Friday, 12-Sep-2003 8:06 AM

Islamic laws only for the Muslims; is it two-faced?

Malaysia has always been practicing Islamic laws since Merdeka (independence), says Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Since Malaysia practices Islamic laws, the country is therefore already an Islamic State, argues Dr Mahathir. Therefore, what is PAS shouting about setting up an Islamic State? It has already been done.

This argument is as good as saying, “Ducks swim. Since you also (sometimes) swim, then you must be a duck.” The fact we practice SOME Islamic laws does not yet make us an Islamic State because there is still one more Islamic law yet to be implemented to fully qualify Malaysia as an Islamic State.

PAS has very cleverly announced that it would not push for Islamic laws in any of the other states, other than the two East Coast states already under its control. It added that even if it did pursue the matter in any other states that may later come under its control, it would only do so with consensus, and even then it would only apply to Muslims and not to non-Muslims. This makes sense since, according to the Constitution, Islam comes under the states and each state is free to implement Islam as it sees fit.

For this compromising stand, PAS has been accused of being two-faced.

You can never satisfy the critics. When PAS pursues the matter, there is an outrage and all sorts of abuse thrown at the party. When they compromise, they are accused of being two-faced.

The fact is, Malaysia has been a half-Islamic State since Merdeka – or 90% Islamic State if you wish. PAS just wants to take that one last step and turn 90% into 100%. And, since the present Islamic laws only affect Muslims, not the non-Muslims, PAS would continue with this practice. Therefore, what else is new and in what way does this make PAS two-faced? PAS is merely perpetuating the present system; which is what everyone wants anyway.

Malaysian Muslims have always been subjected to Islamic laws when it comes to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and so on. When a Muslim dies, his property is divided according to Islamic laws. There are no two ways about it and this cannot be challenged in court. A Muslim cannot go before a JP and say, “I do”, for the marriage to be legalised. Muslim marriages must follow Islamic rules. And so on and so forth. But this only applies to Muslims. Non-Muslims are free to get married according to their own customs.

Muslims may not live together outside wedlock. They would get arrested if they do. Non-Muslims are free to do so.

Muslims may not enter casinos, sit and drink in a bar, be alone with a woman in a hotel room, etc. Non-Muslims are free to do what they want.

Muslims may not eat, drink or smoke in the daylight hours of Ramadan (unless in the privacy of their homes). They would be arrested if they do.

And the list goes on. But non-Muslims are not subjected to all these Islamic rules. And this has always been so. And this is all PAS is proposing; maintaining status quo.

The only extra PAS is proposing is that one last aspect of Islamic law, Hudud, which is not yet applied in Malaysia. All other aspects of Islamic laws have already been applied and have been in place all this while since Merdeka; even Dr Mahathir admits this. And Hudud addresses serious crimes that, currently, are subjected to common law.

Islam forbids murder, assault, rape, robbery, child-sex, incest, sodomy, corruption, and everything else that other religions forbid as well. Islam, however, has its own way of dealing with these serious crimes. And, if you are a Muslim, and if you commit these crimes, PAS wants your punishment according to what has been prescribed by Islam.

The non-Muslims can argue that their religion does not forbid them committing any of these acts; or they have no religion; so they have committed no crime. Well and fine, then they have done no wrong under Islam and can instead face common law in the event common law also makes what they have done a crime (where the punishment could actually be more severe or the indictment process downright unjust as the Anwar Ibrahim case has proven). But, if you are a Muslim, then you have clearly committed a crime according to Islam and, PAS says, then you must be punished according to Islamic rules.

Muslims accept that Islam forbids them from drinking liquor, eating pork, gambling, extra-marital sex, eating or drinking during Ramadan, etc.; and they are prepared to be punished according to Islamic laws if they transgress.

Muslims accept that they must divide their property, get married, divorce, etc., according to Islamic laws, and they comply to the letter with no protest whatsoever.

Muslims accept that sodomy, rape, murder, robbery, corruption, incest, etc., are forbidden, but they refuse the punishment prescribed by Islam.

Muslims accept that there is no halfway under Islam. Either you are a Muslim, or you are not. You cannot be half-Muslim. This is like being half pregnant. Yet they accept half of Islam and reject the other half knowing full well this would make them Kufur.

I suppose there is always one way for Muslims to get exemption from Islamic laws. Declare you are not a Muslim (after all, you were just born into a Muslim family and never really “converted” to Islam) and be granted full exemption from ALL Islamic laws.

RAJA PETRA KAMARUDIN

Check your voter registration here