Tuesday, December 24, 2019

Najib's Sumpah Laknat - Someone's 'Hidden Fear'


After Najib oath, Jawi warns against ‘misuse of mosques’

Jawi director Mohd Ajib Ismail and FT mufti Zulkifli Mohamad issued statements about misuse of mosques 

PETALING JAYA: Action can be taken against anyone who misuses mosques for personal or political reasons, the Islamic affairs department of the Federal Territories (Jawi) said today.

The warning comes in the wake of a statement by Federal Territories mufti Zulkifli Mohamad urging Jawi to enforce laws barring religious oaths or “sumpah laknat” in mosques on matters of public interest or court cases.

Last Friday, former prime minister Najib Razak took a “sumpah laknat” to deny allegations made by a former police commando that Najib had ordered the murder of Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu. The ex-commando, Azilah Hadri, and a colleague were sentenced to death in 2015 for the murder.

After Friday prayers at Masjid Jamek in Kampung Baru, Najib had said in front of a congregation numbering about 500 that “I have never directed anyone to kill a Mongolian citizen named Altantuya Shaariibuu and I have never met nor do I know the deceased.”

He had made a similar oath 11 years ago at a mosque in Bukit Mertajam, Penang, denying claims that he had known Altantuya.

Jawi director Mohd Ajib Ismail did not make any mention of Najib or “sumpah laknat” in today’s statement but said the department took note of the misuse of mosques in the Federal Territories.

“The administration of mosques in the Federal Territories is subject to the Administration of Islamic Law Act 1993,” he said.

“As such this department wishes to remind all that action can be taken on any breach of the act, and all parties, regardless of their political and ideological backgrounds, are advised to always ensure that mosques are protected as an institution for the ummah.”

The FT mufti had earlier called for the enforcement of rules against “sumpah laknat” in mosques on matters of public interests or court cases to avoid mosques from being manipulated. He said the courts were the more appropriate platform to resolve legal issues and, if necessary, for taking an oath.

I am not interested in the 'sumpah laknat' made by Najib per se, as:

(a) I am NOT a Muslim and

(b) It will be the police's job to assess and determine the substance of the SD made by former Chief Inspector & now death-row-convict Azilah Hadri against Najib on the Altantuyaa Shaariibuu murder case, and if/where grounds are found to charge Najib for the murder, then the issue will make its way to the civil court, regardless of the 'sumpah laknat'.

former Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri
now on death row

I am also aware that the 'sumpah laknat' made by Najib has been/is something personal & religious between him and his God (Allah swt), and it's nobody's business, not even the police's nor civil court's.

However, due to what I have read and what I see as the existence of some discrepancies, perhaps in my un-educated-in-Islamic knowledge, I would love to have some help & clarification from my Muslim visitors to improve my limited knowledge on the religious belief, culture & practice of our Malay co-citizens.

As per above FMT news article the following extracts are reproduced as follows for our easy perusal, reference and discussions:

(i) The FT mufti had earlier called for the enforcement of rules against “sumpah laknat” in mosques on matters of public interests or court cases to avoid mosques from being manipulated. 

(ii) Action can be taken against anyone who misuses mosques for personal or political reasons, the Islamic affairs department of the Federal Territories (Jawi) said today.

FT mufti Zulkifli Mohamad 

Pertaining to para (i) above, regarding the statement made by the FT Mufti, I have been confused by an extract from Astro Awani's article Apa maksud sebenar sumpah laknat?, to wit, its following sentence:

Berdasarkan penjelasan Mufti Wilayah Persekutuan, Datuk Seri Dr Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri di laman web rasminya, sumpah yang menggunakan kitab suci al-Qur’an, hukumnya adalah dibolehkan.

[Translation: According to the Federal Territory Mufti, Datuk Seri Dr Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri on his official website, swearing to use the Holy Qur'an, the law is allowed]

That has been my confusion. If the FT Mufti's website says "... swearing to use the Holy Qur'an, the law is allowed" then how does that gel with his subsequent contradictory call for "... the enforcement of rules against “sumpah laknat” in mosques on matters of public interests or court cases to avoid mosques from being manipulated"?

