousinsultlaws.

LackofSafeguardstoPreventAbuseBecauseMalaysia’sblasphemyandreligiousinsultlawsaresovaguelyword-

ed,lackinganycleardefinitionforblasphemyitself,theyarepronetoabuse.Theyhavebeenused toharass, intimidate,andsilencegovernmentcriticsaswellasthosedeemedto“deviate”fromthestate-sanctionedversionofSunniIslam.OneexampleisthecaseofoutspokengovernmentcriticandbloggerRajaPetraKama-ruddin.HeisthefounderandeditoroftheonlinenewspaperMalaysia Today,andalsodirecteda2001campaigninsupportofoppositionleaderAnwarIbrahim,whohadbeen jailedonpolitically taintedchargesofcorruptionandsodomy.33In2007,RajaPetrawasinvestigatedforallegedlyinsultingIslam;atthetimeofhisarrest,hewasalso facingchargesof seditionandcriminaldefamation.Ac-cording toHumanRightsWatch, thesechargesappear tohavebeenpoliticallymotivated.34InSeptember2008,hewasarrestedanddetainedundertheISAfordemeaningIslamandtherebyposingathreattonationalsecurity.Heappealed,andhewasreleasedinNovember2008afteraHighCourtjudgefoundhisdeten-tiontobeunconstitutionally“unfetteredandarbitrary.”35

RajaPetrahadbeenarrestedundertheISAonsimilargroundsin2001,alongwithnineotheractivistsinvolvedinpublicprotestsagainstAnwar’ssodomyandcorruptionconvictions.36As in2008,hewasdetained foroveramonthbeforebeingreleased.37

Thesecasesindicatethatthegovernmentiswillingtomisuseblasphemylawstojustifypoliticallymotivatedarrests,andtoharassandintimidateitsmostvocalcritics.Atthetimeofthiswriting,RajaPetrawaslivinginLondon,havingfledMalaysiatoavoidprosecutionundertheSeditionAct.38

Impact on the enjoyment of human rIght s

FreedomofExpressionTheprosecutionsforblasphemyandotherreligiousinsultshavecreatedan

environment inwhichexercisingone’sright to freeexpressioncancarryheavycosts.Thegovernmenthas initiatedcountless investigations intoblogsandon-linenewspapersforarangeofsuspectedspeechoffenses,includingdefamationofpublicofficialsandblasphemy.39AsseeninthecaseofRajaPetra,suchlawsareusedtosilencegovernmentcriticsandtheologicaldissenters.


In2004,apolicereportwasfiledagainsttheMalaysianBarAssociationforanarticleinitsmonthlynewsletterInfolinethatwasfoundtobeblasphemousandinsultingtoIslam.Thearticlediscussedthepossibilitythatfornon-Muslims,thecalltoprayer(azan)maybeasourceofnoisepollution.40Thegovernmentalsoengagesincensorship,andin2009atotalof57booksdiscussingreligiousissueswerereportedlybanned,includingthenotableMuslim Women and the Challenge of Islamic ExtremismbyNoraniOthman,cofounderofthenongovernmentalor-ganization(NGO)SistersinIslam.41Theorganizationappealed,andinJanuary2010ajudgeoverturnedtheban.42

Alsoinearly2010,policeinitiatedaninvestigationintoSistersinIslamoverastatementinwhichtheNGOcondemnedtheMalaysiangovernmentforallowingthecaningofthreeMuslimwomenaspunishmentfor“illicitsex.”43TheSelangorIslamicReligiousCouncillodgedthecomplaintthattriggeredtheprobe,object-ingtothestatement’sallegationsofhumanrightsviolationsincludingdiscrimina-tionagainstwomenandcruel,inhuman,anddegradingtreatment.44Theongoingcase was filed under Article 298A of the Malaysian Penal Code.45 It should benotedthatthissortofharassmentofcivilsocietygroupsforlegitimatecriticismisnotalwaysinitiatedbyofficialbodies.InMarch2010,theMalaysianAssemblyofMosqueYouthfiledalawsuitagainstSistersinIslamregardingtheuseoftheword“Islam”initsname.Theplaintiffsreportedlyargued:“Theuseoftheword‘Islam’innamesmustberestrictedandprotected.Theso-calledSistersinIslamuses thewordtoattractattention,but it issuesstatements thatcontradictwhatotherMuslimsbelieve.ItcausesconfusionamongMuslimswhomightthinkthatthegrouprepresentsIslam.”46

