Freedom of religion in Malaysia

In April 2002, the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) initiated an interfaith dialogue aimed at promoting better understanding and respect among the country's different religious groups. Participants included representatives from the Malaysian Islamic Development Department, the Malaysian Ulama Association, and the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST).

In early 2005, much debate was stirred up by a proposed Inter-Faith Commission put forward by various individuals, some of which included academics and lawyers from the Bar Council.

The steering committee behind the proposal for a draft bill for the commission organised a national conference that saw about 200+ people from all religious backgrounds attending it. There they hashed out the framework for a commission that could advise the relevant parties on the many interfaith issues that arise in pluralistic Malaysia such as conversion from Islam to another faith, which is deemed as apostasy in Malaysia.

PAS, member of parliament Dzulkefly Ahmad, stated that he is against religious pluralism saying that it has "relativised" truth claims, by implying that Islam is the same as other religions.[7] Dr. Ahmad went on to make a distinction between promoting relativism of religions and co-operation with people in a "multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-cultural, and multi-lingual" society, and that the latter was necessary to build a strong country.[7]

After much coverage in the local newspapers, the draft bill was put on hold by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, due to the controversy surrounding it.

A non-Muslim person who wishes to marry a Muslim person must convert to Islam before the marriage can be recognised as legally valid.[8][9] A marriage between two non-Muslims (civil law marriages), however, will not become void after one spouse subsequently converts to Islam.

In 2006, T. Saravanan, a Muslim convert, sought to dissolve his marriage with his non-Muslim wife via the Syariah Court. His wife, R. Subashini, applied to Kuala Lumpur High Court for an injunction against her husband seeking divorce in the Syariah Court. The High Court dismissed her application. This was affirmed in the Court of Appeal, where the court also ordered Subashini to take her case to the Syariah Court. As of September 2007, their case is pending in the Federal Court after an appeal by Subashini.[10] Subashini is also seeking to stop or declare void the conversion of their children.[11] As of 27 December 2007, R. Subashini failed in an attempt to stop her husband from divorcing her in an Islamic court. She also failed to persuade the federal court her husband should be banned from converting their four-year-old son to Islam. The appeal was rejected on a technicality but court added that she would be able to try again in a few months.[12]

Conversion to other faiths is allowed in Malaysia once one has reached an age of majority. A minor may not convert to another faith without explicit permission of his or her guardian as described in the Guardianship of Infants Act (1961) and the Federal Constitution (Articles 11 (1) and 12 (3) and (4)).

This case was tested by Teoh Eng Huat vs Kadhi mot of Pasir Mas Kelantan in 1986.[13] Teoh Eng Huat's daughter was a ward of the state. She married a Muslim. Hence then a minor, converted to Islam. The high court ruled that the father's right to decide the religion and upbringing of the infant is allowed "subject to the condition that it does not conflict with the principles of the infant's choice of religion guaranteed to her under the Federal Constitution". Through the proceedings, Susie Teoh never appeared in court to testify.

The decision was over-ruled on appeal to the Supreme Court, who held "in all the circumstances and in the wider interests of the nation no infant shall have the automatic right to receive instruction relating to any other religion other than (her) own without the permission of the parent or guardian".

The Supreme Court further held that this was "only of academic interest" as Susie Teoh was no longer a minor at the time of hearing.

In response several states (Islamic laws are passed by individual states) passed laws providing for conversion by 15 (defined as "baligh" in Islam or the age of puberty). Federal law still provides for the age of majority as 18.

The state of Selangor passed a legal amendment in 1989 that if an adult converts to Islam, any infant children become converted at the same moment. This passed over the opposition of the Malaysian Chinese Association and the Democratic Action Party, and became law. However, after public outcry, it was quietly removed by its non-inclusion in future amendments of the state bill.[14]

In the case of Chang Ah Mee v Jbt. Hal Ehwal Agama Islam (2003) heard in the Sabah High Court,[13] the father converted to Islam and converted the child to Islam without consent or knowledge of the mother, Chang Ah Mee, on 28 July 1998. The mother gained custody of the child on 13 November 1998 and subsequently sued to declare the conversion void.

The court determined that as a state court, it had jurisdiction over all state matters even those concerning Islam. Further, based upon the Federal Constitution (article 12), The Guardianship of Infants Ordinance (Sabah) 1999, The Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, 1976 and The Administration of Islamic Law Enactment 1992 (Sabah) determined the conversion of a two-year-old child to be void.