I made the remark of "... his [FT Mufti] subsequent call ..." because I observe that the news article in Astro Awani was made on 20 Dec 2019 whilst the apparent change of mind regarding making a 'sumpah laknat' was published by FMT three days later, on 23 Dec 2019.

PM Mahathir had supported 'sumpah laknat' when he was formerly an ex-PM, in a case of oath taking by businessman Shazryl Eskay Abdullah in implicating Anwar Ibrahim in a sex video incident

Mahathir said those who has (or have) been reluctant to participate in oath-taking could be feeling guilty 


To my puzzled confused mind, it lends the worrying impression that the FT Mufti might have been "under pressure" (during that 3 days, wakakaka) to reverse his policy. This uncomfortable impression has been reinforced by JAWI stating "... Action can be taken against anyone who misuses mosques for personal or political reasons ...".

Look, if the FT Mufti website says "... sumpah yang menggunakan kitab suci al-Qur’an, hukumnya adalah dibolehkan ...", then Najib's 'sumpah laknat' should be allowed, full stop.

And why has the HEAVY weight of JAWI suddenly come into play against the 'sumpah laknat'?

What is this about JAWI's warning on the misuse of mosques, when the FT Mufti's website says "... sumpah yang menggunakan kitab suci al-Qur’an, hukumnya adalah dibolehkan ...".

I am suddenly reminded of a Chinese equivalent of the religious oath-taking (if I may use the term 'equivalent' without any offence intended).

Most Malaysians (including non-Chinese) know of the sacred ritual 'potong ayam' or in Penang Hokkien 'cham3 peh3 kay1'.

destined for a 'sacred' role?

Wikipedia says (just substitute the word 'Taiwanese' or 'Fujianese' in Wiki with 'Penang Hokkien' for our discussion - it'll have same implications for the local scene as the Penangites have their folk religious-cultural roots in Fujian Province):

Chicken-beheading rituals have historical roots in the legal traditions of China's Fujian Province, where over 70% of Taiwanese citizens can trace their lineage.

In feudal Fujianese society, individuals who were suspected of theft were taken before images of judges and forced to proclaim an oath of innocence. Someone hiding behind the judge image would then point at the defendant who would supposedly break down and confess if they were guilty.

Legal trials were also often conducted in the presence of images of deities as a way of forcing individuals to be honest. Temple managers even sometimes acted as judges themselves.

These Fujianese trials have been embedded into Taiwanese culture and many other aspects of Fujianese tradition have also been transferred into Taiwanese chicken-beheading rituals, notably the use of oaths of innocence (赌咒, duzhou “oath-making” - literally meaning to gamble on an oath) and use of local deities to encourage people to fear breaking their oaths.

oath usually taken before the image of Guan Gong (Penang Hokkien pronounced the name as 'Kuan Kong')

a deity who brooks 'no sh*t' (wakakaka) and who is to the Chinese the very epitome of courage, honour, integrity & honesty

in Hong Kong, bizarrely both the Police and the Triads worship Guan Gong because of his qualities of courage, honour, integrity & honesty 

In a broader sense, the history of chicken-beheading rituals represents the important role that religion plays in Taiwanese society; Taiwanese citizens turn to their local city deity to arbitrate when the Taiwanese legal system is insufficient.

The exact dates of the first instances of chicken-beheading rituals in Taiwan are unknown, yet the rituals were frequently practiced ... [...]

In Penang and parts of Malaysia where Hokkiens live, the sacrifice of the chicken involves a white rooster. Religiously, the belief has been that the oath-taker will be damned by the gods if he/she lies.

Wiki continues (again just substitute the word 'Taiwanese' or 'Fujianese' for 'Penang Hokkien'):

Taiwanese chicken-beheading rituals have often led to the resolution of disputes because of what they symbolise.

Taiwanese chicken-beheading rituals are deeply laden with symbolism. The chicken is considered a representation of the human that is beheading it. The implication of beheading the chicken is that the human would be willing to die or lose their integrity if their oath of innocence was false.