Inarelatedincidentthatalsotookplaceinearly2010,policereportswerefiled against P. Gunasegaram, managing editor of the Star, an online daily, forarticlescriticizingthecaningofthethreewomen.47Accordingtoanewsreport,thepoliceinvestigationreportread:“Thearticleclearlywantstochallenge[and]angertheMuslimsandinsultIslam.[Theauthor]hasnorighttocommentaboutIslamic jurisprudencebecausehe isnotaMuslim.”48TheStar receiveda“showcause”letterfromtheMalaysiangovernment,givingit14daystoexplainthear-ticlesandjustifywhyitspublishinglicenseshouldnotberevoked.49

TenofMalaysia’sstateshavereportedlybannednon-MuslimsfromutteringcertainwordsrelatedtoIslam,suchasAllah, ulema,andhadith.50InDecember2008,aRomanCatholicnewspaper,theHerald,wasbannedfromusingthewordAllahfortheChristianGodinitsMalay-languagepublication.51Thenewspaperappealedthedecision,andacourtoverturnedtheban inDecember2009.The


governmentthenchallengedthatruling,andthecourtissuedafinalstayinJanu-ary2010.52Asmentionedabove,thedecisiontooverturnthebanwasmetwithangryprotestsbyMalaysianMuslims,despitethefactthattheArabicwordforGod—Allah—isusedbyChristiansallovertheMuslimworld.53Theprotestses-calatedintoviolentattacksonchurches,whichwerecondemnedbyPrimeMin-ister Najib Tun Razak.54 The dispute reportedly stemmed from some Muslims’concernsthat“theuseofthewordbyotherreligionscouldconfusebelieversandtemptthemtoconvertfromIslam.”55

FreedomofReligionTheapplicationofMalaysia’sblasphemyandotherreligiousinsultlawseffec-

tivelyrestrictsreligiousfreedomforallresidents.Non-SunniMuslimsfaceper-secutionfortheir“deviant”beliefs,andaremonitoredandtargetedbyJAKIMaswellasthestate-levelIslamicReligiousCouncils.Meanwhile,SunniMuslimsareforcedtopracticetheirreligionwithinthestrictconfinesimposedbythestateanditsinterpretationofIslam.Individualsfoundtobeinbreachoftheseregulationsarearrestedandprosecuted,andlocationswheresuspectedShari’aviolationstakeplace,suchasbarsandnightclubs,areraidedbyreligiousenforcementofficersaswellasstateandfederalpolice.56

Onecaseinvolvinga“deviant”formofIslamcenteredonAbdulKaharAh-mad,whoclaimedtobeanIslamicprophet;theassertionamountedtoblasphemyunderstateShari’astatutes.57HewasarrestedinSeptember2009andchargedwithfivecountsof“deviationistteachings,”includingblasphemyandspreadingfalsebelief.58InOctober,hewasfoundguiltybytheSelangorShari’acourt.AccordingtothenationalnewsserviceBernama,the judgenotedthattheaccusedwas“aMuslimfrombirth,”andadmonishedhimforhaving“pokedfunatIslam’steach-ingsandproclaimedhimselfasaMalayprophet”ratherthantendingtohisre-sponsibilitytoensurehisfamily’sproperobservanceofIslam.59Hispunishmentconsistedofafineof16,500ringgit($5,000),10years’imprisonment,andsixcanestrokes.60

Statereligiousauthoritiesgenerallyfollowfederalguidelinesconcerningwhatconstitutesdeviantbehaviororbelief,andJAKIM’slistofdeviantsectsincludes56differentgroups.61Forexample,themartialartsorganizationNasrulHaqwasformed in 1977, and by 1978 it had a membership of approximately 300,000.UMNO had apparently viewed the group as a possible counterweight to PAS,whichwasgainingpopularityamongMalayMuslims,62butwhenattemptstoex-ploititforthisendfailed,thegovernmentreactedbybanningitonthegrounds


thatitinvokedIslamandAllah“inappropriately,”usedSufi-stylechantinginitsself-defensesessions,andheldsomesessionsinmosques.63Anothergroup,Al-Arqam,wasestablishedin1968byAshaariMuhammad.Itwasdevotedtopro-motinganIslamicwayoflifeandby1994hadastrongfollowingandconsiderableassets.64Fearingthatthegrouphadpoliticalambitions,thegovernmentbanneditin1994andarrestedAshaariundertheISAfor“deviatingfromtheteachingsofIslam.”Hemadeapublicapologyandwasjailedfor10years.65

