Cool heads: The case of the Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman Temple has been resolved by the stakeholders peacefully. — Bernama
IT was a good ending to a controversial issue involving a proposed new mosque on a piece of private land and a Hindu temple that has long occupied a small space there.
It proved that cool heads have prevailed.
Like everything involving race and religion in this country, it could have turned emotive, especially when disruptors on social media and politicians get into the act.
There are many who are not even stakeholders in this issue but want to be self-proclaimed communal heroes with their agitative messages and postures.
I don’t have to name them, but we all know who these serial characters, with their repulsive videos, are.
But it is commendable that landowner Jakel Trading Sdn Bhd has worked out the issue patiently and amicably with the management of the Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman Temple, with the help of Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL).
The temple will now be relocated to a piece of land opposite its current spot. To be precise, it will be just 50m away.
The new place, measuring 371sq m, will also be a little bigger than the old one.
It is good that the Prime Minister even took the opportunity to visit the temple after attending the groundbreaking ceremony of the proposed Madani Mosque last Thursday.
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had earlier promised that the temple would not be touched, and that it would continue to operate until the relocation process begins.
After the brief meeting between Anwar and temple committee chairman K. Barthiban, the latter said the PM gave his assurance that the government was committed to an amicable resolution to the matter.
The issue, however, has attracted much attention because it involves a Hindu temple and a proposed mosque.
The owner is said to have bought the land and was aware of the existing temple, while the temple management reportedly claimed they were not informed that Jakel had bought the land from DBKL in 2014.
Previously, there have been disputes involving Hindu temples and housing developers, where police had to be called in.
While the case of the Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman Temple has been resolved by the parties involved, it won’t be wrong to suggest that there will be similar cases in future, as there are many such unregistered temples.
It was reported in 2021 that there were 115 temples and shrines built illegally on government land in KL with eight sites granted occupation offers while 58 were asked to relocate urgently.
There is no exact official number of unregistered Hindu temples but one researcher, Elanjelian Venugopal, has been quoted as saying that a seven-year long study found that there were 3,200 temples in Malaysia, most of them unregistered.
Those without proper registration, he said, were built decades ago by plantation workers on estates “and they were not familiar with the need to register the temple’’.
The study from 2005 to 2012 was carried out with the cooperation of the Malaysian Hindu Sangam.
Temple committees and politicians are upset when these places are called illegal, preferring the more polite term unregistered.
But to private landowners, whoever sits on their land – whether they are temples or homes – are just squatters and illegals.
In all fairness, many of these temples have been in existence since the colonial days, when documents were not as important as they are now, and retrospective legal action would be difficult to explain or justify.
Many were established decades ago on land without formal documentation or approval.
Over time, as land ownership changed or development projects began, complications arose.
For local authorities, they have no choice as they need to refer to legal documents as a reference when disputes arise.
It has been reported that almost half of the temples identified through the survey did not have land ownership. If the land belongs to the government, whether state or federal, it would be easier for negotiation.
But if it is privately owned, as in the case of Jakel Trading, then negotiations become more complicated.
The only compromise would be to plead with the private landowners not to demolish the temple and to provide enough time for it to be relocated.
Federal Territories Minister Datuk Seri Dr Zaliha Mustafa must be commended for defusing a hot issue. She even stopped Jakel Trading from pursuing a legal case against the temple.
Even after finding a solution for the temple, she had to answer calls from firebrand preacher Firdaus Wong who demanded to know if the government had given the temple land for free plus RM2mil in compensation.
The government has no obligation to reveal to anyone the details of the agreement reached by the parties involved.
As in any dispute, efforts must be made to create a win-win situation where both parties come to an agreement and get something in return.
More importantly, a harmonious approach was taken and an agreement made and accepted.
In this case, we now see a Hindu temple, which is over a century old, co-existing near a modern mosque, which is living proof that places of worship from different faiths can stand next to each other.
It is common in Penang, such as along Jalan Kapitan Keling, formerly Pitt Street, which houses Chinese and Hindu temples, a big mosque, and a church. There is a similar case in Seberang Jaya on the mainland.
In fact, in Miri, Sarawak, when the Muslim faithful pray on Friday, they park their vehicles at the church next door.
At Jalan Kampung Melayu in Air Itam, Penang, where I live, there is a 16-storey block of flats which is predominantly occupied by Malays, and the many homes face a giant Goddess of Mercy statue at nearby Kek Lok Si temple.
Dr Zaliha is right to emphasise that the resolution in the case of Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman temple “cannot be made a precedent for any future cases” and that this solution “is a specific resolution to this particular issue… in accordance with the law, and with due consideration for the sensitivities of all parties involved”.
It is necessary now to set up a Hindu regulatory body to regularise and protect temples and oversee their management affairs.
It is commendable that the Unity Ministry met over 700 temple representatives last November to look into land and administrative issues.
It has been proposed that a committee be formed through the Hindu Sangam to carry out a thorough study on issues facing temples, and proposed solutions.
It is understood the Cabinet has agreed to the proposal.
Such a move will take away any perceived bias or allegations of racial and religious discrimination.
The reality is that Hindu temples do sit on TNB reserve land, on playgrounds, and on road reserves.
But we also need to address the broader challenges faced by minority religious communities regarding land rights and freedom of worship.
While Muslims and Buddhists make up the larger number of Malaysians, let’s not forget the rights of Hindus and Christians to worship and have proper places of worship, too, as guaranteed under the Federal Constitution.
Mosques, temples, and churches are not merely places of worship but also community centres, and a living reflection of our diversity.
