Bernama
December 22, 2008 20:31 PM
PAS Admits Difficulty Getting Consensus On Hudud From Opposition Partners
KOTA BAHARU, Dec 22 (Bernama) — PAS has admitted that the implementation of Hudud and Qisas laws would have to be postponed even if Pakatan Rakyat is able to take over the government in future.
This is because it will require the agreement of its two other Pakatan Rakyat partners, Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) and DAP, which has already objected to the plan.
The admission was made by PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa at a press conference, here, today as the three opposition components had signed an agreement in August, stating that any policy change should have a multilateral agreement among them.
Husam said PAS would not act unilaterally in coming up with the Hudud law if the party ruled the country but would instead work together with DAP and PKR on the matter.
“However, PAS will continue with its struggle to implement Hudud law, which is God’s law, by explaining to all quarters, including the Pakatan Rakyat component parties, until they are ready to accept the law.
“We will discuss the Hudud law and if they cannot accept its implementation when the time comes, we will postpone it,” he said.
In Islamic law, Hudud usually refers to the punishments that are fixed for certain offences including theft, robbery, illicit sex, alcohol consumption and apostasy. Punishment for these offences are corporal in nature, involving whipping, stoning to death and amputation of limbs.
Qisas (law of retaliation) refers to offences that involve bodily injury or loss of life. The punishment is death or imprisonment, but compensation in the form of money or property is accepted if the victim’s guardian forgives the offender.
Husam said many things had be done before the Hudud and Qisas laws could be brought to Parliament, including holding a referendum or discussions with the legal bodies.
He said at the same time, several national issues such as racial unity, the New Economic Policy (NEP), corruption and the economy, would also have to be addressed fast.
“The Hudud law is still hypothetical. There are other issues that have to take precedence,” he said.
He cited the NEP which focused on the advancement of the Malays in the field without taking into consideraton the poor among the Indians and Chinese who also needed assistance, hence PAS regarded the NEP as unIslamic.
He said PAS would continue to explain to the people Hudud and Qisas laws to discourage them from committing crime.
Asked how long would the people have to wait for the implementation of the laws, Husam said: “What’s wrong with waiting longer? Umno has not done it after more than 50 years in power.”
#1 by undergrad2 on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 10:31 pm
Calling for the implimentation of hudud laws is just like demanding that the Chinese, men and women, be circumscised. The United Nations defines that as GM or genital mutiliation which is a human rights issue.
#2 by wanderer on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 10:59 pm
The only good that may come out from the introduction of Hudud laws in this country is, we may see a great number of armless UMNO goons!
#3 by sinnerconman on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 11:07 pm
Hudud law to cut off one hand of a thief is as good as death punishment like death from wound infection. We need two hands to do things like nailing a coffin and how do Muslims eat and clean their private parts with the same hand, meaning the food becomes haram.
With only one hand how will this “Muslim” be employed and who will employ this guy knowing that person was a thief once upon a time?
So the option is to steal again thereby losing another hand and now without hands, this guy uses his feet to feed himself!
What a joke but seriously this is not a joke.
#4 by All For The Road on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 11:08 pm
That is what it should be : the implementation of hukum hudud is NOT Pakatan policy, so clarified by PAS VP Husam Musa in a press conference. At least the air has been cleared on the hukum hudud which is vehemently objected by both the DAP and PKR, the other partners in the Pakatan Alliance.
So the up-coming Kuala Terengganu parliamentary by-election early next year will be an interesting fight between BN and Pakatan. Hopes have brightened again for Pakatan where the non-Muslim votes will be crucial in deciding the outcome. My bet will be on a Pakatan win!
#5 by sinnerconman on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 11:14 pm
“… see a great number of armless UMNO goons!” – NO WAY!! They are high above any law in this country.
The armless will be the poor real Muslims!
#6 by vsp on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 11:22 pm
I just came back from RPK blog. RKP was chastising the Chinese for being hypocrites because they don’t walk the talk. I totally agree with his views because what made it possible for the BN to rule the country for half a century was because of this selfishness: the Chinese always want to have their cake and eat it.
Frankly, in my two comments on this blog I was very critical of PAS announcement. I can’t blame them because they have been led to the trap by Khairy and most probably they have not think carefully on the response they gave.
But in future, please PAS think carefully before you open your mouth. If RPK reasoned that PAS cannot pass any hudud law without the two-thirds majority, why does PAS have to waste their time on creating controversies. Wouldn’t it be better if PAS can prove themselves that they can support universal values first and then slowly build trust in their Islamic agenda through good governance and practices instead of shouting off their mouths without thinking of the consequences?
By the way, I am a Malaysian Chinese and I have not once voted the despicable BN in all my life. For those hypocrite Chinese please walk the talk. The sick country we are living in now is result of your past action.
#7 by chengho on Monday, 22 December 2008 - 11:57 pm
Hussam is another flip flop leader in the mould of AAB but of course without PAS do u Pakatan have the no? don’t think so . you still need to swim with the shark.
#8 by OrangRojak on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 12:01 am
I’m glad you got that cleared up – seems quite an amicable and efficient end to a potentially upsetting difference of opinion.
I still don’t fully understand the issue with hudud in Malaysia though. If Muslims only want hudud to apply to themselves, is there any legal impediment to them applying hudud, so long as all parties to it consent?
If the court, the plaintiff and the defendant all wish to adhere to hudud, would a Malaysian court be impeded for carrying out something that might otherwise be regarded by the courts as Grievous Bodily Harm or Murder?
I understand that judgements in Europe regarding sadomasochistic rituals, abortion, voluntary cannibalism and assisted suicide are sometimes difficult (I was going to say tortuous!) because of the issue of informed consent. How would a devout Muslim stand in Malaysian law if they had consented to amputation as punishment? How would the court and the person carrying out the amputation stand? Would the courts look on such an event as ‘not in the public interest to prosecute’? Maybe ‘stand’ is not the right word either, since we’re discussing amputations.
Maybe Malaysian courts would follow: R v Donovan (1934) AER 207 in which Swift J. stated the general rule that:
No person can license another to commit a crime
So Hudud would have to have federal sanction, presumably as an outcome of massive popular support? Well that’s all right then! So long as Malaysia’s Universities remain world-class and the media is free and unfettered, there’s nothing to worry about.
