Majority Must Not Tyrannise Minority--well said Jabu

Majority must not tyrannise minority is what democracy in its pristine form is all about. Democracy is about the protection of the minority against oppression by the majority in the name of 'majority decision will rule'.

Well said Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Alfred Jabu [for simplicity hereinafter I shall just call him as "Jabu" only, without intention of showing any disrespect]. Since you agree and even portray yourself as proponent of that principle, naturally we expect you to practise it too.

Unfortunately it's an irony. For so many years members of the public continuously fail to notice any trace of such practice. Those in the corridor of power in which Jabu is a member thereof have continuously acquire and siphon illegitimately the wealth rightly belonged to the State. There are so many cases of dubiously and illegitimately or corruptly alienating State land to themselves and members of their families and cronies and thereafter immediately disposed off the land through sale to investors, who are usually West Malaysian companies. Majority of the population are just watching helplessly while these people are distributing the State's wealth to themselves and cronies including Jabu. The tyranny of the minority against the majority is not just about denial of fundamental rights but also include the siphoning and illegitimate plundering of the State's wealth. This is just one example. We have litany of records and documentary evidence to prove these facts.

I am of course amazed by the courage Jabu had in uttering that statement which obviously lacks evidence. He said everyone can interpret the issues in his own way depending on his mindset and cultural background or values. Is he saying that the indigenous people have been lying about their rivers being destroyed, their land plundered, etc? The indigenous people [the Iban, the Orang Ulu, the Bidayuh, and Melanau and Malays too] must have been very crazy for having similar complaints that their customary right land have been robbed at broad daylight. Measured in Jabu's language, they must have had a crazy value and mindset or social dialectic for continuously differing in opinion with those who benefited from such illegitimate alienation of land. But in reality, are they crazy? Nevertheless, it is trite that any thief would find ways to tell everyone that he has never stolen anything even though the loot is still conspicuously held in his hand.

Food, Caning, Muslims and Non-Muslims and Name Calling

I am writing this note basically stemming from two articles: one from the Borneo Post dated 4 November and the other from Sarawak Update.com on 5 November in which Mr Abdul Hakim Bujang is its administrator and author. Extracts of both articles and comments thereto are reproduced in verbatim below. I have also provided the links to the two articles for easy access and ease of reference.

What happened was a young boy aged 10 years old studying at Saint Thomas Primary School in Kuching was caned by the Senior Assistant Principal for bringing non-halal food to school. In fact there were a few others who were also reprimanded and caned for the very same reason but only Basil's mother lodged a complaint and even went one step further by calling for a press conference held at Parti Keadilan Rakyat's [PKR] office in which she is a member accompanied by other PKR's Women Wing members.

The news has attracted quite a number of responses and one of them coming from no other than YB Dato Sri Dr James Jemut Masing, one of Sarawak's cabinet ministers. For link to James Masing's response please click below.

http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=72931


Another interesting response came from the CEO of the The Islamic Information Centre, Zabariah Matali, who said, "Stop this madness; I am speaking, of course, of the caning of a 10-year-old boy in Kuching for the evidently unpardonable crime of bringing non-halal food to school".

http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=73409

Other responses came from commentators of Sarawak Update.com in which the author or administrator had responded with name calling on those commentators, for he believes it is Anwar Ibrahim who should come forward to answer since Basil's mother has used PKR as a platform to lodge her complaint. Abdul Hakim considers the issue not a non-Muslim issue hence he is not interested to have any exchange of comments with non-Muslims or any non-Muslims PKR member as manifested in his remark or response to one commentator by the name of Helen.

In Malaysia anything that has to do with religion is always a sensitive issue. It's not the religion that is sensitive but the people who professed a certain religion are very sensitive about his or her religion. As a matter of fact a religion, I would say is personal to the holder. What I mean is that it is between that person alone and God. Whatever others do or fail or have omitted to do will not reduce or enhance his chance to win favour with God.