In 2003, this issue became prominent again in the case of Shamala Sathiyaseelan v Dr. Jeyaganesh C. Mogarajah.[13] In the first hearing before the High Court, Shamala Sathiyaseelan sought (1) to bring committal proceedings against the father of the infants for breach of the interim custody order of the High Court of 17 April 2003, and (2) to declare that she was not bound by any decisions, order or proceedings of the syariah court.

Earlier the High Court had granted custody to Shamala Sathiyaseelan with access for the father. He failed to return the children to her on 25 May 2003. Shamala and Jeyaganesh were married under Hindu rites registered under the jurisdiction of the Law Reform Act. The husband converted to Islam on 19 November 2002. On 25 November 2002 he converted the children without the mother's knowledge or consent. They were still not divorced at the time.

Without knowledge of Shamala he then obtained a custody order in the syariah court on 30 January 2003. The High Court ruled that the custody order issued by the syariah court "did not change the interim civil court order". They ruled that the syariah court order "is not binding on the plaintiff wife who is non-Muslim". The interim custody order of the High Court and proceedings were binding on the now Muslim husband as matters arising out of the Hindu marriage registered under the Law Reform Act. As his Hindu wife did not file for divorce, she remains "his unconverted wife" under this law.

On 13 April 2004 Shamala once again went to the high court. This time to seek an order that the conversion of the infants was void. As in Chang Ah Mee, she cited the Federal Constitution (Article 12), the Guardianship of Infants Act 1961 and the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act, 1993.

The Guardianship of Infants Act for the Federal Territories differed from that of Sabah in one aspect as it used the term "parent or guardian" and not "both parents or a guardian" as in AMLE Sabah.

In this case the High Court ruled that only the consent of one parent is required in the conversion to Islam of a person below 18 in the Federal Territories.

Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution reads "For the purposes of cl. (3) the religion of a person under the age of eighteen years shall be decided by his parent or guardian."

The High Court interpreted the term parent to mean father. The equality of rights granted to both parents under the Guardianship of Infants Act, 1961 was held inapplicable on the Muslim father.

In its judgement the High Court held the fatwa or the Mufti of the Federal Territory as persuasive (legal term). The Mufti stated that the father had the right to unilaterally convert the infants to Islam.

Shamala once again went to the high court on 20 July 2004 to apply inter alia for custody, care and control of the infants. The court awarded it with access for the father. In its judgement, it stated that "the right of religious practice of the two infant children shall be exercised equally by both parents" based on the Guardianship of Infants Act 1961. This was in spite of the earlier ruling that this act does not apply to Jeyaganesh who was now a Muslim.

The court also held that the applicable law at the time of conversion was civil law. It even ruled that the infants were "still Hindus at the time of conversion" and that the father should have consulted the mother before converting the infants.

However the court explicitly cautioned the mother from "influencing the infants' religious belief by teaching them her articles of faith or by making them eat pork" or she would risk losing her children. The rationale given was that the court "cannot run away from the fact that the two infant children are now muallaf" (converts to Islam).

As the case has gained prominence various religious organisations, human rights organisations and women's issues organisations have registered watching briefs. En. Haris Bin Mohamed Ibrahim has registered a watching brief on behalf of the Women's Aid Organisation, (WAO), All Women's Action Society (AWAM), Women's Center for Change, Penang (WCC) and Sisters in Islam (SIS).[15] A. Kanesalingam, held watching brief for the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism (MCCBCHS). Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Bar Council are also holding watching briefs for this case. The various organisations holding watching brief in this case now call themselves loosely Article 11 after the article of the Federal Constitution guaranteeing freedom of religion.

In 2014, the Seremban High Court over-ruled a Shariah Court, granting custody of Muslim children to their Hindu mother over that of their father who converted to Islam.[16][17] However the father Izwan Viran Abdullah abducted the son from the mother after the ruling,[18] and in which the police refused to help the mother retrieve the son citing the original Shariah custody ruling.[19][20] The police inaction was criticised by Women's Aid Organisation[21] and both governing and opposition politicians.[22][23]

State laws on apostasy in Malaysia. Criminal offences include 'apostasy', 'attempted apostasy' and being an 'accomplice to the apostasy' of someone else (i.e. converting another person).