#9 by simon041155 on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 12:03 am
The gesture by Datuk Husam Musa is indeed commendable. Mutual accommodation in a mulit-racial society is very important and is a very important element in the viability of the Pakatan Rakyat. Maybe what can be done is to allow PAS to implement hudud laws in all states that it form the state government. In states that they do not form the government, they can have a kind of referendum among the Muslims as to whether they want hudud laws to be implemented among themselves (excluding non-Muslims). This will be a win-win situation for all parties. The Barisan Nasional still has a place in Malaysia, but it cannot be the only choice, otherwise what democracy are we talking about when we are given only one choice to choose from.
#10 by luking on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 12:07 am
At least we know that,Pas need the other two partner’s agreement to let it happened.In bn,when the BIG cannon say yes,all the others got to toe the line otherwise get lost.
#11 by mx14 on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 12:33 am
what so big deal abt hudud law..the law is only be implemented on the muslim like fasting ..i don’t see why non muslim become worried abt it..this is muslim right
#12 by melurian on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 12:35 am
that reminds me of “heute in der Geschichte” –
hitler signed peace with chamberlain ……
and then he invaded poland….
#13 by One4All4One on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 2:21 am
There are just too many contentious issues which are bothering, worrying, disturbing, annoying, being prolonged, being abused, being used as trump cards, being perpetuated or simply left aside to rot or grow malignant and holding everyone at ransom.
It seems no concerted efforts are being taken and pursued with relentlessness and vigour that would solve those contentious issues once and for all to the satisfaction and relief of all stakeholders, especially those of the rakyat who seem to be forever trapped in the cacophonies and misdeeds, trickery and “wayang kulit” played out by the so-called leaders and captains, some, or rather most, of whom are more interested to enrich themselves and their kins and friends, or to pander to the whims and fancies of their supporters, or simply resigned to throw their support behind the leadership to perpetuate their fortune and selfish interest.
All at the expense of truly getting into the heart of matters which are relevant to their posts and duties. And for which the rakyat voted them in.
It is time the rakyat wake up and demand that those who are tasked to work for the common good of all, and that include the elected themselves, really stand up to their expectation. Else it would all boil down to futility and make a complete mockery of the system and defeat the very purpose of the election process.
The rakyat must not accept being taken for a ride, or simply being hoodwinked. Let’s not fall prey to the false cries and wolf calls made by those insincere and less than able so-called leaders. We can and should demand that they carry out reforms which truly matter to all, without prejudice and discrimination. If they fail to deliver they should be booted out at the soonest.
It is not a time to be emotional or sympathetic as our future and that of our children are at stake.
Enough is enough.
#14 by anakreformasi on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 2:53 am
Ok……
Sebab, kami tak tahu agreement yang korang tandatangani antara PAS-PKR-DAP, tapi, sebab apa DAP bimbang sangat dengan HUKUM HUDUD yang terang-terangan untuk kami orang ISLAM???
Kalau kami halang penternakan BABI di Malaysia, apa kata DAP???
Kami tak pernah halang agama lain melakukan ajaran mereka untuk penganutnya….
Tolong respek dengan AGAMA ISLAM, dan Tolong Bagi Kebenaran kepada kami untuk melakukan AJARAN AGAMA KAMI.
Akhir kata, Tidaklah perlu DAP takut dengan HUKUM HUDUD, sebab, ianya dilaksanakan untuk Orang Islam sahaja, Kalau ada kesalahan membabitkan non-Muslim, sila terus ke MAHKAMAH UNTUK NON-MUSLIM yang Sekular.
Sekian, terima kasih.
Semoga, Kebenaran DAP memberikan kami menjalankan ajaran Islam membuatkan kami respek terhadap non-Muslim yang memahami ajaran Islam. Sama-samalah kita menghormati agama lain.
#15 by anakreformasi on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 3:11 am
undergrad2 Says:
Yesterday at 22: 31.50
Calling for the implimentation of hudud laws is just like demanding that the Chinese, men and women, be circumscised. The United Nations defines that as GM or genital mutiliation which is a human rights issue.
Jawapan daripada Anak Reformasi
Kami tidak mendesak, Hukum HUDUD untuk kami orang Islam, Ummat Muhammad.
Kalau kamu kata mendesak, seolah-olah kamu kata kepada kami, apa yang kamu lakukan dengan tidak membenarkan kami melakukan AJARAN KAMI seolah-olah kamu meminta kami mengikut ajaran anda pula… Tak Begitu???
circumscised??? Bukan nak melawak atau bukan nak mengata, cuma nak terangkan……. Agama Islam tak wajibkan agama lain untuk melakukan perkara tersebut…. kalau ada di kalangan korang yang nak lakukan, silakan, kalau tak mahu, Hukum Hudud tak akan menghukum korang daripada non-Muslim kerana tidak melakukan circumscised….. jangan bimbang……
Untuk kami (Orang Islam), Agama (Agama Islam) Kami, Untuk Kamu (Non-Muslim), Agama Kamu (Non-Muslim)…….. Memang ada dalam Al-qur’an tentang hal ini…….
sinnerconman Says:
Yesterday at 23: 07.52
Hudud law to cut off one hand of a thief is as good as death punishment like death from wound infection. We need two hands to do things like nailing a coffin and how do Muslims eat and clean their private parts with the same hand, meaning the food becomes haram.
With only one hand how will this “Muslim” be employed and who will employ this guy knowing that person was a thief once upon a time?
So the option is to steal again thereby losing another hand and now without hands, this guy uses his feet to feed himself!
What a joke but seriously this is not a joke.
Jawapan daripada Anak Reformasi
Lawak? joke? it’s not joke lah……
Memang Hukum HUDUD menjelaskan hukuman sedemikian kepada pencuri…….. tetapi, masih ada perbicaraan terhadap pencuri ini sebelum memotong tangannya, sekiranya, si pemilik hanya ingin meminta ganti rugi daripada si pencuri, tiadalah HUKUMAN POTONG TANGAN DIKENAKAN!!!!
So……. Berani kerana benarlah…… sebab apa nak takut, undang2 itu hanya untuk orang Islam sahajalah…. so, jangan bimbanglah, kalau orang Non-Muslim yang mencuri, tidak akan dibawa ke mahkamah yang menjalankan HUKUM HUDUD, akan dibawa ke MAHKAMAH SEKULAR…..
Jangan bimbang, sedangkan kami pun masih memberikan orang Non-Muslim makan BABI walaupun Agama Islam melarang memakan Babi kerana banyak keburukannya, dan satu lagi ARAK….. banyak keburukannya, tapi, agama non-Muslim, terserahlah kepada agama non-Muslim….. kami tak pernah kacau agama non-Muslim.
So, sila buat kajian semula berkenaan Hukum HUDUD, sampai kamu begitu takut sekali Tanganmu dipotong, padahal kamu non-Muslim!!!!