The issue, in my mind, of the above incident is not about Islam and non-Muslims or about non-Muslims "going full force to run down Islam" (borrowing the claim that Abdul Hakim Bujang is using: see the quote below and the link above to verify). It is about school's rules and alleged breach of the same. Is there such a rule or is there not? If there is, was the punishment meted out too harsh or fit the offence allegedly committed? If there is none, was it prudent for such punishment? The only fault that Basil's mother has done was by bringing her PKR Women's Wing into the picture to assist in her complaint, which is unnecessary, which Abdul Hakim considers as running down of Islam in full force by non-Muslims. And likewise the only fault with this particular teacher is to punish a student for an alleged wrongdoing that was ambiguous in his endeavour of promoting mutual respect and especially for Muslim pupils, the punishment which was also unnecessary. I strongly believe this teacher is not representative of the thought of other fellow Muslims. In the same light, I also strongly believe any comments by non-Muslims detesting such act cannot be deemed to be attempts of running down Islam in full force. Meting out such punishment on pupil of such tender age for such "offence" is really an isolated case. But those who put up comments, many have blown things out of proportion. The author, Mr Abdul Hakim Bujang, is a shining example, who went an extra mile to comit name calling on one commentator, Helen, saying she must be stupid if she thought the complaint was to protect the child and his constitutional right. Helen was merely saying that a child should be free from abuse regardless of his religious background but only to receive such remark from the author. We got to take exception to that name calling remark, which is not a mark of an ethical journalistic practice.

The teacher, I believe, must have felt that it was his duty to ensure that Muslim pupils in the school should not be associated with non-halal food that their fellow non-Muslim schoolmates bring to school. Not a bad a intention after all. But he lacked wisdom and common sense. Non-Muslims are non-Muslims and by default every food prepared in their homes are not halal and it is next to impossible for any non-Muslim parent to prepare halal food without having a Muslim maid or a Muslim cook at home. We have not heard hitherto in any particular school pupils are barred from bringing and consuming home cooked food in their respective schools. Many parents prefer their children to consume home cooked food on reason of cleanliness and also to save costs, which of course is very prudent.

Be that as it may and putting politics aside, the real issue at hand is, are pupils allowed to bring home cooked food to school. Bear in mind there is no such thing as non-Muslims bringing halal food because by default any food prepared in non-Muslim homes is not halal. So bringing halal food from home of non-Muslims cannot be an issue. It is either home cooked food is allowed or disallowed. Halal or non-halal is totally irrelevant unless the school is meant for 100% Muslim pupils.

Again by putting politics aside, what the teacher has done in the above incident, in my considered opinion, was a misconception of religious obligation. I do not see a fellow Muslim would be offended by his witnessing his non-Muslim schoolmates consuming non-halal food in his vicinity and let alone a 10-year old pupil who hardly appreciates the concept of halal or non-halal. I was made to understand the teacher had duly apologized and I think it should just rest there and in fact it is prudent to rest the matter just there. Everybody does make silly mistakes sometimes and nothing is so big to be forgiven. But not quite so with the boy's mother while accepting the teacher's apology she wants the Ministry of Education to make a specific ruling so that in the future it would be clearly defined to avoid any ambiguity. Definitely it is most welcome if the Ministry can come up with such a ruling. In the meantime, I believe an apology from the teacher should be sufficient to put the matter at rest. To err is human and to forgive is divine. There is nothing to lose by extending forgiveness to the wrongdoer and in fact an admirable way in solving most of human problems.

Touching on the issue in which Mr Abdul Hakim Bujang had verbally struck the boy's father, Baginda Anak Minda, formerly a converted Muslim, who then took a Muslim name of Nur Azman, I have a few things to say. Although it might not be very pleasant to fellow Muslims to note, it is nevertheless Baginda's constitutional right to revert back to his former faith. I was told in the two General Elections Baginda had used the name of Nur Azman because it took some time for the National Registration Department to have his name changed. To avoid being disqualified, the name printed in the National Identity Card was used as it was. To say his Muslim name would give him the advantage among the Dayak voters, and hence its usage, is a misstatement and in fact it worked the reverse. But Baginda's reverting back to his previous religion or renouncing Islam has no relevance to the issue of a teacher punishing his pupils for bringing non-halal food to school. No doubt the issue of renouncing the Islamic faith is a very serious matter and an issue of great importance to all practicing Muslims but that can never be used to defeat one's right to equal protection before the law. Why the author of Sarawak Update.com had raised the issue is something that many of us could not comprehend vis-a-vis the alleged caning of Baginda's son by his school teacher for bringing to and/or consuming non-halal food in his school.

