However, PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang has postponed his plan to table a Private Member’s Bill to pave the way for the party’s version of the hudud in Kelantan in next Dewan Rakyat meeting.
A PAS controlled state of Kelantan had repeatedly said that it would push for the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code II Enactment and enforce PAS’ hudud on Muslims in the state by next year if the Bill was passed.
Meanwhile, a Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom had reportedly given an assurance that the Federal Government would back PAS on the matter.
The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism & Taoism (MCCBCHST) however does not agree with proposal and subsequently introduction of hudud law in Malaysia.
This is because hudud law would undermine the basic structure of the constitution other than changing the legal system of the land, at the same time would also undermine the Rukunnegara and non-Muslim rights.
Thus, it would be seen as being unconstitutional.
Some quarters claimed that hudud has been in the manifesto of PAS all the while and that those who voted for PAS are actually voted for hudud . Thus, they wish to see that at least, hudud be implemented at least in Kelantan, a state they govern for so long.
PAS Central commitee member who is a lawyer and Sepang member of parliament and Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad who is currently the executive director of PAS Research Center and former member of parliament for Kuala Selangor believed there are distructive elements in the society and that they have been called and equipped by God to dismantle and/or disable such elements.
Hanipa and Dzul were driven by their conviction that “Islam” means subjection to a system of penal laws.
For them, these laws determine who may be judges; the rules of evidence; mandatory punishments.
For them, these laws have been dictated to men by God, and established by the actions of the Prophet of Islam.
To many the non-Muslims, hudud is better known as the law of amputation. They opined introduction of hudud would undermine the constitution and more importantly their rights.
To some quarters, there has been curiousity on saveral points in respect of the hudud implementation. For example, they cited the four Muslim male witnesses required in rape cases. They believed that it is almost impossible to get four Muslim males witnessing such crime.
What is more important is the fact that one should not get confused between zina and rape. The two had different meanings. Zina is voluntary act commited by the parties involved and rape is a non-consensual sexual intercourse.
In these modern days, other kinds of evidence such as DNA and CCTVs recordings have been widely and effectively used in our present criminal law system.
The proposal to move a Private Member's Bill at the Dewan Rakyat to pave the way for PAS' hudud to be implemented in Kelantan recieved strong opposition by DAP, a PAS' ally in Pakatan Rakyat as well as parties in the Barisan Nasional coalition such as MCA, MIC and Gerakan.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Najid was reported to have said on April 24 that the Federal Government had never rejected the implementation of PAS' hudud but there were loopholes that needed to addressed before it be done.
His deputy, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin was also reported to have suggested that a hudud technical committee be formed.
Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad regrets what he sees as the use of religion to gain political mileage in the hudud issue, The Star on line May 7, 2014.
He said religion should be used to administer religious laws among the Muslims but it was “regrettable” when it was used to win votes.
“Umno believes in hudud as found in the Quran. However, when it is used by a political party, they’re bound to interpret it in a biased manner.
Ironically, PAS' hudud proposal is not only opposed strongly by DAP and Barisan Nasional component parties like MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP but saveral Umno MPs had also expressed their reservations.
Barisan Nasional MP for Titiwangsa Datuk Johari Abdul Ghani was reported to have said that PAS should convince it's partners in Pakatan Rakyat partners to support the move before tabling the Private Member's Bill in Parliament. A clear reference to opposition by the DAP.
“If they do not agree with PAS, I suggest that PAS leave Pakatan. We will discuss with all Umno MPs on whether we should support the Bill or otherwise. We do not want PAS to use the issue for its political interest,” he said.
BN Pengerang MP Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said felt PAS’ hudud Bill would be unfair to all Malaysians.
“Hudud is God’s law and it is about prevention (of crime).
“What will happen if the criminals involved are both Muslim and non-Muslim. There will be some form of double standards if they are punished in different ways.
“However, I believe that if we are a fully Muslim country, then PAS’ hudud can be implemented,” she said
Tan Sri Shahrir Samad, Barisan Backbenchers Club chairman and MP for Johor Bharu said it was too early to tell whether Umno MPs would support the PAS’ Private Members Bill.
“We are arranging for briefings and discussions for Barisan MPs,” he said.
Meanwhile, another Barisan Nasional MP Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed said he personally would not vote for the Private Member’s Bill if the intention was political and aimed at winning votes in the general election.
He said that it would be unfair for the people of the state if they are not consulted as the law would affect the Muslims and non-Muslims.
“To be fair, even non-Muslims should be consulted despite PAS’ claim that the law will only affect the Muslims.
“And they should also have a national referendum on how many Malaysians really want PAS’ hudud law to be implemented,” he said
There has been opinion that majority of the Chinese in the country who supported DAP are not against to the implementation of hudud by virtue of DAP's association with PAS in Pakatan Rakyat. Is there any truth to this opinion?.
Perhaps, only a national referendum could provide an answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment