Religion and the law

The Sunday Star

Legally Speaking by Roger Tan

The Jais raid on the premises of the Bible Society of Malaysia has put into focus the Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment 1988 of SelangorThe Jais raid on the premises of the Bible Society of Malaysia has put into focus the Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment 1988 of Selangor.

THE Jan 2 raid by the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (Jais) on the premises of the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM), in which 331 copies of Malay and Iban Bibles were seized, has brought to national attention a piece of state legislation hitherto unknown to many Malaysians – the Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment 1988 of Selangor (Selangor Enactment).

So far, Jais has argued they were empowered to do so under Section 9 (1) of the Selangor Enactment, which prohibits any non-Muslim to use in writing or speech any of 25 words or any of their derivatives and variations, as stated in Part 1 of the Schedule, pertaining to a non-Islamic religion.

The 25 words are Allah, Firman Allah, Ulama, Hadith, Ibadah, Kaabah, Kadi, Ilahi, Wahyu, Mubaligh, Syariah, Qiblat, Haj, Mufti, Rasul, Iman, Dakwah, Injil, Salat, Khalifah, Wali, Fatwa, Imam, Nabi andSheikh.

Section 9 (2) also prohibits a non-Muslim to use 10 expressions of Islamic origin set out in Part II of the Schedule, including Alhamdulillah and Insyallah.

Non-Muslims can, however, use the words and expressions by way of quotation or reference.

Jais contended that Section 9 (1) had been contravened because the Malay and Iban Bibles contain the word “Allah”. Further, they were entitled to arrest without warrant the BSM chairman, lawyer Lee Min Choon, and manager Sinclair Wong as section 11 provides that all offences and cases under the Selangor Enactment are deemed to be seizable offences and cases under the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), that is, offenders of seizable offences can be arrested without any warrant of arrest.

A fortiori, as this is a law passed by a state legislature, it has the force of law and quite rightly it can, therefore, override the 10-point solution decided by the Federal Cabinet and communicated via the Prime Minister’s letter dated April 11, 2011 to the Christian Federation of Malaysia.

Eulogy delivered by Roger Tan for the Revd Dr. George Hood at the Sunday Worship Service of Holy Light Church (English) on 20 January 2013

Members of this congregation, it gives me great honour and yet sadness to deliver a eulogy for the Revd Dr. George Hood who passed away peacefully in his sleep in the early hours of the morning of Wednesday, January the 9th at his home in Alnwick, Northumberland, England. According to his daughter, Catherine, George was normal the night before when she helped him to the bed. He was 95. 

This Church remembers him as the one instrumental in restarting this English Service on the evening of the first Sunday of August, being 3rd of August, 1952 after it had ceased shortly with the passing of Dato’ James Meldrum in 1904.

George was a veteran missionary and Church historian. Born on Friday, April 27, 1917, he graduated in history at Oxford and studied at Cambridge for the ministry of the Presbyterian Church of England (now known as the United Reformed Church). In 1943, he was ordained at Trinity Presbyterian Church, Newcastle to serve as a missionary. He first served at the English Presbyterian Mission in Lingdong Synod of the former Church of Christ in Shantou (or historically known as Swatow), China, between 1945 to 1950. This was also the area in which his wife, Elizabeth’s parents and grandparents had worked from 1869 onwards. Elizabeth passed away on October 7, 2010.

Double joy for Holy Light Church

All praise for new hall: Church-goers during a worship session.

The Star

Congregation celebrates newly completed hall and 60th anniversary

JOHOR BARU: It was a poignant moment for the congregation of Holy Light Church (English) when their retired pastor Reverend Nicholas Yeo took the stage of the newly completed Faith Worship Hall to sing ‘My Tribute (To God)’. 

This is understandable considering that the congregation had waited close to 20 years to have their own Church building.

On Sunday Oct 28 their dream finally came true when the completion of the RM4Million multi-purpose hall in Persiaran Ponderosa Utama project finally came to fruition. Close to 700 worshippers turned up for the morning service. It was also a double celebration as the Church is 60 years old this year.

Church leaders slam raid by state Islamic department

The Star 

PETALING JAYA: Church leaders have come out to strongly condemn the raid by Jais.

Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) senior pastor Dr Daniel Ho, who heads the church at the Dream Centre in Petaling Jaya, said the trespassers had subjected the dinner guests to undue harassment.

