My Anthem

Friday, June 27, 2014

KimQ's take on "Allah" court's decision...

Desi can only sigh: Ah Lah!

“Allah” judgment a fatal blow to fundamental liberties
By Kim Quek

The federal court’s decision on June 23 to deny leave to appeal against an earlier court of appeal judgment banning the use of “Allah” by non-Muslims has devastating and far reaching consequences against religious freedom and fundamental liberties in this country.
This is because by shutting the door to appeal, the erroneous and heretical interpretation of the Federal Constitution by the court of appeal that has precipitated such heinous distortion of the constitution has become the unchallenged authority on these issues for future enforcement by the Executive and the judiciary.  
Thus, it has the effect of having amended the Federal Constitution – however improper these might be – for purpose of law enforcement and judicial interpretation.
Beyond the imagination of most people, this is not only the death of religious freedom, but also the loss of other fundamental personal rights guaranteed under Part Two of the Federal Constitution, as will be explained later.
First, let us look at how the court of appeal has denied religious freedom through its misinterpretation of the federal constitution.
In a unanimous decision among a panel of 3 judges, presiding judge Apandi Ali hinged his verdict on Article 3(1) of the federal constitution, which reads:
“Islam is the religion of the Federation, but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”
Interpreting this Article, Apandi wrote in Para 33 of his judgment:
It is my judgment that the purpose and intention of the insertion of the words ‘in peace and harmony’ in Article 3(1) is to protect the sanctity of Islam as the religion of the country and also to insulate against any threat faced or any possible and probable threat to the religion of Islam. ………….”
Apandi based his interpretation on the pre-Independence negotiations and consensus reached among various racial and religious groups that were recorded in a White Paper known as the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals 1957.  
But nowhere in this White Paper was there any mention that Article 3 was meant to “protect the sanctity of Islam”. On the other hand, there was categorical assurance of religious freedom as elaborated in Para 57 of the White paper, which reads:
“57. There has been included in the proposed Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation.  This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practice his own religion, though this last right is subject to any restriction imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.”
The consensus so reached in Para 57 of the White paper later found its expressions in the Federal Constitution under Article 3(1) and Article 11(1), (3) & (4).
Article 3(1) is as stated above.
Article 11(1) states that every person has the right to profess and practice his religion.
Article 11(3) grants every religious group the right to manage its own religious affairs.
Article 11(4) grants every State the right to enact laws to control and restrict the propagation of any religious faith among Muslims.
Based on these Articles, as well as on the White Paper, it is clear that Apandi’s interpretation of Article 3 as a constitutional dictate to “protect the sanctity of Islam” is a far-fetched imagination of his own and is completely unfounded in fact and in law.
If it is otherwise, wouldn’t it be a big loophole in our Constitution that could create pandemonium in our multi-religious society, as neither the definition of “sanctity of lslam” nor the measures that are allowed to be taken to “protect the sanctity of Islam” are defined and prescribed in the Constitution? And wouldn’t such an imprudent provision in the Constitution (if true) lead to rampant abuse by obsessed zealots and to endless disputes among the different religions? 
Besides, isn’t a deliberate act to violate the sanctity of any religion an offence? Why should it be confined to Islam?
And, most importantly, how could one logically and rationally relate the use of “Allah” to the issue of “sanctity of Islam”?  If the whole world, including the 1,300 million Muslims, sees nothing wrong with non-Muslims using Allah to call God, why should a small group of Muslims in Malaysia find such usage of Allah unacceptable?
