The forced removal of a Christian symbol from a sect building sparks heated public debate. The concerns of the bishops and the attempts to Islamise the constitution.
Constitutional liberties, religious minorities, abuse of Christians: the right to erect a cross on a building used by a Christian sect has reignited the public debate in Malaysia about religious freedom and rights for non-Muslims.
Religious and civil leaders, intellectual political authorities, mass-media and commentators are engaged in a heated debate that seems to touch upon the cardinal points of the nation and the foundations of social cohabitation, laid out in 1957 – after independence from the British crown – in the Constitution of Malaysia, a federal state in south-east Asia, with 30 million inhabitants; a population with an Islamic majority (65%) but characterised by a diverse ethnic and religious pluralism.
The episode that sparked the debate occurred on Sunday 19 April in the district of Taman Medan, in the capital Kuala Lumpur. A group of around 50 demonstrators began a violent protest that forced the believers of a small protestant church to remove the cross placed on the front of the building that they use as a meeting place for the sect. According to the demonstrators, the cross represented “a challenge to Islam” and could “influence the beliefs of young people”.
The case provoked indignation among non-Muslims and moderate Muslims, many of whom have expressed their fear of increasing signs of religious intolerance in the country.
The condemnation of Catholic Bishop Paul Tan of the diocese of Malacca-Johor was clear-cut. “This incident marks a new and more insolent intimidation of Christians in this country”, he underlined, noting how in recent years religious violence in Malaysia has had an evident political connotation and been instrumentalised. “The bullying of Christians has become a sport for failed politicians, anxious to boost their waning popularity”, he said.
The point is that, after several episodes, “incidents like these no longer represent an exception but seem to have become the norm”, he remarked with concern. He warned that: “If this case is met with general indifference, the anti-Christian violence will soon escalate”.
The bishop also remembered the words of Pope Francis, when in the wake of the massacre in Paris, he criticised use of “freedom of speech to justify insults towards symbols considered sacred by Muslims. But at the same time, he denounced the persecution of Christians”. The bishop concluded his comments remembering that “the cross is the universal symbol of the Christian faith, just as the crescent moon and star is the symbol of Islam.”
After pressure from political leaders, religious leaders and commentators, the Malaysian government has ordered an official inquest. The case reached the desk of the Prime Minister Najib Razak: the leader, informed of the illegal act, ordered that the demonstrators be found and charged with sedition.
Yet some Christian leaders are urging the authorities not to punish the demonstrators. According to Pastor Datuk Jerry Dusing, head of the Evangelical Church of Borneo, “it would be counterproductive to penalise ignorance with legal action against the demonstrators. Humiliation only gives rise to hate”. Whereas, he said, “if the demonstrators understood the true meaning of the cross, they would perceive it as a symbol of the love and mercy of God. The cross is not a challenge to anybody”. “I urge the promotion of greater understanding between Malaysians. We must look to the future, constructing a dialogue and social and religious harmony”, he concluded.
But, aside from the obviously illegal violence, other signs are worrying Malaysian Christians, a consistent minority that represents around 10% of the population: attempts to Islamise state legislation based on a Constitution drawn up at the end of British rule, with a laic character.
Last March, the legislative assembly of the state of Kelantan, a member of the Federation, unanimously approved changes to the law of actuation of the hudud, or punishments deriving from Sharia law. In May, the assembly will propose the changes to the Federal Parliament to try and extend the punishments to the entire nation. However, the inclusion of the hudud in the national penal system (today they are not applicable even in Kelatan), would require a change of the Constitution. This is the objective of the radical groups.
If these changes were approved, crimes such as theft, robbery, alcohol consumption, extra-marital sex, or apostasy could be punished by flogging or the amputation of a limb.