#16 by chiakchua on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 4:32 am
“sebab apa DAP bimbang sangat dengan HUKUM HUDUD yang terang-terangan untuk kami orang ISLAM???”
If the constitution allowed if 2/3 of Muslim in the country cnsent to Hudud law, and is only applicable to Muslim, with clear guideline given when it involves Muslim-Non Muslim cases, Non-Muslim shall agree to their practice as this is Muslim’s religious practice; if it is really so.
Just like non-Muslim must respect the Muslim to have their Puasa, but its only for Muslim.
#17 by dawsheng on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 4:57 am
Perlaksanaan hukum hudud tidak dapat memberi jaminan kepada sesiapa termasuk orang-orang muslim yang negara ini akan bebas daripada jenayah dan kegiatan yang diharamkan oleh Islam. Kalau besok hari ada hukum hudud orang jahat terus jadi orang baik, yang malas jadi rajin, yang bodoh jadi cerdik siapa tak sokong?
#18 by RGRaj on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 6:44 am
Did anyone notice, there’s no conviction for the crime of rape? Anakreformasi, care to enlighten us on this apparent shortcoming?
#19 by vsp on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 7:24 am
anakreformasi:
I get the gist of what you trying to say.
Frankly, if you ask me, I would agree there is no problem with Islamic practices if they are implemented with good governance and practices. Islam is a good religion, but remember that Islam, or for that matter any other religion, is very susceptible to exploitation from bad people who clothe themselves with piety and good intentions but when they have the power they will show their true colours.
Hudud is no light matter. Hands and feet will be chopped off. If this is applied to criminals nobody will argue against it. But the problem to worry about is ABUSE. What will prevent a megalomaniac to misuse this power if he decide to harass his political opponents or for some other purposes? Then you will find that there would more innocents without hands and feet than real criminals. This is no exaggeration. We are witnessing how the UMNOputras have abused the laws of the land and become immune to any repercussion of their wrong doings. Many innocents are persecuted but the real UMNOputras criminals are mocking everyone with their blatant disregard of the law.
The BN that was given absolute power to rule the country for half a century also have good intentions. They wanted to protect the country from all enemies and so the ISA, OSA, the University Acts, the Printing Act, the Police Act were all justified and the good citizens of Bolehland swallow these justifications hook, line and sinker. And what are the results? Journalist being arrested for her own protection and all types of nonsense fly around.
PAS have to be very careful with this type of law. It’s very powerful and it can be abused. PAS people are also men of the flesh, they are no angels. No man is an angel when it comes to absolute power without check and balance.
As I suggest earlier in this blog: if RPK reasoned that PAS cannot pass any hudud law without the two-thirds majority, why do PAS have to waste their time creating controversies. Wouldn’t it be better if PAS can prove themselves that they can support universal values first and then slowly build trust in their Islamic agenda through good governance and practices instead of shouting off their mouths without thinking of the consequences?
The action of some PAS leaders immediately after the 2008 electoral tsunami who secretly made a pact with archenemy Tojo to topple the Pakatan government in Selangor is very worrying. Fortunately, it was not successful.
One of the utterances that was attributed to a top leader in PAS was that it is better to have a bad Muslim leader to lead than for a good and honest non-Muslim leader to rule over the faithful. With this type of mentality from a top PAS leader I shudder to think if Islam can be kept pure.
#20 by hadi on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 7:49 am
This is what I like PAKATAN RAKYAT, the leadership of the DAP, PAS and PKR will say their pieces without fear and favor.
Keep up the spirit of democracy and let it flourish for the benefit of the nation. I know with the presents of YB Husham and YB Kit and the like, my rights and the future generation will be protected.
You guys out there, this is the quality of politics that we want not the BN type who simply bulldozed and abused their power especially UMNO.
Vote for PAKATAN to ensure a better future. In GOD we trust.
#21 by monsterball on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 8:13 am
Yes….Be united …be sincere and apply give and take attitudes.
UMNO have lured PAS into race and religion far too long.
Now in Pakatan Rakyat …one for all..all for one..
Leave religion out of politics…and politics..out of religion.
Every religion teaches good…and I am sure Huduh law is good…as explained by RPK.
But we are dealing with a crooked government…using religion and race…to side tracks all their sins…and other Malaysians have given up so much.
Don’t expect DAP to compromise on religion….when the have proven to be the people’s voices.
Win or loose by-election by PAS…do so with merits..deeds and good results..benefiting Malaysians… and not by winning heats through religion. That’s out-dated politics.
#22 by wanderer on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 8:23 am
vsp;
I agree with you to a certain degree, that the Chinese want the cake and at the same time eat it. Not all Chinese though, only those who are in business seeking favors from UMNO and those who want to climb the political ladder in the quickest manner and getting rich with ill gotten wealth. Having said that, the other communities with MIC and Gerakan are not much better.
I too have not once given my vote to this corrupted UMNO-BN regime.
#23 by seage on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 10:23 am
Anakreformasi… You only assume that all things can only happen one way or the other. Ever heard of things happening in between? What happens if the case involves two party of different religion with one being a muslim? What happens then? Supposed that a kafir girl got raped by a group consisted of 2 non-muslim AND 2 “not-so-genuine” muslim? How is the case going to be handled and resolved?
About chopping hands, I can easily use it as a weapon against people that I don’t like or wanted to get rid off. Ever heard of framing someone? Forging fake evidence? If you think that for every case, it is a straight forward one, then we have no need for a judge and even a judge can make mistake whether unintentionally or otherwise. You may argue that the secular law is no different in this manner as what TGNA has said. Please, make my day by asking that. To sum it all, like what RPK has mentioned before, a law can be good or bad, depending on the person using it. A sharp knife is good for a good chef to help him whip up good meal and thus making it benign, but can also be used to chop off limbs or kill someone, which makes it evil. I leave that with you.
No one is challenging the authority of your God’s law that was meant for His people. If truly God’s law is above all, why should it even be implemented but in the heart of believers? Supposed (And I mean just supposed) that God says “Thou shalt not steal”, the believer is expected to obey God and if he disobeyed, he ought to be punished if he is unrepentant. Now, supposed that I buy pirated DVDs, that is intellectual theft and my hand ought to be chopped off right? But “sorry beb, I didn’t know it is theft… I am repentent. Take back the pirated porno DVDs that I have bought (Afterall, I had downloaded it into my external HDD, so no sweat!)”. One has to be accountable to God and whether you obey or not, God knows and God rewards you accordingly and by saying that, the carrot or the stick. Bear this also in mind, that we are all born with a physical body that is imperfect and all of us will sin one way or the other. None is infallible and all WILL sin.
