Some Malays see the recent brouhaha over the secular state issue as both MCA and DAP getting too big for their boots.
What with the DAPsters lording it everywhere, evangelista aggression (whose prestige is burnished by the MCA media machinery) as well as the increasingly in-your-face behaviour, don’t be surprised if the ‘Something’s-Gotta-Give’ eventually does.
If the Chinese consolidate into one voting bloc as seems almost inevitable, why shouldn’t Malays do the same?
Umno can offer PAS the Islamic state it desires. What can DAP offer the Islamist party?
The Pakistan, Bangladesh experience
Pakistan and Bangladesh amended their constitutions several times to shape their countries into the model Islamic state. Malaysia can easily do the same.
PAS joining forces with Umno will enable Parliament to modify the Federal Constitution. Who can stop the Malay-Muslim MPs then?
Remember that the Chinese-majority federal seats remain unchanged (if not decreased) from the 2008 electoral boundaries. Even if DAP wins big and MCA is wiped out, Chinese representatives will be maintained at more or less the same number.
As for any PKR Members of Parliament (the party had only one MP, Wan Azizah, in the House in 2004-2008), why would they refuse to co-operate with any potential Malay pact to preserve Agama, Bangsa dan Negara? After all, the PRK reps are Muslim too and their DNA is Umno anyway.
Path to Islamic state
We can learn from Pakistan and Bangladesh.
By the mid-20th century, the Indian Muslims and the Hindus had decided they could not live together. So when the white colonialists departed, the British Raj empire was split into two.
Essentially the 1947 Partition separated the sub-continent’s religious groups by marking off the Muslim-majority regions as Pakistan, East and West.
East Pakistan is today Bangladesh, a sovereign nation (also a failed state) after seceding from Pakistan in 1971 following a bloody independence war.
A military coup four years later in August 1975 further eroded the secular character of Bangladesh. The government led by the army and headed by General
Zia ur Rahman removed the principle of secularism from his country’s constitution.
Tinkering with the constitution — Bangladesh
As of 2011, the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh has been amended 15 times.
The Proclamation (Amendment) Order 1977 declared on 23 April 1977:
1. In the beginning of the Constitution, above the Preamble, the following shall be inserted, namely:-
BISMILLAH-AR-RAHMAN-AR-RAHIM (In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful).
.
The second paragraph of the Preamble of the Constitution read:
Pledging that the high ideals of absolute trust and faith in the Almighty
Allah, nationalism, democracy and socialism meaning economic and
social justice, which inspired our heroic people to dedicated [sic]
themselves to, and our brave martyrs to sacrifice their lives in, the
war for national independence, shall be the fundamental principles
of the Constitution (The Constitution of the People’s Republic of
Bangladesh, Appendix XVII, The Proclamation (Amendment) Order
1977, pp. 156-157).
.
In 1988, Lt Gen. Hussain Muhammad Ershad, who had toppled General Zia, proceeded to modify the constitution again by adding the Eighth Amendment which proclaimed that “the state religion of the Republic is Islam”.
The military leaders brought back religion, relying as they did on faith as a ploy to earn popular support and much-needed legitimacy. They also “found it expedient to use Islam as a mobilizing force”, said Prof. Habibul Haque Khondker in his paper ‘State and Secularism in Bangladesh‘.
Although neither General Zia nor Lt Gen. Ershad were personally very religious men, exploitation of Islam helped to consolidate their power through earning them approval from the devout.
Tinkering with the constitution — Pakistan
Passages excerpted from ‘The Pakistan Islamic State Project: A Secular Critique’ by research professor Ishtiaq Ahmed.
<QUOTE>
The first constitution of Pakistan, adopted in 1956, declared Pakistan an Islamic republic. The head of state was to be a Muslim.
