At the joint media conference on April 1 to announce PKR, DAP and PAS decision to take the next logical step to the March 8, 2008 political tsunami with the three parties tentatively agreeing to establish a Pakatan Rakyat (a proposal and term subject to confirmation by the three respective parties), I said that March 8 general election results were a clear and unmistakable message from the people that they want the three parties to work together to bring about changes in the country to restore justice, freedom, democracy and good governance – and not for an Islamic state or hudud laws.
I was asked by a reporter today whether my statement that the March 8 political tsunami was a demand for change to restore justrice, freedom, democracy and good governance and not for an Islamic state and hudud laws applied only to non-Muslims and non-Malays.
I replied in the negative, as I believe that it is not only the non-Malays and non-Muslims but also the Malays and Muslims who voted solidly on March 8 for justice, freedom, democracy and good governance and not for Islamic state and hudud laws – producing for the first time in 50 years of Malaysian electoral history the national phenomenon of cross-race and cross-religion voting – DAP voters voted for PAS candidates and PAS voters voting for DAP candidates.
Just as it was a great mistake after the 1999 general election to regard its results as a vote for Islamic state and hudud laws (resulting in the DAP leaving the Barisan Alternative in 2001), it will be an equally cardinal error to interpret the March 8, 2008 general election result as a mandate for Islamic state and hudud laws.
It is pertinent to revisit the reasons why DAP had to pull out of Barisan Alternative in 2001. The following is an extract from a statement I made on 30th June 2001, entitled: “BA at crossroads and no more tenable”:
Barisan Alternative is at the crossroads as it is no more tenable with PAS leaders openly flouting the BA common manifesto for “A Just and Democratic Malaysia” and disregarding the opposition of the other three component parties towards an Islamic State. The Barisan Alternative would not have been formed in the first place to take on the Barisan Nasional as one united front in the 1999 general election if PAS was not prepared to respect the opposition of DAP, Keadilan and PRM to an Islamic State, focussing on the common objectives of restoring justice, freedom, democracy and good governance in Malaysia. Barisan Alternative leaders should face up to the unpalatable fact that in the next general election, whether 2003 or 2004, if the voters are faced with the choice between an Islamic State and a sixth term of Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad as Prime Minister, the choice would be the latter as Mahathir would already be close to eighty and cannot remain at the helm of government for long while voting for an Islamic State would be the start of a journey which could not inspire confidence and hope from the experience of other countries. Before the 1999 general election, PAS leaders were at pains to help the other Barisan Alternative parties and leaders to assure the people that the Opposition Front was founded purely on the common objectives of restoring justice, freedom, democracy and good governance and was no agreement on an Islamic State. PAS leaders even went out of their way to explain that there was no basis to worry about an Islamic State as PAS was fielding less than one-third of the parliamentary candidates and could not have the two-thirds parliamentary majority necessary to alter the Constitution for the establishment of an Islamic State. Of late, however, PAS leaders have decided to openly and publicly disregard the opposition of the other component parties of the Barisan Alternative to an Islamic State and flout the Barisan Alternative Manifesto “Towards A Just and Democratic Malaysia” by publicly reiterating its commitment to an Islamic State. For instance, the Selangor Bar Journal May 2001 in an exclusive interview with the PAS deputy president Abdul Hadi bin Awang said that at the top of the agenda of a PAS-led Federal Government once it is returned to power is to commence implementing Islamic law, starting with the amendment of Article 4 of the Malaysian Constitution to enable Islamic enactment which are in conflict with laws passed by Parliament to prevail, such as the death sentence for apostasy. Hadi said that if Malaysia came under Islamic rule an act against the religion would be construed as an act against the State, which would be tantamount to treason for which the sentence was death. He said: “The laws on apostasy only bind Muslims and do not affect non-Muslims but a non-Muslim should be aware of the consequences of apostasy before converting because then he would come under the purview of Islamic law.” PAS leaders should not expect Malaysians, both Muslims and non-Muslims, to be unconcerned about such a position, not only from the human rights principles of freedom and justice, but also because of the raging controversy among Muslims including a significant body of opinion among the ulama from the earliest Islamic history that apostasy is not a capital crime as the Qu’ran is completely silent on the death penalty for apostasy. PAS president Datuk Fadzil Noor from Manchester yesterday urged the DAP not to make a hasty decision by leaving the opposition front over the Islamic state issue or the DAP will be walking right into the Barisan Nasional trap. DAP will not take the “easy way out” or “walk right into the Barisan Nasional trap” and this was why the DAP had insisted immediately after the last general election that there should be Barisan Alternative leadership dialogues to iron out our ideological differences over an Islamic State. I must say, however, that the dialogue held on June 16, 2001 to deal with the issue had been most unsatisfactory. The issue confronting the Barisan Alternative is whether the PAS leaders are prepared to respect the DAP’s opposition to an Islamic State in Malaysia not because of anti-Islam sentiments but because an Islamic State in multi-racial and multi-religious Malaysia is not compatible with parliamentary democracy, power-sharing in a plural society, human rights and individual freedoms, women’s rights and social tolerance. DAP respects PAS for its ideological position on the Islamic State, but in a modern, multi-racial and multi-religious society where non-Muslims comprise some 40 per cent of the population, and where it is not only non-Malays but Malays who oppose the establishment of an Islamic State, is PAS prepared to be realistic and concede that its Islamic State concept is not a practical or feasible proposition or option for Malaysia?
The rest is history. Can we larn from the lessons of history?