Malaysiakini.com（http://www.malaysiakini.com）
1. Karpal: Anwar's statement on hudud misleading, 8 January 2009
PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim’s statement that people should not worry about PAS’ intention to implement hudud laws as it would only be applicable to Muslims, was today called a fallacy by DAP stalwart Karpal Singh.
He said this was because Anwar’s statement was "diametrically opposed to PAS’ avowed aim to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state" which Karpal believes would also mean the indiscriminate implementation of hudud laws.
"This has been PAS’ stand from its inception as is clearly reflected by the statements by former and present leaders of PAS.
"In fact, (PAS spiritual leader) Nik Aziz is on record to have said on Dec 22 last year that PAS would implement hudud laws with or without the support of DAP and PKR," said Karpal in a statement today.
Both News Straits Times and The Star on Dec 23 reported on Nik Aziz’ persistence that his party would pursue the implementation of hudud laws even without the support of its other Pakatan Rakyat coalition members.
He was also quoted as saying that he could not understand why DAP was rejecting hudud laws when he believed they were similar to western laws.
"In light of this statement, there is a fallacy in Anwar’s assertion that hudud laws would only be applicable to Muslims," Karpal reasoned.
"The pre-requisite of implementing hudud laws is the setting up of an Islamic state and as such, it is wrong for Anwar to imply that the implementation of hudud laws would not affect everyone including the non-Muslims.
"It is important for Anwar to know exactly what PAS intends to do in calling for the setting up of an Islamic state," Karpal added.
Hudud laws 'unconstitutional'
DAP and PAS have long been at logger heads over the Islamic state issue. PAS believes that the country should be an Islamic one given its Muslim majority, while DAP believes that the best system for the country is secularism, in light of the plural nature of the country.
The matter has also threatened the frail unity of the Pakatan alliance, with PKR often acting as the neutral mediator struggling to keep the opposition alliance united.
Meanwhile, Karpal said PAS president Hadi Awang should clear the air as to whether hudud laws were intended to be made applicable to both Muslims and non-Muslims in the event PAS succeeded in setting up an Islamic state.
"In the public interest, he should do so," said the veteran DAP leader.
Nevertheless, Karpal reiterated DAP’s stand that the country is not an Islamic state and that the implementation of hudud laws would be "unconstitutional".
2. No room for hudud in secular M'sia, PAS and Anwar told, 14 January 2009
by Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
DAP stalwart Karpal Singh has once again reminded Anwar Ibrahim and PAS that there is no room for an Islamic agenda in secular Malaysia.
In view of this, he urged the opposition leader and Islamic party to drop their Islamic state agenda and the intention of implementing hudud laws.
Should PAS, in particular, fail to do so and goes ahead with enforcing their implementation, DAP will pull out of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition, said Karpal.
"DAP will have no alternative. We have to be consistent in our principles. We cannot sacrifice our principles at the expense of public interest and what we have been saying all along," the Bukit Gelugor MP told reporters today.
"It’s a very fundamental issue and I think this has to be settled among the parties of Pakatan. The only settlement is this: we go with the federal constitution," he said.
Karpal said this after submitting a letter to Yang Dipertuan Agong Mizan Zainal Abidin on the matter of Chief Justice Zaki Azmi at Istana Negara in Kuala Lumpur.
Karpal said the Islamic state vision went against the federal constitution's secular vision of Malaysia. Both these visions, he stressed, cannot be reconciled even if Islamic laws were only applicable to Muslims.
"We say that hudud laws are inapplicable across the board to all races. You can’t say it’s just for Muslims. You can’t have two systems: one for Muslims and one for non-Muslims.
"There can only be one system, the system which is there now, which is guaranteed by the federal constitution, whereby it is the federal parliament that passes criminal laws," said Karpal.
'Respect the federal constitution'
Other than in a limited way such as in the areas of marriage, divorce and inheritance, the constitution does not go to the extent of allowing state legislatures to implement hudud laws whether only on Muslims or otherwise, said Karpal.