Further, it contained a commitment to bring all laws into conformity with Islam. It could not be put into operation because the civilian government was overthrown in a military coup in October 1958. Nevertheless, the commitment to bring all laws into conformity with the Quran and Sunna was celebrated by the ulama as a firm and irreversible commitment to gradually convert Pakistan into a state consonant with their idea of an all-embracing Shariah.
The second Pakistani constitution adopted in 1962 by the military strongman, General Mohammad Ayub Khan, initially declared Pakistan simply as a republic, but immediately protests from the ulama and other conservatives resulted in the first amendment which restored the epithet “Islamic,” and Pakistan was again called the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. In any case, the second constitution reiterated the commitment to bring all laws into conformity with Islam.
The third constitution of 1973 went even further in ascribing an Islamic character to Pakistan. This time it was adopted by a newly elected National Assembly dominated ironically by the Pakistan People’s Party, which was led by the Islamic socialist, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Thus, unlike the first two constitutions that only required the president of the republic to be a Muslim, the third required the prime minister to be a Muslim too.
It further obliged both of them [the Pakistan Muslim president and the Pakistan Muslim prime minister] to take an oath testifying their belief in the finality of Prophet Muhammad’s mission. Such a concession was a significant gain for the Islamists because it effectively excluded a potential candidate from the Ahmadiyya sect from qualifying as the Ahmadis did not conform to the finality of Muhammad’s prophethood.
It was converted into a constitutional and legal provision when, in 1974, the National Assembly declared the Ahmadiyya sect non-Muslim.
Later, Bhutto was to concede to the demand of the ulama for a ban on horseracing and gambling and on alcoholic drinks.
<UNQUOTE>
Dar al-Harb and kafir harbi
According to Prof. Ishtiaq, the ulama’s fundamental standpoint that divine laws must reign supreme in the state was strengthened by the formula that elected representatives are not allowed to make human laws which contradict the Shariah.
Spearheading the Islamist movement in Pakistan was Syed Abul Ala Maududi, supreme leader of the main Islamist party Jama’at-e-Islami.
Maududi wanted the classical Islamic idea of Dar al-Islam (abode of Islam) and Dar al-Harb (enemy territory) to be observed by the state.
“It meant that the Islamic state could establish peace with its neighbours through treaties but in the ultimate sense no real peace could be consolidated between the world of Islam and non-Muslims, and Dar al-Islam was bound to prevail universally at some future point in time,” writes Prof. Ishtiaq.
Maududi’s thoughts are, needless to say, more familiar to the PAS politicians than they are to Umno. It’s PAS that is master of the Islamist political vocabulary, and not Umno politicians like de facto law minister Nazri Aziz who stopped short of labelling Malaysia an Islamic state.
Reading the tea leaves
The Pakatan people – with DAP politicians taking the lead – are busy demonizing Chua Soi Lek and MCA as anti-Islam.
The Umno people acting almost reflexively to convention are also busy denouncing Lim Kit Siang and DAP as anti-Islam.
Between them, the DAP (major) and the MCA (minor) make up for the overwhelming share of Chinese representation.
Never mind that the lines of fire are crossing in the shootout. What happens is that PAS Malays are persuaded that MCA Chinese are anti-Islam. Meanwhile Umno Malays are persuaded that DAP Chinese are anti-Islam.
What’s the end result? ALL Chinese end up being seen as anti-Islam.
Then the Chinese will be considered kafir harbi – not that some are not already viewed as such – and treated accordingly. And a political solution will be found to resolve the pockets of Dar al-Harb, those areas where its inhabitants think “Malaysia belongs to Jesus“.
Helen Ang 
Malaysia negara Islam? Over my dead body … kata Karpal Singh and Co.
Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall,
All the King’s horses and all the King’s men,
Can’t put Humpty together again..
– be careful DAP for what you wish for, it may came true & at what cost?
and to all agent provocateur & instigator ..
Ring-A-Ring of Roses,
A pocket full of posies..
Atishoo, Atishoo..
And ALL fall down.