FreedomfromDiscriminationArticle11oftheconstitutionguaranteesfreedomofreligion,whichincludes

thefreedomtochangeone’sreligion,andArticles8and12ensureequalityforallMalaysiansandprohibitdiscriminationbasedonreligionorbelief.66Neverthe-less,theoperationofthecivillegalsysteminpracticeandjurisdictionofShari’acourtsoveranyissuerelatedtoIslammeanthatMuslimsandnon-Muslimsaretreatedquitedifferently.Whenitcomestoconversion,itseemsthatfreedomofreligionexistsonlyfornon-MuslimsinMalaysia.CivilcourtshavesetprecedentsforreferringcasesofconversionfromIslamtoShari’acourts,andthegovernmentmaintains that renouncement of Islam cannot be recognized without an orderfromaShari’acourt,despitethefactthatsuchcourtshavenomechanismsforac-ceptingtheseconversions.67Infact,Shari’acourtsviewdeliberatedeparturefromIslamasapostasy,aseriousandpunishableoffense.68

AlthoughArticles298and298AoftheMalaysianPenalCodeostensiblypro-tectallrecognizedreligionsfromblasphemyandinsult,inpracticenon-Muslimreligionsdonotappeartoreceivethesamelevelof“protection”asSunniIslam.ThisdisparitywashighlightedinarecentincidentinwhichtwoMuslimjournal-istspretendedtobeRomanCatholicswhileconductingresearchforastory.Themenattendedachurchserviceandtookcommunion.69WhenitcametolightthatthemenwereMuslims,theCatholiccommunitywasoutraged.ArchbishopMur-phyPakiamcriticizedthegovernmentforfailingtochargethemenwithinsultingCatholicism.Malaysia’sattorneygeneralrespondedbysayingthatthemenhadnotbeenprosecutedbecausetheyhadonlycommitted“anactofsheerignorance,”andthattherehadbeennomaliciousintent.70Thelackofmaliciousintenthasbeennodefenseagainstprosecutioninothercases.

Theimplementationofblasphemy-relatedShari’aprovisions insomestateshas ledto instancesofdiscriminationagainstwomen.Inone incident in2000,a group of 25 people, including 15 women, were arrested by the Islamic Reli-gious Council in Selangor for being “in premises where alcohol was served.”71


Thewomenwerechargedwiththecrimeof“insultingIslam,”achargethatthe10menreportedlydidnotface.72ThendeputyprimeministerAbdullahAhmadBadawicriticizedthearrests,sayingit“isnotrighttoarrestMuslimsbasedonthefactthattheywereinrestaurantsthatservednon-halalfoodanddrinks.”73Allofthechargeswereeventuallydropped,andnoprosecutionswereinitiated,74buttheharshertreatmentmetedouttothewomendrewaccusationsofgenderbiasonthepartofthereligiousauthorities.75

RighttoDueProcess

ThecaseofRajaPetra,discussedabove,illustrateshowindividualsaccusedofblasphemyorreligiousinsultcanbedetainedarbitrarily,withoutchargeortrial,underlawsliketheISA.Thenightclubandbarraidsoverseenbystate-level religiousenforcementofficersandIslamicReligiousCouncilshavealsoledtoarbitraryarrestanddetention,ashaveenforcementactionsagainst“de-viant”Muslimsects. In2006, theSelangorIslamicReligiousCouncilreport-edlydetained107people,includingchildren,whoweresuspectedofbelongingtothebannedreligiousgroupAl-Arqam.Allbutfourallegedleaderswerelaterreleased.76

ThreatstotherighttoafairtrialanddueprocessinthecontextofblasphemyandreligiousinsultlawsinMalaysiahavebeenmostnotableinconversioncas-esandinprosecutionsofpeopleaccusedof“deviancy.”Asnotedabove,formerMuslimsseekingtohavetheirconversionsrecognizedareshuntedtotheShari’acourts,whichofferthemnolegalrecourse.Membersofbannedsects,meanwhile,canencounterconsiderableobstaclesinobtainingcounsel.