"It is beyond reconciliation. The only hope (for Pakatan) is for PAS to give up its intention to set up an Islamic state and for Anwar to withdraw his statement that PKR is for hudud if it is applicable only to Muslims," he said.
"I call upon PAS and Anwar to respect the federal constitution. In fact, I'm surprised at Anwar's ambivalent stand on this.
"PAS has been quite consistent in their stand right from the beginning. But I didn't expect Anwar to say that PKR is also for hudud even though it's limited to Muslims."
Karpal also called for PAS to consult with one of its own leading members - former Lord President Salleh Abas - who two decades ago delivered a judgment declaring Malaysia to be a secular state with secular laws.
"PAS should, in fact, have a word with Salleh Abas and have him explain to them what he did together with four other judges at the Supreme Court which, at that time, was the supreme court of the land.
"That judgment is still there, it has not been overruled, and PAS must respect it. It must be respected by everyone," he added.
Alluding to statements by MCA leaders who had campaigned in the Kuala Terengganu by-election against DAP and accused it of being ambivalent on the issue of hudud, Karpal hoped Chinese voters would be more discerning on the issue.
"I call upon the Chinese in Kuala Terengganu not to be duped by the MCA, particularly on hudud law. The stand of the DAP has been clear right from the beginning. We are against hudud laws. The Chinese should not be in any doubt what the DAP’s stand is on it."
3. Islamic judicial system may ensure better justice, 14 January 2009
by Saad Hashim
I refer to the Malaysiakini report Karpal: Anwar's statement on hudud misleading.
I find it quite amazing that in the light of the collapse of the Western financial system and the growing relevance of the Islamic one, DAP chairperson Karpal Singh continues to practice scare- mongering tactic against Islamic laws.
Is Karpal (including the so-called progressive Muslims) saying that hudud is nothing but a set of laws for the the jungle which are no longer applicable in this modern life? In the first place, has Karpal studied the full extent of Islamic criminal law on the crimes of theft and homicide and their rules on evidence and punishment as they are now practiced in some Islamic countries?
Has Karpal studied the principles of ijma and qiyas of the Islamic law in reaching a just and equitable result in a case? My reading is that Karpal and the non-Muslim lawyers are against it purely due to theitr selfish reasons ie, they have already made a comfortable living from practising the existing English law, thus his massive income from handling cases in court would be reduced considerably if hudud was introduced.
So too if this country decided to adopt the European law system. Here, I would like to ask Karpal what happens to the principle that defence counsel are also officers of the court which together with the bench, try to establish truth and justice before punishment is meted out.
I wonder whether the first result of the Altantuya trial would have been different if the accused were tried under hudud or European law. Karpal, as a prominent criminal lawyer, should hold a seminar to discuss the differences among the various judicial systems like the British and the American system as well as the European system.
In this seminar Karpal himself should present an objective and impartial assessment of these systems because between the European inquisitorial system and the English adversarial system, there are also pros and cons so how do they compare with the Islamic judicial system (provided they are implemented properly).
I am sure non-Muslims like Karpal are aware that the hudud or Islamic criminal system is merely a component of Islamic law. Also, why then does Karpal chose to ignore that many non-Muslims and non-Muslim companies are now happily taking advantage of the Islamic banking and financial system.
As a matter of fact, more and more European banks are now offering Islamic instruments in raising new capital because they know that these Islamic instruments - which are not riba or usury- based - are better than the conventional ones.
So if the Islamic banking and financial system are acceptable to the non-Muslims, how then that they cannot accept hudud whose main aim is also to establish justice and equality? The problem with human beings is that they don’t know, don’t want to know or that they know but they don’t want people to know that they know.
The problem with hudud is that it was never clearly explained to Muslims as well as to non -Muslims because we all thought that whatever we have now is good enough so why should we rock the boat.