Finally on a topic, I can agree with you. I think in the zeal to claim power many in Pakatan Rakyat are simply keeping a closed eye on the “danger” facing the 1957 Constitution.
I think its time for Malaysians to be clear about one thing and particularly those those non muslims who foolishly gives support to creation of Islamic state. There is not one single Islamic state where non muslims are not discriminated. The non muslims are reduced to third class citizens at the mercy of the majority and the state.
The choice for non Muslims must be whether to vote for a party which is ambivalent to the 1957 constitution or a party who is hell bent to change the constitution and the country.
You may say non muslim are discriminate in muslim state ,what about muslim being discriminate in non muslm state like in europes and else where in the world’s even in china.
Malaysian muslim are too tolerance on others fate to the extend that they being subject to interference .
Well, guess this is the norm. Minorities will always be discriminated by the majority. We have to learn to live with it. Including in Malaysia.
Btw, for India the best thing that has happened is the breakaway of Pakistan and Bangladesh. Today both this failed states are like a cancereous wart. Imagine having both the countries within India. India will have trouble on both flanks and and also up north.
Fernandez I think your beloved India didn’t do a good job. Obviously it should have expelled ALL the muslims from india. Your distant brothers, the hindu nationalists, have only recently realized that mistake and are trying their best to reduce the indian muslims to the point of insignificance.
The hindu nationalists cleverly use token “muslim” bollywood actors to gloss over the truth. But we all know that the muslims are having a smaller and smaller voice in indian academia, society and politics in general.
Read this article entitled, “How to Exterminate Muslims in India?”
http://www.missionislam.com/conissues/india.htm
I find this part interesting on how back in the day Spain got rid of their ‘muslim’ problem.
I don’t know how true the above is, but it is certainly food for thought. These same tactics are being used all over the world, even by some ‘muslim’ govts (ehem, malaysia).
So, norman, your belief that india is better without pakistan/bangladesh reveals a lot. This post reveals a lot. It means that you, your parents and people like you (incl. the author of this blog) made the stupidest mistake of staying in Malaysia when Singapore was formed. You guys should have left when you had the best chance!
You guys can’t live with us, so better divorce yourselves from us!
Overseas Bumi, you correctly described yourself. Why would I want to go back, when you yourself is a migrant who stole the country from orang Asal. Being in the vicinity of Malaysia and sneaking in does not give you the right of first mover advantage. You are as much a pendatang as I am. Maybe you may wish to track your ancestors walk from Yunan. Alternatively, Indonesia may be half a history for you.
So your point. No use having fancy portuguese names when cannot argue properly. You can go fly kite la.
Your theory that the bumi stole this country from orang asli are just to justified your position as pendatang, just because you are pendatang, so everybody is pendatang.
Norman your sikap shows your are forever pendatang who claim Malaysia first, race second for your benefit.
Tebing Tinggi, the point I am making is that WE all are pendatang. That includes YOU and me. The Baba’s been here much, much longer than you and me. In fact, they have the greater right to call you and me Pendatang. The point, I am making is since we all are immigrants, then let’s work to make this country better. Is it that difficult? And Forrest Cat, can’t understand, what’s the point you are making. But just remember no race can singularly claim that they build this country to what it is today. All the races have contributed. All.
That’s funny. I am constantly replaying in my mind how the British asked the Malays to give citizenship to some kaum pendatang, back before Merdeka.
Remember that bit? The white people who fought for your citizenship recognizes the Malay as the Tuan Rumah.
Don’t pretend to forget, and don’t argue. Try to be a decent and grateful human being, OK?
I am now in the Mideast. I drive a Porsche, up to speeds of 250 km/h on desert highways when I can get away with it. My significant other enjoys her time here. I enjoy being in this part of the world, though it doesn’t always comport with my asian background and tropical sensibilities.
Let’s say one day, the Arab govt decides to give me permission to buy landed property, the right to stay permanently and bring up my children here. Would I say yes? Perhaps.