InAugust2005,agroupof45membersofthereligioussectknownastheSkyKingdomwerearrestedfollowingaviolentattackontheircompoundtheprevi-ousmonth.Theywerereportedlychargedwith“violatingIslamicprecepts”underthe Terengganu Shari’a Criminal Offences Act of 2001.77 According to HumanRightsWatchandtheMalaysianBarAssociation,theyfacedseriousdifficultiesinsecuringlegalrepresentationpriortothestartoftheirtrial;theMalaysianBarAssociationcommissionedalawyerfromanotherstatetospeakforthegrouponthedayofthetrial,butonlytoletthejudgeknowthattheaccusedhadnotsecuredrepresentation.Shari’a-accreditedlawyersinTerengganuwerereportedlyunwill-ingtotakethecase,fearingreprisalsfromreligiousextremists.78Afterthreepost-ponementsduetothelackoflegalrepresentation,lawyerWanHaidiWanJusohofthefirmUbaidullahAzizandCompanycameforwardtoactascounselforalloftheaccused.Heaskedthejudgetobarnewspapersfromusinghisnameorthe


nameofhisfirmwhenreportingonthecasetopreventitfrombeingblacklisted,buttherequestwasdenied.79

The Terengganu lawyers’ concerns about reprisals were not without merit.Lawyershavebeensubjectedtoharassmentandintimidationfordefendingsuchclients.Forexample,MalikImtiazSarwar,whohasrepresentedindividualschargedwithblasphemyandotherreligiousoffensesinthecivilcourtsystem,hasreportedreceivingdeaththreatsasaresultofhisinvolvementinthesecases.AccordingtotheInternationalFederationofHumanRights,Malikreceivedathreatviae-mailconsistingofaphotographofhimselfwiththecaption“WantedDead.”Thethreatwasalsocirculatedtootheraddressesandviamobile-phonetextmessage.80

c onclusIon

The enforcement of Malaysia’s blasphemy and religious insult laws has ledtoarangeofhumanrightsviolations.IndividualschargedwithsuchoffensesinboththecivilandShari’acourtshaveexperienceddeprivationsoftheirrighttofreedomofreligionandfreedomofexpression,aswellas theirrighttobefreefromdiscriminationandarbitrarydetention.Inaddition,thelawsappeartobeselectivelyapplied,leadingtofurtherdiscriminationbasedonreligionandgen-der.Morebroadly,theuseofblasphemylawstoimposenarrowinterpretationsofreligiousdoctrine,impedetheworkofhumanrightsorganizations,andpreventtheempowermentofpotentialpoliticalchallengershampersthedemocraticandsocialdevelopmentofMalaysiaasawhole.


dom in Indonesia,2009,therewere200reportedincidentsofreligiouslymotivatedviolencethatyearinthe12provincestheorganizationmonitors.Ofthese,101casesfeatured“ac-tive”involvementbystateofficials,andin38casesofficialswereguiltyofstandingbyandtakingnoaction.See“‘GovernmentComplicity’LetsReligiousConflictGoOn,”Jakarta Post;SetaraInstituteforDemocracyandPeace,Condition of Religious Faith and Freedom in Indonesia, 2009.

118USCIRF,“Indonesia,”inAnnual Report 2010,259.119Siahaan,Osman,andHaryanto,“CaucusTellsSBYtoGetToughonIslamicHardliners.”120“MasohiinRecovery,2NamedSuspects,”Jakarta Post,December11,2008,

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/12/11/masohi-recovery-two-named-suspects.html;“FreedomofReligioninIndonesia,”Caveat.

121Nancy-AmeliaCollins,“IndonesiaSendsTroopstoQuellSectarianViolenceinMalukuIslands,”VoiceofAmerica,December10,2008,http://www.51voa.com/VOA_Standard_English/VOA_Standard_English_26924.html.

122“Church,HomesBurnedinMasohiBlasphemyRiot,”Jakarta Post,December10,2008,http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/12/10/church-homes-burned-masohi-blasphemy-riot.html.

123Collins,“IndonesiaSendsTroopstoQuellSectarianViolenceinMalukuIslands.”124M.AzisTunny,“ForumBlastsPoliceforLateResponseinMasohi,”Jakarta Post,December

17,2008,http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/12/17/forum-blasts-police-late-response-masohi.html.