Regardless of the past or current religious background of Basil's father, the issue of being punished for bringing non-halal food to school is absolutely irrelevant. And whether PKR has politicized the issue is also of no relevance. And it has nothing to do with non-Muslims resenting religious obligations, which is personal to every individual. The non-Muslims are only asking the Ministry to come up with a ruling on the bringing of home cooked food to school. And another issue is, if home cooked food is allowed in school, Muslim teachers should not be offended by food non-Muslims pupil bring and consume in school. Perhaps what could be done is that the school would make available special room or canteen for non-Muslims to consume their food separated from Muslim pupils. But the irony is that there ought to be segregation too in class because it would be offensive to Muslims to interact with non-Muslims pupils who had just consumed non halal food in a non-halal canteen. Non-halal food need not be associated with pork lest it would be misunderstood. Even chicken slaughtered by a non-Muslim or chicken slaughtered by a Muslim but prepared and cooked in non-Muslim kitchen is also not halal.

The best solution to overcome this misgiving, it seems, is to have separate schools: schools for the non-Muslims and manned only by non-Muslim staff, and schools for the Muslims and manned by Muslim staff only. This will certainly guarantee that no non-halal food will ever enter the school compound of Muslim schools. But then what about in the office or workplace? In the universities? In the Legislative Assembly Chamber? In Parliament? In shopping malls? In public transportation conveyance? In the train? In banks? What about the currency? Shall we have two sets of currencies: one for the Muslims and the other for non Muslims? So there's a litany of list and it is non-exhaustive. It can go on and on. Really difficult huh! Yes, really very difficult for a multi-racial and religious society like ours if we make it difficult. But on other the hand it can be full of fun to have such varieties. Some three weeks ago I had great time dining with several former schoolmates of different racial and religious backgrounds. We had great fun and until today we are still exchanging messages on how we had enjoyed the fun-filled dinner. So it really depends on how we adjust ourselves to different situations. This adjustment must come from both directions. We cannot expect Muslims alone to adjust themselves while fellow non-Muslims don't do anything. Non-Muslims must reciprocate too in ways that are possible, practical and dignified.

But I suggest why not we make things easier for ourselves and others. We do what is ours and God what is His. Once we are tuned to this philosophy, life would become easier and more meaningful without the need to judge ourselves and others. Making such judgment can be very stressful, but for what? Life in this world is too short to be unhappy. We all deserved to be happy and by making others happy we are in fact accumulating happiness ourselves.


-------QUOTE FROM BORNEO POST--------
http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=72660

Pupil caned for bringing non-halal food to school
by Eve Sonary Heng. Posted on November 4, 2010, Thursday

Mom claims son caned 10 times on the palm by senior assistant
KUCHING: A mother yesterday claimed her 10-year-old son was caned for bringing non-halal food to school.
...........
............
..............
---------------------------------

-----------QUOTE FROM SARAWAK UPDATE.COM-------------

http://sarawakupdate.com/home/10th-state-election/his-name-is-nur-azman-bin-abdullah-beginda-but/comment-page-1/#comment-3766

When there is no other issues to be popular, some people played up religion issue to cause anxiety. Sadly, they forgot they would end up opening floodgate. Is our beloved Anwar Ibrahim aware of this?