  Death penalty (suspended by federal law)

  Imprisonment or detention

  Apostasy not legally possible

  Apostasy legal after counselling

As Malaysia is a federation, certain matters, such as religion, are handled by state governments. There is subsequently some amount of divergence between different states in the treatment of converts from Islam. Apostasy is not a federal crime.[30] Civil rights group G25 stated in January 2020 that, although apostasy is a 'major sin in Islam', Muslims have freedom of worship under the Federal Constitution, just like all other citizens of Malaysia, so the various state laws prohibiting apostasy should be struck down. The group emphasised that other Malaysians are also allowed to change their religion, and pointed to other Muslim-majority countries such as Morocco, where apostasy isn't a crime for Muslims either.[31]

The states of Negeri Sembilan, Perlis and Selangor allow Muslims to leave Islam after a process of counselling, in which they are repeatedly asked to repent, and if they refuse, a sharia court may declare the person no longer a Muslim.[32]

• Negeri Sembilan: Section 119 Administration of The Religion of Islam (Negeri Sembilan) Enactment 2003 under the chapter of “Renunciation of the Religion of Islam”[32] allows a Muslim change his or her religion for a 'reasonable cause'.[33] A convert must first apply to the Shariah Court for a declaration that he or she is no longer a Muslim; the convert will then be counselled for about a year by a Mufti. If, after this period, the convert still wants to convert, the judge may permit the application.[33] In 2006, the Negeri Sembilan Court also permitted Wong Ah Kiu, a convert from Islam to Buddhism legally known as Nyonya binti Tahir, to be buried in the Buddhist fashion, although her conversion had not been legally recognised while she was still alive. The case marked the first time non-Muslims had testified in a Shariah court in Malaysia.[34] Statistics indicate that has the largest number of converts, with 840 applications made to officially renounce Islam in 2005, 62 of which succeeded.
• Perlis: Section 10 of the Perlis Islamic Faith Protection Enactment 2000 enables a Muslim to apply for apostasy. The Aqidah Rehabilitation Centre is given a role to advise the applicant to repent during a counselling process, which is called 'Istitabah'. After the counselling, a sharia court judge will once again advise the applicant to repent, but if he refuses to do so, and 'the judge is satisfied that the person has no liability or obligation under the Islamic Family Law, [the judge will] declare that the person is no longer a Muslim and order his release.'[32]
• Selangor: after applying to leave Islam, a Muslim needs to undergo counselling and advice by an appointed committee before a decision is made by the shariah court to declare the applicant as no longer Muslim.[32]

In the states Kelantan and Terengganu, apostasy by a Muslim is a crime punishable by death and forfeiture of property; however, federal law prohibits the death penalty from being carried out.[31] In the states Malacca, Pahang, Perak, and Sabah, apostasy, attempted apostasy or being an accomplice to apostasy of someone else is a crime punishable by various measures ranging from a fine of up to MR 5,000, imprisonment (up to 3 years), or detention in an Islamic rehabitation centre (up to 3 years). In Pahang, apostates can be lashed six times with canes as well:[35]

• Kelantan: 'Apostasy' is a criminal offence punishable with death and forfeiture of property. 'Attempted apostasy' is another criminal offence, carrying the maximum penalty of 36 months detention in an Islamic Rehabilitation Centre.[35]
• Malacca: 'Apostasy' is a criminal offence, carrying the maximum penalty of 6 months detention in an Islamic Rehabilitation Centre. 'Accomplice to apostasy' is another criminal offence, carrying the maximum penalty of 3 years jail, a RM 5,000 fine, or both.[35]
• Pahang: 'Attempted apostasy' is a criminal offence, carrying the maximum penalty of 3 years jail, six lashes, a RM 5,000 fine, or a combination.[35]
• Perak: 'Apostasy' is a criminal offence, carrying the maximum penalty of 2 years jail, a RM 3,000 fine, or both.[35]
• Sabah: 'Attempted apostasy' is a criminal offence, carrying the maximum penalty of 36 months detention in an Islamic Rehabilitation Centre.[35]
• Terengganu: 'Apostasy' is a criminal offence punishable with death and forfeiture of property. The accused has the option of repentance within 3 days to go free.[35]

• Kedah: The Administration of Muslim Law Enactment (1962) does not mention apostasy. Therefore, it is neither punishable nor officially possible to stop being a Muslim.[36]
• Sarawak: There is currently no legal process by which to change one's status from Muslim to something else. During an ongoing legal case in that started in 2015, involving three applicants who wanted to return to Christianity after divorcing or the death of their spouses and one applicant who converted to Christianity after marrying a Christian, the state government promised in 2018 to institute a legal process through which Muslims could apostatise.[37]

Lina Joy, who was born Azalina Jailani, converted from Islam to Christianity, arguing that it came under her right to freedom of religion under Article 11 of the Constitution of Malaysia. She first approached the National Registration Department (NRD) in February 1997, seeking permission to change her name to Lina Joy, and also her religious status. The application was rejected in August 1997 on the grounds that the Syariah Court had not granted permission for her to renounce Islam. In 1998, the NRD allowed the name change, but refused to change the religious status on her identity card.