MAL AYSIA

1 U.S.DepartmentofState,“BackgroundNote:Malaysia,”July14,2010,http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2777.htm.

2 Ibid. 3 DonaldL.Horowitz,“TheQur’anandtheCommonLaw:IslamicLawReformandtheTheory

ofLegalChange,”American Journal of Comparative Law42(Spring1994). 4 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”inInternational Religious

Freedom Report 2009(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofState,2009),http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2009/127277.htm.

5 AbdullahSaeedandHassanSaeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam(Aldershot,UK:Ashgate,2004),125.

6 NurjaanahAbdullah,“LegislatingFaithinMalaysia,”Singapore Journal of Legal Studies(De-cember2007):264.

7 Horowitz,“TheQur’anandtheCommonLaw.” 8 U.S.DepartmentofState,“BackgroundNote:Malaysia.” 9 ConstitutionofMalaysia,Article3andArticle160;seeAppendixA,availableathttp://con-

finder.richmond.edu/admin/docs/malaysia.pdf.ThedraftersoftheconstitutionspecifiedthatArticle3wasnotintendedtodeclareMalaysiaanIslamicstate,accordingtotheReidCommission,thebodyestablishedtofacilitatethedraftingprocess.However,UMNOpoliticianshaveopportunisticallyinvokedtheideaofMalaysiaasanIslamicstateoverthepastdecadetorallysupportamongMuslimMalayvoters,exacerbatingethnicandreligioustensionsandbolsteringidentity-basedpoliticsforallconstituencies.SeeTommyThomas,

a fReedom house special RepoRT REFERENCES 115

“IsMalaysiaanIslamicState?”MalaysianBarAssociation,November17,2005,http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/constitutional_law/is_malaysia_an_islamic_state_.html;MahnazMohamed,“IsMalaysiaanIslamicState?”Guardian,September21,2006,http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/sep/21/post406.

10 ConstitutionofMalaysia,Article11. 11 ReligiousscholarsformedPASin1951withthedeclaredgoalofestablishinganIslamicstate,

thoughithassoftenedthispositioninrecentyears.SeeSaeed,Freedom of Religion, Apos-tasy and Islam,132;U.S.DepartmentofState,“BackgroundNote:Malaysia”;Horowitz,“TheQur’anandtheCommonLaw.”

12 Saeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,163. 13 Saeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,162,165;Horowitz,“TheQur’anandthe

CommonLaw.” 14 SistersinIslam,“Reviewof‘Hudud’Proposals,”May23,2002,http://www.sistersinislam.org.

my/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=408&Itemid=298. 15 Thesestatutesvaryconsiderably,andpunishoffensesincluding“declaringoneselftobe

non-Muslim,insultingthereligionofIslam,deridingtheQuranortheSunnah…,defy-ingreligiousauthorities,worshippingwrongfully,teachingfalsedoctrine,propagatingnon-IslamicreligiousdoctrineamongMuslims,falselyclaimingtobeaprophetorotherreligiousauthority,andpropagatinganyopinioncontrarytoafatwapresentlyinforce.”SeePerrySmith,“SpeakNoEvil:Apostasy,BlasphemyandHeresyinMalaysianSyariahLaw,”UC Davis Journal of International Law and Policy 10.2(Spring2004).

16 JaclynLing-ChienNeo,“‘Anti-God,Anti-Islam,Anti-Quran’:ExpandingtheRangeofPar-ticipantsandParametersoverWomen’sRightsandIslaminMalaysia,”UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal21(Fall2003):49.JAKIMhasalsoallegedlycarriedoutforcedconversionsofindigenousgroups,notablytheOrangAsli.AccordingtothenewssiteMalaysiakini,OrangAslihaveexperiencedforcedconversionsbygovernmentalandquasi-governmentalbodies,includingthestateIslamicandMalayCustomCouncil(MAIK),JAKIM,MuslimWelfareOrganizationMalaysia,andtheMuslimYouthMovementofMalaysia(ABIM).SeeClaudiaTheophilus,“OrangAsliCryFoulOver‘Forced’Conversion,”Malaysiakini,Febru-ary3,2005,http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/33358.

