The Court of Appeal ruling which banned the word Allah in the Catholic weekly, Herald, does not extend to Al-Kitab, the Bahasa Malaysia bible, said lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla, who is representing the six state Islamic councils in the case.
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Haniff said the public should understand the scope of the court’s decision.
“The issue of whether the Malay-language bible should or
should not contain the word Allah was not a subject matter before the High Court and the Court of Appeal,” Haniff was quoted as saying to WSJ.
The lawyer was referring to reports that the Court of Appeal ruling was a blanket ban against the use of the word Allah by non-Muslims.
Based on Haniff’s argument, the court was only determining issues which were disputed in the case, in particular the usage of the word Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia section of the Catholic weekly, Herald.
“That is why, I would conclude that the decision of the Court of Appeal only goes as far as prohibiting the Archbishop from using Allah in Herald, and nothing beyond that,” Haniff responded to WSJ.
The lawyer also c
larified that the case was based on whether or not “the correct translation of the word God in English into the Malay language is Allah”.
“This is why I would stress that if any person objectively reads the judgments of the Court of Appeal, one would come to the conclusion that this matter is not about the battle of scriptures, but purely an issue of language and translation, and nothing beyond that,” he said.
When it came to a question about the court’s decision implying that Muslims have more rights under the Federal Constitution, Haniff responded, "it is not about Muslims having more rights under the Federal Constitution than believers of other faiths, but it is about Islam having been accepted as the religion of the Federation, being placed at a higher position than any other religion under the constitution.
“That is why the Court of Appeal, correctly, had to define Article 3(1) of the Constitution, being 'but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony' to mean that the position of Islam cannot be compromised by the practices of another religion, if that practice is not an integral part of that religion,” he added.
Haniff also added that “the findings of the Court of Appeal, based on the evidence available before it, that the use of Allah is not an integral part of the Christian religion, would therefore constitutionally disallow Christians of Malaysia from using that word in reference to God in the Christianity context”.
Last Monday, a three-man panel of the Court of Appeal, in its judgment, ruled that "the word was not an integral part of the Christian faith and practice and that such usage if allowed, will inevitably cause confusion within the community". - October 22, 2013.