Joy appealed against this decision in the High Court, arguing that she should not be subject to sharia law, having converted to Christianity. In April 2001, Judge Datuk Faiza Tamby Chik ruled that she could not change her religious identity, because ethnic Malays are defined as Muslims under the Constitution. Joy then took her case to the Court of Appeal. On 19 September 2005, the court ruled in a 2–1 majority decision against Joy. Justice Abdul Aziz and Justice Arifin Zakaria agreed that the NRD was correct in rejecting Joy's application and said it was up to the Syariah Court to settle the issue (Justice Gopal Sri Ram said it was null and void. ). Joy further appealed to the Federal Court of Malaysia, the highest court and the court of last resort in Malaysia.[38] The Federal Court heard the appeal in July 2006, and it was presided by the Chief Justice of Malaysia Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Halim, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum, and Federal Court Judge Alauddin Sheriff.

On 30 May 2007, the Federal Court, in a 2–1 decision, dismissed Joy's appeal. The Court's panel ruled that only the Syariah Court had the power to allow Joy to remove her religious designation of Islam from her national identity card. Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and Federal Court judge Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff delivered the majority decision dismissing her appeal.[39] Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Richard Malanjum dissented.

Wong Ah Kiu, legally known as Nyonya binti Tahir, died on 19 January 2006.[40] When her family went to the local police office to file a notice of death, the officer on duty was reportedly confused by the fact that the identity card of the deceased identified her as a Malay and a Muslim, while her family were Chinese and Buddhist. He later informed his superior, who contacted the Negeri Sembilan Religious Affairs Department.[41] The Religious Affairs Department had the Tampin Syariah Court issue an injunction to put her burial on hold when they found out she was Malay; the Negeri Sembilan Islamic Affairs Council and Negeri Sembilan Islamic Affairs Department then filed an ex parte application with the Syariah High Court in Seremban the next day regarding her burial.[40][34] The head of the Negeri Sembilan Religious Affairs Department came to her family's house in person to present the order that she be buried in the Muslim fashion.[42] However, the court, having heard testimony from her children that she lived and died as a Buddhist, ruled on the following Monday that Wong was a non-Muslim when she died, and permitted her family to proceed with Buddhist funeral rites. Wong was buried next to her husband in the Chinese cemetery in her birthplace of Simpang Ampat, Alor Gajah.[34]

The case marked the first time that non-Muslims had testified in a Syariah court in Malaysia; though non-Muslims are not permitted to initiate cases in Syariah courts, there had never been any official bar to their offering testimony. Religious minorities were reportedly relieved by the decision, but one advocacy group stated that the decision showed that the courts were "inconsistent in their protection" of non-Muslims. [43]

Revathi Massosai is a Malaysian woman who was raised as a Hindu but her identity card designates her as a Muslim. She has declared her religion to be Hindu and has petitioned unsuccessfully to have the word "Islam" removed from her identity card. Massosai married a Hindu man, but her marriage is not recognised by the Malaysian government because of the religion issue. Massosai was incarcerated for six months in an Islamic re-education camp because of her attempts to renounce Islam in favour of the Hindu religion.[44] Revathi was denied the guardianship of her new born baby and was not allowed to meet her Hindu husband.

There have been a few high-profile incidences and accounts of persecution of people from Muslim backgrounds attempting to convert from the Islamic faith. Some notable cases include:

• Hilmy Mohd Noor

Hilmy Mohd Noor, in his book "Circumcised Heart", describes his experiences during his detention under the Internal Security Act of Malaysia in what he described as resulting from religious persecution by Malaysian authorities. In the book, he also mentioned incidences of lobbying by some Muslims in his place of employment—a multinational oil company—to get his job terminated.[45][46]

• Nur'aishah Bokhari

Nur'aishah Bokhari made a writ of habeas corpus by statutory declaration claiming that she was detained involuntarily by her own family members for wanting to convert out of Islam before marrying her Roman Catholic boyfriend. She subsequently escaped and has since left the country.[47]

• Abdullah or Jeffrey

Jeffrey also known as Abdullah and Or Boon Hua, 36, made the application on the grounds that he had not practised the Islamic teachings since converting to the religion 14 years ago.[48]