If i were to accept, I would know the privilege I was given. I would be grateful and respectful. I would even pay taxes when asked to. I would also teach my wife and children to be respectful of the government, — be they authoritarian or democratic or anything in between– as long as I am given a good life.
However, I would know that not all privileges would be mine. The Arabs will still hold dominion in terms of political, social and cultural authority. I wouldn’t expect me, my wife or my children to ever get the chance to rise above the arabs in terms of political strength unless there is a dramatic change in demographics.
This brings me to you. I don’t know which boat, horse or donkey you or your forefathers came from, and in fact, I don’t care. But the point is you are here and have been given the privilege to stay.
You may have worked hard to achieve some economic advantage over the locals. Good. I don’t besmirch your success if it is achieved fairly (ie not through collusion, discrimination or thuggery).
Lamentably, economic advantage is not enough for you. The world is not enough for you. You want more. You want the top political positions too. And this is where the line has to be drawn.
If you want to have the highest political power, then breed more. Political strength is strength in numbers.Stop complaining and start making more babies. The malaysian government hasn’t stopped you for making more genetic copies of yourself.
If all else fails, go to india if you think it’s so great.
Well said Overseas Bumi, straight to the core point. For others, please read carefully before making ridiculous comments.
no need to read carefully la, straight to the core point of “tyranny of the majority”.
Hi Ane…
Wish you all the best if you decide to migrate back to India. Don’t forget to bring also your uncles, relatives… I am sure the space you left behind can be filled by someone Maybe from India, Iran and Lebanon. They will appreciate more the citizenchip of this country. No offencelah, Ane
Sometime you have to make the decision. Your grandfather migrated to here because they feel Malaysia offer better prospect than staying put. Likewise, if you feel this country going to the drain, please leave. Maybe the grass is greener over there.
off topic.
selamat hari raya aidiladha buat semua pengunjung blog ni. maaf zahir & batin seandainya komentar dan tulisan saya ada yang mengguris perasaan.
hati-hati di jalan raya. selamat balik kampung dan selamat kembali ke rumah.
[mode: tengah letih…, baru habih buat kue d’vali…]
However the political game is played, Allah forbid that the so-called uelama would gain prominence by default. For it is these similar groups of people that had been instrumental in bringing doom to Muslim countries. They’d rule the state not by the Quran, but by the thousands of hadiths (hitherto an oral tradition only committed to writing some three centuries after the death of Mohammed), most of which are not in consonance with the Quran, trivial and frivolous but nonetheless constricting social conduct to the point that there’d hardly be anything that one could do that do not bring the wrath of Allah.
So you can basically say to the evangelists , look at what you have wrought — a more islamic and intolerant Malaysia! You can blame DAP for the talibanisation of malaysia
Kak Helen,
if push come to shove, Dapster and his like can always find a better land to settle down; when push come to shove, Muslims could only have Umno and Pas to do the right thing — to make this land a pleasant shelter (a temporary one of course), before they are called upon to meet the Creator.
Dear Helen
I cannot thank you enough for writing this piece. You displayed maturity and foresight to see what DAPsters and MCA members could not see, the boldness to say what UMNO and even Perkasa dared not say.
Nik Aziz, and his merry men of DAP ‘worshippers’, if they read this article, would want you silenced. For here goes their ‘wet dream’ of becoming a minister in a newly occupied Putrajaya.
The anwaristas would be equally flabbergasted by the ‘inconvenient truth’ you have so insightfully painted here. Their ambitions of being the new senior partner in the new regime, just as UMNO is in the BN government, would be blasted into smithereens. Indeed in the scenario you gave PKR the role more akin to that of the PPP.
So Dear Helen, be ready to be spammed. Be ready to be abused and be cyber bullied. Unless they are downright obnoxious, let these comments through and we will DEFEND you.