The problem with our British law system is that while we have drifted quite far away from the the original legal practices in England and Wales, we tend to think that what we have here is quite good despite the fact that in recent years our judicial system, including the appointment of judges, has been quite flawed.
At the end of the day, Malaysia as an Islamic country, should, after the success of the Islamic banking and financial system, look for a much better judicial system like the Islamic judicial system if it can guarantee the rights of every citizen, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.
4. Hudud issue not a concern in KT, 14 January 2009
by Gabrielle Chong
A recent survey conducted by the Merdeka Centre revealed that only a small number of voters in Kuala Terengganu considered the implementation of hudud law an important issue.
Of the 408 Malay and 119 Chinese voters polled, only 19 percent and 18 percent of the respective respondents agreed that the hudud issue was 'very important'.
Twenty-two percent of Malay voters and 32 percent of Chinese voters respectively regarded the hudud issue 'somewhat important'.
Another 46 percent of the Malays and 42 percent of Chinese surveyed felt that the issue was 'somewhat not important' or 'not important at all'.
Among the Chinese surveyed, only 40 percent considered the implementation of hudud law 'a serious matter to be considered'.
Another 37 percent believe that the issue was 'being exploited by the media to deter Chinese voters from supporting the opposition party'.
The issue has spread since Dec 20 when PAS started a firestorm with its vice-president Husam Musa announcing that the party would implement hudud law if Pakatan Rakyat takes over the federal government.
The statement drew criticism from both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan ally DAP, with Ipoh Timor parliamentarian Lim Kit Siang reiterating that hudud law was not a Pakatan policy.
PAS slammed for being irresponsible
MCA Youth has submitted a memorandum to the PAS headquarters in Kuala Lumpur in protest.
MIC president S Samy Vellu has slammed PAS for being irresponsible and neglecting the sensitivities of non-Muslims, while Gerakan urged Malaysians to stand united to oppose the intention of PAS to create a theocratic state.
However, PAS has since clarified that hudud law will only apply to Muslims, a position that PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim has also adopted.
Another issue of concern listed in the survey was the outlook of the identified ethnic groups on the Terengganu government undertakings on the economy, religion and human rights.
Twenty-nine percent of Malay voters stated that upholding the position of Islam should be the state government's main focus.
Only one percent of the Chinese agreed with this.
'Treat non-Malays equally'
In a reverse development, 53 percent of the Chinese voters said the state should be focused on “treating non-Malays equally” while only one percent of the Malays felt it was necessary.
The survey was carried out by telephone interviews between Jan 7 and Jan 11 to gauge voter perceptions on current issues and developments surrounding the by-election which will be concluded on Saturday.
Below are responses from political analysts on the deductions of the survey.
James Chin, political science professor of Monash University Malaysia
The reason why hudud is not a main concern in Kuala Terengganu is because the law will not be implemented regardless of the result of a by-election.
This can only be done through a change in the federal constitution, and the addition or deduction of a Pakatan Rakyat seat in Parliament is not going to affect the constitution.
Another reason is that the issue has been oversold by both the ruling coalition and the opposition. The media hype is merely a reflection of the actions of politicians.
I am not surprised with the (survey) results. It merely reinforces what we already know about the political situation in Malaysia.
For the Malays in Kuala Terengganu, the position of Islam has always been a major issue, while the Chinese have not been satisfied with the implementation of the New Economic Policy (NEP) and treatment of non-Malays.
Khoo Kay Peng, independent political analyst
The Chinese in Kuala Terengganu, unlike those in the west coast, are not intimidated by any plans to implement hudud law.
They interact with Malays on a daily basis and are well-versed with the Islamic way of life.
The way the survey has been constructed gives a false impression that Malays are not concerned with the rights of non-Malays.
Since the survey merely asked respondents to name the single most important issue, it is understandable that the Malays will name the upholding of Islam.
However, if they had been asked whether equal treatment of non-Malays would be important as well, I am sure a huge number would have said 'yes'.
（End）
