Pakatan: Hudud only if all parties agree


By Shannon Teoh
The Malaysian Insider
Sep 29, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 29 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) agreed today that the contentious hudud or Islamic criminal law is not part of its joint policy until all parties agree to it, stepping back from the brink of a major difference that broke an earlier opposition coalition.

Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim told a press conference just after midnight that the set of Islamic laws was “certainly now not PR policy and DAP’s objection has to be respected.”

Anwar said PR will continue to allow its members to air different views. — File pic
“Yes, very clear, it has to be together,” the PKR de facto leader replied to a question on whether any move to implement hudud would need the unanimous agreement of all three parties in the pact.

He had earlier backed imposing the law in Kelantan, just like political foe Umno whose former leader Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dredged up the issue last week.

Close to 30 top PR leaders had met for over three hours last night to resolve the longstanding hudud issue which has seen the DAP and PAS repeatedly at loggerheads.

Dr Mahathir, who opposed hudud when Kelantan passed the law in 1993, dared Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat, the state’s mentri besar, to implement hudud now that the country’s longest-serving prime minister was no longer in power.

The PAS spiritual leader then called on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to propose amendments to the federal constitution to allow the Islamic law, which prescribes stoning, whipping and amputation as punishment for criminal offences.

But the DAP has insisted that it is not part of PR’s common policy, leading to the three-year-old pact’s unity being questioned.

Secretary-general Lim Guan Eng vowed this week that his entire central leadership would resign their posts if hudud became part of the coalition’s joint stand.

PR issued a gag order earlier this week, barring their members from speaking on the issue until the pact’s emergency meeting last night.

Anwar also said PR will continue to allow its members to air different views but that no policy would become part of its common platform without the consensus of all.

“Why must PAS be denied the right to articulate their views? We cannot deny the right of any party to bring forward any view. PR respects PAS’s initiative and aspiration but we have to reach a consensus,” the former deputy prime minister said.

He added that he could not understand “why (hudud) cannot be discussed? Why the strong abhorrence?”

The Permatang Pauh MP also said that the hudud enactments that were passed in PAS-ruled Kelantan and Terengganu in 1993 and 2003 respectively were done before PR had been formed.

Anwar said that “both enactments are there, but it requires PR consensus and an amendment to the constitution. DAP is not supportive of that particular position.”

Print Friendly

  1. #1 by dagen on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 8:40 am

    At least one can be sure that all parties in pakatan are equal and sensible. Even on important issue like hudud (well important to pas) all parties can see some sense and compromise.

    Imagine what we would get if the same were to happen to BN. Any issue which is important to mca or mic or the rest would automatically be shove aside as non-issue; and any issue which is important to umno must prevail no matter what and any attempt to discuss it would be anti-agung, anti-islam jenis-umno, anti-melayu, an act of ungratefulness, terrorism and communism, unpatriotic and etc etc. and hence can result in detention without trial and or revocation of citizenship.

    So I say pakatan leaders are showing a great deal of maturity and aboveall statemanship.

  2. #2 by yhsiew on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 8:42 am

    This is how Pakatan differs from BN. In BN only Umno has the right to make decision. Whether MCA, Gerakan or MIC likes the decision or not, it will be shoved down their throats.

  3. #3 by k1980 on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 8:54 am

    //Pakatan Rakyat agreed today that the contentious hudud or Islamic criminal law is not part of its joint policy until all parties agree to it.//

    Now, I challenge BN to publicly state that the contentious NEP or national discrimination law is not part of its joint policy until all its component parties agree to it.

    What say yoy, Chua Soiled Leg, Senator Ah Koon, kelinga kayves and thambi (little brother) palanivel?

  4. #4 by k1980 on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:02 am

    Now that the orang-orang tua are allowed to drag out their old bones and slough till they are well above 60 years old, the GST can now be implemented, because these orang-orang tua will then have money to pay for the price increases due to service taxes. Brilliant idea, jibby!