Keep up the good work. Stay brave, stay loyal to our country Malaysia
It is funny everyone becomes an armchair historian by the minute. Nice topic to b***h about one another for religion affiance without any discourse on how the country was built although the fabric of the nation like Malaysia is nothing like India, Pakistan or Bangladesh. Why India was divided is not because of religion but how the British played the mind game to ensure the divide and rule policy. Imagine together they could have been such a superpower.
Recent examples USSR and of course Sudan by the Americans. As food for thought, it was India who stood by Bangladesh to ensure Bangladesh obtain their independence. Why would Bangladesh want to secede from Pakistan since they are all Muslims? Go google and learn history before blurting everything with a tit for tat attitude with half past six knowledge.
I think better similarity could be Indonesia which happens to be the largest Muslim country in the world with their Pancasila principle based on philosophical traditions in Indonesian history based on the evolvement of the nation. History & evolvement is the key word. Go figure that out rather than pandering everything on religion.
Also like to wish all Malaysians in celebrating selamat hari raya aidiladha along with their Muslim brothers/sisters.
MNY, engkau pun sama tetiba jadi HISTORIAN. Pot calling kettle black.
Really !!! okaylah accept, you betul saya salah. Happy tak !!!!
No, really, Antihipokrit’s got a point.
Helen, since we on the constitution drive, let’s also revisit the Chinese constitution. This is an interesting one. http://www.purdue.edu/crcs/itemResources/PRCDoc/pdf/Constitution.pdf.
Always wondered what race, religion, creed got to do with constitution when the ability to live and prosper is diminished for the community in the pretext of the the above when it is inverse. I like what Arsene Wenger (Arsenal Manager) said on reverse discrimination.
see link http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1201444/wenger-faults-rooney-rule-as-a-'kind-of-racism‘?cc=5901.
it is not difficult to amend the Constitution to put a seal on Islamic state. all you need is 148 MPs to vote yes and there you have it.
first you need someone to put forward a motion to discuss the topic. if the motion is accepted, you proceed.
then when the details are ironed out, you put them forward for a reading. when that’s done, you put the whole thing up for a vote. you get 148 votes, then you proceed to amend the Constitution.
now, if such a motion or whatever is put up for a vote, which Malay Muslim in his, her right mind would vote ‘No’?
many years ago, in 1993 if I m not mistaken, the Kelantan State Assembly unanimously approved the Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment II which encompasses hudud law, all those BN UMNO assemblymen voted yes for it. so you see, when it comes to Islamic issues, the vote crosses the political divide.
now my question is, do the Chinese know this?
Dear PPP,
No doubt that the Kelantan State Legislative Assembly attempted to pass a state law to enforce Hudud in the state way back in 1993. It was only a short period of 3 years after PAS has gained power in Kelantan. The irony was that the BN Federal Government that objected to it, citing reasons that the state enactment was ultra vires the Constitution as criminal matters are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. It was Mahathir that blocked the implementation of Hudud in Kelantan. UMNO Kelantan may have agreed to the enactment but UMNO Pusat under Mahathir was not.
Our country was ruled by BN for the past 55 years. What took them so long to implement Hudud? Where is their sincerity especially UMNO who has prided itself as a party that fights for Islam? Did BN or UMNO during the time when they have 2/3 majorities in Parliament initiated the motion to discuss Hudud in Parliament and thereafter voted to support the motion?
At least PAS has made a move to implement Hudud but was obstructed by BN. It was the ‘unislamic’ UMNO that blocked the Hudud Enactment. I concede that civil criminal matters are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government, but Islamic criminal offences are under the jurisdiction of the respective states. As such, the Federal Government under BN has no power to interfere with state matters.
My question is, why BN prohibited Kelantan from implementing Hudud back then?
Why?
1. You said Mahathir blocked the implementation of PAS hudud? It could be true then, but then again you didnt care to explain why he blocked it. There must be a valid reason.
