“The mufti has no business whatsoever to be speaking of another faith,” its chairman, P Waythamoorthy, said today.
He said the Federal Constitution does not condone unlawful acts which include insulting a religion but instead provides for equality of laws for all citizens under Article 8.
“A mufti is not supposed to derogate another religion to prove the superiority of his religion,” he said in a statement.
He said Hindraf believed in freedom of religion.
“We are not opposed to Islamic teachings and believe religion is a personal matter which should not be the subject of debate in order to prove the superiority of another religion.”
He pointed to an undated video widely shared on Facebook today that shows Asri making remarks on gods in ancient Hindu mythology, claiming that one god’s wife had an extramarital affair.
In another viral video, first forwarded in social media circles on April 28, Asri is seen telling a forum of how low-caste “pariah” Hindus lived an insulting life in India yet had demanded rights after settling in Malaysia.
In a statement today, Asri said the video in which he referred to “pariahs” was 10 years old and should be viewed in the context of the time when Hindraf was attacking the Malaysian government repeatedly.
Asri, who is popularly known by his Facebook name “Dr Maza”, also questioned certain “racist media” which highlighted his video but ignored another one showing a gathering that insulted the Malays.
Waythamoorthy said the latest video where Asri allegedly mocked and belittled Hindus, with misleading references to their sacred mythology, was even more humiliating.
“As a Muslim religious leader, Asri should set an example of the need to respect other religious practices and beliefs and not cross his boundary by insulting another religion, more so when he has no business speaking on another faith.”
He said the inspector-general of police should invoke section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948 which deals with involvement in a seditious act, as well as section 504 of the Penal Code (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and section 505 (statements conducive to public mischief).
He said section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 should also be referred to for alleged improper use of network facilities or network service.
“His insults on Hinduism are immoral,” Waythamoorthy said.
“The laws of Malaysia have to be applied equally among all citizens and we see no reason why Asri should be spared from any action under the Malaysian constitution.”