In such a god fearing society, as Taiwan traditionally has been, the gravitas involved in symbolically killing yourself after proclaiming your honesty and innocence has a profound power in the cultural imagination of society.

The reasons for using chickens, as opposed to other animals, in this ritual are both symbolic and practical. Chickens symbolise the sun (陽) and positive forces of life and vitality in Chinese and Taiwanese culture.

However, it is commonly understood that the main reason chickens were used is that chickens remained extremely cheap and plentiful in both Southern China and Taiwan. As such, ordinary people could not only easily decapitate a chicken without much hassle but also conveniently buy one ...

I am not sure about this but I've heard that the 'potong ayam' ritual before a Chinese deity was held so sacred by the Chinese that during British colonial days, the British courts accepted such cultural rituals as kosher to the settling of disputes (only) among the Chinese even in civil courts.

Thus, if true, the Chinese 'potong ayam' ritual in British colonial days would have had great legal implications, far beyond what a 'sumpah laknat' has today.

Back to Najib and his 'sumpah laknat' - FMT has just published Najib: I wouldn’t have done it had they objected (extracts follow):

Former premier Najib Razak said today he would not have gone ahead with the Islamic oath he performed on Friday had the authorities objected.

Responding to statements today by Federal Territory religious officials, Najib said he had announced his intention of taking the oath two days beforehand to allow time for the authorities to state their stand.

“I purposely announced that I would take the oath two days earlier … to allow religious authorities like Jawi (the Federal Territories Islamic affairs department) and the Mufti to oppose or stop me,” he said in an online posting this evening.

“Had there been an objection, I would definitely have withdrawn,” he said.

On Friday, after prayers at at Masjid Jamek in Kampung Baru, Najib had taken a “sumpah laknat” to deny an allegation that he had ordered the murder of Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu in 2006.


But as we can see, there is no significance of Najib's 'sumpah laknat' to the common law, police or any likely civil courts' proceedings. Thus I wonder with the back-flipping by the FT Mufti and the now-intervention of JAWI, whether there is instead a fear somewhere that Najib could achieve his effort at MORAL cleansing, somehow successfully in the eyes of the Malays.

Hey, don't forget that Mahathir supported the ritual of 'sumpah laknat' some years back when the purpose of the oath-taking ritual was specifically against Anwar Ibrahim, wakakaka.


  1. QUOTE
    I am also aware that the 'sumpah laknat' made by Najib has been/is something personal & religious between him and his God (Allah swt), and it's nobody's business, not even the police's nor civil court's

    If that's the case then why publicise the "ceremony" two days in advance, have it immediately after Friday prayers in a mosque, gather a crowd, microphones, have the whole thing recorded on camera and made into a circus?

    Just go privately into a room, swear before Allah and don't tell anyone about it. Jibby can even do it at his house. Then the KL Mufti wouldn't care.

    Did he have to do it in Kampung Baru mosque, the same place where he held a rally in 1987 when he was UMNO Youth leader, which was followed up by Operation Lalang?

    1. since he has been smeared publicly he has a right to publicly conduct a "private conversation" with his god to rebut those same public accusations

    2. The allegation against Najib was made through a Statutory Declaration, a secular document under civil law.

      Najib chose to politicise religion, turning a mosque into a circus for his private agenda. He doesn't have the RIGHT to do that.

    3. Wakakakakaka…

      "I am also aware that the 'sumpah laknat' made by Najib has been/is something personal & religious between him and his God (Allah swt), and it's nobody's business, not even the police's nor civil court's."

      If that holds truth, then WHY publicly conduct a "private conversation" with his god to rebut those same public accusations?

      Remember PERSONAL?

      Or it's the case of buying blurred religious sympathies & supports from a targeted audiences who obstinately believe that their 'faith' rituals can ameliorate ANY sins if the offender dares to conduct such 'pious' act within their place of worshipping?

      Furthermore, ain't it pinklips take that ONLY doing a sumpah laknat in a mosque CAN he gained his ulterior aim?

      WHY not doing it at his house? Mall?

