FOR a visiting preacher, Zakir Naik certainly courts an unhealthy dose of controversy.

His on/off presence since 2012 has been both criticised and defended. Some of his scheduled talks, including one in Malacca in 2016, have been called off due to public pressure. But on the flip side, he has been granted permanent resident status and won a Maal Hijrah award, and reportedly has a house in Putrajaya. Through all this, Zakir has built up a fan base – along with a growing number of people uneasy with his continued presence in Malaysia and increasing influence over Malay-Muslims, especially powerful figures in the government.

To his supporters, Zakir represents a fresh brand of dakwah, or missionary work. Ditching traditional robes and preachers’ usual seated position in mosques, he sports a relatively modern look, keeping only his skullcap and beard as expressions of his faith, and prefers to stand during his talks. He quotes scriptures, both Islamic and those from other faiths, with rapid-fire delivery, seemingly saving his most powerful lines against Christians and Hindus, faiths whose adherents he tried to convert – or get along with, depending on who you ask – in his home country of India, and after finding fame, other parts of the world, too.

This televangelism-type preaching is opposed by non-Muslims mainly because it doesn’t grant them the space to rebut the points raised. Zakir’s fans urge people to take up his offer of open debate, often taunting his detractors to go head-to-head with him. But how? Malaysia’s laws clearly prohibit insulting Islam, and every state has a shariah enactment detailing a laundry list of what constitutes an insult, the special position of the religion as enshrined in the federal constitution, and the fact that proselytisation is prohibited.

Even if one is to argue with Zakir at his events, having the floor for just two to three minutes isn’t enough to explain their side of the story. And, they would likely be dismissed as unworthy opponents, or poorly informed, misguided people, or worse, stubborn, belligerent folk who refuse to accept his version of the truth. This makes most non-Muslims upset, especially when their religions are derided, and leaves them with no recourse but to pressure for such programmes to be stopped. But, many Muslims might not understand this sentiment, with some basing their arguments on the fact that Malaysia is a Muslim-majority nation, and believing that spreading Islam is obligatory.

To a good number of Malaysians, however, Zakir went overboard with his recent remarks – allegedly questioning the loyalty of Hindus in the country, and comparing his status as a “guest” in Malaysia to the Chinese community – and vow to take legal action against Pakatan Harapan politicians.

More than 100 police reports were lodged against him, leading to two sessions of questioning by police lasting a total of 17 hours. Seven states barred him from giving public talks, and yesterday, police issued an order, banning him from giving speeches anywhere in the country. It appears that cool heads have prevailed, with national interests placed above the “Islamic brotherhood” espoused by PAS.

The move to ban Zakir from giving public talks could expedite his team’s departure, or he could stay in Malaysia and do other religious work, with little to no opposition expected. There will be quite a political backlash if Putrajaya decides to deport him, with PAS and Umno surely trying to gain mileage. They must tread carefully, however, as Zakir is not without enemies from other Islamic groups, some of which have a notable presence or influence in the country.

More importantly, perhaps, the controversy surrounding Zakir can teach us more about ourselves. By now, we should have learnt that race relations are more fragile than ever, we need to repair the damaged trust between communities, and we should not let any one person or issue tear our social fabric.

Some may persist in trying to pull us to either extreme, but we still have a strong-enough middle ground to counteract them. This force is waning, though, and we need to work harder to keep the centrist ideology alive. – August 21, 2019.

* Emmanuel Joseph firmly believes that Klang is the best place on Earth, and that motivated people can do far more good than any leader with motive.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.