The event was organised by non-governmental organisation Harapan Komuniti on Wednesday as an appreciation for its volunteers, leaders, supporters and members of the community who have benefited from its work.

The NGO assists the poor and the needy, including women, children, and victims of HIV/AIDS and natural disasters, regardless of race or religion.

DUMC is among the bigger churches in the Klang Valley, with its membership numbering in the thousands.

“At 10pm on the same night, a large group of between 20 and 30 Jais and police officers entered the premises of Dream Centre.

“They entered the hall where the dinner was taking place and started taking videos and photographs,” Dr Ho said in a statement yesterday.

The officers, who took down details of the Muslim guests, had entered the private property without a warrant.

“When asked by the organisers why they were there, Jais replied that they received a complaint, but they were unable to produce a copy when asked,” Dr Ho said.

Council of Churches Malaysia general secretary Reverend Dr Hermen Shastri said the act had made a mockery of the sanctity of religious places.

Time to break the impasse

By not confronting racial and religious issues, civil court judges have abdicated their duty to uphold the people’s constitutional rights to equality and freedom of religion.

ON Nov 12, much to the dismay of many Malaysians, the Federal Court declined to answer five constitutional questions of public importance on unilateral conversion of children to Islam by one parent who has embraced Islam.

The case involved Shamala Sathiyaseelan, 38, and Dr Jeyaganesh Mogarajah, 42. The couple were married on Nov 5, 1998 according to Hindu rites in Alor Setar and the marriage was registered under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, 1976 (Act 164). Their sons, Saktiswaran and Theiviswaran – born in 1999 and 2001 – were Hindus at the time of their birth.

On Nov 19, 2002, Jeyaganesh converted to Islam. As a ‘saudara baru’ or muallaf, he is known as Muhammad Ridzwan bin Mogarajah. On Nov 25, 2002, Jeyaganesh converted the two minors to Islam without the knowledge or consent of Shamala. Saktiswaran’s Muslim name is Muhammad Firdaus Jeya while Theiviswaran is named Muhammad Asraf Jeya.

Shamala then went to the Kuala Lumpur High Court to challenge the conversions and seek custody of the minors. Justice Faiza Tamby Chik held on April 13, 2004 that since the two minors were now muallafs, Shamala should take them to Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan for help and advice to resolve the issue because under Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution, the civil court had no competency to determine the status of the minors’ conversion.

Meanwhile, Jeyaganesh had also obtained hadhanah (custody) of the two minors from the Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Selangor on May 8, 2003. However, on July 20, 2004, in addition to an interim order made earlier in favour of Shamala on April 17, 2003, the High Court granted Shamala ‘actual custody’ or actual care and control, and the husband, ‘legal custody’ of the children.

Too much of a good thing

Venting their anger: Jones' threat to burn the Quran has resulted in worldwide condemnation against him.

If we adopt a free for all, which includes the right to indulge in hate speech or a right to foment and incite hatred and violence, our beloved country will be torn apart in no time.

MANY of us have heard of the infamous Pastor Terry Jones – the bewhiskered preacher from the diminutive Dove World Outreach Centre in Gainesville, Florida, in the United States who had threatened to hold “Inter­national Burn A Quran Day” on Sept 11. He subsequently backed down after worldwide condemnation against him.

This included our Foreign Affairs Minister Datuk Anifah Aman, who called the act of burning the holy book of Muslims a “heinous crime”.

US President Barack Obama warned that this could increase the recruitment of individuals who would be willing to blow themselves up in American or European cities, adding that it would be a recruitment bonanza for al-Qaeda.

As a Christian, I am ashamed by what Jones tried to do, especially when it came from a man of God.

But why were the US authorities, including the President, powerless to stop him from carrying out his threat?

The answer lies in Jones’ right to freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment to the US Constitu­tion.

The First Amendment is part of the United States Bill of Rights which contains the first 10 sacrosanct amendments to the United States Constitution.

Leading with an open heart

It remains one of the non-Muslims’ gravamina that they find it increasingly difficult to build their places of worship. But recently, the Johor state government not only approved the building of a church, it also contributed RM200,000 to its construction.

ON Aug 1, the congregation of my church, the Holy Light Church (English), Johor Baru (HLCE), was elated to learn at a special fund-raising service that Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman had granted a sum of RM200,000 towards the construction of our first church building.

A member of the congregation, Suzie Teo, who shed tears of joy upon hearing the announcement, said: “We are overwhelmed by the Mentri Besar’s kind gesture. What was initially a pipe dream is now a dream come true.