My view is this and take it if you will. The Hudud is not readily ACCEPTED by the majority of the people is NOT whether it applies to them or not, my friend. It has never been about THAT, but I sincerely believe it is one of the propaganda that the gahmen machinery has all along been feeding to the mind of the rakyat. Why in the world would a PAKATAN partner that has vowed for a non-racial ideal suddenly has this mindset that DAP is afraid that Hudud law will be applied to the non-muslim as well? Why? There are 1001 reasons why the Hudud is not readily accepted for different people.
Two of the prevalent ones are human rights and civilisation. Half truth are worse than a whole lie, so is handicap worse off than death and yet, opinions differ on this. Someone would rather die that to have one of his/her limb amputated or the other way round. Actually even if you asked me would I rather see the corrupted officials be amputated, the answer would be a resounding “NO!”. As much as these people are evil, the crime does not befit chopping off hands. There are more humane ways (yes you can argue that God ways are higher than our ways) than that of mutilating the body (temple of God) of the offenders. For example, confiscation of all direct families’ assets and life time imprisonment with the rights for parole may be another way to get things done. I for one am not ready to accept Hudud laws that allow (Yes, I know that there’s a possible remedies to this) mutilation of the human body, PERIOD.
#24 by borneo_war on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 10:36 am
One common mistakes that m’sian government always make is that quoting Malaysian as Malays, Chinese and Indians… what about us at borneo?? what about Iban, Bidayuh, Kenyah, Kelabit Melanau, Kadazan etc… are we not malaysian? What’s the points of arawak joining Malaysia if we are not appreciated. 60% sarawakians still holding temporary residents status, which is too absurd. they’ve been living in sarawak since world war 2, and still some of them are not entitled to get permanent residents status. this is a very serious matter. Sarawak has always generate surpluses in annual income of resources yearly, mostly 90% of the resources goes to KL for development, and we here still suffers the third world amnesia. here in sarawak the development is too slow. cronysm and corruptions is too much too handle. the minorities are getting neglected day by day while the riches get to get richer and richer. some datuk did apply for the constructions of LRT system in sarawak, but mostly rejected by higher authorities, the reason? bcos of less traffic jams in big cities like Kuching, Sibu and Miri.. this is what create anger among sarawakians. when are we going to taste the fruit of development in the future if we’re continued to be left behind..? when are we going to ride our first LRT in kuching? 10? 20? 50 years later?? too much … going on in parliament, one of it is this Hudud law. do you think that by implementing this law the sarawakians will support and bother about it? we don’t have time for all this craps and jokes. there are more bigger issue to tackle here in sarawak. roads from kuching to miri, to sabah, still looking pathetic, a one-way road.. whereby in semenanjung there are more than enough 5-lane expressway available, still the government are trying to create more expressway in semenanjung, plus some intelligent train tunnels that consumed billions of ringgit in constructions.. in sarawak?? still using the classic way, tampal2 jalan here and there.. this is not a joke my friend, we’ve been suffering for more than a decade already.. what are we? expendable? what happen to sarawak MP’s? are they not fighting for sarawakian’s right as malaysians?? that’s why kuching residents chose DAP and hope for a change in the future. the development for roads and public transportations in big cities like Kuching, Sibu and Miri are very important matters. please consider this agendas very2 serious if you want to win sarawakian’s heart. let’s not forgetting making more road projects to towns like Kapit and limbang/lawas as they are important too.. don’t think that sarawakians still lives in the tree, yes they are still some natives borneo here still living in the jungle. who can blame them, they’ve been neglected since sarawak join malaysia. most of us now are educated and smart people. we are the quiet-type, we are not rebellious, not protestors or even not an anti-government or anti-religion. but don’t take us very lighly, as we can retaliate far more worse than you can imagine. if the government thinks that they can main-main with us, we’ll just wait till the right time to come, then you will see how we show our true colours… ive been voting for BN eversince and now its time for a change. let me remind you that we cannot entirely blame the natives of sarawak for voting the BN in the last election. in fact they don’t have any choice but to vote BN because they don’t have anywhere else to get depend on to. even RM5 given to each of the native voters is enough to make them smile and vote for the government. this is how severly the poverty happens in sarawak. if the government don’t consider helping the sarawakians, then who else will?? if u consider yourself a leader, show us that you can become a leader, not just mulut manis semasa election, selepas election terus lesap bersama dgn duit2 pembangunan.. we are getting tired of malaysian politics and some useless agendas. try to focus on some bigger issues on creating a better malaysia in terms of economy, development and currency, and not personal war, religious law and agendas… we never mix politics with religion.. its for our own good.
thank you.
#25 by Kelvenho on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 10:43 am
Now Kelantan UMNO wants to support Hudud Law. I wonder what
MCA, Gerakan, MIC and the other non-muslim coalition partners will
comment ? Will they have the political will to comment ? That will be interesting.
#26 by anakreformasi on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 11:19 am
Ya, kami ada kepercayaan kami iaitu mengikut ajaran Nabi Muhammad S.A.W., kami berpegang kepada Al-qur’an dan Al-Sunnah.
Al-Qur’an adalah Kitab SUCI Agama Islam yang disampaikan oleh Allah S.W.T kepada Malaikat Jibrail dan disampaikan secara wahyu kepada Nabi Muhammad S.A.W. secara beransur-ansur.
Al-SUnnah pula ialah hadis yang menerangkan secara terperinci daripada kehidupan Muhammad S.A.W. dan ianya adalah kata-kata daripada Muhammad.
———————————————————
Kepada chiakchua,
Ya, Hukum HUDUD adalah untuk agama Islam dan kami tidak akan menghukum dengan Hukuman HUDUD terhadap Non-Muslim.
Akan tetapi, non-Muslim jangan pula nak kacau kami orang Islam yang mengharamkan Arak dan Perjudian……. non-Muslim harus bekerjasama….
Apa yang saya lihat, non-Muslim masih menjual tiket Sports Toto, 4 Digit kepada Ummat Islam padahal di situ terang-terangan ada menyatakan Tidak dibenarkan menjual tiket judi kepada orang Islam.
———————————————–
kepada dawsheng,
Kamu memandai nak komen tentang kepercayaan kami, Kami daripada Ummat Muhammad yang merupakan penganut Islam berani menyatakan selagi kami mengikut landasan yang ditetapkan dalam Al-Qur’an dan Al-SUnnah, kami akan bahagia.