2. You said Mahathir blocked it. Its been almost 10 years since Mahathir left office. Why couldnt PAS implement it after Mahathir? Are you now saying Pak Sleepy too block it, followed by Najib? Are you going to say PAS Hudud in Kelantan would be implemented should China Doll become the next PM?
3. You said Mahathir blocked it. Did you know that after the Kelantan State Assembly approved the PAS Hudud Law, it has to be gazetted first before anyone think of implementing it. But the PAS Gomen never submitted for the Law to be gazetted. Nobody can stop them from gazetting it, but they never do it. So, in the first place, how can you implement a law which you yourself fail to gazette?
Why, because you are prejudice and hypocrite. A cakap tidak serupa bikin type. A typical mengata orang, dia yang lebih.
Btw, after 20 years approved, Hadi said it’s only 0.0001% wtfish. After 20, years, Hadi relabelled it Negara Berkebajikan wtfish. After 20 years, PAS Kelantan only now formed a Committee to review the approved Hudud (and gosh, how many times has the Committee meet?). After 20 years, they found out that a muslim husband can sodomize his wife under Kelantan Hudud but not under Terengganu Hudud.
Man, be real, wake up, cant lie to all people all the time. Cant spin either!
Dear kiasu and pas, action speak louder than words.
1. In 15/07/1994, Mahathir in his official capacity as the PM sent a letter to Kelantan stating that the Federal Government will oppose the implementation of Hudud in the state. The letter was never withdrawn by his successors, i.e. Pak Lah and Najib. As such, the objection by the BN Federal Government persists till to-date even though Mahathir has retired.
2. UMNO alleged that the enactment is not in compliance with the teachings of Quran as it was the PAS version of Hudud. Then, why the UMNO Aduns in the Kelantan State Assembly supported the enactment only to be objected by the UMNO president, i.e. Mahathir?
3. The implementation of Hudud in Kelantan requires the cooperation of the Federal Government controlled institutions such as police, syariah courts and Attorney General. Kelantan state assembly at most can only pass and gazette the enactment but without the support of the said institutions, there will be no enforcement. At least Nik Aziz managed to pass the bill at the assembly but stopped short at gazetting it. I challenge Najib to withdraw the letter written by Mahathir, amend the constitution to remove the legal barriers and instruct the federal institutions to give cooperation to the state.
4. Nik Aziz has no right to complain against the BN Federal Government unless he has exhausted all the necessary legal process at the state level. I challenge Nik Aziz to immediately gazette the enactment and see whether the BN Federal Government will tender its cooperation.
Both BN and PAS must stop confusing the people.
I agree that everyone must stop confusing the people. I also agree that actions speak louder than words. This is also true for inaction.
Just because of one letter from the PM, Kelantan has refused to follow up on the matter? I thought pious men feared only Allah? Ask for a withdrawal of the letter, then.
As to why Tun M objected to the enactment, please view the video below.
I agree with your point (4).
Overall, I admit that you have good points. But it seems that you’re working on the premise that PAS is actually interested in upholding Islamic syiar. If that is indeed your opinion, I invite you to review how PAS has sold off on the “kalimah Allah”, and how they are supporting someone who clearly “menyekutukan Allah”.
People are not confused, you are.
“At least Nik Aziz managed to pass the bill at the assembly but stopped short at gazetting it.”
– at least
– stopped short at gazetting
you make a mockery of your comment. you dont do thing halfway and then expect people to accept it.
” I challenge Nik Aziz to immediately gazette the enactment”
it already 20 years maa, and who are we to challenge a MB or State Gomen to do thing they would dare not do? Why need a challenge and then expect Federal to cooperate.
Have you heard the “cakap tak serupa bikin” thing? My advise to you, instead of challenging NA, just tell him “lu cakap tak serupa bikin” maa.
Btw, you purposely ignore my comments on 0.001, negara berkebajikan, committee and sodomy things. kenapa ya?
A letter from Mahathir and they stopped Hudud.