In 2016 a court in Sarawak state allowed a Muslim to convert back to Christianity since he had become a Muslim when he was underage.[49]

Proselytising of Muslims by members of other religions is prohibited by federal law, even though Muslims may proselytise. It is prohibited in 10 of the 13 states (i.e. excepting Penang, Sabah, Sarawak and the Federal Territories) and can lead to lengthy jail sentences and many strokes of the rotan (whipping). Most Christian and a few other religious groups in Malaysia put a standard disclaimer on literature and advertisements stating "For non-Muslims only".[50]

In 2002 the government banned the Bible in Malay (Alkitab) and in Iban (Bup Kudus). The Kudus uses the term "Allah Taala" for God. The ban has since been rescinded. Abdullah Badawi, when in office as Home Minister, claimed it was the work of an overzealous bureaucrat and he had the ban repealed personally.

Some states have laws that prohibit the use of Malay-language religious terms such as usage of the term "Allah" for God by Christians, but the authorities do not enforce them actively.

Distribution of other materials such as books or tapes translated into Bahasa Melayu (local Malay) or Indonesian is also discouraged. However, Malay-language Christian materials are available. Prior to the banning of the Bup Kudus in 2002, the distribution of Malay-language Christian materials faced few restrictions in East Malaysia.

In recent years, visas for foreign clergy no longer are restricted, and most visas were approved during the period covered by this report. Beginning in March 2000, representative non-Muslims were invited to sit on the immigration committee that approves such visa requests.

Movies which depict people considered prophets in Islam are generally censored or banned as the depiction of prophets is considered "haraam" (not allowed) under Islam. One notable case was the banning of The Prince of Egypt when its producers would not accept censorship of the character Moses (Musa in Islam).

However, in a more recent case, The Passion of the Christ was allowed, after the intervention of the Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, under strict conditions restricting its viewership to Christians with sales of tickets being carried out by various churches and para-church organisations.

In 2004, Yasmin Ahmad's (herself a Malaysian Muslim) film Sepet was rejected by censors who asked that scenes be removed. 10 scenes were objectionable. Among objectionable material queried in the movie was why the movie did not depict any attempt to convert Jason (the Chinese non-Muslim main character) to Islam after he had fallen in love with a Malay girl.

In 2014 the biblical film Noah was banned by the Malaysian authorities reasoning that the film was un-Islamic. [63][64]

On 10 December 2007, Malaysian authorities banned the Malay-language section of a Catholic weekly newspaper, The Catholic Herald due to its use of the word Allah, the name for God which Christians had used for hundreds of years in the country.[65][66] Their reasoning is that the word Allah by Christians would confuse Malay Muslims. The Herald meanwhile, filed suit at the beginning of December following warnings that its permit could be revoked if it did not cease use of the word "Allah" in the Malay language section of its newspaper.[67] Countering the Herald's suit, the Malaysian security authorities on 30 December, warned its printing permit would not be renewed if it continued using the word "Allah," which the government continued to say can only be used by Muslims.[68]

The Catholic Church began its challenge of the government gag order prohibiting it from using the word "Allah" in its Herald-The Catholic Weekly- through a judicial review. The government had earlier argued that the church's application is frivolous and had urged the court to throw it out but Madam Justice Lau Bee Lan disagreed and allowed the application by the Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Datuk Murphy Pakiam, for leave to sue the government regarding the use of the word "Allah" to proceed. Three points that were raised in the lawsuit. The first is for the court to declare that the government's action in prohibiting The Herald from using the word "Allah" is illegal and null and void. The second is for a court declaration that the Archbishop as publisher of The Herald is entitled to use the word "Allah" and lastly, that the court should declare that the word "Allah" is not exclusive to the religion of Islam.[69]

• The Sabah Evangelical Church of Borneo also took legal action after the authorities banned the import of Christian books containing the word Allah.[70]
• In January 2008, children's Christian books with illustrations of prophets were confiscated from several bookstores around the country.[71]
• In May 2008, Malaysian customs confiscated 3 Christian CDs with the words Allah written on them from a Christian Sarawakian lady, Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill. She is currently challenging the confiscation of the CDs in court.[72]
• In March 2010, the Malaysian Home Ministry seized 30,000 Malay bibles from a port in Kuching, Sarawak.[73]
• In January 2014, the Selangor Islamic Religious department (Jais) raided the Bible Society of Malaysia and confiscated 320 Malay and Iban bibles, which catered for Sabah and Sarawak Christians.[74][75]
• In October 2014, Malaysian Customs seized Christian books and CDs from a pastor at the low cost terminal at Kuala Lumpur International Airport who was on the way back to Sabah from Medan.[76][77][78]