The possibilities of abuse arising from such misinterpretation are endless.  Today, it is Allah and scores of other Arabic words that found themselves in the prohibition list.  Tomorrow, it could be certain religious ceremonies wherein certain gestures or chants that bear resemblance to those of Islam are found objectionable and hence must be banned. Day after tomorrow, it could be architecture or emblems or signs with similarities to those used in Islam that may be taken to “confuse” Muslims, the way Judge Apandi had claimed that others using “Allah” had “confused” Muslims and thus threatened public security.
It is not difficult to see that such a court judgment has opened the floodgate for abuse by not only religious extremists but, more worrying, by political opportunists. 
In fact, it is now a political truism in this country that the ruling power has been ruthlessly exploiting religious and racial fault lines to ferment animosities both for self-entrenchment and for sabotaging its political adversaries. 
And this latest federal court decision which has sealed the infamous court of appeal judgment as the final authority on these issues is undoubtedly a godsend gift that has boosted the ruling power’s arsenal of political weaponry.
In case anyone should think that such judicial judgment has only affected religious freedom, he is wrong, for the legal principles upon which the court has justified the Home Minister’s banning of Allah from being used in the Catholic publication The Herald, have also undermined the fundamental liberties enshrined in Part Two of the Federal Constitution, which includes among others, the individual’s rights of equality and freedom of speech and assembly, in addition to, of course, religious freedom.
First, Apandi in his judgment said he was satisfied that, in ordering the ban on ground of undermining public security, the Minister had “considered all facts and circumstances in an objective manner”.  But flying in the face against such judgment is the fact that there had not been a single incident which had jeopardized public security or appeared to have the tendency to undermine public security arising from the use of Allah by the Christian natives in Sabah and Sarawak and other Malay-speaking Christians in more than a hundred years of harmonious living between Christians and  Muslims – up to the time when the Minister ordered the ban.
If the appeal court can uphold the minister’s order that violates one’s right of freedom of religious practice on ground of threats to Islam or public security without an iota of evidence, what is there to stop the lower courts from using such legal precedent to sanction the Executive’s arbitrary violations of fundamental rights that may extend well beyond religious matters in the future?  In fact, the lower courts are bound to accept such appeal court judgment as guiding principles in their own rulings.
Second, in an effort to bolster his dubious decision, Judge Apandi cited certain Latin maxims to support his view that public safety is the supreme law, for which the interests of minority must yield to that of the majority, without mentioning the legal context which justifies such subordination of minority interests.  Following this legal maxim, Apandi was effectively saying that minority non-Muslims must be subservient to majority Muslims for the sake of public safety. Applying to this case, it means that if Muslims say Allah must not be used by non-Muslims, then the latter must obey for the sake of peace and tranquility.  It also means, of course, that the minorities have to forget about their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution.
Hence, this is a judgment that also sanctions tyranny of the majority, in addition to legalising arbitrary transgression of fundamental personal rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
If such a dangerous judgment remains unchallenged, as it appears to be the case now unless a review is granted by the federal court, what is there left in our egalitarian Constitution founded on democracy and human rights except ruins at the hands of bigots and traitors who have turned what was once a happy and liberal democracy into a nightmare of corrupt authoritarian rule characterised by endless racial and religious conflicts?
Shouldn’t those with the power to avert such catastrophe pause now and reflect deeply before deciding their next move?
Kim Quek