“I am so touched to learn that after waiting for 20 years, the Johor state government has not only approved our application but has also decided to partially contribute towards the construction cost of RM3mil.”

Indeed, the Mentri Besar’s thoughtful gesture in our time of need, which is not given at election time, will go a long way to assure the HLCE congregation that the state government is not just a government of one particular race or religion, but that of all Johoreans.

In fact, as we look back at the last 20 years, the entire journey is one of faith, which is obviously not suitable for the faint-hearted lacking any tenacity to persevere from the application stage to the final approval.

It was in September 1989 that HLCE acquired this piece of agricultural land in Pandan, next to the Ponderosa Golf Resort, measuring 8.925 acres. As the HLCE congregation has been worshipping on rented premises since 1952, it is hoped that a permanent place of worship would be erected on this land.

In 1991, the HLCE applied to the Johor state authority to convert the land use from “agriculture” to “religious use”, but this was turned down in 1993. In August 1993, the HLCE received notice that the land would be compulsorily acquired for a joint-venture project between a state agency and a private developer. The HLCE then filed a suit in 1995 against the state government challenging the validity of the acquisition. At this time, I had already moved from Kuala Lumpur and started worshipping at the HLCE.

When I brought to the attention of then Mentri Besar Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that the land belonged to a church, Muhyiddin immediately instructed that the land acquisition be withdrawn. When Ghani became the Mentri Besar in 1995, he arranged for the withdrawal of the acquisition to be officially gazetted on Sept 3, 1996.

Being only too aware that it would be near impossible for the state authority to convert the land use to religious use over a piece of property measuring about nine acres, the HLCE then had it sub-divided equally into two plots.

Over the years, the HLCE applied for the two plots to be separately converted for institutional and religious purposes. In 2000, the state government approved the piece meant for institutional use. It was not until April 2008, and that also only after the personal intervention of Ghani, that the other piece was converted for religious use.

In June 2010 and early this month, the state security committee and the Johor Baru City Council respectively approved the building plans for the new church sanctuary. Piling work is expected to commence in October.

As shown above, the application and approval process for the erection of non-Muslim places of worship is most cumbersome. As it is almost unheard of that state governments would alienate lands for building non-Muslim places of worship, most lands involved are private lands. Hence, the necessity of having first to convert the land use to religious use before a place of worship can be erected thereon.

Only after the land conversion is approved can one submit the building plan for approval by the local authority. It must be emphasised that when applying for both the land conversion and building plan approvals, the entire approval process is repeated in that the approvals of the district and state security committees are mandatory for both stages. It is also open knowledge that representatives from the Islamic Affairs Department would sit in these committees.

It follows that it is not unusual to take at least five to 10 years from the time the application is submitted until the project finally comes to fruition. Perhaps what creates the most resentment among non-Muslims is the fact that the erection of their places of worship is treated as a security threat.

In the last general election and even today, it remains one of the non-Muslims’ gravamina that they find it increasingly difficult to build their places of worship. They are upset that the approving authorities have scant regard to Articles 3 and 11(3) of the Federal Constitution which guarantee them the right to profess and practise their religions as well as to establish and maintain institutions for religious purposes.

In the case of the HLCE, it had to seek the assistance of various high-ranking government officials and politicians in the last 20 years. While I find them most understanding and helpful, the same cannot be said of the junior and local government officers. As the civil service is almost mono-religious and often devoid of multi-religious sensitisation, it is understandable if they feel that it is against their religion to support the erection of other places of worship.

So when applications are so frequently turned down and approvals are so difficult to obtain, it is axiomatic that the only human reaction is, of course, to convert, albeit illegally, houses, shoplots and commercial premises into worship places.

In the true spirit of the Federal Constitu­tion, I wish to reiterate my calls made over the years on the need to establish a non-Muslim Affairs Committee/Department in each state to deal with all matters relating to non-Muslim places of worship.

Renewed resolve on places of worship

New Straits Times
by Yong Huey Jiun

Since March 8, religious leaders have found more open doors in government offices. But, they tell YONG HUEY JIUN, they have a list of outstanding problems to address

THE Sri Maha Kaliamman Temple near Kampung Tasek Tambahan in Ampang has been demolished several times in its 19-year existence. Now it will be rebuilt for the third time -- once the Selangor government provides a new location.

Scores of non-Muslim places of worship have faced a similar fate, but with this issue swaying voters in the March 8 general election, both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat members are speaking up for them.

