The vice president of PKR, Nurul Izzah raised an uproar when on the 3rd of November 2012, she claimed that everyone, even the Malays, should be granted freedom in practicing religions of their choices. As a panel member of the forum ‘Islamic State: Which Version? Whose Responsibility?’ organised by the ‘Oriental Hearts and Mind Study Institute’ and the ‘Islamic Renaissance Front’, she was asked if Malays should have religious-freedom like the Non-Malays. In reply, she said:
“When you ask me, there is no compulsion in religion… how can anyone say, ‘Sorry, this (religious freedom) only applies to non-Malays’? It has to apply equally.”
Please listen to her statement in the video below:
In the statement, she had obviously declared “it (religious freedom) has to apply equally”, meaning to every person disregarding their race or ethnicity including the Malays as she also said, “how can anyone say, ‘Sorry, this (religious freedom) only applies to non-Malays’?”
In the Article 160(2) of the Federal Constitution, a Malay is defined as one who professes Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language and conforms to Malay customs.
So why is she denying that she encourages Muslims to renounce Islam? She is now trying to sue Utusan Malaysia, Berita Harian as well as a number of bloggers for slander, stating that:
“I regret there are people trying to twist my statement as if I disparage the issue of faith or accept Muslims who choose to apostate.”
Is she trying to say that while she wants everyone including Malays should be granted religious freedom, she at the same time doesn’t support the Muslims who choose to apostate? Though Malays are, by the definition written in the federal constitution, must be Muslims? And yet she claims that people are ‘twisting her statements’.
It doesn’t make any sense, does it? And how odd it is for a person who claims to fight for justice, when the news portal that reported her statement before Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian did was not being blamed for twisting her words. Is it because the news portal Malaysiakini is linked to the oppositions as claimed by many?
She is starting to sound exactly like the PKR leader who also happens to be her father, Anwar Ibrahim. Like father, like daughter – both sharing the idealism of Islamic liberalism and religious pluralism, and both bombarded false accusations of defamation and slander mercilessly to the reporters who simply wrote down their statements, word by word.
Despite that fact, they still have the heart to claim that Pakatan Rakyat and Party Keadlian Rakyat are fighting for ‘Human Rights’. In the same forum, to the questions on the rights of the LGBT community, Nurul Izzah stated that we should not ‘victimise’ anyone. Of course to Nurul Izzah, the LGBTs, who goes against the laws of nature and laws of Allah by their own choice, should be given their ‘rights’ but the reporters who reported what she said should be sued if her own statements went against her.
But of course, her dear father, Anwar Ibrahim would also agree with her that human rights and press freedom does not apply to folks from Utusan Malaysia or anyone who dares to tell the truth thus may stand in their way from reaching Putrajaya.
Malaysiakini wrote that “she said, what should be sought is “quality” where Muslims’ faith is strong. ‘Even me, being schooled in Assunta (secondary school) with a huge cross in the hall and an active singing Catholic society did not influence me,’ she said.”
Obviously, it did… or she wouldn’t dare to say that Allah Himself said in the Quran that there is no compulsion in religion to all including the Muslims. How could her aqidah stays strong when she dared to make such a statement? Where is the ‘quality’ and what kind of ‘quality’ is she referring to?