Nur Azman’s wife, Angela Jabing is now complaining that their son was caned 10 times on his palm for bringing fried rice cooked with pork sausage.
The pupil, Basil Beginda was allegedly caned by the Penolong Kanan, Iskandar bin Fadeli who was from Simujan on October 15 (Friday) for bringing non halal food to school and is tramautised by the whole situation.
.........
..........
..........
-------------------------
Abd Hakim
07/11/2010 - 1:17 pm

SN Voon, to you Who is angel’s husband is NOT relevant ! To others, it is very big issue. Thank you for opening up a very big issue. We will bring it up for the authority attention. So, in PKR Sarawak eye, DENOUNCING ISLAM AND GOING FULL FORCE TO RUN DOWN ISLAM, is small issue? Is that what you are saying? Canning the boy is BIGGER than denouncing ISLAM? We would like to hear from PKR Muslims leaders on this, specifically Anwar Ibrahim. Let talk in the open forum. Arrange date. I will cover it personally. TQ

Helen
07/11/2010 - 6:31 pm
Abd Hakim: The issue here is about the little boy. Why must you canned the ignorant little boy. Not once but 10s! Regardless of their races and religions children should be protected. HANDS ARE FOR LOVING,NOT HITTING – UNICEF. I’m sure you once have the kids at that age. Parents feelings toward their children r the same.
His parent ‘s background, its between him and God. We are not God to judge that. Religion is in ones heart, words and deeds!

Abd Hakim
07/11/2010 - 6:37 pm
Helen,We are requesting PKR top leadership to make their stand here, the Muslim one, and his name is not Helen. His name is Anwar Ibrahim. Let be open and let hide no bone since the issue was opened up using PKR platform. I am not interested to debate with a non-Muslim. The argument whether you like it or not was triggered by RELIGION and POLITIC, and not love. Thank you.

Abd Hakim
07/11/2010 - 9:16 pm
Helen, your concern is none of my concern. I have gone through the worst in my schooling days. Do you know that some school in Sarawak there is no Halal canteen? Yes, no Halal canteen when there were hundredth of Muslim student there. This was partly due to the school policy and some technicalities which is beyond the student control. Student who brought and try to sell Halal food would be penalised. I will write on this later. My concern here the way PKR bring up this issue. Do you think they want to protect Angela child in the first place? You must be very stupid. The intention is very clear. They want maximum publicity and get this controversial issues debated openly. The teacher did say this is sensitive, and Angela said who cares? Now when the issues struck her own nose, our reporter asked her and she said it is SENSITIVE. Why being selective on sensitivities? Since they want to talk about sensitive issues in the open, let do it openly. No malice intended. The big question is why PKR suddenly said Nur Azman religion is sensitive but talking about the non Halal food not sensitive. Why is PAS Sarawak quiet? Are they deaf and mute? Why are the Muslims PKR leaders in Malaya quiet are they illiterate? Let discuss this openly. With an open heart and smile on our face to the through spirit of being 1Malaysian? Is that wrong? Why is asking why the father name Nur Azman Bin Abdullah but bringing pork to school sensitive? Is that wrong? Which Islamic school of thought said its ok to eat and bring pork to school until your schoolmate, at the tender age open it and start a roar that trigger National debate? Why must the parent call PC at PKR office and not go straight to Director of Sarawak education and demand this stupid teacher sacked? Why they did not go to the Minister of Education and write an email or letter to him demanding him to be sacked? It is very clear they want PUBLICITY and political mileage? What says you? Am I fabricating stories and being irrelevant?

sn voon
07/11/2010 - 12:22 pm
When there is something wrong with any system in this country, somehow people will try say that the matter is politicised in a way to invalidate an injustice or a flaw.
The issue here is very simple : The issue of whether a child should be canned and intimidated for bringing non halal from home for his recess ?
That is all.
Who is angel’s husband is NOT relevant !
Please do not try to water down an issue of public concerns here.
We had many responses for this issue from the public and basil is not the only student who was intimidated by teachers on this issue in their schools.

Abd Hakim
07/11/2010 - 11:11 pm
Voon,
As a lawyer does it ever cross your mind that what you, Angela and Nurhanim doing that day is exploiting a minor? If she is stupid, why you being a lawyer does not request the press from not mentioning his name? This will scar him for the rest of his life? Pathetic desperate politicians!

Helen,
Since you care for a child why not you sue them?

------------UNQUOTE------------------------------------