Amidst the brouhaha about the controversial guidebook in ethnic relations in Dewan Rakyat, another debate has reignited the controversy whether Malaysia is an Islamic or secular state.

Taking centre stage in the Islamic or secular state debate is Karpal Singh, the MP for Bukit Gelugor.

This issue is likely to come up again and again in the Dewan Rakyat and it would be advisable for MPs to keep a file on the subject matter.

But Karpal Singh has no need for such a file. He has the matter close to his chest.

On 13 July 2006, Karpal Singh asked parliamentary secretary in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Dr Masitah Ibrahim what she thought of the insistence by the country’s first three prime ministers that Malaysia is a secular state.

Dr Masitah coolly replied: “The opinions of the former prime ministers that Malaysia was a secular state were purely their personal views.”

“Since Islam is mentioned over 20 times in our Federal Constitution, this shows that Malaysia is an Islamic state,” she concluded sheepishly.

Dr Masitah as well as her boss Datuk Dr Abdullah Md Zain (Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic affairs) was unable to defend the indefensible.

How could they, when Malaysia is not an Islamic state.

Despite Dr Masitah’s assertion that Malaysia is an Islamic state, the word “Islamic” or “secular” does not appear anywhere in the Federal Constitution. However, there is strong historical evidence in the Reid Commission papers that the country was meant to be secular.

The highest court also held in Che Omar Che Soh v. PP (1988) that though Islam is the religion of the federation, it is not the basic law of the land.

In Malaysia, we do not see a situation where the law of God is the supreme land of the land. On the contrary, under Article 4(1), the Constitution and not the syariah law is the supreme law of the federation.

Dr Masitah may be right that Islam is mentioned over 20 times in the Constitution, but Malaysia is nowhere near a theocratic, Islamic state. However, it is clear that there are plenty Islamic features and the trend towards more and more Islamisation in both public and private realms.

Karpal Singh got his second bite at the cake when he raised a “preliminary issue” when debating the Penal Code amendment bill.

“In Malaysia, which laws apply, the English criminal laws or the Islamic laws,” Karpal Singh shot the question straight at the Minister, Datuk Radzi Shiekh Ahmad.

Karpal Singh said he was asked by Mohd. Amin Mohd Razali of the Al-Maunah group to appeal against the latter’s death sentence.

The appellant wanted the court to declare whether Malaysia is an Islamic state and if so, he should not be tried and sentenced by the English criminal laws.

It was a difficult question for Radzi and he conveniently ignored this preliminary issue in his Ministerial reply.

Karpal was not about to let go so easily. He pressed the Minister until Radzi had to say, “This is not an Islamic state.”

Interestingly, another Minister in the PM’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz told the Chinese press that it was Dr Mahathir’s personal view when the former premier declared Malaysia an Islamic state.

Like it or not, this issue will continue to rage on.