In the mid-1990s, then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad ordered that the demolition of places of worship had to be approved by the respective menteri besar or chief minister, while he himself would decide on cases within the Federal Territory. But over the years, this directive has been ignored or forgotten.

Part of the problem is that many of these sites do not have land titles, notes Datuk A. Vaithilingam, president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism.

The Malaysia Hindu Sangam, the country's umbrella body for Hindus, has been working to register an estimated 7,000 temples and 10,000 shrines. So far, they have been able to register only 2,000 because many are suspicious of the exercise.

Last year, the Hindu Sangam asked the Housing and Local Government Ministry to conduct the registration instead.

In some cases, places of worship are built "illegally" on land belonging to the government or private owners. The Sri Maha Kaliamman Temple, for example, was on Selangor forest reserve land.

As far as possible, religious leaders try to negotiate new sites with local authorities or developers before the bulldozers move in. But sometimes, they only find out about demolitions when it is too late.

The demolition of the 60-year-old Sri Maha Mariamman temple in Shah Alam on Oct 30 last year, just before Deepavali, may have cost BN the local non-Muslim vote in the polls.

When the Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) demolished the Sri Maha Kaliamman Temple last September, both BN and Pakatan leaders protested. MIC Youth chief T. Mohan pointed out that the new Pakatan-run state government had promised not to demolish any places of worship, while Kapar member of parliament S. Manickavasagam threatened to resign as Parti Keadilan Rakyat's Selangor liaison committee deputy chairman if no action was taken against MPAJ officials.

Selangor's state committee on non-religious affairs, set up after the elections, temporarily suspended MPAJ deputy president Hamid Hussain and investigated the incident.

One of the outcomes was that owners of 27 plots of state land approved for places of worship in Selangor were told they need only pay RM1,000 quit rent for the first year and then a nominal RM1 for the remainder of new 99-year leases.

But although authorities are now more open to talks, it will take time for change to take effect.

"The government may have changed in some states," says Loka Ng Sai Kai, coordinator of the Malaysian Buddhist Solidarity Group, "but the local government officials are still the same. These officials don't necessarily understand the structural and cultural issues involved."

Bar Council's Roger Tan has been calling for a department of non-Muslim affairs to be set up in every state, stressing that religious leaders should be involved in decision-making on issues affecting their communities.

"If an illegal non-Muslim place of worship is demolished by a department of non-Muslim affairs, the impact and reaction would not be as great as it might be if the task were performed by the land office or local authority," he says.

Religious leaders complain of having faced political and bureaucratic hurdles for years.

Vaithilingam says the difficulty of establishing non-Muslim houses of worship leads to "illegal" temples and shophouses being turned into churches.

It is not uncommon for a decade to pass between application and approval of a non-Muslim house of worship. The Vihara Samadhi Temple in Shah Alam is a case in point. In the early 1990s, the Buddhist Missionary Society Malaysia (BMSM) submitted a building plan to the Shah Alam municipal council for 1.3 acres bought from the Selangor State Development Corporation.

The application was rejected -- after some five years -- on grounds that there was a large Muslim population there. BMSM was compensated with another piece of land nearby, which took the Shah Alam municipal council another three years to approve. Finally, after more than 10 years, the layout plan was approved just before the March general election.

Datuk Chee Peck Kiat, BMSM's honorary secretary-general, says impractical restrictions on building dimensions are as much to blame as the bureaucracy that stalls approval.

At a meeting with various non-Muslim representatives to discuss new guidelines for non-Muslim places of worship, Pakatan decided that such restrictions should be dealt with "on a case-to-case basis", taking into account the needs of the communities.

Another major hurdle is funding. The Federal Government has earmarked RM8 million for building non-Muslim places of worship from 2005 to 2008, with RM428 million allocated for Muslim facilities. Non-Muslim leaders say the meagre allocations compel them to rely on their own financing.

In his Budget 2009 speech last month, Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim proposed RM6 million for non-Muslim places of worship and RM103.5 million for the state Islamic Religious Department to build, maintain and upgrade religious primary schools, offices and mosques.

Religious leaders urge that places of worship not be seen as flashpoints but as nation-building blocks. Such institutions can help promote consciousness of morality and service to others, says Reverend Dr Hermen Shastri, general secretary of the Council of Churches Malaysia.

"The religious community is a vital link in this process," he says. "If people want to learn more about their own faith and offer services beyond themselves, the authorities should facilitate them."