17 ForsomefactionsofUMNO,these“streamlining”measuresareaimedattheestablishmentofafederalShari’acourtsystemtostandardizethejurisprudenceofthestate-levelShari’acourts.However,thiswouldnecessitateuniformityintheinterpretationofSunniIslamandShari’a.SeeHorowitz,“TheQur’anandtheCommonLaw”;Saeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,160.FormoreontheroleofJAKIM,seeDepartmentofIslamicDevel-opment,“AboutJAKIM,”http://www.islam.gov.my/english/jakim.html.

18 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”inInternational Religious Free-dom Report 2009.

19 Saeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,165. 20 V.VasuvedanandSugantiSuparmaniam,“Najib:1MalaysiaIdeaforEveryone,”New Straits

Times(Malaysia),June16,2009. 21 WomenLivingUnderMuslimLaws,“Update:Malaysia:CaningSentenceofKartikaUpheld,”

newsrelease,September28,2009,http://www.wluml.org/node/5433. 22 Ibid.


23 SitiZubaidahIsmail,“TheImplementationofShariahOffencesinMalaysia:Issues,Chal-lengesandtheWayForward”(paperpresentedat5thAsianLawInstituteConference,Singapore,May23,2008),3,http://eprints.um.edu.my/849/1/siti_zubaidah_university_of_malaya.pdf.

24 Forexample,theShariahCriminalCode(II)ofKelantanmandatesuptofiveyears’imprison-mentforapostasy,afterrepentance,underSection23(4).SeeSaeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,135.

25 ShariahCriminalCode(II)Kelantan,1993,Section23(4),ascitedinSaeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,35;seealsoBureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”in2008 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofState,2009),http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eap/119046.htm.

26 HumanRightsWatch,Malaysia’s Internal Security Act and Suppression of Political Dissent (NewYork:HumanRightsWatch,2002),http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2002/05/13/malaysias-internal-security-act-and-suppression-political-dissent;HumanRightsWatch,Convicted Before Trial: Indefinite Detention Under Malaysia’s Emergency Ordinance(NewYork:HumanRightsWatch,2006),http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2006/08/23/convicted-trial-0.

27 PenalCodeofMalaysia,Act574,incorporatingallamendmentsuptoJanuary1,2006,avail-ableathttp://www.agc.gov.my/agc/Akta/Vol.%2012/Act%20574.pdf.

28 Ibid. 29 ShariahCriminalOffences(FederalTerritories),Act559,1997,incorporatingallamendments

throughJanuary1,2006,availableathttp://www.mylawyer.com.my/law/Syariah_Crimi-nal_Offences_Federal_Territories_Act.php.

30 MalaysiaisastatepartytotheConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationAgainstWomen(CEDAW)andtheConventionontheRightsoftheChild(CRC).

31 AscitedinHumanRightsWatch,“LettertoPrimeMinisterNajibonMalaysia’sCandidacyfortheUNHumanRightsCouncil,”newsrelease,April27,2010,http://www.hrw.org/node/90069.

32 UNGeneralAssemblyResolution60/251. 33 HumanRightsWatch,“Malaysia,”in2009 World Report(NewYork:HumanRightsWatch,

January2009),http://www.hrw.org/en/world-report/2009/malaysia;HumanRightsWatch,In the Name of Security: Counterterrorism and Human Rights Abuses Under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act(NewYork:HumanRightsWatch,May2004),http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2004/05/24/name-security.

34 HumanRightsWatch,“Malaysia:NewPrimeMinisterShouldRepealInternalSecurityAct,”newsrelease,April6,2009,http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/04/06/malaysia-new-prime-minister-should-repeal-internal-security-act.

35 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”in2008 Country Reports on Hu-man Rights Practices.

36 HumanRightsWatch,In the Name of Security. 37 AccordingtoHumanRightsWatch,twootherswerereleasedthroughsuccessfulhabeascor-

puspetitions,andtheremainingsixweregiventwo-yearsentences,winningreleaseattheendoftheirtermsinJune2003.SeeHumanRightsWatch,In the Name of Security.

38 Bernama,“UKIssuesStatementonitsExtraditionPolicy,”Malaysia Today,July7,2010,http://www.malaysia-today.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=32956:uk-issues-statement-on-its-extradition-policy&catid=19:newscommentaries&Itemid=100131.


39 SeeDanielCalingaert,“Authoritarianismvs.theInternet,”Policy Review(April/May2010),http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/5269.

40 Bernama,“ShahAlamUMNOClaimsBarCouncilArticleInsultsIslam,”MalaysianBar,August4,2004,http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/bar_news/berita_badan_peguam/shah_alam_umno_claims_bar_council_article_insults_islam.html.