Monday, June 23, 2014

Retrospective prosecution of American President in using the word "InsyaAllah"?

Re,member it was NOT that long ago President Barack Obama visited Malaysia, and one higfhlight was his call on the National Mosque Mufti, and in their exchanges, Obama used the word "InsyaAllah" noty just once, but a few times, as reported by the media. Well, the visit  by thge head of government of the sole super-power must have won PM Najib Tun Razak many "brownie points" internationally.

But ooops, just weeks later the Malaysian federal Court, rendered a potentially embarassing situation of Prez Obama, he SHOULD NOT have used that sensitive word "InsyaAllah"which is a derivative of "Allah"! Hence my post title, THINKING ALOUD, STILL ALLOWED eh? -- YL,  Desi, knottyaSsusual

Malaysia divides itself further with latest Allah decision

Make no mistake, the biggest losers from today's decision by the Federal Court not to give leave to the Catholic Church to appeal a decision stopping it from using the word Allah are East Malaysians.
For seven years, the church has challenged the prohibition order by the Home Ministry against the Catholic Herald on the basis of this principle: that Sabahans and Sarawakians have worshipped in the Malay language for more than 100 years and have used Allah without any controversy; without any cockamamie argument that Muslims are confused by the use of Allah by those from other religions.
Yes, Christians in East Malaysia used Allah way before Umno was formed and way before Malaya came into being. And to think they have been persectuted for doing so by Umno makes this Allah saga a real travesty.
The Catholic Herald earned the ire of authorities because it has a Bahasa Malaysia section to cater to the Catholic congregation in Sabah and Sarawak and the word Allah crops up occasionally.
In 2007 with an eye on the Umno polls, former Home Minister Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar slapped a prohibition order on the Herald, a move that forced this lengthy and painful litigation.
Litigation that invited derision from Umno, Perkasa and other right-wing groups toward the Catholic Church and put the editor of the Herald, Father Lawrence Andrew, in harm's way.
Umno – the political party with a mandate from only 47% of the electorate – likes to say that the prohibition only applies to the Herald.
That is hogwash. The Court of Appeal ruling and now the decision by the apex court not to grant the church leave to take the appeal court's ruling before the Federal Court has far-reaching consequences for East Malaysians and non-Muslims.
Call it a game changer. Watershed. A point of no return.
Don't for a moment believe that the storm-troopers at Jais, Mais and other religious groups will not feel emboldened by the court outcome. Expect more raids and expect more seizures of Bibles and other holy books.
The considerable number of East Malaysians who have come to Peninsular Malaysia to work and study will not be allowed to use Allah in their masses or worship services. Hey, but the 10-point resolution put forward by the Najib administration to win votes before the state election in 2011 allows East Malaysians to use the word Allah and import Malay-language Bibles.
That 10-point resolution is not worth the paper it is written on. Never has been. It was sleight of hand politics by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, ably abetted by Christian ministers in his administration.
The impotence of the resolution has been laid bare for all to see by the refusal of Jais and Mais to return the Malay and Iban-language Bibles seized from The Bible Society of Malaysia and instead place some state enactment on a higher pedestal than a Cabinet ruling.
East Malaysians, and for that matter non-Muslims, have been operating under an illusion. In Sarawak, there is the belief that the Barisan Nasional (BN) of Tan Sri Adenan Satem is more moderate and inclusive than the right-wing chaps who occupy Putrajaya. Perhaps so.
But ring-fencing yourself in the state does not change the fact that what has been your right for more than 100 years is suddenly being taken away. And just because some people in Umno are insecure about their own faith.
Ring-fencing yourself in your state also does not provide a solution for the thousands of East Malaysians who now study or make their living in Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Johor and other urban centres in West Malaysia.
Perhaps more importantly, ring-fencing yourself in Sarawak will not help Christians and other non-Muslims across Malaysia who really help to hold back the advancing tide of racism and religious bigotry being pushed by Najib's Umno, Perkasa and other groups.
Today, it is the use of the word Allah. Tomorrow it will be something else. The food that you can consume. The books you can read. The places where churches and temples can be built. The clothes you can wear.
The only way to stop the right-wing forces in BN and to reclaim this country for all Malaysians is through the ballot box. BN is surviving only because Sarawak and to a lesser extent, Sabah, delivered big on May 5 last year.
So now that the courts have failed to protect the religious rights of Sabahans and Sarawakians, it is time for the Christians in East Malaysia to stand up and be counted.
The courts can't help. The royalty is consumed by their own affairs. The government of the day is bent on dividing the country further. – June 23, 2014.

Saturday, June 21, 2014

Of hooded accused in Altantuya case, AN INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT...

