OPINION | The 'No Pork, No Lard' Debate: Clarity or Confusion?
26 Sep 2025 • 9:00 AM MYT
Image from Jaansan Bali Restaurant
“Seperti membeli kucing didalam karung” is a Malay proverb that literally means how it reads. By committing to the act of purchasing a cat in a sack, the buyer does not know what he has in fact purchased; if it is a cat that meets the initial description and/or representation or if the content is even a cat.
Succinctly put, without knowing the contents and believing the safe and/or benign exterior is a risky and potentially dangerous endeavour.
The same proverb can be used in the context of JAIS and its caution with regards to eateries that advertise “No Pork, No Lard” in that the mere absence of pork or lard in the preparation of the food sold does not in itself qualify for the same establishment to be Muslim friendly.
For those who just went “woah woah what the heck is going on” – here’s a quick recap. The Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) recently released a one-minute “educational” video addressing the use of the phrase “No Pork, No Lard”. This was quickly followed by a series of articles echoing the video’s message. In short, JAIS sternly warned food operators against using the phrase, on the grounds that it is “ignorant” of cross-contamination, alcohol, and the use of non-halal gelatin.
Since we are big fans of Peribahasa and Simpulan Bahasa and often use them in expressing our views inside and outside of court; it is disheartening to say that the views of JAIS are the perfect analogy of “lebih sudu dari kuah” and to prevent the spirit of it being lost it means seseorang yang menunjukkan sikap yang berlebihan mengada-ngada, atau melampau-lampau terutamanya apabila mereka tidak mempunyai kuasa atau jawatan, tetapi bercakap besar seperti orang yang terlibat secara langsung.
At first read, our reaction was simply: haaa…? (as in, what?) A few re-reads later, one inference became clear: while JAIS may be acting out of concern for Muslim consumers, we need to pause and ask - is that really the issue here?
Now, from a simple read of the sign, it is pretty straightforward. It is a notice to the general public that the food in the premises are free from pork or lard. Nowhere in the sign does it claim to be a halal sign, nor does it gives an assurance that the premise has met with the requirements of Islamic dietary requirements. So, to attach assumptions about cleanliness, hygiene, alcohol or any hidden ingredients is just a misread of the sign’s intent.
Since we are both lawyers, we should probably stick to the words used by JAIS rather than to go on and on about what they may have intended – JAIS claimed that the concerns include hygiene and cross-contamination. Let’s look at that.
If those are truly the concerns, then shouldn’t those standards be applied to all eateries and not just those that display the “No Pork, No Lard” notice?
Time for a quick flashback – remember the rat infestation issue in Penang at the at the eateries, including two nasi kandar shops? Didn’t that shop had a Halal certificate, although the hygiene was severely compromised? Ah, bummer. This goes to show that just because there is a certificate, it does not automatically guarantee cleanliness.
And, c’mon, let’s be honest, the Malay makcik selling karipap, nasi lemak or even pisang goreng tepi jalan, can we say for certain that they have a halal certificate displayed? (Pretty sure, we’re all gonna go on that hunt soon enough!) But there is this assumption that her food meets halal standards. Why? Because she’s a Malay/Muslim. But, when a non-Muslim has a “No Pork, No Lard” sign, all hell breaks loose, about lard, gelatin, alcohol or contamination as brought up by JAIS. If that is so, then the issue isn’t really about the laws anymore, it has transgressed into prejudice. And if you reduce it to “Muslim = trusted, Non-Muslim = doubtful,” then let’s call it what it is: not just ignorance, but racism.
Malaysia is diverse country and a melting pot of many races and religions of which each has its own dietary restrictions. That is a no-brainer. We have Hindus who don’t eat beef, we also have Buddhists who do not consume beef as well. It is to be noted that both these communities have a significant number of vegetarians, and it is also safe to say that pork is also consumed selectively. This is also underscoring the fact that many individuals may have dietary restrictions that is not tied down to their faiths and based on health. As such, signages such as “No Pork, No Lard” provides for a guide for the same to navigate the endless choices of food and establishments in Malaysia.
Let’s take a breather here. There’s no way denying that Malaysia is a multiracial, multicultural country. Heck, we just celebrated 68 years of independence, but why are we so backwards. Signs like “No Pork, No Lard” are not religious statements—they are simply informational. It is as simple as that. Muslims who want assurance, there’s the halal certification system, which we think is clear, comprehensive, and widely respected. But for everyone else, this simple phrase is just another piece of information to help them decide where to eat. Not every label needs to be read through a religious lens. The true focus here should be ensuring consistent hygiene standards and respecting the cultural diversity that makes Malaysia what it is.
Honestly, we feel that JAIS choosing to address this is outside its job scope. “No Pork, No Lard” is in no way an alternative to Halal Certification and with the existence of such certifications, the consumer has already a clear guideline to follow which would not lead to any “confusion”.
