PRESS STATEMENT FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) Statement

On Government's Stance on Article 11

The Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) would like to express its disappointment with the government's latest position on the forums held by Article 11 on the Federal Constitution. This current stance appears to be based on the mistaken assumption that public discussion on issues related to fundamental liberties will cause tension in our multi-racial and multi-religious society.

The CPPS would like to point out that these forums are not related in any way to the proposal to establish an Inter-Faith Council. Nowhere in the objectives of the coalition of NGOs comprising Article 11 is there any reference made to promoting inter-faith dialogue, much less an IFC - see Article 11's home page on the web which is open to all members of the public to view. At the same time, the actual substance of the Article 11

Forums - focusing on the supremacy of the Federal Constitution and its guarantee of rights for all Malaysians – has been manipulated and distorted by a small group of extremists to imply an attack on the position of Islam in the Constitution. Nothing can be further from the truth.

The three forums held by Article 11 this year have sought civil and rational discussion on crucial issues of fundamental liberties and rights. It is not Article 11 that is intentionally stirring up anger and tension among the masses but rather the small group of intolerant religious extremists that are bent on silencing Article 11, and coercing and intimidating the great majority of right thinking and fair minded Malaysians with their authoritarian tactics.

In a statement by our Prime Minister just two days ago, he said that Islam Hadhari would be able to showcase Islam as a tolerant and caring religion. Amongst the guiding principles of Islam Hadhari are to foster a "free and liberated people" and to ensure "the protection of the rights of minority groups". Putting an end to open dialogue such as that being conducted by Article 11 not only violates the principle of freedom of speech and _expression enshrined in the Federal Constitution but it also directly contradicts the principles and values of Islam Hadhari.

It is important at this point of our country's development for the advocates and protagonists of Islam Hadhari to make a stand on what the values of this new vision stand for: a tolerant, self-confident and progressive religion or one that is being hijacked by intolerant religious hardliners determined to impose their narrow and bigoted agenda, insecurities and interests on Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

The decision to end the Article 11 public forums sets up a negative precedent that will undermine our growing democracy. We also fear that this regressive move will encourage other minority groups of extreme views to pressure the government to alter policies according to their own interests, and bring about a retreat on the upholding of basic liberties. This will send the wrong signal to the public, who has welcomed the government's promise of a liberal and open society. That extremist groups can so easily influence the key socio-political policies and fundamental liberties of the country will not say much about the government's commitment to equally protecting the rights and freedoms of all groups in the country.

The CPPS hopes that the present decision is only a temporary one. We call on the Government to reconsider its decision based on an open, full and fair assessment of what has taken place with regard to the forums conducted by Article 11. This assessment should include not only an analysis of the role of Article 11 but also of the dissidents and troublemakers intent on disrupting and silencing the forums. We strongly support the Government in standing firmly behind the principles of the freedom of speech and assembly as enshrined in the Constitution, to not to give in to intolerant extremist groups, and to protect and not undermine or diminish the right of Article 11 and other similar organizations to exercising their democratic rights and freedoms.

Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam

Chairman, CPPS 26 July 2006

Article 11

----------

The Federal Constitution and Human Rights Conventions commit the coalition of NGOs known as Article 11 to embracing, upholding and pursuing the realization of the following principles as guaranteed:

1. No citizen shall be discriminated on the basis of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender

2. Parents (both mother and father) are equal guardians and have equal say in all respects of the upbringing of children

3. Children shall be protected from any form of discrimination on the grounds of religion and in all cases; the interests of children shall be paramount

4. The freedom of thought, conscience and belief for all persons shall be fully respected, guaranteed and protected

5. Every citizen has a responsibility to condemn discrimination and intolerance based on religion or belief

6. Every citizen has a responsibility to apply religion or belief in support of human dignity and peace.

Article 11 is fully committed to upholding those fundamental rights for all Malaysians regardless of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender.

---------------------------------------------

26 July 2006

A press statement by Article 11, a coalition of Malaysian NGOs committed to upholding the fundamental rights of all Malaysians regardless of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender.

*Article 11* is very concerned that the Prime Minister's statement reported in today's press, calling for a halt to *Article 11*'s public forums, is based on the widespread but mistaken belief that the coalition's activities are aimed at reviving the initiative to establish an Inter-Faith Commission (IFC).

*Article 11* would like to take this opportunity to clarify that the forums, entitled "Federal Constitution: Protection for All", are in no way related with the IFC initiative.

Rather, *Article 11*'s forums focus on the rights that the Federal Constitution, as the supreme law of Malaysia, guarantees to each citizen. The forums are also intended to highlight the concerns of civil society resulting from the plight of various individuals who are unable to obtain legal redress and who therefore suffer as a result of the current jurisdictional uncertainty in the courts. There is no discussion about the IFC in *Article 11*'s public forums or other activities.

*Article 11 *will seek a meeting with the Prime Minister to request further information about his concerns regarding the coalition's activities and to provide clarification on the misconception that links *Article 11* with the IFC.

*Article 11* takes note of the concerns of the Prime Minister. The coalition members will meet soon, and will carefully consider his advice in its discussions of its future plans.