Azilah Hadri ditangkap khalwat dengan polis wanita

Seorang bekas polis komando berusia 38 tahun yang dibebaskan tahun lalu atas tuduhan membunuh warga Mongolia Altantuya Shaariibuu pada 2006, Azilah Hadri ditahan awal hari ini selepas ditangkap berkhalwat dengan seorang polis wanita yang sudah berkahwin di Sepang.
Azilah yang sebelum ini bertugas di Skuad Tindakan Khas di Bukit Aman ditangkap di sebuah unit kuarters polis di Sepang bersama seorang wanita oleh suami wanita terbabit pada jam 1.20 pagi.
Suami berkenaan, seorang anggota polis yang bertugas di unit kereta peronda, pulang ke rumah untuk memeriksa sama ada isterinya di rumah dan mengesyaki sesuatu tidak kena apabila mendapati pintu berkunci.
Selepas memeriksa dengan lebih lanjut, beliau mendapati bekas komando itu bersembunyi di sebelah katil dalam bilik tidur.
Ketua Polis Sepang, Superintendan Mohd Yusoff Awang mengesahkan tangkapan itu dan berkata, kes itu diserahkan kepada Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (Jais) untuk tindakan selanjutnya.
“Polis membuka fail tindakan disiplin terhadap polis wanita itu. Lelaki itu, bagaimanapun, tidak tertakluk kepada tindakan disiplin kerana bukan lagi anggota polis. Kes ini akan dikendalikan oleh Jais,” kata Yusof kepada The Malaysian Insider.
Pada Ogos tahun lalu, Mahkamah Rayuan membebaskan Azilah dan bekas corporal Sirul Azhar Umar selepas menterbalikkan sabitan terhadap mereka dalam kes bunuh Altantuya.
Azilah dan Sirul dituduh bersama dan disabitkan bersalah oleh Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam pada 2009 kerana membunuh Altantuya, 28, di hutan simpan di Shah Alam pada Oktober, 2006.
Kedua-duanya pada masa itu bertugas dengan Skuad Tindakan Khas Bukit Aman dan berada dalam pasukan keselamatan Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Najib pada ketika itu adalah timbalan perdana menteri dan menteri pertahanan. – 19 Jun, 2014.

DESIDERATA: Malaysians are living in "interesting times" indeed. And I believe the concept of "KARMA" and "What Goes Around Comes Around" somehow have some connections somewhere....

Monday, June 09, 2014

"May You Live in Interesting Times'

Just announcing my entrance into writing for English Section, HARAKAH, party newspaper of PAS that publishes TWICE a week:). Following is my first contribution, warts (like typos...) and all, in edition June 9-12, 2014 selling at RM2.00. IF thou want my autograph, it will mean you have to invest USD2. When I move on, you may fetch RM1k, was my marketing pitch when I sms-ed around to promote my virginal art. Desi had the audacity to compare with van Gogh's "Sunflower" which fetched millions of bucks after the poor artist's moving on, so come and sing wit' me: "Starry, Starry Night..."When I receive the payment in a month's time, look Desi up at De Miang Corker and we will have endless rounds of tehtarik. If you behave yourself and qualify for an exclusive KoBoi Club (KBC), may then escort you up to the Butterfry Varrey to croon a few C&W, and pay tribute to "Vincent..." OK! Desi, knottyaSsusual:~~~~~

'May You Live in Interesting Times'

By YL Chong

This is my maiden article for Harakah, and I will try to make it as interesting as possible, in more than one sense of the word "interesting". Those who know me as a journalist for some 30-plus years and later, as a blogger the past decade, will detect that journalistic writing is more objective and serious -- with governing rules pertaining to sources and ethics -- as an important objective is to inform and educate in news reporting, and in commentary, add on an onjective "to persuade". Meanwhile, blogging is less rigid and free-style and allows room for experimentation, but still ethics prevails, so some exuberant  bloggers take to entertaining themselves with no regard to third parties' interests, and find themselves recipients of defamation suits!

I will always hold my readers in both the old and new media -- referred to popularly as the Fourth and Fifth Estates respectively -- in high esteem, and it's always in the spirit prompted by Voltaire's credo, "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend, to the death, your right to say it," or rendered another way, "Let's be agreable in our disagreement."