Undo the acts that hurt others

IN a multi-religious country like ours, religion is one issue which always invokes and provokes strong passions and reactions if not handled carefully.

In the last general election, many non-Muslims turned away from Barisan Nasional and voted for the opposition.

In some cases, church leaders even openly encouraged their Christian congregations to vote for Pas - something hitherto unthinkable, especially when Pas has always been advocating the establishment of an Islamic state.

But why had non-Muslims voted for the opposition so resoundingly this time?

The reason is obvious. The non-Muslims' gravamens are essentially these:

• the authorities were trigger-happy in demolishing illegal places of worship.

• the government's inaction, especially by the non-Muslim component parties in BN, in resolving the conflicts of civil law and syariah arising out of Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution. The problem is compounded when non-Muslims could more or less predict the outcome of the decisions of civil courts whenever a remedy was sought there.

• religious polarisation caused by the rivalry between Umno and Pas, each wanting to outdo the other in being more Islamic.

• non-Muslims find it increasingly difficult to build their places of worship.

Of these, I would only like to deal with the last grievance.

Article 3 of the Federal Constitution declares that non-Muslims are entitled to practise their religions in peace and harmony while Islam is the religion of the federation.

This is reinforced by Article 11(1) which provides that every non-Muslim has the right to profess and practise his religion. Article 11(3) also states that every religious group has the right, inter alia, to establish and maintain institutions for religious purposes and to acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law.

Sadly, in practice, this is not the case. The time taken to obtain approvals to build non-Muslim places of worship is incredibly long. In almost every case, it takes years. The application and approval process is most cumbersome. For a start, it is almost unheard of that state governments would alienate lands for erection of non-Muslim places of worship. Hence, the lands involved are usually private lands and so before it could be used for religious purposes, the land has to be first converted for religious use. So an application will have to be made to the state authority (which is the state executive council), and it will be processed by the land office.

However, because it involves the erection of non-Muslim places of worship, most states require the matter to be first referred to a district security committee. At the district security committee level, the district office will have to obtain comments from various government departments, including the police.

The least palatable aspect of it all is that views from the Religious Affairs Department will also be sought.

Even if the district security committee approves it, the matter would still have to be referred to the state security committee, which is chaired by either the chief minister or state secretary.

In most cases, the process of obtaining comments from the various government departments is repeated.

If the state security committee okays it, it does not mean the application has been approved. It then goes to another committee chaired by the state executive councillor in charge of land matters, a position usually held by the chief minister.

If the committee approves it, the state executive council has to give its final approval.

As the process takes such a long time, it is no surprise that along the way, the file is either misplaced or goes missing. In addition, sometimes there is a delay in submitting the papers for deliberation by some over-zealous junior government officers, who are mono-religious and feel that it is against their religion to support it.

The story does not end there even when the land has been converted for religious use. The next thing is to put up the building.

To do that, an application will now have to be submitted to the local authority for approval of the building plans.

But because it involves a non-Muslim place of worship, the process of going through the district and state security committees has to be repeated.

Even if the final approval is obtained, it still takes a few years for the building to come up. The reason being the costs of financing the construction and completion of these places of worship have to be privately raised and borne. All in all, it is not uncommon for at least 10 years to pass by the time a project comes to fruition.

It follows that because the approval process is so difficult, it is no wonder illegal places of worship mushroom here and there.

What is most insulting to them is the erection of their places of worship is viewed as a security threat. Often, it has to be referred to a security committee whose composition includes representatives from the Religious Affairs Department.

On the other hand, the erection of mosques is efficiently co-ordinated by one body - the state Muslim Council (Majlis Agama Islam).

Land is easily made available and whenever a new housing development is completed, a place will be reserved for the construction of either a mosque or surau. Financing its construction is not a problem either.

Some two years ago, I suggested in this column ("Religious freedom the keystone" - NST, Jan 8, 2006) that each state government should set up a non-Muslim religious department to look into the religious issues affecting non-Muslims and to co-ordinate applications and funding for non-Muslim places of worship.

I repeat this call and it is hoped that all state governments, whether under BN or Pakatan Rakyat, will consider this.

I am confident that any step taken to expedite the approval process and provide funding for non-Muslim places of worship will, in turn, expedite the healing process among these Malaysians who certainly feel aggrieved by this course of events.