      This is the SAME principle behind the old Chinese village pumpkin practice of of chicken-beheading (only happened in Guangdong/Fujian rurals) - a form of horrendous blood sacrifice to buy one's presumed innocent!

      If pinklips thinks he has been smeared publicly he should let the modern legal proceedings take their eventual consequences. Praying for divine intervention by manipulating the emotions of a captured religious crowd IS a form of trying to twist the truth.

      It also means that pinklips DOESN'T care a thing about the vowed promises of his faith about judgement day that his targeted audiences r so blindly believed in!

    4. It's NOT just Fujian or Guandong but in Penang as well, when 'potong ayam' have been conducted, ALWAYS before a Chinese god, someone divine - likewise, sumpah laknat would usually be performed in a holy place, like a mosque - why begrudge Najib that?

      When/if the civil court proceedings take place then Najib has to face that, BUT until ti happens if he wants to cleanse himself before his god, who are we, especially Lim KHAT Siang to say otherwise, and who are you to judge that Najib DOESN'T care a thing about the vowed promises of his faith about judgement day?

    5. Monsterball, it has only become a circus because of Lim KHAT Siang's and your criticisms which serve to highlight the case

    6. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fLIks97FP6U/XgDJDB9iNwI/AAAAAAAA9Gk/xmRbLTwi5rIELvlsom-vcp4qhNAk8R0uwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/NAJIB-RAZAK-sumpah%2Blaknat.jpg

      See the circus at the mosque, organised by Najib.

      Plueez don't tell us that was Lim Kit Siang's doing.

    7. More views of the Najib Sumpah Laknat circus at the mosque.

      You mean to say this was Lim Kit Siang's doing ?



    8. Wakakakaka…

      From where r the majority of the Penangites descended from?

      "'potong ayam' have been conducted, ALWAYS before a Chinese god, someone divine"

      Obviously u r only indulging in bastardized voodoo as practised by the rural Chinese blur-sotongs!

      There r NEVER such ritual description in ANY religious texts of any major Chinese faiths!

      Sumpah laknat is mentioned ONLY by the udang ulamas in their preachings. It's NOT described in the Quran!

      As such it SHOULD be an act of syirik, prohibited by the true teaching of Islam. Especially when it's been committed in a mosque!

      Again, remember PERSONAL?

      If pinklips wants to cleanse himself before his god then DON'T use it as a form of motive like what he is doing openly NOW.

      By doing so openly, indeed pinklips has ignored the vowed promises of true Islam about judgement day placement which is the ultimate red line that true Muslim won't cross.

      If one wants to preach one's innocence through sumpah laknat THEN does it in one's heart. Allah will guide u!

      (As clarified by my Ningxia ustaz friend!)

      The blurred ritualised zombies WILL only flame the criticism on sumpah laknat as an attack on their religion - just like what that despicable mom wrote!

    9. who can decide what is true teaching? u? no diff from the zombie u accuse.

    10. Mfer, true teaching as DICTATES within the words of Quran.

      That's totally ABSOLUTELY firm within the doctrines of Islam.

      Unless, of course yr zombieic pals have a different interpretations. Just like many of their deviant preachings.

      R u too accepting that as their zombiric right?

  2. The polis may or may not consider this sumpah of any value, like a polygraph test, but when a polis report is made they must investigate.

    We had this funny situation where Jibby made a polis report on himself, over not one but THREE murders, coincidentally all with NO MOTIVE.

    So while KT always say the IGP is "Toonsie's Boy" then why haven't these murders been re-opened on Jibby, till now for the Altantuya murder following Azilah's SD?

    Najib 'orders' police report against himself

    Oct 11th, 2018

    Former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak says he will order his assistant to lodge a police report against him tomorrow so that the authorities can start investigating if he was involved in several high-profile murders while he was in power.

    In a Facebook post tonight, Najib said this was the last resort he had to take to clear his name following repeated calls by DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang to the authorities to reopen their investigations into these cases.

    Lim and Najib have been engaged in a war of words over the past few days, ever since Lim urged the government to consider reopening the high-profile cases.

    The cases he cited are the murders of Ambank founder and banker Hussain Najadi, deputy public prosecutor Kevin Morais, Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu and the death of DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock.