A warning from Najib but they went ahead with Bersih.
They were more afraid of Mahathir than they were of Allah swt.
Kiasu,
What about the Hudud Enactment in Terengganu? It was passed by the state legislative assembly on 8/7/2002 and gazetted on 25/9/2003. PAS ruled Terengganu from 1999-2004 but lost the state in the 2004 General Election. Terengganu was returned to BN rule until today. Refer here http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2011/09/29/terengganu-masih-kekalkan-enakmen-hudud/ and http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/litee/bahasa/article/bila-pula-terengganu-mahu-laksana-hudud-soal-hadi/.
The BN state government has decided not to abolish the enactment and also not to enforce it. They have been ruling Terengganu since 2004 and 8 years have lapsed. Terengganu is even more ‘advance’ than Kelantan as the former has actually gazetted the enactment. Not to mention that Terengganu is ruled by BN.
Isn’t it clear that the burden is now on the BN Federal Government to amend the constitution and also to facilitate the implementation of Hudud at least in Terengganu? Terengganu has done all it can and now awaiting the green light from the Federal Government.
The implementation of Hudud? Which Hudud, PAS Hudud or Islam Hudud? That’s two different things, and did the muslims nationwide or worldwide acknowledge PAS Hudud as Islam Hudud acceptable by all?
Before anyone wish to implement something, its vital to ensure that thing is the right thing.
I wish to see the implementation of hudud in both Kelantan and Terengganu and I am trying to understand what are the stumbling blocks that will hinder the same. I must admit that I am not a legal expert and I may be interpreting things wrongly. I prefer to look in prospective, i.e. what can be done from now onwards to ensure Hudud can be implemented. Let these 2 states be the testing ground before we introduce Hudud for the country. Here is my opinion.
For Kelantan, I think that Nik Aziz should immediately gazette the enactment. Why no action to gazette it although time has lapsed for 19 years? For BN, Najib should remove all the barriers and facilitate the implementation of Hudud in Kelantan. As pointed out above, withdraw Mahathir’s letter, amend the constitution and request federal institutions to cooperate with Kelantan. It seems to me that the BN Federal Government has more things to do than the PAS Kelantan State Government.
For Terengganu, the Enactment has been gazetted. The former PAS led government under Hadi Awang (1999-2004) has delayed the implementation for about 1 year plus. When BN won back Terengganu in 2004, they have delayed the implementation for 8 years until today. It seems to me that the Enactment can be gazetted, but Terengganu state government can choose not to enforce it and let the same stay in abeyance. Why not just abolish the Enactment then? Otherwise, if there are provisions in the Enactment that are contrary to the teaching of Islam, why no amendment is being made although BN was returned to power 8 years ago? Similarly, the BN Federal Government should amend the constitution and request federal institutions to cooperate with Terengganu. In this case, I see that the burden is really on BN as they are in control of both state and federal governments.
I invite readers to point out if I miss anything. Many thanks.
Tun M already answered that quite nicely [YouTube].
Dear friend, that is a video of Uztaz Kazim. Not Mahathir himself.
Uztaz Kazim is a 3rd party and what he said about Mahathir is ‘hearsay’. I am not saying that the uztaz is lying. What I understand from the video is that Mahathir rejected the Kelantan Hudud Enactment due to the fact that non-Muslims are not subjected to the law. The Uztaz said that Hudud has to be enforced across the board, including on non-Muslims.
How can religious laws be enforced on non-believers? This would constitute a fundamental breach on the freedom of religion.
If Hudud has to be enforced on non-Muslims in Malaysia in order to be called a ‘real Islamic Hudud’, this will never happen as non-Muslims must never be subjected to Islamic laws. The PAS version of Hudud says that it shall be enforced only on Muslims, hence it is not the ‘real Hudud’ according to Islam. How to reconcile this conflict?
