IS IT PAS OR GOD WHO WANTS HUDUD?

The next hurdle for Kelantan is to try to get Parliament’s approval. I don’t think PAS is really concerned about that. Their only concern is to be seen to be doing the right thing. And they believe they have achieved that. If Parliament does not approve Hudud, that is not PAS’s fault. That is the fault of those Members of Parliament who voted against Hudud.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

This is what my good friend Zaid Ibrahim said today:

“They think the people will not complain too much about the way they govern the state because the fear of hudud will distract them. This is a mistake of great proportion.”

“The people of Kelantan and of the entire country will punish Pas for this total disregard for their welfare by insisting on hudud as the criminal law of the country.”

“It’s a political bluff for which they (PAS) will pay and they will become a truly marginal party come the next general election.”

“Bereft of popularity, and lacking in any meaningful service to the people for many years now, PAS has to resurrect the party by introducing God’s law, hudud, even when they know many Kelantanese do not want such punishment.”

“God will understand if the Kelantanese leaders try to improve their administration of other matters before taking on Hudud.”

That was Zaid’s response regarding the amendments to the Sharia laws that was unanimously approved in the Kelantan State Assembly today. Unanimous means all the Kelantan State Assemblypersons from PAS, Umno and PKR voted in favour of Hudud.

The question we need to ask is whether this issue is about the law, the Constitution, religion, or politics — or all of the above? Religion is a state matter while the law is a federal matter. However, there are some laws, which are religion-based, that are state matters — hence the ambiguity or grey area on this matter of the Sharia.

For example, close proximity (khalwat) is not allowed in Islam. Neither is adultery (zina). But it is the religious authorities that arrest you for these crimes and not the police (although sometimes the religious department officers are accompanied/escorted by the police). And it is the religious department that charges you in a Sharia Court and not the Attorney General.

There are some, Muslims included, who say that Hudud, which is part of the Sharia, are barbaric laws. If that is true and if Hudud is part of the Sharia and since the Sharia is part of Islam that would make Islam a barbaric religion. Would you not say so?

While over the last few months politicians and pseudo-religious scholars have been arguing this matter, either in favour or against, we are yet to hear what the Muftis of the 13 states and the one from the Federal Territory have to say about the matter. Jakim, too, has been conspicuously silent although they talk so much about dog shows and whatnot.

So, the question they must answer is: is Hudud part of the Sharia and is the Sharia part of Islam and is it, therefore, mandatory? We have heard from the politicians. Now let us hear from the religious authorities and scholars.

If Hudud is not part of the Sharia and if the Sharia is not part of Islam then why do Muslims who drink beer get arrested? And why, also, are those who commit khalwat or zina arrested?

You see, all those acts such as consuming alcohol, close proximity, adultery, not fasting, not attending Friday prayers, etc., are already crimes under the Sharia long before Merdeka. Hudud is not, today, just making them crimes. They were already crimes long ago. Hudud is just determining the punishment for those crimes, which is more severe than before.

Hence Hudud just talks about the punishment. The crimes are already crimes even without Hudud. Hence to say that Hudud is barbaric means the Sharia is barbaric.

In the past, if you were caught with ganja, the policeman would join you for a puff. I actually personally experienced that when I was 16 and slightly younger than I am now.

Then, later, when not many policemen smoked ganja, they would arrest you and you went to jail.

Now they will hang you if the amount is above a certain weight.

Hence the new law of the death penalty just replaced the old law of a few months in jail. That is all.

That is the same with Hudud. The crime is still a crime. Only now the punishment has changed.

I remember back in the 1970s when if you were caught smoking during the month of Ramadhan you would get fined RM300. If you were caught littering, however, the fine was RM1,000.

Hence if you were caught smoking during Ramadhan you did not get rid of the evidence by throwing the cigarette on the ground and stepping on it. You would be fined RM1,000 for this. Instead, you continued smoking and paid the RM300 fine. That is much cheaper.

So the issue of it being a crime to smoke during Ramadhan has not changed. What changes is merely the punishment. Can you now get away with just a RM300 fine or is the fine now RM10,000 (plus maybe jail, whipping, etc.)? In that case throw the cigarette on the ground and step on it and pay the RM1,000 fine for littering.

In cases where the state laws contradict federal laws passed by Parliament then federal laws will prevail. Federal laws override state laws. Hence Kelantan needs to bring this matter to Parliament and get Parliament to approve these laws. If not the state cannot implement these laws.

So let us see what Parliament does when Kelantan brings this to Parliament for approval.

To amend the Constitution you need at least two-thirds of Parliament. To pass laws that do not violate the Constitution you only need a simple majority — 112 votes. So does what Kelantan is doing require constitutional amendments or, since it is a Sharia matter, the Constitution already covers it?

That is what will be interesting to see.

And how will the Muslim Members of Parliament vote? Probably we first need to ask whether the Muslim Members of Parliament see this as a political, legal, constitutional, or religious matter?

Most who are speaking, the politicians and political party supporters in particular, see this as a political issue. They say PAS will lose the support of the non-Malays and probably some of the Malays as well because of what it did in Kelantan today.

I am not sure whether the Malays will desert PAS. Maybe some would. But would those who now support PAS because of Hudud more than make up for those who desert PAS?

That is yet to be seen.

And the non-Malays have already said they no longer support PAS because it is not a team player, the Selangor Menteri Besar crisis being the main reason. Hence what does PAS have to lose? The non-Malays already said they would no longer support PAS anyway, with or without Hudud.

So how would the Hudud issue make any difference? At least now PAS may get more Malay support.

The question these Malays will ask is: is it PAS or is it God that wants Hudud? And this is how PAS will have to articulate this issue to the Malays. But, as I said, so far it is only the politicians who are talking. We have not heard from the 14 Muftis yet.

HRH the Sultan of Kelantan, who is head of religion in his state, has already spoken, though. And HRH said he wants Hudud. So will the 14 Muftis dare contradict the Sultan and say that Hudud is not part of the Sharia and the Sharia is not part of Islam and, therefore, is not mandatory?

Let’s see what happens over the next few days.

The next hurdle for Kelantan is to try to get Parliament’s approval. I don’t think PAS is really concerned about that. Their only concern is to be seen to be doing the right thing. And they believe they have achieved that. If Parliament does not approve Hudud, that is not PAS’s fault. That is the fault of those Members of Parliament who voted against Hudud.

Hence, politically, PAS has proven to the Malays that they are truly Islamic. PAS cannot be blamed if Hudud cannot be implemented. And those Muslim Members of Parliament who voted against Hudud would have to explain why they rejected God’s laws.

For political reasons, they may not want to be in that position. Hence they may find it politically prudent to vote in favour of Hudud and demonstrate that they are actually good Muslims.

Politics is difficult is it not? Sometimes you need to do what will win you votes even if that is not morally right or legal. And we have so many idiots who challenge me to enter politics if I want to talk so much.

Are they stupid or what?