“Untuk kami agama kami, dan untuk kamu agama kamu”
Kalau saya katakan upacara menghalau hantu tidak memberi kesan terhadap HANTU-HANTU….. apa kamu kata? Walau Hantu diberikan makanan KFC dan McDonald sekalipun, akan tetapi, kami respek dengan ajaran agama lain. Kami tidak pernah menghalang kamu semua.
———————————————-
kepada seage,
Ok, saya jawab soalan yang pertama, Islam ini mudah dan tidak menyusahkan penganutnya.
What happens if the case involves two party of different religion with one being a muslim? What happens then? Supposed that a kafir girl got raped by a group consisted of 2 non-muslim AND 2 “not-so-genuine” muslim? How is the case going to be handled and resolved?
Dalam kes ini…….. Sistem perundangan dan mahkamah akan menentukan secara adil, dan sekiranya didapati 2 orang yang dikatakan “not-so-genuine” Muslim tuh bersalah dan sememangnya bersalah, hukuman yang akan dikenakan ke atas 2 orang Islam ini mengikut Hukum Hudud dan yang non-Muslim mengikut Hukum Sekular.
Sekiranya Ingin mendapatkan penjelasan LEBIH LANJUT, sebab apa DAP tidak berani untuk mengadakan satu konvensyen berkenaan HUKUM HUDUD ini secara terbuka???
ISLAM ITU MUDAH.
——
ok. soalan yang kedua berkenaan hukuman potong tangan ke atas pencuri right???? saudara/i kena paham, hukuman ini hanya untuk orang Islam.
Dan tidak semuanya pencuri akan dipotong tangan, ianya atas budi bicara perbicaraan yang Adil dan sekiranya Tuan Empunya memaafkan dan hanya memohon ganti rugi daripada si pencuri tadi, ianya tidak sampai kepada pemotongan tangan.
Jadi, SAYA LEBIH TERTARIK TENTANG KEsEDARAN Non-Muslim Berbicara berkenaan HUDUD, kerana IANYA BOLEH DIADAKAN KONVENSYEN bagi penerangan, penjelasan dan juga menjadai isu perbahasan……… lakukan selama seminggu.
———
ok berkenaan CD Pirates atau CD cetak rompak nih, penyelesaian amat perlu……. pembeli tuh bukan pencurilah……. kalau u pencuri pun, u pun bukan Muslim, 100% tak akan dikenakan HUKUMAN HUDUD.
Berkenaan CD pirates nih, pembanterasan terhadap CD Cetak Rompak memang ada penyelsesaian, cuma…. Malaysia yang ditadbir BN masih belum dapat mencari jalannya.
KONVENSYEN BERKENAAN PEMAHAMAN HUKUM HUDUD DI KALANGAN NON-MUSLIM PERLU DIADAKAN. ( Ini Yang terbaik!!!)
——-
Hudud masih dipikirkan dan tidak diterima oleh DAP kerana pemahaman terhadap HUDUD itu sendiri oleh DAP tidak jelas dan memang tidak tahu langsung.
KONVENSYEN BERKENAAN PEMAHAMAN HUKUM HUDUD DI KALANGAN NON-MUSLIM PERLU DIADAKAN. ( Ini Yang terbaik!!!)
——
Kamu bercakap tentang PENJENAYAH ISLAM yang akan CACAT setelah mereka mencuri, adakah kamu sedar, penjenayah sekarang, setelah mereka bebas, adakah semuanya akan insaf???
Kami percaya dengan apa yang ALLAH Turunkan untuk kami dan memberikan Undang2 HUDUD kepada Ummat Islam untuk dilaksanakan kepada kami Ummat Islam.
Jadi, kamu jangan bimbang kepada penjenayah dikalangan orang Islam yang akan cacat sebab kamu non-Muslim, kalau kamu mencuri, kamu akan disumbat ke dalam penjara……
Sekian, terima kasih.
—————————————————–
– Perbincangan yang bebas sebegini membuatkan kita semakin faham dan memahami….. Semoga, DAP dapat mengizinkan kami Ummat ISlam daripada PAS dan PKR mengadakan KONVENSYEN TENTANG HUDUD INI ANTARA MUSLIM dan NON-MUSLIM, ianya lebih akan difahami apabila dibicara oleh PAKAR dikalangan undang-undang sekular dan PAKAR dalam UNDANG-UNDANG ISLAM, dan kami alu-alukan untuk kamu berbincang dengan kami UMMAT ISLAM
bagi setiap persoalan, dan persoalan harus dibincangkan satu persatu.
-ADIOS.
#27 by wesuffer on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 12:11 pm
why we non-musliim so worry about hudud law..?
1stly PAS should give education to non-muslim what ,how and when to using hudud law to guilty person ? i believe all non muslim not understand about hudud law. i heard my colleague from muslim.
they explain some to me. they said hudud law should not applicable to all crimener and not mean stolen have to chop hand , cos they want atleast 4 witness otherwise he/she will only to jail term .
anyway. if we are clean all times. why we worry hudud??
#28 by JDoe on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 1:27 pm
I really don’t understand why you all waste your energy, time and saliva arguing about religious issues. Religion issues can never be solved. Look at middle east, they been fighting for centuries.
Since different people got different religious beliefs, can’t we find something common to talk about?
Please focus on issues like a clean and fair administrative government, how to achieve CAT? Zero-corruption, increasing crime index, how to increase the standard of our education system, how to reduce the impact of the slowing world economy, etc.
I am sure that these issues are more pressing than religion. To me it is more pressing to survive in the current world, while our body is still strong and productive. We need food on the table and a roof on top of our head.
If you want to talk and argue about religion, please do so when you are in your retirement years. That’s the best time when you will be nearer to your creator.
Rememer also, not all religious people are saint, and not all saints are religious people. So in the end all boils down to between you and Him. So for religion matters, I suggest you keep it to yourself.
May God bless you.
#29 by seage on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 1:37 pm
An open discussion will be good but given the current gahmen administration, do you think that it can be left untouched? It is a golden opportunity for them to drum this up in the MSM, thus alternative media is always best and due kudos has to be given to people that operate such mediums.
“… sekiranya didapati 2 orang yang dikatakan “not-so-genuine” Muslim tuh bersalah dan sememangnya bersalah, hukuman yang akan dikenakan ke atas 2 orang Islam ini mengikut Hukum Hudud dan yang non-Muslim mengikut Hukum Sekular.” Do you know why I said 2 non-muslim and 2 “not-so-genuine” muslim? Because it is the cruz to proof whether the 2 “not-so-genuine” muslim is guilty or otherwise. Think along the line of definition of “Acceptable Witness” under Islam. Plus, what is the law on apostasy under Hudud? How would it be fair to say that under the same sentence, one guy gotta be stoned until death and the other on 8 years imprisonment? If the “not-so-genuine” muslim apostasize in this instance, what happens?