  5. #5 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:02 am

    ///Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim told a press conference just after midnight that the set of Islamic laws was “certainly NOW not PR policy and DAP’s objection has to be respected.”///

    To me, the word “now” as applied to Hudud not being part of PR’s policy is just as ambiguous as Najib’s “eventually” as applied to removal of quota!
    Not now means what?
    Its of course its not “now” – as there’s an general election to contest, without winning of which, the question of having the federal power (2 against 1) to implement the Hudud does not arise.

  6. #6 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:18 am

    I agree that PR is more democratic in that it, according to Anwar, “will continue to allow its members to air different views” so that Rakyat may vote with their eyes opened. However an agreement to disagree tantamounts to a disagreement. There is basically no change of position of respective parties both before and after last night high level PR talk. Anwar’s statement that Hudud is not, for “now”, PR’s policy due to DAP’s objection is entirely consistent with both Nik Aziz’s and his own statements (before last night) that Hudud could be implemented in the future but not now – no different in principle from Muhyiddin’s! He mentioned “DAP’s objection” implying PKR does not object! That’s the major shift in PKR’s position. To me, it debunks claims that PKR pursues “New Politics” or is committed to Middle Malaysia.

  7. #7 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:32 am

    It also means that if PR wins federal power then by normal democratic process PAS will likely have its way because of PKR’s support in a 2 versus 1 equation.

    The political axis/fault line in this country’s critical moment of history ought to be Moderate/Inclusive/Progressive/Middle Malaysia on one side versus Ethnocentric (Race/Religious Card)/Patronage ladened & Corruption proned on the other side on which DAP stands on the former’s side. This should be the choice for Rakyat!

    Rakyat should not be forced to choose between Piety/Religion/No Corruption on one side versus Ethnocentric (Race/Religious Card)/Patronage ladened & Corruption on the other side – that PKR/PAS present. Tis is a false choice!

    From DAP’s ideological standpoint, it, in absence of alternatives, is basically misaligned in this equation.

  8. #8 by sheriff singh on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:35 am

    Reports say the meeting was a fiery one with table banging and all that. Karpal Singh was even shouted down by his colleagues which must be a first – a Lion being silenced by a Lamb.

    I was a bit disappointed that no Malay / Muslim was included in the DAP’s delegation to offer his / her views.

    Nevertheless the meeting’s outcome seems to be quite a fruitful one – for now, the time being. Let us see how things pan out in the coming months especially at the coming GE. One step at a time.

    Maybe PR should now take the lead and come out with its own Inter-Party Interfaith Council to trash out any religious issues. This will give the public an indication as to how a PR government will move when it takes over power.

  9. #9 by boh-liao on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:45 am

    UmnoBputras, certainly MMK n his children, very scared of hu dud, nanti kena stoned 2 death or limbs got chopped off; hu dud NO, mayb hoo doo n spells YES

  10. #10 by limkamput on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 9:58 am

    Quote from someone posting this in Malaysiakini:

    I have a few questions for PR: 1.You said the implementation of hudud will be based on consensus, but what do you mean by consensus? What if someday in future those against the hudud have become minority while those in favour have become absolute majority, would you still base your decision on consensus? 2. You said the implementation of hudud would be based on the present Federal Constitution. But would the constitution be amended when it is opportune to do so. Continue 1…

    Continue 1…You see, PR, we support a political party/coalition based on their policy intent and conviction and how they see the future of Malaysia, not based on some devious guarantees or checks and balances when issues become insurmountable or protracted. We should all know by now guarantees in politics are worth nothing more than the paper it was written. Checks and balances can only happen when there are real and genuine sharing of power which again I find wanting. What more Malays/Muslims would soon become the absolute majority in this country. If you have asked the Malays whether hudud is appropriate for them, which Muslims would say no, (even if some of them could have said so out of political correctness).

