Control of religion in S'pore must change with times

Home

The Party

Young Democrats

Sunday, 23 January 2011

Muhd Shamin

The recent ruling by the Hindu Endowments Board (HEB) governing the festival of Thaipusam is a manifestation of the worsening state of human rights in Singapore. Under the new guidelines "shouting and other forms of unruly behavior is prohibited; participants shall not paint their faces or bodies or wear any form of disguise".

These restrictions are not uncommon in Singapore. In the Muslim community, the Islamic Religious Authority of Singapore (MUIS) rules that mosques are not allowed to project the sounding of the azan (call to prayer) because it causes a “public nuisance”.

These PAP rulings are issued through religious bodies to give them a “religious coating”. It is therefore not surprising to note that these bodies are resented by the followers of the religion in this country and lack the moral and spiritual legitimacy to represent the followers.

Origins of the HEB and MUIS

Islam and Hinduism are among the world’s major religions commanding the following of about two billion people. Due to their long history, these two religions have evolved and the interpretations of the religions have diversified as a result of changing times and different cultural understandings.

Naturally, it is difficult to find consensus on a lot of matters, let alone finding one body to represent and govern the religions.

Islam and Hinduism have their origins from the Mohamaden and Hindu Endownment Boards (MHEB) under the British Colonial Administration. Through an act of Parliament, they became two separate bodies: HEB would govern matters of the Hindu religion and customs, and MUIS would take care of issues pertaining to Islam.

Secular Republic

It is not the business of the secular government to involve itself in the matters of religion. Religion is a personal right and choice. No one government should dictate how an individual should practice his/her religion.

All a government should do is to ensure that an environment exists that allows all religions to practice their faiths as they see fit with the following ground rules:

That it be understood by all that no one faith is superior to another,
That none of the practitioners espouse or practice violence against another religion,
And that there must be tolerance in our society that each religion has the right to practice their rituals freely.

Under the PAP, however, the Government actively controls the practice of religious faiths by appointing religious leaders. In Islam, for example, the Mufti acts as the representative of the Muslim community in Singapore. He is appointed by the President of the Republic of Singapore who is not a Muslim. Why is he not elected or chosen by the Muslim community?

Religious leaders appointed by the government will be viewed with suspicion because they will be seen as a mouthpiece of the ruling party and lack credibility. This will cause unhappiness in the community.

There is an urgent need for a new form of engagement between the secular government and religious currents. We cannot hold on to the current, out-dated practice. A new religio-political arrangement based on the rule of law and respect for human rights and dignity must be established.

Muhd Shamin is a member of the SDP's youth wing, the Young Democrats.

Share this article:

Comments (11)

Mon 24 Jan 2011 4:23 AM | freedomT

This is so true. Everything that is in Singapore belong to LKY and the PAP. Even our religious institutions are run by the PAP. They have no knowledge in Islam but headed the Muis in all aspect.

Sun 23 Jan 2011 10:25 PM | Educator - Islamic Rights

I find it highly ridiculous that when MUIS is supposed to uphold the Islamic rights like waqaf etc and defending the rights of Muslims, they are not. On one hand of suspicion, I wonder what about their conscience.

God-willing, the new mufti will do good to the community and society when the new government (God-willing) takes over.

Sun 23 Jan 2011 11:22 PM | quantum - Head of Religion

In China , the Tibetan Buddist Lama is chosen by the Chinese Communist Party, even though it is supposed to be decided by the Buddhist people 's method of reincarnation.
This is a very strange thing indeed - the secular government playing the roles of heads of religions.

Mon 24 Jan 2011 5:54 PM | Robox

Educator, don't hold your breath re: the new mufti. The problem lies with the PAP's system of political interference in just every single publicly funded body and not necessarily with the individual/s heading them.

Of course, you could argue that the individuals heading those bodies are selected on the basis that they will be amenable to the PAP's bidding as well, but that is another discussion.

Mon 24 Jan 2011 9:42 AM | Robox

In the wake of the Thaipusam debacle, I think that one effcetive recourse for the Hindu community is to stop ALL monetary contributions to the four temples controlled by the PAP's Council of Hindu Mullahs with immediate effect. (Check the HEB website if you need to know who they are.)

The HEB wants your money, but they want to use that money to embolden the police against Hindus.

The PAP wants your vote, but they want to win your vote by taking racist action against Hindus.

The PAP had better learn a better paradigm than this sick one of votes in exchange for abuse

What they want to turn Hindus into with this action is what they have successfully turned all fascist Singaporeans as well as other Singaporeans who vote for the PAP into: downright unselfrespecting individuals.

Please spread the word to your family members and friends as well. All non-Hindus opposed to the PAP, please spread the word to you Hindu friends as well.

Mon 24 Jan 2011 1:03 PM | freedomT

ROBOX, MUIS and mosque building funds are not publicly funded by the government. It is entirely funded by all working Muslims from their salary deduction. That is why the funds are never enough to begin with. Since the PAP refused to help, they should not get involved in Islamic politics in Singapore. Hands off!!

Mon 24 Jan 2011 11:10 PM | Robox

Hmm, FreedomT, I'm not sure that you are entirely right. But let's seperate MUIS from mosques first.

MUIS is a statutory board; all its employees are paid by the public coffers. That makes MUIS a publicly-funded body. As an addendum, in a secular state, that also means that none of their activities can even remotely involve interpreting scripture. However - and this is the Singapore practise, in theory, of the practise of secularism which I don't disagree with - MUIS can be involved in the administrative aspects of services to the Muslim community such as collecting and disbursing the funds for the building of mosques. (I'm sure they are or could be involved in other ativities that fit the criteria.)

Now for mosques themselves. I recall reading that their building is funded, or at least it used to be funded, by the government matching the funds raised by the Muslim commuinity. I'm not entirely sure of this, but it does look like more information is required about this.

Tue 25 Jan 2011 12:56 PM | freedomT

ROBOX, I am a Muslims here to begin with and they do deduct our salary for MUIS, Mosque building funds and Mendaki.

Tue 25 Jan 2011 9:11 PM | musarios

Hello Old Man....u are getting senile and distorted comment. Its time for you to step down. You are uttering nonsence that will incite racial tension.

Wed 26 Jan 2011 2:51 AM | Robox

freedomT, in a transparent system, we would know ALL the specifics about public revenue and public expenditure.

Using your example, the precise details for how much the deductions from Muslim Singaporeans' salaries amount to, and what that amount is spent on, would be public (or publicly accessible) knowledge. (That's how we are going to determine where the

That's the transparency that is lacking in Singapore.

However, this gives me the opportunity to mention that, even though the quality of opposition has been steadily rising for a period of slightly less than three years now, fiscal issues and especially, holding the PAP government fiscally accountable is not yet one of the strengths of the collective opposition to the PAP. (They are not one of my own areas of strength either, admittedly.)

Wed 26 Jan 2011 2:55 PM | freedomT

Agreed Robox, MUIS including Madrasah educations both full time and part time, Mendaki and mosque building Funds are only supported and sponsor by all working Muslims in Singapore through salary deduction. That is why Muslims are exempted to contribute to other Charity organisation such as NKF as contributed by other races. The burdens are too much for any Muslims to bear. Around 20 to 30% of our salary are deducted for these. PAP has been very good in trashing the Malays/ Muslims community while keeping these secret to other races.