Islam does not allow for democracy because of its commitment to Allah Watch on You Tube Oxford Debate

Malaysiakini : In Malaysia, of course, the sensitivities of non-Muslims when it comes to free speech are not taken into account.

When it comes to Muslim hate speech, anything goes in Malaysia where even someone like Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali got away with threatening to burn Bibles in 2014 because in the words of the attorney-general, “This is not a sentiment or intention to cause religious disharmony, but this is defending the sanctity of Islam that is clearly defined in laws.”

Indeed, the Attorney-General’s Chambers, when touching on the bible burning issue said, as reported by The Edge - “As decided by the court, before a statement is said to have seditious tendencies the statement must be viewed in the context it was made... When studied in its entire context, Datuk Ibrahim’s statement is not categorised as having seditious tendencies.

“It was clear Datuk Ibrahim Ali had no intention to create religious tensions but was only defending the purity of Islam.”

Hoodwinking rakyat

It is amazing the lengths that Madani and its enablers would go to gaslight the rakyat into believing that this is for our own good. DAP MP Syerleena Abdul Rashid in carrying water for Madani attempts to use the “think of the children” gambit.

She writes: “This is our moment to act. By supporting these changes, we stand against the darkness of exploitation and for the light of safety, justice, and hope.

“In Malaysia, there will be zero tolerance for those who prey on our children and the protection of our children remains non-negotiable.”

Really? Adults who prey on children are mainstream in Malaysia. What do you think child marriage is? Why do you think that an organisation like Sister in Islam is hell-bent on leather urging authorities to end this practice?

Here is the latest dispatch from Sisters in Islam regarding this issue, as reported by the Malay Mail Online: “In Malaysia, there are several provisions within the Islamic laws which inadvertently may necessitate the child bride or her parent to choose marriage rather than other alternatives, often under the guise of ‘social protection’.

”This practice not only endangers young girls but also undermines Malaysia’s commitment to safeguarding children’s welfare.”

So, get off your high horse and your bellicose rant about having “zero mercy” and “non-negotiable” and attempt to correct a serious problem here in Malaysia without hoodwinking the rakyat with these appeals to emotions and gaslighting, for amendments that would irremovably damage freedom of speech here in Malaysia.

If you read all these amendments, which seem to have come from the “how to be a fascist and force people to like you” playbook, the Madani government is gaslighting people into thinking that these proposed laws are well defined but, as nearly everyone has pointed out, they are open to interpretation and gives the state obscene power to interpret it as it sees fit.

Of course, some people are still under the illusion that these laws would be used to contain the likes of Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh but the reality is that not only would they be used to go after whomever the state thinks aggrieve it but also be used to reinforce certain narratives at the expense of the moderate centre.

This is exactly what an operative like Akmal does.

‘Super liberals’

I’ll give you an example. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim talks of the “super liberals”. In this country, the Islamists, Malay far-right and even mainstream Malay political operatives demonise these groups which they consider anathema to their race and religion.

Is this a form of hurting the sensitivities of a specific group or is it a way how the state marginalise certain groups? Which narrative does the revised CMA favour?

Let us have another go at this. Recently, PAS MP Siti Mastura Muhammad said she would study the judgment made against her to pay Lim Kit Siang, DAP chairperson Lim Guan Eng, and Seputeh MP Teresa Kok for defaming them.

How exactly did she defame them? Well, she linked them to the defunct Communist Party of Malaya’s big cheese. Now we know what the state thinks of communists, right?

The state even took action against a coffee shop for allegedly using utensils featuring images of communist leaders, I can’t believe I typed these words but there you go.

So, would this PAS MP be sanctioned by the state using the CMA? If you believe that, then you would believe anything.

In fact, seeing how the state views communists, by claiming that members of the ruling coalition were part of some sort of communist identity, should have warranted intervention by the state security apparatus. But nada, this PAS MP got away with saying what she said.

Why? It is because although they got some form of justice from the courts, what she said was acceptable narratives by the mainstream Malay political establishment and have been used by Malay uber alles political operatives from the establishment and opposition to demonise specific communities.

And this is really what the CMA amendments are about. It is about the state wanting no dissent from the narratives that Madani is attempting to shape.

Worse, Madani is building the foundation for a theocratic state to inherit and build upon. The state wants you to believe that this is done for political stability.