Under subsection 48(3) and (4) of the Penang Islamic Religious Administration Enactment 2004, the Mufti of Penang state is allowed to pass legally binding religious rulings, or fatwa. In 2010, this power was used to pass a fatwa which would penalize non-Muslims for using the following words, or to write or publish them, in any form, version or translation in any language or for use in any publicity material in any medium: "Allah", "Firman Allah", "Ulama", "Hadith", "Ibadah", "Kaabah", "Qadhi'", "Illahi", "Wahyu", "Mubaligh", "Syariah", "Qiblat", "Haji", "Mufti", "Rasul", "Iman", "Dakwah", "Wali", "Fatwa", "Imam", "Nabi", "Sheikh", "Khutbah", "Tabligh", "Akhirat", "Azan", "Al Quran", "As Sunnah", "Auliya'", "Karamah", "Syahadah", "Baitullah", "Musolla", "Zakat Fitrah", "Hajjah", "Taqwa" and "Soleh".[79][80] This ruling caused uproar, particularly in the Sikh community, as Sikh religious texts use the term "Allah", with members of the community calling the law unconstitutional.[81] The ban was overturned in 2014, as Penang lawmakers decreed that the Penang Islamic Religious Administration Enactment law only gave the Mufti permission to pass fatwas for the Muslim community, and that these bans were not enforceable on non-Muslim individuals.[82]

Approximately nine percent of the population of Malaysia are Indians, of whom nearly 90 percent are practising Hindus. Indian settlers came to Malaysia from India in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

After a violent conflict in Penang between Hindus and Muslims in March 1998, the government announced a nationwide review of unlicensed Hindu temples and shrines. However, implementation was not vigorous and the program was not a subject of public debate. In April 2006, local authorities demolished several Hindu temples to make way for developmental projects. Their excuse was that these temples were unlicensed and squatting on government land.

Between April to May 2006, several Hindu temples were demolished by city hall authorities in the country, accompanied by violence against Hindus.[84] On 21 April 2006, the Malaimel Sri Selva Kaliamman Temple in Kuala Lumpur was reduced to rubble after the city hall sent in bulldozers.[85]

The president of the Consumers Association of Subang and Shah Alam in Selangor had been helping to organise efforts to stop the local authorities in the Muslim dominated city of Shah Alam from demolishing a 107-year-old Hindu temple. The growing Islamization in Malaysia is a cause for concern to many Malaysians who follow minority religions such as Hinduism.[86]

On 11 May 2006, armed city hall officers from Kuala Lumpur forcefully demolished part of a 60-year-old suburban temple that serves more than 1,000 Hindus. The "Hindu Rights Action Force", a coalition of several NGO's, have protested these demolitions by lodging complaints with the Malaysian Prime Minister.[87] Many Hindu advocacy groups have protested what they allege is a systematic plan of temple cleansing in Malaysia. The official reason given by the Malaysian government has been that the temples were built "illegally". However, several of the temples are centuries old.[87]

According to a lawyer for the Hindu Rights Action Task Force, a Hindu temple is demolished in Malaysia once every three weeks.[88]

Malaysian Muslims have also grown more anti-Hindu over the years. In response to the proposed construction of a temple in Selangor, Muslims chopped off the head of a cow to protest, with leaders saying there would be blood if a temple was constructed in Shah Alam.[89]

Laws in the country, especially those concerning religious identity, are generally slanted towards compulsion into converting to Islam.[90]

On February 2020, more than a dozen Selayang Municipal Council (MPS) enforcement officers tore down a Chinese shrine dedicated to "Datuk Gong" near Yu Xu Gong temple in Taman Bidara, Selayang. The shrine, which had stood at the end of the alley for close to 30 years, was torn down by MPS enforcement officers because according to the council, it was built illegally on government land.[91]

The Metro Tabernacle, an Assemblies of God church in Desa Melawati, Kuala Lumpur was set on fire on 8 January 2010.[92] While in Malacca, black paint was splashed on the outer wall of the Malacca Baptist Church in Durian Daun.[93]

There were also incidences of attacks being made onto Muslim places of worship. In January 2010, two separate prayer halls (surau) in Muar became targets of arson attacks.[94] And as recent as August 2010, another prayer hall in Seremban was subjected to vandalism. The prayer hall was defaced by red paint and littered with alcohol bottles.[95]