I hope very few of my readers had occasion to part company with their conversationalists and the departing party in a raised tone bade you: "May you live in interesting times!" I hope you had not then felt "flattered"! Instead of getting into trouble by calling your enemy "UMNO celaka!" as did happen with one Penang Wakil Rakyat addressing hispolitical enemy, he could have complimented them with this "interesting times" greeting instead. And the episode of the UMNO youths storming the august house of the Penang State Assembly would have been avoided.

I think many honourable members who make up the state assemblies and the national Parliament are lacking in language command and humour, hence you have many who made crass and often sexist remarks more befitting the inmates of Zoo Negara now made more civilised by two imported Chinese pandas. The pandas pander to human curiousity, while sexual innuendoes often emitting from an East Malaysian Menmber of Parlaiment pander to the low taste of the speaker and his nincompoopfellow MPs who often thump the table as a show of ape-like support. But I apologise to the monkey species if I demean them using this metaphor, but I learnt that description at primary schoold when the teacher would reprimand naughty pupils: " Don't behave like monkeys!"

If I may recall --I hope correctly! -- that once the honourable Mr Opposition Dr Tan Chee Koon had in a session asked of the fellow members, "Who among you have not committed a similar sin? Then you please stand and cast the first stone!" No one else stood up -- only two persons were standing at that moment in time -- then Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, in replying to a question by Dr Tan himself.

Malaysia's First PM was proud of being the "happiest" leader alive

The politics during the first PM's era was tranquil and not quite arresting as the present times -- no constant harping by politicians and the media of corruption or homosexuality, transvestite or sodomite. The down-to-earth Tunku was a little "colourful" leader beloved by the people, who hardly thought in terms of race or colour or religion then. When accusations were hurled at his "wayward" hobbies of playing cards with the Chinese towkays and owning prize-winning horses from Australia, I believe his answer to the critics was that those pursuits were his personal and privte ones, and it's between him and his God, an answer which I salute!

So modern Malaysians now live in more "interesting times". I sometimes wonder had it been a curse levelled on beautiful Malaysia as a whole by foreign parties that we have become victim to the unannounced curse of ''May you live in interesting times''? Our leaders often choose to bury their heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich, so they return from overseas trips narrating the "high praises" heaped on Malaysia by the generous host-nations.

Well, quoting Alice in Wonderland, it can get "curiouser and curiouser" when there are enough enemies out there wishing that Malaysians continue to live in interesting times.
How could the murder of a Mongolian beauty on Malaysian soil take place, and now there has been no offender serving time for this heinous crime? Malaysia broke records by allowing two accused persons to be hooded and faces covered up throughout the trial -- why the privilege? Do you blame the man in the street for thinking that the Government has covered up many aspects of this crime, and the two accused now set free were just scapegoats for show only?   Since no criminal has been brought to account for Altantuya's death, could the Mongolian people have been saying daily prayers that Malaysians be visited by "interesting times"? Maybe there is a connection between their greetings and the Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 vanishing into thin air?
For the record, immigration records of the entry of Altantuya's two relatives/friends into Malaysia also disappeared into thin air. So when the MAS flight to Beijing about three months ago just "vanished into thin air", do you blame Malaysians for being "sceptical" and generally disbelieving of the accounts given by the nation's high officals, right up to the acting Transport Minister and his boss, the Prime Minister? Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim did not surprise when he stated that Singapore was wrong in was praising Malaysian for a job well done. Anwar said that Singapore -- a nation always promoting "meritocracy" -- was endorsing "mediocrity"  for the Malaysian government's less than creditable and competent handling of the high-profile MH370 incident. 
Of course, several international media poured scorn on the Malaysian leaders' abiliity and competence to manage the international efforts to unravel the tragic mystery. Instead of showing humility, the few government leaders concerned have berated news agencies like the CNN for their uncomplimentary covearge, alleging "biased" reporting and commentary. But one of CNN respected business commentators, Richard Quest, did say many good things about the Malaysian handling of the MH 370 issue, which lends credit to the foreign news network that their staff were allowed to hold "dissenting" views. Did we or do we see any such contrasting perspectives in reporting and commenting in our local mainstream media on the MH 370 and other national issues? Yes, someone whispered: "Suara Keadilan and the Harakah." My thinking allowed: "They are not yet mainstream. Nyet!"

