It needs to be said that the decision of the court in rejecting Lina Joy's appeal to have Islam deleted from her identity card is disappointing, unfair and unconstitutional. In my opinion, judge Gopal Sri Ram was right and, regrettably, the other judges wrong in their decision. Time will bear this out.

It would have been an open and shut case. But Lina's ordeal is prolonged, and now she is legally hampered in practising her true faith. In the eyes of the law she is still a Muslim, a preposterous situation, like in the case of the Kiwi woman arrested during the Ayah Pin raid, who claimed to be Muslim but a Christian in her heart. It can't be fair to Lina who wants to be consistent, open and honest about her faith.

Judge Gopal rightly relied on the evidence of the statutory declaration, the only reliable and legally enforceable evidence to decide Lina's religion. By referring the matter to the Syariah Court, as the other judges insisted, makes no sense. How will anyone decide if not by relying on the statutory declaration, the strongest proof of her true beliefs?

If the learned judges, except judge Gopal who disagreed with his colleagues, can't decide on the evidence what makes them think the Syariah Court will do better? Isn't it ironical that the same judges who considered it an administrative matter, and ought to have judged in Lina's favour, had to refer it to a religious body?

There is no other conclusion one can arrive at than that Lina is a Christian. Even Blind Billy can see that. The recalcitrance in acknowledging the fact and dragging this harmless woman through the corridors of bureaucracy are but a form of harassment, so typical of the religious persecution in the country. Sure they don't feed them to the lions today but they can make life so onerous for sincere people like Lina.

The judgment against Lina has undermined the statutory declaration as an important and serious legal document. It subsumes the right of the individual to a body, the Syariah court, which has no constitutional power in the matter. Surely the judges should know that, or were they listening to judge Gopal's arguments?

In the final analysis, the reasons given by the rejecting judges are indefensible and reflect a lack of compassion, and disregard for Lina's constitutional right. It scorns her right as a human being in choosing and practising her religion of choice. Those arguments would not have won a high school debate or pass the test of common sense.

As Pilate passed the buck, the judges have merely passed the buck. It is proof that the courts ought not be given the onus of deciding such matters. The lawmakers should legislate laws to make it easier for people like Lina to change religion without facing religious persecution, often in the form of bureaucratic harassment, or face judges who may be more concerned about political correctness and the community's backlash than the individual's civil liberty and constitutional right.

In 1987, during Operation Lallang, a couple of Malays who were Christians were wrongfully arrested and detained under the Internal Security Act. Their crime was that they had become Christians, and Mahathir's government took it upon itself to punish them. It made a mockery of religious freedom and was a dark day for the country.

It appears that all that talk about Islam Hadhari means nothing for religious liberty. Nothing has changed. Justice is only a word that has no relevance to a Malay who wants out of Islam. Ayah Pin and his followers, all Malays face the same ordeal as Lina, a Christian. They share a common plight of religious persecution, so unnecessary and unfair, and should I add, un-Islamic?

I urge the bureaucracy to show a greater respect for the constitution and Islam which is against compulsion or injustice and uphold the people's human right to choose their religion. Hampering the handful of Muslims who may want to leave Islam by unfair bureaucratic hurdles is gratuitous and unproductive, and will stifle the social development of a nation already beset by social problems caused by an unprogressive approach.

Most Malays who leave Islam do it out of conviction not convenience, and nothing will stop them. They have their reasons as we all do when we choose to believe in God or a religion or not. It is our God-given fundamental right, supported by declarations of human rights and our constitution, and no one ought to rob us of it. It saddens me that everyone else enjoys the freedom to choose and practise their religion whatever it is, except the Malays.

For once, I'm glad I am not a Malay Malaysian.