    Continue 2…Politics is about doing the right things for the people and society. Political leaders must decide what is enduring, sustainable and in consonant with present day developments when charting the destiny of this country. It is dangerous to base on dogmas, one’s faith, or unwavering attachment to some doctrinaires. Leaders must lead and bring forth their convictions to change their people for the better. Leadership is not based on expediency or what they think the people want even though they know what the people seemingly want would lead to long term destruction of the country.

  11. #11 by sheriff singh on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 10:03 am

    Do you understand what a ‘Federation’ means?

  12. #12 by Cinapek on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 10:05 am

    Najib, watch and learn. This is “best democracy” in practice. Not your empty rhetoric.

    Each has their own opinion. It is healthy to open your minds and to disagree. But it is even healthier to discuss your disageements and work out a mutually acceptable solution. In doing so, all parties has “ownership” of the solution and will more likely give their 100% support. We don’t need opressive laws such as the Sedition Act or the ISA to force unwelcome policies down the people’s throat. Such methods gag and it is only a matter of time before they are vomitted back out into the face of the oppressor.

    This is a good spirit for PR to start with and I hope it is not adopted merely for reasons of expediency, though I would be a fool to believe completely otherwise. I still harbour the hope that PR would see the positives of such an approach and use this as a model to resolve all their future disagreements, which I am sure there are many more to come. As long as two parties can sit down and talk things out rationally, we have hope.

  13. #13 by Taikohtai on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 10:11 am

    Kudos to DSAI for once again presiding over contentious issues that matured minds once again agree upon for the sake of Malaysia going forward. The importance of DSAI as the gel for Pakatan is not be be underestimated. UMNO knows this very well, hence their relentless pursuit to kill him off politically in order to maintain their tenancy in Putrajaya.
    But Pakatan holds strong in the face of adversity and BN is now back pedalling once more.
    Hidup Pakatan! Hidup PAS! Hidup DAP! Hidup ABU!

  14. #14 by asia on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 12:44 pm

    The law is more suitable for military or slave servant

    but not suitable for a modern modern civilization who demand human rights

  15. #15 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:28 pm

    According to Malaysiakini report “the coalition agreed to disagree on existing enactments pertaining to hudud law in Kelantan and Terengganu, as the enactments predate the formation of Pakatan”. Of course the status of these existing enactments is both divisive & thorny but it of importance. It remains an open wound for PR’s enemies to pour salt into. One can see how TDM cleverly ignited the controversy within PR by simply daring Nik Aziz to implement hudud based on these existing enactments now that he (TDM) who prohibited it was no longer in power!

    However we do not, for now, know (except speculating on surface) the merits or demerits of the arguments between DAP & PAS on these enactments.

  16. #16 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:29 pm

    Any way speculating nonetheless: PAS would argue (1) why disturb enactments introduced prior to PR’s formation & formulation which (2) in reality and for practical purposes their enforcement requires 2/3 parliamentary support for constitutional amendment and (3) for it to repeal is a slap in its face that divests the only differentia between it and UMNO ie that PAS is seriously more Islamic than UMNO.

  17. #17 by dagen on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:29 pm

    Right.

    Let us move on. Plucked this from the bbc online (today):

    ///Knowledge is power – economic power – and there’s a scramble for that power taking place around the globe.

    In the United States, Europe and in rising powers such as China, there is a growth-hungry drive to invest in hi-tech research and innovation.

    They are looking for the ingredients that, like Google, will turn a university project into a corporation. They are looking for the jobs that will replace those lost in the financial crash.