When other countries hand our country a compliment, often it's just diplomacy at work -- and our leaders are best warned not to take their praises literally.  I hope to end my first chat with my Esteemed Readers on a sincere note -- I hope you do not receive this parting wish ever:  "May you live in interesting times!" so that you remain tranquil and serene. That is a form of curse one wishes on the enemy so that he meets with more trouble and hard times ahead! Just also remember, that often in politics, international or local, it's another adage that applies:
"There are no permanent friends or foes in politics. Only permanent interests."

NOTE: YL CHONG has been a Journalist -- in print, online and diplomatic media -- for some 30 years, and is now working on a novel which he hopes may attract enough attention like Flight MH 370 so he can retire in comfort as he rides into the Malaysian sunset. He also runs a blog at

Wednesday, June 04, 2014

For Once, I Salute former PM Dr Mahathir...

I know most Malaysians either LIKE HIM or HATE HIM, no in-between feelings.

I have been trained as a Journalist, so I will say I have protested many of his policies during his dictatorial reign as Prime Minister, BUT SOMETIMES he has been consistently and doggedly going against the popular thinking -- and when he spoke up as reported by The Malay Mail Online, I must say this "IS" the man yet being doggedly consistent, and he differed from the current PM Naib's defamation sut against

I can believe the Doctor No More Aroud the Putrajaya House is to be taken at his word. I had served at Mkini as its inaugural News Editor, and there were times I was caught in the cross-hairs in the Malaysiakini-GeorgeSoros-FarEastern Economic issue when I challenged the Top Two at Mkini to come clean on receiving funding from George Soros, INDIRECTLY NO BOUBT, via the Media Development Loan Fund, a unit of Georgeyboy's OIpen Society Institute.

Okay, from the

Dr M: They can call me what they want, I wouldn’t have sued Malaysiakini

KUALA LUMPUR, June 4 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said today he would not have taken legal action against Malaysiakini even as he backed Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s right to sue the news portal for alleged defamation.
Wading into the row perceived as an attempt to muzzle the media over government reports, the former prime minister conceded Najib had the right to use the existing laws to defend his reputation.
“Ya, it is right,” Dr Mahathir replied when asked by reporters if the sixth prime minister was right in suing for defamation.
Despite that, the 88-year-old insisted he would not have taken the same action as Najib.
“I don't, I won't sue. They call me anything also, they can,” he said.
“This is politics. In politics, you get cursed. That’s alright,” added Dr Mahathir.
The nation’s longest serving former prime minister pointed out that he had been called many names in the past, including “jihadist” and “infidel”.
He also joked that he rarely goes to court because he cannot afford it, referring to his five-year RM100 million legal battle with political nemesis Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
He told reporters that even after the case was thrown out of court and Anwar had to pay damages, most of the money had gone to the lawyers.
“After he lost, I only got RM70,000. It was not even enough to pay the lawyers. Supposedly, if he sued me for RM100 million, then he should’ve paid me that much money when he lost. That would’ve been fair,” Dr Mahathir said jokingly.
He was speaking at a lecture in the International Islamic University Malaysia here, during which he mentioned the futility of restricting online media in protecting the faith of Muslims.
Umno, the country's largest political party, and its president Najib have filed a civil suit against news portal Malaysiakini yesterday over a series of readers' posts published on their website related to the recent Terengganu mentri besar saga.
The suit centres on two articles published by Malaysiakini during the brief leadership crisis in Terengganu last May, titled “A case of the PM reaping what he sows” and “How much will Najib spend to keep Terengganu?”