Just came across this thought, what will be the position of the Muslim women in a Muslim majority state like Malaysia (47% of the Muslim vote count)? Will muslim women in malaysia accept the Wahhabism indoctrination. Came across an interesting link, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/wahhabism.html.
Now going back to Muslim women in Malaysia, do they like to be like Saloma who professes her religion in her own belief or the state & JAKIM needs to dictate what a Muslim woman should be.
How is this [YouTube]? The top 10 Malay actress. You don’t need religious arguments, you need logic deduction based on the fabric of the country for the history and its evolvement. We are not hard core Wahhabi nations like Saudi, Pakistan, Afghan etc.
Helen, what is your take on the Batu Caves Condominium Project ? The PR promised to look into it, but will it become another Kampung Buah Pala ? would like to hear your point of view.
Sorry, I think some of us have lost the plot.
The creation of a new theocratic state will be the final nail in the coffin for our Constitution – the foundation which this nation was built upon.
I hate n’sync,
The Constitution allows itself to be amended. Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi estimated that the Constitution has been amended 42 times for the past 48 years as of year 2005. The estimated no. of amendments is about 650. He opined that “the spirit of the original document has been diluted”. So, what is the issue of further amending the Constitution to allow the implementation of Hudud and making Malaysia a theocratic state since the foundation is already destroyed?
PAS,
Why the big fuss over Hudud? Was it not Hadi, then the MB for Trengganu who said that Hudud is merely 0.00001% of Islamic law?
Central to tre issue is PAS as a hypocrite party. That is the source of all this mess over Hudud. PAS in the first place has no intention to implement hUdud. Hudud is just a weapon to earn Malay votes.
If PAS is serious about hudud, it would not have wasted time in explaining to all Malaysians and try to influence them. After all, PAS and “ceramah” are like Siamese twins. Ceramah is Pas forte.
For this reason alone., not only MCA rejects Hudud PAS but Muslim also. They reject PAS, not Hudud.
Try to understand the perception. If you still fail to comprehend, try watching Sister ACT. The comedy on a Cabaret singer dressing like a nun and stays in a convent. But she ain’t no nun.
Excellent analysis Helen. I am of the view that neither DAP nor PKR would be able to resist Pas’ demands. It is a dangerous gamble.
can pas n pkr resist dap demand aka christian state?
no need to resist, just pull out of PR, then offer UMNO a deal, we support you, you give us Islamic state. habis cerita.
ur writing generates a lot more questions than they provide answers, but i think that is fine, fit ur handle.
Here we are fighting about religion. Who actually owns the world? $$$/religion or policies to enhance them. Nice speech from Noah Chomsky for those familiar with him.
Let me warn you the video [here and here] is about one hour.
I am posting this not because of $$$ or religion but purely to share his view. Leave it to you whether it is worth your precious time to listen and understand how the world revolves besides what we think we know best within our own world in Malaysia for $$$/ religion/ policies minus the truth and reality for humanity. Look out for the Adam Smith quote in the beginning of the speech.
This is the 2nd part [YouTube].
Helen,
I had watched the full documentary on the partition of India. It was a pitiful sight. Muslims, Hindu and Sikh killed each other.
For the record the mufti of India was against the partition but Jinnah, an anglophile and not so religious person was using a separate muslim state as the bargaining chips to seek more concession from his political enemy. He failed and some how the British accepted the fact that India must be separated. The borderline was decided by one British Officer.
Being a small minority now in India, the muslims suffered. If the partition did not happened, some analysts predicted Muslims will be treated better as the Muslims numbers will balance the Hindus.
Back home in Malaysia, how the Hindus feeled when they arrived in Malaysia. I am sure that many Indians that had made that decision to travel to Malaya in 1900s will not had regretted that decision, including the great great grandfather of MINY and
TerenceNorman Fernandez.___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DAPsters fail to appreciate the lack of violence in this country. Minorities have relied on negotiation which is MCA’s way. All this will change post-GE13. DAPsters are taking our peace too much for granted. — Helen