Anakreformasi, I have mentioned this again and again, that the problem is not whether Hudud applies to Muslim and not to non-Muslim or otherwise, it is the punishment which is brutal. In striving for a Malaysian’s Malaysia, the issue is not only because “Oh, the Hudud is gonna affect me, thats why I am not going to support it!”, which is very selfish in nature and stiffle the establishment of a Malaysian’s Malaysia BUT because it is going to affect a big part of the Malaysian body i.e. Brothers like you! I don’t know you personally but as long as you are born in Malaysia, you are considered my comrades. Human are not perfect and will make mistakes/sin and some really aweful ones. But to give such a brutal sentence, its beyond my acceptance and I would believe most too.
Buyers of pirated DVDs are not thieves? Well, I don’t feel like arguing this with you as to me, it is as blatant as it can gets. The fact that the corporal punishment for theft (Whether the victim forgives or not is irrelevant) or amputating the limb remains a fact in Hudud. Back to the basics, as long as the option is there, it will be exercised.
#30 by Lee Wang Yen on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 3:35 pm
The discussion here shows that DAP have to be clear about their grounds of objection to the implementation of the Hudud Law in Malaysia.
Do you object because you think that Hudud Law, whether it is a just law according to ordinary standards shared by people of different worldviews (if there are such shared criteria), is inappropriate for a multi-religious society? Let’s call this (1).
Or do you object because you think that there is something fundamentally wrong about Hudud Law. For example, it is seen as an unjust or brutal law that clashes with the moral principles shared by people of different worldviews? Let’s call this (2).
If the grounds of objection are (1), then you must deal with the contention that Muslims do not have any intention to apply the law to non-muslims. Since DAP agree that allowing a particular religious community in a multi-religious society to practise their own religion and impose their rules exclusively on members of that particular community is acceptable in a multi-religious society, why is multi-religious society a reason for rejecting Hudud Law if it is meant exclusively for Muslims? This is a question DAP have to answer if their grounds of objection are (1). There might be a way to answer this challenge. One can argue that when it comes to issues as complicated as a system of criminal justice, there is no such thing as exclusive application to a particular community without infringing on the rights of other community within a larger society. If one argues along this line, it will be very helpful to adduce various real-life or hypothetical scenarios in which an application of Hudud Law to a Muslim inevitably infringes on the right of a non-Muslims. DAP lawyers might want to work on this.
If the grounds are (2), DAP will have to argue that some interpretation of the Islamic scriptures and tradition (i.e. the literal interpretation) is wrong, or that Islam is not really a true revelation of a morally perfect God, according to ordinary moral principles, or that the sections of the Islamic scriptures and tradition that promulgate the Hudud Law are not the true revelation of a morally perfect God.
#31 by kengsong on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 7:13 pm
To AnakReformasi:
When we are implementing a law which meant to reserve the rights of everyone regardless muslim or non-muslim, we have to think big and far-sighted. I personally do not believe hudud law will help in reducing nor lower down the crime rate in the country, when our secular law which has been developed for so many years and practiced by so many countries still have flaws in it.
Just think outside the box, WHO KNOWS THE PERSON WHO PROSECUTING HUDUD LAW IS SINCERE OR NOT?
A human being whether he/she is a muslim or non-muslim, will has at least a black sheep among it. What if this black sheep if the one who presecute hudud law, do you think it is fair? Maybe you can say the GOD will punish him/her in future, but indeed the scapegoat might already lost his hand and maybe died. Just imagine if hudud law already implemented before DSAI case at 1999, i guess DSAI will no longer be with us fighting for us now. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?
Furthermore if you have children, do you really like your children to get exposed to this type of brutal punishment. On one hand you may think by doing so they will be scared and do not dare to commit crime, but on the other hand don’t you worry that they will learn the brutal behavior and live their life in that way as well? Children is fast learner, but they can’t judge which is correct and which is wrong. If hudud law is really implemented in this country, believe me there is no way you can hide it from them, and there is no way you can ensure that they will not learn those brutal behavior. So that’s 50/50, do you want to take the risk? To me personally NO.
When you judge on thieves, truly some of them never learnt from mistake. But there is also some of them who knows they are wrong and willing to change, so will hudud law be fair to take away one’s chance to turn over a new leaf? You may said it’s their problem as they never think before they do it. Yes you are right, but indeed some of them have their own side of sad story (if you watch Kisah Benar before). So implementing hudud law will only produce more ORANG CACAT who will end up being beggar since they can’t work as normal human being (if you have shops will you hire a strong and ‘complete’ guy or will you hire a guy who lost a limb?) This is why current secular law punish thief depending on the number of times they commited, hoping that they will turn over a new leaf soon.
On buying lottery and those haram stuff in Islam, please be reminded that no one is forcing them to buy lottery nor drink alcohol. They walk on their feets and pay on their own for it, and now you blame us for selling to them. Will it solved the problem if we don’t sell to them? NO NO NO, they will still look for other shops who is willing to sell. Business is business. Why not you think the other way, if they alert and don’t want buy who can force them to buy? Do you agree with that? Before you point finger to other, always remember there are 4 fingers pointing back to yourself.
So AnakReformasi, please think before you support on it as it is not only affect non-muslim but also muslims themselves. We do respect everyone, indeed in my neighbourhood some of them are muslims. Regards
#32 by OrangRojak on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 9:57 pm
“Before you point finger to other, always remember there are 4 fingers pointing back to yourself”
Unless they’ve been amputated, perhaps.
#33 by farouk_a_peru on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 - 10:10 pm
Mr Lim, take the hint, sir. PAS is no good. Finish all association with them and work the DAP by itself. It’s the only party with an actual ideology.
Farouk A. Peru
http://www.peru.name/writing/?p=325
#34 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 8:19 am
YB Kit,
DAP as well as PKR’s objection to Husam’s proposed implementation of Hudud law should rest on practical grounds, that in a multi racial, religious and cultural society like ours, it just won’t work.
This is not to say that you’re not respecting right of any community to realise their religious aspirations but to make it public law is not feasible as it creates more problems in its wake.
This is because to make implementation of Hudud law work, the entire society and its values, norms and legal system must be totally and comprehensively Islamic, and even then you have to determine by the standards of which of the 4 sects of Islam.
We can’t have common law and its notion of fairness and punishment existing side by side with Sharia without conflict and controversies.
