Aren't there any specific laws here that trigger immediate action against those who spread slander and harass others while using religion as a shield?
Honestly, if a non-halal café hangs up a sign saying “No Pork” or “Pork Free,” why should that be interpreted as an attempt to mislead Muslims? Aren't there also thousands of non-Malays in this country who don't consume pork?
In fact, why are many still gripped by fear that their faith is under attack every time they spot anything that looks or even sounds like the dreaded “pork” word?
Or could it be that they are merely attention seekers who crave instant fame and monetary benefits?
Okay, let’s get this straight: after almost seventy years of continuously drumming it into the rakyat’s brains, by now everyone in this country perfectly understands Muslim sensitivity when it comes to non-halal food. Sure enough, with Islam as the religion of the Federation, non-Muslims should not question their rights. Full stop.
But going by that same logic, shouldn't the rights of non-Muslims also be treated with equal sensitivity when it comes to food?
Or has religious sensitivity been turned into a one-way street here—especially by the so-called celebrity preachers and aspiring, self-serving politicians?
Incidentally, just when the nation was enjoying a welcome lull in what used to be a noisy, never-ending "halal war," another unwanted controversy has erupted.
Last Saturday (August 8), it was reported that a 95-year-old popular kopitiam in Segamat, Johor, was mulling legal action against a Facebook page for insinuating that it served pork.
(Below) One of Segamat's iconic kopitiams that has been attracting a multiracial crowd decades before the country even gained independence!
Taking to social media, the Chinese-owned coffee shop then slammed the account administrator for somewhat lazily confusing "mee pok" (a type of flat noodle) with an actual pork dish.
Understandably, the proprietors of the long-established kopitiam were in no charitable mood to let self-appointed “halal inspectors” get away scot-free for an outright slander—apology note or not!
They have lodged a police report, handed over evidence to the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), and are mulling legal action against the accused party.
But seriously, why do these kinds of controversies still pop up? Did the eatery blatantly misuse the “halal” logo? Were they guilty of promoting pork to their Malay-Muslim clients?
The answer is an emphatic NO!
In the first place, is it right for vigilantes to set up social media directories to “red-flag” suspected rogue restaurants? Isn't that the job of the relevant authorities?
So the question remains: was the act due to plain ignorance—or could it be due to overzealousness born out of a deeply embedded religious supremacy culture?
Or maybe, as some may wonder: could it be just plain jealousy seeing patrons from diverse racial backgrounds happily chilling out at a traditional Chinese kopitiam?
Anyway, does the sight of the word “pok” or pork give them the right to poke their noses into where they have no business?
In the case of the Segamat kopitiam, the owners have every right to take the alleged perpetrators to court for defamation. No doubt, many may also agree that those engaging in slander should be exposed and dealt with according to the law for recklessly “throwing sand” into the rice bowl of honest businesses, regardless of the ethnic background of the owners.
Can there be a greater abomination than to slander others in the name of religion?
The thing is, by sowing doubt in the minds of their patrons, the popular coffee shop in question could potentially suffer some financial and reputational damage.
(Below) The proprietor's impassioned plea to his faithful clients to continue patronizing the well-liked kopitiam.
Screenshot from Nan Yang Coffee Shop Facebook.
If left unpunished, what could be next—will the culprits set up another dedicated Facebook page and lobby for the “pork" word or anything that sounds like it to be either renamed or banned?
Could the innocent “tau pok” end up being a victim one day? What about “keropok"?
While earlier the prime target of some self-ordained “religious watchdogs” used to be the so-called kuil haram, are some now training their guns at kopitiams? Why can't they open a Facebook page to zoom in on suspected corruption cases instead?
When red lines are crossed, aren't hefty million-ringgit lawsuits the best recourse to nail those who knowingly destroy livelihoods and divide a nation, just for social media fame and personal gains?
Main information source: Malaysiakini and Focus Malaysia.
JK Joseph (jtkingsworld@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.