First off, Kok was voicing concerns about a religious Jakim policy that would affect non-Muslim businesses.

Secondly, she never said that there was no need for Jakim regulations. Kok is a seasoned politician in a ketuanan (Malay supremacy) paradigm; hence, it is odious to imply that she meant that regulations for Muslims, which are the purview of Jakim, were unnecessary.

Lastly, she was right about placing an unnecessary burden on Malay businesses, which is why the Umno ulama wing made the suggestion it did.

Indeed, in response to the manufactured backlash, Kok acknowledged that this country's halal certification was one of the best in the world and that she supported it.

However, she was also a representative of all ethnic communities in this country and thus had to voice concerns that would affect everyone.

But the most cogent point she made to rebut the prime minister, who claimed she should have made her concerns known through the proper channels, was to rightly point out that the de facto religious minister had mentioned the Jakim proposal in “an open forum without prior engagement”.

So the question then becomes, why wasn’t there prior engagement with Harapan partners, and why are ministers suddenly making declarations without discussing them with coalition partners?

More importantly, in a public forum, Kok has every right to respond to another minister without fear of inviting sanctions from the state security apparatus.

Not the first time

And all of this is not new.

In 2016, the Rubber Industry Smallholders Development Authority (Risda) and the Malaysia Institute of International Islamic Cooperation (Ikiam) proposed a “halal certification” that differentiated between halal products produced by Muslims and non-Muslims.

Why, you ask? Well, according to Risda at the time - "The need for another halal logo is to distinguish products that were produced by Muslims against that of non-Muslims besides helping Risda smallholding entrepreneurs and Muslim entrepreneurs make forays into the halal markets locally and abroad."

Of course, Jakim had to issue a reminder.

"If Ikiam and Risda proceed with using a new halal logo for Muslim-made products (without Jakim's approval), it is an offence under the Trade Descriptions Act 2011 (Halal certification and identification) Order," it said.

Former law minister Zaid Ibrahim said: “The deep understanding I can think of is that Jakim will make a lot of money. Already, it’s a billion ringgit business, and if the purpose is to make easy money, say so.”

Quashing dissent

Non-Muslims are always warned not to interfere with the religion of the state. We are told that the religion of the state only affects Muslims.

We are told that secularism, progressive democratic values and the right to defend them should not be at the expense of the religion of the state.

Indeed the Madani regime has created a political climate which is detrimental to dissent because DAP claimed to be the ones to hold the line against the creeping Islamisation of this country. Now we are told to be fearful of the “Green Wave”.

What are we really talking about here? Well, it means that non-Muslims standing up for their rights would be going against the 3R. It means that if you object to a policy based on religious grounds, you are going against the 3Rs.

The fact that Kok is under investigation is further evidence that any kind of dissent with regard to a religious policy which affects non-Muslims would involve state security intervention.

This, of course, is bad but what is worse is that all the Madani regime is doing is laying the foundation for when a theocratic state takes over.

Non-Muslim dissent against religious extremism or interference has been weaponised. This is one of the first / principles of a theocratic state.

All this is merely the logical conclusion to the don't spook the Malays mantra.