    Not to invest would now be “unthinkable”, says Maire Geoghegan-Quinn, the European Commissioner responsible for research, innovation and science, who is trying to spur the European Union to keep pace in turning ideas into industries … ///

    Read in full here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-14949538

  18. #18 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:30 pm

    I imagine DAP’s position would be (1) how can these enactments be allowed to remain when they contradict squarely both the spirit and letter of Common Policy Framework (CPF) or Buku Jingga, not to mention the Federal Constitution as well that underpins the consensus necessary for DAP’s participation in and support of the Opposition Coalition! (2) PAS’s argument that they were enacted before PR’s formation and CPF is not valid as the issue is really whether these enactments are good enough to be allowed to stay under PR’s auspices when they are inconsistent with Middle Malaysia that PR espouses as a way forward for the nation into the future. These enactments however represent not a finger pointing forward from present to future that PR wants to take the country but the contrary way from present back to the past (6th century) instead.

  19. #19 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:36 pm

    After all ISA & EO also predated PR’s formation and CPF but that does not stop PAS from objecting that ISA & EO be allowed to remain. So the issue still comes back on the merits / demerits of these enactments and PR’s component parties’ common or if not majority position on these enactment One can shelve it but can’t duck the issue for long: TDM, BN supporters & Utusan will sure leverage and continue to hit on the cleavages/divisions arising from this issue ducked for now.

  20. #20 by yhsiew on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:52 pm

    Perhaps people who advocate hudud should learn to be forgiving.

    Saudi woman driver’s lashing ‘overturned by king’

    @@http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15102190

  21. #21 by wanderer on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 1:53 pm

    If Hudud laws were to be introduced in Bolehland, UMNO PM would be the first to have his “little johnny” chopped off!…same warning goes to all the sex maniacs. (Bung Mokhtar is next I have in mind).

  22. #22 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 2:22 pm

    Well whether under Hudud or secular law it depends on judge whether it is rigid. There are well documentated cases in Pakistan and Bangladesh how married women were raped but it was not considered rape as there were no credible pious male witnesses present to witness “penetration” at the time the act took place and hence the women raped woman were inferred to have committed zina-adultery/fornication punishable by whipping/jail under Hudud law.Sisters in Islam, a women’s advocacy group in Malaysia has reported, that in neighboring Pakistan: According to Sisters-in-Islam 3 out of 4 women in prison under its Hudud laws, are rape victims. I don’t know how far PAS can go with this Hudud thing but its not going to get modern Muslim votes with it. It is not an issue whether Hudud is applied to Non Muslims or not. It is a question whether its a system of law that is relevant in modern times and whether it could lead to a perversity or travesty of justice as all people of whatever race creed or religion can immediately identify with.

  23. #23 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 2:27 pm

    So actually sex maniacs who rape can get off rather than have their “little johnny” chopped off!…This is because rape must be proven not based on modern DNA or other identification/profiling methods but the witnessing of the act by 4 pious adult males present. Can rape ever be then proven???

  24. #24 by cintanegara on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 2:53 pm

    DAP wins handsomely …..PAS flops….what a shame….the betrayal of PAS, the so called “Islamic party” is clearly seen…..PAS had abandoned its goal of setting up an Islamic state. It is a political party without principles

    “Jangan jadi seperti Pak Pandir, menang sorak, kampung tergadai.“

    A close english version would be: You win the battle but you lose the war.

    That is why the entire Malay community must reject PAS in the next GE…….

  25. #25 by waterfrontcoolie on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 3:02 pm

    YB, I am sure by now you would have received flyer from people who had experience with a locally “created’ University with magnificent credential even fron the Great PM himself. This so-called University is being “infested’ by so-called students from Africa, who are in fact drug peddlars, committing rapes and other drug related problems. Are we making this nation into the centre of DRUG EXCELLENCE? It looks like, we have indeed joined Zimbabwe!

  26. #26 by sheriff singh on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 3:03 pm

    Does sodomy, which is illegal here, also need 4 pious witnesses? Does the culprit also need to get his naughty Johnnie Boy chopped off if found guilty? Front door, back door, same, same?