    Najib has welcomed fresh investigations into the cases, saying it was high time “justice is served” to him.

    When Najib questioned why the government was hesitant to reopen these cases, Lim had asked Najib to explain why he did not reopen the same cases when he was still in power.

    1. making police reports on allegations would be a way of killing off the allegations if police investigations prove that

  3. Perhaps another SD will come forth soon on this murder too...

    Pascal Najadi - My Fury Over Najib's Lawyer Mohd Shafee Abdullah
    1 June 2017

    The son of the assassinated former chairman of AmBank, Hussein Najadi, has told Sarawak Report that he has deep concerns about the way the lawyer Mohd Shafee Abdullah controlled events after his father was shot in broad daylight in KL.

    The shocking event took place just a few weeks before another huge personal payment by Prime Minister Najib was made to Shafee of RM4.3 million.

    The payment was transacted on 11th September 2013, whereas Najadi was murdered on 29th July. Once again, the money came from Account no: 2112022011906 in Najib’s name, which was funded by money stolen from 1MDB’s subsidiary SRC.

    Pascal Najadi, who was in Moscow when the tragedy occured, says that neither he nor his immediate family knew Shafee and no one had contacted him to be involved. Nevertheless, the lawyer mysteriously arrived at the hospital almost as soon as his father’s body was brought into the mortuary and started to take charge of events.

    Photographs even show Shafee on the scene as an ambulance bearing Najadi’s injured second wife arrived, bringing Najadi to the mortuary:

    According to Najadi, the family soon found that this strange lawyer was muscling in on their situation and insisting on taking control. Pascal has testified:

    Tuesday July 30 2013, it must have been lunch time or a little later in KL, my mum Heidi Najadi called me from the KLK Morgue where they have laid up the body of my late father… She asked me “there is this Dato Shafee running around rude and nervous acting as if he owns the body of dad and giving orders to all of us?!” I asked my mum, who? She said “His name is Dato Shafee..?!” I told my mum to pass this man on the phone to me.

    This is my perception of this call. Dato Shafee was nervous when talking to me, he was breathing short and gave half clipped words answers to my question: “Can we wait with the burial please?” He stuttered to me: “No can not, all is in hand, I take care of all, he will be buried today, this evening…”

    Pascal says he was shocked by the haste and by manner in which decisions were taken out of his family’s hands. He says a swift burial was not their custom and he had wanted to be able to fly to KL to attend the ceremony.

    Shafee did not say “I am so sorry for your terrible loss….or can I help you are you OK? Where are you now? ” He said nothing of what a normal human or indeed a friend would say.

    Shafee was the ad hoc burial master for the body of my late father Hussain without any reason, he even had the service paid every penny of it to make it fast and swift”,

    Speaking to Sarawak Report Pascal Najadi says that Shafee had told the family that he had been ‘put in charge’ of matters, but he never explained by whom.

    Shafee, whom he described as brusque and nervous, managed the entire funeral and all the related matters, yet Najadi says the family never received a bill from him.

  4. "If the FT Mufti's website says "... swearing to use the Holy Qur'an, the law is allowed" then how does that gel with his subsequent contradictory call for "... the enforcement of rules against “sumpah laknat” in mosques on matters of public interests or court cases to avoid mosques from being manipulated"?".........Ktemoc

    The two statements are not contradictory
    One....any Muslim can make a religious oath. It is essentially a private religious matter.

    Two....you are not allowed to turn it into a circus at a mosque.

  5. Wahhhh...memang hebat Ah Mok khor....dragging in potong kepala ayam to bolster his defense of ChiefLiarPirate's sumpah laknat.

    If his audience is not not gullible indoctrinated Melayoos, he would have discarded this sumpah circus, equipped with microphones to boot, all dressed up for the part...baju melayu, songkok ( temporarily shelving his Hugo Boss suits ); and hippo wifey seated next to him all bertudung, sans heavy gold jewellery and the infamous Hermes on the arm.

    1. you are VERY observant of Najib's dressing, well done, wakakaka