I don’t mean here just the long line of controversial conversion cases where family members fight over the bodies of deceased.
To give a specific example : we fall back on precepts of common law on what is fair – ie persons committing the same crime should be subject to same punishment. That is why our Constitution guarantees equal protection before the law.
We can’t have a muslim thief having his hand amputated or an adulteress beheaded in Dataran Merdeka whilst a non muslim thief punished by only 2 months jail sentence or adulteress, without imprisonment but just a payment of damages to the aggrieved spouse betrayed!
In short we cannot vacillate, thinking at one moment that a certain punishment by Hudud meted is fair and just by Islamic standards and the next moment have other considerations based on secular and common law norms why it is also unfair and brutal.
We only serve to confuse ourselves.
#35 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 8:40 am
Nowhere is this best illustrated that a the recent landmark decision (5 months ago) of High Court Judge Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail ruling that the application of the Al-Bai’ Bithaman Ajil (BBA), a hugely popular Islamic home loan financing contract in Malaysia for the last two decades is a sham, and hence illegal, cannot be enforced causing our banking industry to lose potentially millions/billions if the appeals against his decision by the banks (AMIB & BMIB) to Federal Court do not succeed.
One can’t fault Wahab Patail’s logic. He looked first at:-
(a) the Islamic principles (to avoid earning of interest) the BBA financing is structured around a buy and sell situation in which the bank purchases directly from its customer/borrower and sells back to the customer with deferred payment at a higher price, the difference being “profit” as euphemistic cover for interest.
Next he looked at :
(b) our law on property (National Land Code based on Australian Torren System) and asked if Bank were buyer how come the property was registered in customer’s name as proprietor? How come it was the borrower who went to see the real estate agent and not the b ank’s officer in first instance?
So when he looked at (a) and comparing with situation in (b), (a) is a sham, not a bona fide sale, hence illegal, hence bank canot recover all interest in an ilegal transaction!
The judge also said the transactions did not involve any element not approved in the Religion of Islam.
Now that is another problem : there are various sects within the Religion. I believe Saudi Arabia for example does not recognise our BA as Islamic!
Some clever Sharia lawyers will try to come out with another creative solution – the bank registers the property as proprietor under our Land Code and then “rents” out (hire purchase way) to amortise repayment and for a small residual sum at the end, sells/transfers the prioperty to the borrower.
Trouble is our precepts and laws on what is rental/tenancy, and what is hire purchase is based on English and common law, so based on these standards, it will become another sham and illegal transaction!
#36 by anakreformasi on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 8:50 am
sila ke blog saya….
http://anak-reformasi.blogspot.com/
untuk interaksi….
SAYA HARAP Y.B. LIM KIT SIANG dapat mengetuai WAKIL non-Muslim dalam berbicara berkenaan HUDUD.
Kami daripada Pihak Orang Islam, mementingkan prinsip Musyawarah (PERBICANGAN BERSEMUKA) sebelum membuat sesuatu perkara….
So, jangan bimbang berkenaan HUKUM HUDUD, kerana, sebelum ianya dibuat, satu Musyawarah akan dilakukan terlebih dahulu.
– Jangan Cepat Melatah….
#37 by Bigjoe on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 8:59 am
Getting trapped in a rhetorical debate with KJ is really a bit pathetic for heir-apparent of Nik Aziz frankly. Why the hell did he got caught in it? The young man exposed to be mediocre by now walked away smugged. It gives ammunition to the anti-Erdogan faction.
Sure Husam has an enviable task of balancing the basic tenet of his party unrealistic ideology and a realistic agenda. But seriously by now he should know which pitfall he should not get trapped in or he is exposing his so call moderate agenda is basically still unrealistic and will fail to the zealots within his party.
#38 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 9:04 am
The above ilustrations underscore the fundamental point – that Islam is a comprehensive and all embracive system and way of life : one can’t implement Hudud on one segment and allows other values/laws to co-exist or apply to all or other non muslim communities exist. One only gets contradictions and confusion to even try it.
Sharia Intestate/family laws are by constitution allowed as exceptions applied to Muslims and as you can see from conversion cases or intermarraiges, there’s so much problem.
In short when it comes to Religion, there tends to permit no half way house.
It is either (1) all or (2) nothing, “nothing” as meaning not making it a public law for application to a significant segment of people or everyone as is otherwise in a theocratic state advocated by Husam/PAS.
In a multiracial/religious/cultural society as ours, the DAP/PKR’s stand should go with (2) and not (1) – for practical if not ideological reasons.
Sad to say, the dilemma of Malaysians is to choose between 2 unpalatables – corruption or theocracy.
{Many otherwise intelligent people having right BN connections will throw their lot with existing regime because though corruption is an evil, it might from certain perpectives be “lesser” evil in that they can, with connections, partake in that evil and benefit themselves and immediate family. As far as the nation is concerned, cannot think that far, and neither can one change anything or mindsets.}
It is always this 2 unpalatable choices for so long as PKR/DAP for political expedience shirk from the principled decision to eject PAS.
PAS will never give up because to their supporters it is a divine ordained mission to set up, whether now or later, the Almighty’s Theocratic State. Any other c ompromises are Ok for so long as they serve the ultimate goal that you (DAP) resist. This divergence can never be bridged.
To work together – all 3 – is a pipe dream (a triumph of hope over logic), it is a question of when and not if when the split will occur on but people still dream on because they simply have no viable choice.
The BN survives because the Pakatan Rakyat “marriage” is ill fated one and the Pakatan Rakyat survives and thrives, because this ill fated union is put in the back burner, being united by common cause of evicting BN.
Both coalitions are surviving on negatives and not positives.
Good luck, Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to all.
#39 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 9:48 am
Many thanks to Jeffrey for those helpful illustrations!
If we opt for the approach of showing that there is no such thing as exclusive application of Hudud Law to Muslims without infringing on the rights and values of non-Muslims, and thus the inappropriateness of Hudud Law for a multi-religious society, we might encounter the following argument against our approach.
Before introducing the argument, we have to discuss the general issue of mutual respect in a plural society, since it is crucially relevant to the argument. As shown in the discussion here, people on both sides of the Hudud Law dispute agree that members of a particular religious community should respect the freedom of expression of members of other religious community. However, some may not realise that this principle of mutual respect cannot be coherently held without some qualification. If community X demands community Y to accept a certain action A in society S to which both X and Y belong on the grounds that A is part of X’s right of expressing his belief, this demand can only be justified if A does not infringe on the rights and values of Y. Otherwise, it is not ‘mutual’ respect. This entails that the principle of mutual respect for each other’s rights can only be coherently held in a plural society if both X and Y compromise on some of their own rights and values, when these the expression of these inevitably infringes on the rights and values of other community. For example, I cannot make a justified demand that my neighbour has to respect my right of having a noisy overnight party on the grounds that having such a party is an expression of my beliefs and values, given that it infringes on her right to have a peaceful night.