Being the lawyers we are, perhaps what we truly need is a clear legal precedent to resolve this matter once and for all. The concerns shared by JAIS of potential “confusion” is an insult to human intelligence. We must stop misreading intentions and stretching the law beyond its purpose. It is time to remove the religious-tinted lenses and look at issues from a broader perspective, one that promotes prosperity, harmony, and mutual respect among all Malaysians. Kita kan Malaysia Madani, after all.
For those who just went “woah woah what the heck is going on” – here’s a quick recap. The Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) recently released a one-minute “educational” video addressing the use of the phrase “No Pork, No Lard”. This was quickly followed by a series of articles echoing the video’s message. In short, JAIS sternly warned food operators against using the phrase, on the grounds that it is “ignorant” of cross-contamination, alcohol, and the use of non-halal gelatin.
Since we are big fans of Peribahasa and Simpulan Bahasa and often use them in expressing our views inside and outside of court; it is disheartening to say that the views of JAIS are the perfect analogy of “lebih sudu dari kuah” and to prevent the spirit of it being lost it means seseorang yang menunjukkan sikap yang berlebihan mengada-ngada, atau melampau-lampau terutamanya apabila mereka tidak mempunyai kuasa atau jawatan, tetapi bercakap besar seperti orang yang terlibat secara langsung.
At first read, our reaction was simply: haaa…? (as in, what?) A few re-reads later, one inference became clear: while JAIS may be acting out of concern for Muslim consumers, we need to pause and ask - is that really the issue here?
Now, from a simple read of the sign, it is pretty straightforward. It is a notice to the general public that the food in the premises are free from pork or lard. Nowhere in the sign does it claim to be a halal sign, nor does it gives an assurance that the premise has met with the requirements of Islamic dietary requirements. So, to attach assumptions about cleanliness, hygiene, alcohol or any hidden ingredients is just a misread of the sign’s intent.
Since we are both lawyers, we should probably stick to the words used by JAIS rather than to go on and on about what they may have intended – JAIS claimed that the concerns include hygiene and cross-contamination. Let’s look at that.
If those are truly the concerns, then shouldn’t those standards be applied to all eateries and not just those that display the “No Pork, No Lard” notice?
Time for a quick flashback – remember the rat infestation issue in Penang at the at the eateries, including two nasi kandar shops? Didn’t that shop had a Halal certificate, although the hygiene was severely compromised? Ah, bummer. This goes to show that just because there is a certificate, it does not automatically guarantee cleanliness.
And, c’mon, let’s be honest, the Malay makcik selling karipap, nasi lemak or even pisang goreng tepi jalan, can we say for certain that they have a halal certificate displayed? (Pretty sure, we’re all gonna go on that hunt soon enough!) But there is this assumption that her food meets halal standards. Why? Because she’s a Malay/Muslim. But, when a non-Muslim has a “No Pork, No Lard” sign, all hell breaks loose, about lard, gelatin, alcohol or contamination as brought up by JAIS. If that is so, then the issue isn’t really about the laws anymore, it has transgressed into prejudice. And if you reduce it to “Muslim = trusted, Non-Muslim = doubtful,” then let’s call it what it is: not just ignorance, but racism.
Malaysia is diverse country and a melting pot of many races and religions of which each has its own dietary restrictions. That is a no-brainer. We have Hindus who don’t eat beef, we also have Buddhists who do not consume beef as well. It is to be noted that both these communities have a significant number of vegetarians, and it is also safe to say that pork is also consumed selectively. This is also underscoring the fact that many individuals may have dietary restrictions that is not tied down to their faiths and based on health. As such, signages such as “No Pork, No Lard” provides for a guide for the same to navigate the endless choices of food and establishments in Malaysia.
Let’s take a breather here. There’s no way denying that Malaysia is a multiracial, multicultural country. Heck, we just celebrated 68 years of independence, but why are we so backwards. Signs like “No Pork, No Lard” are not religious statements—they are simply informational. It is as simple as that. Muslims who want assurance, there’s the halal certification system, which we think is clear, comprehensive, and widely respected. But for everyone else, this simple phrase is just another piece of information to help them decide where to eat. Not every label needs to be read through a religious lens. The true focus here should be ensuring consistent hygiene standards and respecting the cultural diversity that makes Malaysia what it is.
Honestly, we feel that JAIS choosing to address this is outside its job scope. “No Pork, No Lard” is in no way an alternative to Halal Certification and with the existence of such certifications, the consumer has already a clear guideline to follow which would not lead to any “confusion”.
Being the lawyers we are, perhaps what we truly need is a clear legal precedent to resolve this matter once and for all. The concerns shared by JAIS of potential “confusion” is an insult to human intelligence. We must stop misreading intentions and stretching the law beyond its purpose. It is time to remove the religious-tinted lenses and look at issues from a broader perspective, one that promotes prosperity, harmony, and mutual respect among all Malaysians. Kita kan Malaysia Madani, after all.
Muthiah & Sabrina are simply two lawyers with plenty of thoughts to share. Nothing here is meant to offend. Only to invite reflection and conversation.
Many No Pork No Lard places Got Beer. Tak Masuk Akal.
ReplyDelete