41 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”inInternational Religious Free-dom Report 2009.

42 LizGooch,“MalaysianCourtEndsBanonBook,”International Herald Tribune,January25,2010,http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/world/asia/26malaysia.html.

43 SistersinIslam,“Malaysia:SistersinIslamCondemnsCaningof3MuslimWomenunderShariahLaw,”newsrelease,February17,2010,http://www.wluml.org/node/5989.

44 Ibid. 45 SeeASEANProgressiveMuslimMovement,“SilencingFreedomofExpressioninMalaysia,”

newsrelease,March30,2010,availableathttp://www.stop-stoning.org/files/APMM-001.pdf.

46 AscitedinSeanYoong,“MalaysiaWomen’sGroupSuedover‘Islam’inName,”AssociatedPress,March22,2010,availableathttp://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/03/22/malaysia-women039s-group-sued-over-039islam039-name.html;seealso“MalaysianWomen’sGroupSuedOverName,”AgenceFrance-Presse,March23,2010.

47 GohSengChingandNigelAw,“MuslimGroupsSeeRedOverNewspaperArticle,”Malaysia-kini,February23,2010,http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/124980.

48 Ibid. 49 BaradanKuppaswamy,“MediaMalaysia:CensorshipTakesaReligiousTurn,CriticsSay,”

InterPressService,March23,2010;CenterforIndependentJournalism,“RetractShowCausetotheStar,”newsrelease,February26,2010,availableathttp://www.malaysianmir-ror.com/nationaldetail/6-national/31661.

50 InKelantanstate,24wordsand10phrasesarebannedfornon-MuslimsbytheEnactmentonControlandRestrictionofthePropagationofNon-IslamicReligions.SeeSaeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,127.

51 ThomasBell,“CatholicNewspaperFacesBanforWriting‘Allah,’”Telegraph,December17,2008,http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/3811703/Catholic-news-paper-faces-ban-for-writing-Allah.html.

52 BaradanKuppuswamy,“CanChristiansSay‘Allah’?InMalaysia,MuslimsSayNo,”Time,Janu-ary8,2010,http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1952497,00.html.

53 SethMydans,“ChurchesAttackedinMalaysian‘Allah’Dispute,”New York Times,January8,2010,http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/world/asia/09malaysia.html.

54 “Malaysia:ChurchesFirebombedAmidAllahDispute,”CNN,January9,2010,http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/01/08/malaysia.churches.attacked/index.html.

55 Mydans,“ChurchesAttackedinMalaysian‘Allah’Dispute.” 56 Individualsarrestedduringtheseraidshavereportedlybeensubjectedtoviolenceandmis-

treatmentatthehandsoflawenforcementpersonnel,anddetainedinappallingconditions.SeeAhirudinAttan,“ItMattersHowtheJobIsDone,”New Straits Times(Malaysia),Janu-ary30,2005.

57 “Self-ProclaimedMalayProphetSentencedto10YearsinJail,”Hindustan Times,October22,2009.


58 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”in2009 Country Reports on Hu-man Rights Practices(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofState,March2010),http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/eap/135998.htm.

59 “‘MalayProphet’Jailed10Years,SentencedtoSixStrokesofRotanandFinedRM16,500,”Ber-nama,October21,2009.Itshouldbenotedthatinthisarticle,thenewsagencyincludedthecompleteaddressofthedefendant,infringingonhisfamily’srighttoprivacyandsecurity.SeeJenniferGomez,“10Years’Jail,Rotanfor‘MalayProphet,’”New Straits Times(Malaysia),October22,2009.

60 Gomez,“10Years’Jail,Rotanfor‘MalayProphet.’” 61 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”inInternational Religious Free-

dom Report 2009. 62 Saeed,Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam,130. 63 Ibid. 64 Ibid. 65 “Al-Arqam’sAbuyaDies,”MalaysianInsider,May13,2010,http://www.themalaysianinsider.

com/malaysia/article/al-arqams-abuya-dies/. 66 ConstitutionofMalaysia,availableathttp://confinder.richmond.edu/admin/docs/malaysia.

pdf. 67 NurjaanahAbdullah,“LegislatingFaithinMalaysia.” 68 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”inInternational Religious Free-

dom Report 2009. 69 SeanYoong,“MalaysiaMuslimMagazineApologizesforUpsettingChristiansoverArticleon

ChurchMasquerade,”AssociatedPress,March6,2010,availableathttp://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=10026706.