By allowing them to freely and easily exercise their constitutional right to establish their religious sanctuaries will go a long way towards winning their hearts and minds.

In this respect, the Selangor government's decision to waive quit rent and assessment rates for all registered places of worship and schools in the state is laudable. They now only need to pay a token annual fee of RM1.

Likewise, the statement from the Pahang state secretary that it will now adopt a more liberal approach to matters concerning religion and places of worship is most welcome. Similarly, the prime minister has pledged to improve the situation.

But the most assuring of all came from the Sultan of Selangor, who said that although he is the head of Islam in Selangor, he will not hesitate to take action against any extremists and that it is important to ensure that religious freedom is defended by all.

It is hoped that everyone, be he a leader of BN or Pakatan, a Muslim or otherwise, will now take heed of the voice of the people expressed in the last general election.

It is hoped, too, that politicians will be often reminded by what the regent of Perak Raja Dr Nazrin Shah said exactly a year ago at the Young Malaysians' Roundtable Discussion on National Unity and Development in Malaysia that Malaysia belongs to all Malaysians equally, and all have an equal right and responsibility to take ownership of their country and its future.

He added that the sine qua non of building a strong nation is when its citizens feel a sense of belonging and a common destiny and in our case, when Malaysians of all races, religions and origins are bound together in a common purpose.

Therefore, history has always shown that suppression of a person's inherent right to freedom of religion is a recipe for disaster.

Consonantly, our leaders have also much to learn from the fair and just Muslim ruler in Sultan Abu Bakar, who ruled the state of Johor from 1886 to 1895.

Though a Muslim, he was much loved by his non-Muslim subjects. Hailed as the Father of Modern Johor, he granted many plots of land for the erection of churches and temples throughout Johor.

The best testimony of his sense of fairness and justice is reflected in the Johor constitution promulgated during his reign, wherein it still contains an article proclaiming as follows:

"All the laws and customs of the country shall be carried out and exercised with justice and fairness by all the Courts of Justice and all Officers and Servants of the State between all the people of the country and the aliens who sojourn and reside under its protection, whether for a season or for a lengthened period, that is to say, without their entertaining in the least degree more sympathy or regard to partiality towards those who profess the religion of the country, namely the Muslim religion, or making any difference between those who are the subjects of the State and those who are not."

Let us all Malaysians join hands as one people respecting each other's right to practise his religion in peace and harmony.

Let us take pride rather than cringe with shame if this country is filled not only with mosques but also churches and temples. If it is so, it is only because Malaysia is truly Asia.

Officials directed to read letters published in papers

©New Straits Times

JOHOR BARU, Jan 17: State officials have been directed to read letters published in newspapers to gauge public sentiment on government projects and services.

Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman, who gave the directive, said newspapers’ letters pages were an invaluable source of public feedback, and state executive councillors and heads of department should pay attention to the points raised.

"I know many do not even read the newspapers, let alone the letters pages. But they must make it a point to do this every morning," he said after opening the RM600,000 new clubhouse of the South Johor Chinese Press Club (SJCPC) here yesterday.

Ghani commended newspapers such as the New Straits Times for expanding their letters section from one to two pages, as the views expressed were a vital source of public feedback.

He said he told the state exco at a meeting yesterday to scan the newspapers for letters on problems in Johor, and respond to such complaints.

Ghani said the suggestions and views expressed in the op-ed pages of newspapers were also of merit and should be considered by the state exco and departmental heads.

A case in point, he said, was the piece by lawyer Roger Tan headlined "Religious freedom the keystone" in the New Sunday Times on Jan 8.

Tan, Johor’s state representative to the Malaysian Bar Council, had written about the difficulties non-Muslim groups faced in building places of worship and commented that the authorities should be more magnanimous in approving such applications as "a nation which is religious will only produce God-fearing people".

Ghani supported that view, saying such balanced, impartial and thought-provoking articles were eye-openers and should be read by those making decisions on the ground.

On the subject of the "bad Press" Johor had been getting lately in the Singapore media, he said the State Government was not overly concerned as most visitors knew that such reports were an exaggeration.

Regardless, he added, Johor would seek federal assistance to beef up security with an enlarged police presence on the streets here.

Earlier, he announced a RM200,000 State Government allocation to the SJCPC in aid of the clubhouse renovation project.

The 23-year-old club has 300-odd members from six Chinese newspapers in South Johor.

It has an Education Fund for members’ children and regularly gives out contributions in cash and kind in aid of the poor and needy.