  27. #27 by boh-liao on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 5:01 pm

    Belum hudud yet, Y NR n RM so takut 2 testify in d sodomee II trial
    Rakyat want 2 know what they discussed with Ful of Sai, d AC/DC dude
    Did NR ask him: What did U do 2 RM? Got do or no got do 1?
    Did RM ask him: What did U do 2 NR? Got do or no got do 1?

  28. #28 by Loh on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 6:25 pm

    PAS believes that Muslims in the country prefer hudud laws. UMNO feels that it might still need non-Malays to vote them in power, and chose the status quo. Najib said that hudud will not be implemented. Mamakthir told Nik Aziz that he was no longer the PM now and he dared Nik Aziz to ask Najib to amend the constitution to allow hudud laws in Kelantan.

    Nik Aziz could have asked Mamakthir to confirm whether he regretted his decision in 1993, and that motivated him to making those comments. It is possible that Mamakthir expected Najib to announce rejection of hudud laws so that he can criticize Najib depending on BN election results. That is in keeping with Mamakthir’s practices; he talked about corruption in government as if he had prevented it!
    Nik Aziz, an honest person he is, chose to prove that he was serious about implementing the hudud laws. The Pakatan leaders announce a consensus decision that hudud laws and other issues facing the Pakatan can only be carried with consensus. Clearly, so long as Pakatan needs DAP to remain in power, hudud laws will not be implemented.

    While in government UMNO refuses hudud. What if UMNO proposes hudud in parliament when UMNO is in the opposition? Alternately what if PAS proposes hudud in parliament and UMNO supports it? It will then be dependent on PKR whether hudud laws would go through. Of course, if it did, Pakatan government would fall. UMNO, PAS and PKR would then form the next government. Then hudud laws would also be implemented in Sabah and Sarawak, if the state governments agree.

    Hudud affects Muslims more than non-Muslims if it is possible to implement two legal systems in one country. Well that problem might be removed if the country follow Iran’s example. PKR should organize a referendum for Malays and Muslims in the country to assess whether they prefer hudud laws, and Iran’s practice of Islamic state. They would then know for sure whether it was useful to politicise religion.

  29. #29 by Loh on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 6:42 pm

    Jeffrey :
    Well whether under Hudud or secular law it depends on judge whether it is rigid. There are well documentated cases in Pakistan and Bangladesh how married women were raped but it was not considered rape as there were no credible pious male witnesses present to witness “penetration” at the time the act took place and hence the women raped woman were inferred to have committed zina-adultery/fornication punishable by whipping/jail under Hudud law.Sisters in Islam, a women’s advocacy group in Malaysia has reported, that in neighboring Pakistan: According to Sisters-in-Islam 3 out of 4 women in prison under its Hudud laws, are rape victims. I don’t know how far PAS can go with this Hudud thing but its not going to get modern Muslim votes with it. It is not an issue whether Hudud is applied to Non Muslims or not. It is a question whether its a system of law that is relevant in modern times and whether it could lead to a perversity or travesty of justice as all people of whatever race creed or religion can immediately identify with.

    Potential rapists would hope that they are charged under hudud laws!

  30. #30 by vsp on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 11:03 pm

    Imposing religious laws on society is no guarantee that crimes will not be committed. At best, crimes will go underground, undetected. Look at most of the Islamic countries that have syariah laws and hudud: Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, etc – all these countries are basket cases. The Arab spring that broke out in the Middle East and North Africa proves that the elites are hiding behind religion to commit crimes against their own populations.

    Religious laws by themselves are harmless but place them under the control of religious fascists and corrupt politicians, untold harm to societies would result. Hudud is akin to the burning of women as witches during the Dark Age in Europe.

    Even with enlightened secular laws, if corrupt politicians and power-hungry maniacs control and manipulate them for their own agendas, societies would also suffer. Witness the turmoil that is happening now in the US and Europe. Corrupt politicians and civil services collude with special interests to sabotage the laws, and abrogate their duty to protect society.