70 Ibid. 71 SistersinIslam,“YouBelongtoMe,”Baraza no.3,http://www.sistersinislam.org.my/baraza/

BARAZA%203-2%20FINAL.pdf. 72 “TwoEarlierControversialEnforcementActionsToday,”Malay Mail(KualaLumpur),June5,

2003. 73 MichaelNg,“OfficersShouldUnderstandtheLawBeforeEmbarkingonRaids,”New Straits

Times(Malaysia),July3,2000. 74 “TwoEarlierControversialEnforcementActionsToday,”Malay Mail;AhirudinAttan,“It

MattersHowtheJobIsDone.” 75 SuryaniDalip,“AbuHassantoClarifyToday,”New Straits Times(Malaysia),June28,2000. 76 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Malaysia,”in2006 Country Reports on Hu-

man Rights Practices(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofState,March2007),http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78780.htm.

77 HumanRightsWatch,“Malaysia,”in2006 World Report(NewYork:HumanRightsWatch,January2006),http://www.hrw.org/wr2k6/.

78 MalaysianBarAssociation,“TheAyahPinSaga,”newsrelease,August9,2005,http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/press_statements/the_ayah_pin_saga.html;HumanRightsWatch,“Malaysia:RespectRightsofReligiousCommunity,”newsrelease,August4,2005,http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2005/08/03/malaysia-respect-rights-religious-community.

79 RosliZakaria,“LawyertoRepresentAll45SkyKingdomSectFollowers,”New Straits Times(Malaysia),September1,2005.


80 InternationalFederationforHumanRights,SteadfastinProtest:2006 Annual Report of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders(Paris:InternationalFederationforHumanRights,March2007),http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/FIDH-EN-ASIA.pdf.

PAKISTAN

1 YouTubeandFacebookwereblockedforabouttwoweeksinMay2010duetoallegedlyblas-phemouscontentdirectedattheprophetMuhammad.See“PakistanBlocksYouTubeover‘Blasphemous’Material,”Dawn,May20,2010,http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/03-pakistan-blocks-youtube-over-blasphe-mous-material-ss-01.

2 SteveCzajkowski,“PakistantoReviseBlasphemyLaws:Report,”Jurist(UniversityofPitts-burghSchoolofLaw),February7,2010,http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2010/02/pakistan-to-revise-blasphemy-laws.php.

3 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Pakistan,”inInternational Religious Free-dom Report 2006(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofState,September2006),http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71443.htm.

4 MansoorRaza,“TheUnholyWar,”Dawn,January19,2010,http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/02-the-unholy-law-02.

5 U.S.DepartmentofState,“BackgroundNote:Pakistan,”June9,2010,http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3453.htm.

6 BureauofDemocracy,HumanRights,andLabor,“Pakistan,”inInternational Religious Free-dom Report 2009 (Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofState,October2009),http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2009/127370.htm.

7 DavidF.Forte,“ApostasyandBlasphemyinPakistan,”Connecticut Journal of International Law10(Fall1994):31–32.

8 PakistanConstitution,ANNEX,Article2(A):TheObjectivesResolution,availableathttp://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/annex_objres.html.Itshouldbenotedthatatthetimeofitsadoptionin1949,theresolutionstatedthat“adequateprovisionshallbemadefortheminoritiestofreelyprofessandpracticetheirreligionsanddeveloptheircultures.”WhentheresolutionwasmadeasubstantivepartofthePakistaniconstitutionbyPresiden-tialOrderNo.14of1985,theword“freely”wasdropped.

9 Forte,“ApostasyandBlasphemyinPakistan.” 10 FirstAmend.,ActIof1964(amendingPak.Const.of1962),citedinForte,“Apostasyand

BlasphemyinPakistan.” 11 PakistanConstitutionof1962,PartX,Chapter1,Article204,availableathttp://www.cii.gov.

pk/docs/con1962.pdf. 12 WebsiteoftheCouncilofIslamicIdeology,availableathttp://www.cii.gov.pk/.Seealso

PakistanConstitutionof1973,Articles227–230,availableathttp://www.cii.gov.pk/docs/constitution.pdf.

policing belief - freedom house

Documents