When Syahredzan Johan wrote about the sanctity of citizenship as one of the great guarantees of our Constitution, I couldn’t agree more (http://www.thestar.com.my/
In Islam, neither race nor a group of people is superior by reason of its origin or its nature. People are all equal as the teeth of the comb. In Islam, a race or a group of people can only be noblest in the sight of Allah when they submit themselves as Muslims. Thus, as long as the Malay race submit themselves as muslims and practice the teachings of the prophet (pbuh) correctly, they’re indeed noble in the sight of Allah. The moment they deviated from this path regardless who they are whether in BN or PR, it is only right that their brethren in Islam sets them aright.
One of the great fundamentals of political theory in Islam rests on the basis of justice on the part of the rulers, obedience on the part of the ruled and consultation between rulers and ruled.
There must first be justice on the part of the ruler to all people without discrimination even though there may be hatred between them and their people as long as it does not pose any detriment to Islam. This refers to an impartial justice who cannot be influenced by any relationship between individuals or be affected by love or enmity. Justice in Islam is enjoyed by all the individual members of the community without discrimination due to rank, wealth or influence in accordance to Islamic syariah.
The second fundamental is obedience on the part of those who are ruled. This obedience is derived from obedience to Allah and the Messenger. An absolute obedience such as this is not to be accorded freely to the will of the government nor can it be binding if the ruler abandons the law of Allah and His Messenger. There is a necessity to remind and correct any ruler who violates the compact of Allah.
This is why the third element being consultation or syura is as important as the first two. There is no specific method in Islam on how to administer it however this is the precise avenue to criticise the government. A ruler has no extra privileges as regards the law or as regards the wealth. Their families too have no such privileges either. No ruler shall oppress the souls or the bodies of their citizens nor dare infringe upon their sanctities nor touch their wealth for fear of Allah.
Just as the government have their responsibilities, so does the citizen of a country have their duty which brings me to the point where I have to disagree with Syahredzan.
Syahredzan started his entry by quoting a statement by ISMA’s Vice President which was reported by the press “those who criticise the Government “…are traitors whose citizenships should be revoked….”. I’m not sure whether Syahredzan verified what the source of the so called ISMA statement that the media quoted. If he did, he’d have realized that the source which the media took was actually from an article in ISMAWeb columnist section that coincidentally was written by ISMA’s VP (http://www.ismaweb.net/2014/
I’ll let the reader go through the full article and decide for themselves what ISMA’s VP actually meant in his article but I’d like to stress on the part that was taken out of context by the media.
Abdul Rahman wrote,
”Paling terkini diberitakan ada pihak di kalangan DAP dan PKR memburuk-burukkan kerajaan dan bertindak menghasut di luar negara sehingga ada keluarga mangsa menjadi begitu marah kepada kerajaan.
Kalau benar, mereka ini saya anggap sebagai pengkhianat negara dan patut lucut kerakyatannya dan nasihatkan mereka untuk pindah ke negara yang mereka suka.
Ketahuilah, usaha mempertahankan tanahair, serta bersifat patriotik adalah sebahagian daripada ajaran Islam.”
Anyone who understands Malay language would appreciate that his statement was directed to those who purposely defame and instigate negative sentiments about the Malaysian government to the victims’ family overseas. Such act if one was to really reflect is actually an act of betraying one’s own country.
Yes, one may criticise the ruling party but the moment a person demean and humiliates their own country through a foreign media in a foreign country the buck has to stop there. How should we treat an elected Member of Parliament who went on air in a foreign press and starts to gun down their own government by claiming that there is a massive cover-up while handling MH370 incident? What should we do to a Member of Parliament who openly slams our own air force in a foreign press interview by claiming that our air force is “incompetent” and provide contradictory statements that is not helpful for the search? What if the same Member of Parliament suggested that our government could be a “complicit in a terrorist act” which by now we all know has been ruled out?
What does the person actually want to achieve by slandering the government in such way? Why do we allow such people to call themselves Malaysians while they humiliate our country and kick her while she’s down by belittling all the effort to find the plane and harping on the government’s weaknesses in the international media?
During this tragic incident, wouldn’t it be better for Malaysians regardless of their political affiliation to stand by their country during such great adversity? Is it hard to respond in a positive way to the foreign reporter for example by saying, “Yes, with due respect to the Prime Minister I do not agree with him in certain matters but when it comes to MH370 I fully support his effort”? Is it so hard just to say “I fully trust the capability of our armed forces on this SAR mission” during an international media interview?
To quote President Theodore Roosevelt,“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country.”
Expressing dissenting views against the ruling party if they’ve drifted away from Islamic practices may be considered as an act of patriotism. It is our responsibility as a Malaysian citizen to give such dissenting views and it should not be confused with disloyalty. However, if it is true that any particular person publicly vilify their own government in a foreign press we should not then consider that to be an act of patriotism. It is an act of betrayal. Revoking the person citizenship is probably the least penalty we could inflict for such offence.
Abu Ameen
ISMA Activist
