Tok Guru never sought to regulate alcohol sales for non-Muslims

Malaysiakini:

MP SPEAKS | Tok Guru never sought to regulate alcohol sales for non-Muslims

by Mohamed Hanipa Maidin

MP SPEAKS | It is unconstitutional, my friends.

The new ruling or guideline introduced by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) on the liquor licence prohibiting all sundry shops and convenient stores from selling liquors commencing on Oct 1, 2021, has caused tremendous uproars.

Some people express their utter dismay by asking: “Is our country being held to ransom by religious bigotry?”

To add salt to the injury, the deputy minister for religious affairs was reported to have said that the government has not ruled out the possibility of expanding the ban to all sundry shops, groceries, convenient stores and Chinese medicine shops across the country.

Being a Muslim, I am convinced that liquor is forbidden by my religion. But I am equally convinced that the prohibition shall never be extended to our non-Muslim friends. Therein lies the sanctity of freedom of religion, duly cherished by Islam.

It seems that the government has hard times in trying to justify the introduction of the aforesaid mind-boggling guideline by saying that such a guideline is merely a form of controlling or regulating the sale of liquor.

Truth be told, I wonder, how on earth can a total prohibition be considered a form of regulating?

Having said that, let us begin our deliberation on this issue by looking at the black letters of our highest law of the land i.e. the Federal Constitution.

Being a minister or a deputy ministers cum MPs, the said relevant members of the current administration have duly taken an oath agreeing to defend and protect the supremacy of the constitution. Are they now reneging on such a sacred oath?

Article 11 of the Federal Constitution categorically guarantees the fundamental right of all persons (even to non-citizens) to freedom of religion. All persons in this country are supposed to enjoy such freedom without any justified and lawful restrictions.

The right to freedom of religion is so vital in that no restriction to such rights, let alone a blanket prohibition, shall even be entertained during an emergency. This solemn affirmation was duly pronounced by the then supreme court - the highest court in Malaysia - in the celebrated case of Joshua Jamaluddin.

Just like Muslims, the non-Muslims in this country are absolutely free to practice their own religion. This guarantee is duly enshrined in the said Article 11 of our Federal Constitution.

Dealing with liquors - consuming, drinking, selling and buying - by non-Muslims, is considered to be part and parcel of such religious practices. Be that as it may, it can't be restricted let alone banned or absolutely forbidden.

Is it true or correct for a government to argue that the guideline imposed by DBKL is merely aimed at regulating the sale of alcohol?

With due respect, I find such a lame excuse, unduly canvassed by the government minister, is at best amusing and at worst preposterous.

Yes, regulating the sale of liquor may be constitutionally justified. For instance, the guideline may stipulate certain conditions in respect of selling the alcohol.

The guideline, for example, may impose a restriction by disallowing the sale of liquor to any non-Muslims who are of tender years. Such a partial restriction may be constitutionally allowable as it is merely a form of regulating the sale of alcohol even to non-Muslims.

The ultimate effect of such a restriction, in my view, would not render their right to buy or sell alcohol to outrightly and completely vanish.

On the other hand, the present guideline imposed by DBKL is far from merely regulating the sale of alcohol per se. The guideline plainly seeks to impose a total prohibition of the sale of liquor in all sundry shops and convenient stores.

Yes, therein lies the problem. Therein lies the obvious infringement of the Federal Constitution.

Such a total prohibition would definitely have a tremendous effect of rendering the exercise of non-Muslims' right to practice their own religion as mockery and illusory. Hence, it is unconstitutional. Period.

Finally, it is so unfortunate that the statements championing the total prohibition of the sale of liquor in certain shops are coming from both leaders from Kelantan.

Are they really aware that even the learned and pious Muslim in Kelantan such as the late Tok Guru (Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat) did not even seek to issue any total ban of the sale of alcohol by and to non-Muslims?



MOHAMED HANIPA MAIDIN is the Sepang MP