    PAS is saying that non-Muslims should not be worried because hudud will only be applicable to Muslims. Then why do the religious fascists in PAS always insist on banning gambling, liquor and entertainment across the board? If they can do this, would it not be possible for them to later turn around and say that hudud should be applicable to all? Non-Muslims by nature do not necessarily want to oppose hudud, but they are worried about the religious fascists in PAS and UMNO getting out of control and misusing hudud as a means to terrorize society – both Muslims and non-Muslims.

    So be aware of religious fascists, race supremacists and corrupt politicians, and do not fall into the trap of readily believe their deception. This could happen in either political camp, be it the BN or Pakatan.

  31. #31 by cemerlang on Thursday, 29 September 2011 - 11:38 pm

    In case you do not know, the BN is eyeing all the youths in Malaysia because they think that it is the youths that vote you guys in. So let the youths have all the fun and put the old in some forgotten centres. Let them lantak the system until it goes haywire and who cares. Afterall it is politics. Let their creative curious juice flows and rojakkan the whole system until there is no system. Let them rule the country and make it their playground and see how far they go. Let them experiment with democracy, with communism, with socialism, with right wingism, with left wingism, with whatever political ideology that is available. Right ? Old people are not human beings. Old people should not be helped. Old people are slow. Hey ! Let us vote a 20 year old to be the leader of Malaysia.

  32. #32 by Lee Wang Yen on Friday, 30 September 2011 - 8:27 am

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15116650

    The lawyer for an Iranian Christian cleric sentenced to death for apostasy says he is optimistic that his client will be acquitted.

    The lawyer, Mohammad Ali Dadkhah, said there was a 95% chance Yusuf Naderkhani would be freed.

    Iran’s Supreme Court has said that Naderkhani’s sentence may be annulled if he renounces Christianity. His lawyer says that he refuses to do so.

    There have been international appeals for clemency for Naderkhani.

    Now in his early 30s, he converted to Christianity at the age of 19. He was arrested in 2009 and sentenced to death the following year by a court of appeals.

  33. #33 by dagen on Friday, 30 September 2011 - 9:15 am

    One idiot here spoke of the outcome in terms of win and lose. Now my friends that is typical umno mentality. According to that warped, twisted, perverse, idiotic, illogical, ketuanan mentality, umno must always win, no matter what.

    And umno idiots like him simply transplanted that mentality onto pas and expect pas to behave precisely like umno. But PAS is no umno!

    And as is typical of umno, he forgot that DAP and PAS and PKR are partners and not opponents. They have a common objective and their collective aim is to serve the king, the country and the people; and not their own interest.

    If that rambutan lover cant see it let me point the fact out to him: So you wanna know who really won, rambutan boy? The people! On this particular issue, DAP took a step forward for the people. PAS sensibly took a step backward, also for the people. Between DAP and PAS, as partners, there is no winner or loser. But the people (you, rambutan boy included) clearly had benefited from both the forward and the backward steps.

  34. #34 by tak tahan on Friday, 30 September 2011 - 10:05 am

    That is why the entire Malay community must reject Umno in the next GE…….or else …sampai tak larat nak maju ke depan.

  35. #35 by monsterball on Friday, 30 September 2011 - 11:03 am

    Cintanegara has improved his fanning job well.
    His rambutan tree must have fertilzer supplied by Najib personally.
    Shit talk he is best.
    He is telling all Malays reject PAS ….where even Mahathir …Najib or any ministers dare not talk like that..not even Ibrahim Ali.
    He is hoping for good old days..that only DAP stand tall as opposition…a watch dog.
    2 party system frightens him and UMNO b and his BN goons….become the Opposition give cintanegara plenty nightmares..that he will be transfered to somewhere ….over the rainbow…to shut his mouth forever.

  36. #36 by cemerlang on Friday, 30 September 2011 - 11:25 am

    Who is the hero that free Malaysia from imprisonment ? If they cannot maintain that status, they will feel so ashamed.

You must be logged in to post a comment.