If we apply this general principle to the issue of whether Hudud Law should be established in Malaysia, we have to accept the fact that both the Muslim and the non-Muslim communities have to compromise on some of their rights and values, since the expression of some of these invetably infringes on the rights and values of other community. As some of the contributors here have argued, rejecting Hudud Law infringes on the right of Muslims to fully express their beliefs. As Jeffrey has illustrated, the implementation of the Hudud Law inevitably infringes on the rights and values of non-Muslims (e.g. their sense of justice) and also the rights and values of Muslims who disagree either with Hudud Law per se or with some interpretations of the Hudud Law.
This principle of qualified mutual respect that comes with compromises on both parties when conflicting interests, rights, and values arise is the spirit underlying the social contract of our nation. The non-Muslims agreed to the status of Islam as the official religion in exchange for the promise on the part of the Muslims that the nation would remain a secular state. The federal government also promised the people in Sabah and Sarawak that the proposed federation of Malaysia would remain a secular state. This was presumably the compromises made on both sides in the spirit of the principle of qualified mutual respect delineated above. Therefore, Muslims should not demand the implementation of Hudud Law on the grounds that this is the right of the Muslim community in this country. Such a demand violates the principle of qualified mutual respect that was adhered to by our forefathers, a principle that should be upheld in a plural society if we care about justice.
#40 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 9:58 am
I forgot to spell out explicitly what that argument is: it is the contention that why should Muslims compromise on the Hudud Law rather than the non-Muslims compromise on their sense of justice etc.
I have responded to this argument in the last two paragraphs of my previous post
#41 by borneo_war on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 4:13 pm
sebenarnya nak implement Hudud Law takde ape yg nak dihebohkan. kalau hudud law ni untuk org muslim, tak perlu lah yg non-muslim komplen2 byk. lagipun, patut juga law semacam ni dibuat. crime-rate kat malaysia ni dah terlalu berleluasa sampai pihak polis dan keselamatan pun kena marah dek rakyat konon nya tak menjalankan tugas. diaorang pun manusia jugak, bukan robot. kalau nak guna hudud law ni hendak lah kena pada tempatnya. jangan sampai salah guna oleh pihak yang gila kuasa dan menghukum sebarangan. contoh mcm ISA, org buat opinion sikit pun dah kena masuk lokap. jangan lah kita lupa bahawa malaysia adalah negara majmuk dan berdemokrasi. kalau kita lihat kat USA, ‘saturday night show’ tiap2 malam mmg kerja diaorang mengutuk ahli2 politik dan Bush, tak jugak kena tangkap, sebab diaorang mengamalkan demokrasi yang kukuh. ttg hudud ni, kalau nak hukum penjenayah pun, diminta lah dibicara dulu dan jatuhkan hukuman yang sewajarnya..
#42 by imranj78 on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 10:35 pm
For as long as PAS continues in its current form, it will continue to struggle to fight for the formation of an Islamic state. This is its reason for existence and to drop such a target will mean loosing a big chunk of its supporters. Asking PAS to drop such an objective is like asking DAP to drop its `Malaysian Malaysia’ objective. The fact that PAS `tries’ to portray a moderate face in the public and media does not hide this real intention which has already been made obvious several times. Even Nik Aziz has recently come out to say that PAS still holds to its target of forming an Islamic state with hudud laws.
The next question then is this – how will this impact on the long term viability and coherence of PR? Anwar’s silence on this matter is not very assuring and he knows he is between a rock and a hard place. If PR gets stronger, the chorus among PAS supporters to push for a more Islamic approach in the country will naturally get stronger. How will DAP and PKR respond? Will it eventually buckle to such pressure or will they risk alienating PAS at the expense of loosing all their gains from March 08? I am not confident that things will turn out pretty when the time comes… and the time for such painful decisions for PR will come sooner or later.
#43 by juannie on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 12:30 pm
YB,
Many Malaysians are surprised that two veteran politicians like Lim KIt Siang and KArpal Singh are still drawn into the trap of arguing over the implementation of HUdud Laws.
Why must they argue? Are they now in the position to oppose or accept and has PAS really in power. We must allow each political party to spell out what they want to do but in the process they may have to adjust and adapt to the changing environment. Just like DAP putting forward their concept of a Malaysian Malaysia. Can the people accept that concept?
So it is useless now to release so much spark and controversy over Hudud Law when they are not even in power and each party by itself can never come to power, as shown by the defeat in Terengganu by PAS- when they lost the support of the DAP.
Take for example, China, when Teng Shiao-Ping (the leader of China) embarked to change China. Did he ever mentioned that he is adopting capitalism? No!- he insist that it is socialism with Chinese character.
So if PKR comes to power and if the people accept, it may be Hudud Law or may not be Hudud LAw or Hudud Law in our own style acceptable to all Malaysians.
Social changes came about through action and not just mere rhetoric and that is the old form of politics that is out of place in the present society. That is why those like Lim Kit Siang/Karpal Singh and those older generation of politicians in PAS can never win or be accepted by the younger generation.
Focus on what is good for the people and let each party spells out what they ideally planned for. Then everything will be fine and good.
#44 by adikariff8 on Friday, 26 December 2008 - 7:04 pm
ok my turn now…sory coz don spik english k….
camni
sebenarnye,ade 1 bnde y saye x perasan sape2 cakap pasal hudud/qisas ni
1st ly,hudud/qisas adalah seruan allah(tuhan)so,pangkat dan implemention die adalah wajib la kan…sebab ia adalah sruhan tuhan,dan bukannya manusia.utk pengetahuan semua,kelebihan kepada sesiapa yg menjalani hukuman hudud/qisas ni adalah : dia terlepas daripada azab ketika akhirat nnti.jadi,terpulang kepada orang yang kene hukum sama ada ingin mendapat keampunan atau pun azab di neraka yg dahsyat…walaupon dia mungkin terlepas daripada hukuman potong tangan atau sebagainya,jgn lupa : hukuman lain juga bole dikenakan,yg ditetapkan bersesuaian dengan kesalahanya(ta’zil)…mksd nya,jgn risau jika dia tidak dipotong tgn,tetapi hukuman lain dia akan terima juga…..