DESIDERATA: May I share some nuggets later IF I am still inclined?... That is if I see the sun rise tomorrow, INSYA-ALLAH!:)~~ YL, Desi, knottyaSsusual 


For second time in wan day, gifting credit to Dr Mahathior WHEN CREDIT IS DUE! Going by the quote, though I'm a PKR member, we don't have PERMANENT FREINDS OR FOES IN POLITICS, ONLY PERMANENT INTERESTS! So even when your enemy can teach your somethings, learn from him to arm yourself with better weapons to battle, eh!

Dr M: Jais wrong, should go back to Quran

Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad today called on the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (Jais) to read the Quran again, as its stopping of a wedding was a misguided move.
Mahathir said the Quran respects the rights of non-Muslims and religion should not be used to police others.
"This all comes from not adhering to the teachings of the Quran, but they are following the teachings of somebody.
"I suggest that they (Jais) go back to the Quran to find out what is the way to break such a situation," Mahathir told reporters after a lecture on 'Contemporary Muslim lifestyles' at Universiti Islam Antarabangsa (UIA) in Gombak.
Mahathir was commenting on Jais' action last Sunday in taking away a Hindu bride from her wedding ceremony, after it was learned that she had a Muslim name.
After Mahathir was told that the bride was a 32-year-old woman, Mahathir said Jais was wrong.
"You can investigate but you don't have to stop people getting married," Mahathir said.
The bride, Zarena Abdul Majid, was about to marry a Hindu man when Jais officers, with police waiting outside, moved into a Hindu temple in Petaling Jaya and took Zarena away to their office in Shah Alam for questioning.
It was later revealed that Zarena and her siblings were registered as Muslims in their identity card by their father, who is said to have abandoned them more than 20 years ago.
Zarena has said that she has been brought up as a Hindu by her mother, and that she had been trying to change her erroneous MyKad since seven years ago.
Jais action widely condemned
However, Jais officers were said to have intervened to prevent apostasy or an insult to Islam from taking place.
The move has recently been condemned by those who wanted to see a more secular Malaysia such as Persatuan Hindraf Malaysia, MCA, Sisters in Islam but it was lauded by others in PAS, who argued that Islamic laws rule above all else.
Mahathir said the Quran clearly states that "to you your religion, to me my religion."
He added: "You respect the other religions... you pray in your own way, we pray in our own way.
"The Quran does give full guidance as to how to conduct our lives... so go to the Quran and find out whether you are right or wrong or whether you follow the interpretation of some people and become fanatical."
Mahathir said such folly usually comes about when Islam is used as a political tool and when "people want to show that they are very Islamic."
"And if you say that what they do is non-Islamic, then they say that you are non-Muslim and that you have forsaken Islam so that makes people afraid of making any comment... including me," said Mahathir, who is considered a model Islamic leader by many Muslim-dominated developing countries.
'I am the brother of Nik Aziz'
Earlier, Mahathir also expressed disagreement with Islamist party PAS over hudud, repeating the same argument that he made 20 years ago.
He was responding to a UIA lecturer from Singapore, who proclaimed that he was neither PAS nor an Umno member.
The academic pointed out that after also meeting a PAS leader recently, he found Mahathir and PAS spiritual leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat to be very similar.
"As a Muslim, I am the brother of Nik Aziz, but beyond that, when you do something wrong, I can't accept," Mahathir said.
"I believe religion should not be made use of in politics. You are bound to make mistakes," he added.
Mahathir then pointed out that the PAS move for hudud would pervert justice in Malaysia by creating two very different punishment regimes for Muslims and non-Muslims.
In its desire to see the hudud type of  punishment for crime, PAS has missed this point, Mahathir said.
"If it is not justice, it is not Islamic. The stress is on justice and not punishment, but they like punishment," he added.
"On that, I differ with Nik Aziz - my brother."

Related stories
'Marriage, not conversion, so Jais has no standing'
Jais raid shows injustice of unilateral conversions
'Selangor MB must answer for Jais action at wedding'
Respect one another's choice of religion