Muslim countries use hudud for political gains, says Islamic activist
The push for hudud by many Muslim-majority countries including Malaysia is to ensure its ruling governments maintain their position in power, a UK-based activist and academic said today.
Dr Anas Al-Tikriti, who heads the London-based think-thank Cordoba Foundation, said he believes that the current debates on implementing shariah law stems from a political rather than religious perspective, adding that most countries which have adopted hudud have appalling human rights, economic and social track records.
“Was Malaysia not a Muslim country 30 or 40 years ago? Why (the push for hudud) now?
“Why is it countries that proclaim to be Islamic are the really failed countries in terms of social, political and economic justice? Why resort to hudud?” Anas said.
He was speaking at a forum titled: “The politics of religious liberty. Persecution in the name of religion.”
Anas said that while as a Muslim he is not against shariah laws, the surrounding circumstances are important before the laws can be implemented.
Equitable distribution of wealth, social and economic justice are some necessary preconditions which have to be in place before hudud can be rolled out, he argued.
“If the law is only made for the working class and not the ruling class, then the conditions aren't there (for the law),” Anas said.
He said the problem arose when Muslims are made to choose whether they subscribe to a ruling party's political agenda of Islamic jurisprudence, leaving those who dissent being labelled as “dangerous” and a threat.
University Malaya (UM) law lecturer Prof Dr Azmi Sharom said that in Malaysia, “religiosity” only started playing a major role in the 1980s when Umno started trying to outdo Islamist rival PAS in the bid to claim the Malay-Muslim vote base.
“PAS was a threat to Umno. So they (Umno) said I am more Muslim than you. The ruling authority wanted to appear more religious than PAS,” Azmi said.
Umno did this by giving powers to the various religious authorities in the country such as the Department of Islamic Development of Malaysia (Jakim), he said.
“What then happened was a suppression of intellectualism in the name of faith,” Azmi added, saying this was evident in the quality of discourse and debate on religion in public universities in Malaysia.
PAS has said it will delay tabling two private members’ bills needed to pave way for the enforcement of hudud in Kelantan, after agreeing for a proposed bipartisan committee to study the implementation of the Islamic penal code.
In 1993, the PAS state government passed the Kelantan Shariah Criminal Code Enactment II, allowing it to impose the strict Islamic penal code in the state, but the laws have not been implemented yet.
PAS is now looking for parliamentary approval to implement hudud. It plans to put forward two private members’ bills in parliament.
One seeks approval for punishments including whipping, stoning and amputation while the other seeks to empower Shariah courts to mete out the sentences.
In all previous attempts, PAS had been frustrated by Barisan Nasional (BN) tactics to prevent any vote by employing a “talking out” tactic where BN MPs have been allowed to speak for an extended period of time to prevent such private members’ bills from even being debated.
The filibuster-style tactic was frequently used when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was still prime minister.
Umno leaders now say they have no objections to the implementing hudud and have constantly challenged PAS to try to introduce the law. Recently, Putrajaya also announced the formation of a special committee to study how to enact hudud.
Legal experts insist that hudud cannot be implemented in Malaysia as it would be unconstitutional.
They also pointed to complexities in enforcing a law in which non-Muslims witnesses could not be compelled to appear in shariah courts.
The forum today was co-organised by the Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) and the Penang Institute (PI).-MMO
Dr Anas Al-Tikriti, who heads the London-based think-thank Cordoba Foundation, said he believes that the current debates on implementing shariah law stems from a political rather than religious perspective, adding that most countries which have adopted hudud have appalling human rights, economic and social track records.
“Was Malaysia not a Muslim country 30 or 40 years ago? Why (the push for hudud) now?
“Why is it countries that proclaim to be Islamic are the really failed countries in terms of social, political and economic justice? Why resort to hudud?” Anas said.
He was speaking at a forum titled: “The politics of religious liberty. Persecution in the name of religion.”
Anas said that while as a Muslim he is not against shariah laws, the surrounding circumstances are important before the laws can be implemented.
Equitable distribution of wealth, social and economic justice are some necessary preconditions which have to be in place before hudud can be rolled out, he argued.
“If the law is only made for the working class and not the ruling class, then the conditions aren't there (for the law),” Anas said.
He said the problem arose when Muslims are made to choose whether they subscribe to a ruling party's political agenda of Islamic jurisprudence, leaving those who dissent being labelled as “dangerous” and a threat.
University Malaya (UM) law lecturer Prof Dr Azmi Sharom said that in Malaysia, “religiosity” only started playing a major role in the 1980s when Umno started trying to outdo Islamist rival PAS in the bid to claim the Malay-Muslim vote base.
“PAS was a threat to Umno. So they (Umno) said I am more Muslim than you. The ruling authority wanted to appear more religious than PAS,” Azmi said.
Umno did this by giving powers to the various religious authorities in the country such as the Department of Islamic Development of Malaysia (Jakim), he said.
“What then happened was a suppression of intellectualism in the name of faith,” Azmi added, saying this was evident in the quality of discourse and debate on religion in public universities in Malaysia.
PAS has said it will delay tabling two private members’ bills needed to pave way for the enforcement of hudud in Kelantan, after agreeing for a proposed bipartisan committee to study the implementation of the Islamic penal code.
In 1993, the PAS state government passed the Kelantan Shariah Criminal Code Enactment II, allowing it to impose the strict Islamic penal code in the state, but the laws have not been implemented yet.
PAS is now looking for parliamentary approval to implement hudud. It plans to put forward two private members’ bills in parliament.
One seeks approval for punishments including whipping, stoning and amputation while the other seeks to empower Shariah courts to mete out the sentences.
In all previous attempts, PAS had been frustrated by Barisan Nasional (BN) tactics to prevent any vote by employing a “talking out” tactic where BN MPs have been allowed to speak for an extended period of time to prevent such private members’ bills from even being debated.
The filibuster-style tactic was frequently used when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was still prime minister.
Umno leaders now say they have no objections to the implementing hudud and have constantly challenged PAS to try to introduce the law. Recently, Putrajaya also announced the formation of a special committee to study how to enact hudud.
Legal experts insist that hudud cannot be implemented in Malaysia as it would be unconstitutional.
They also pointed to complexities in enforcing a law in which non-Muslims witnesses could not be compelled to appear in shariah courts.
The forum today was co-organised by the Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) and the Penang Institute (PI).-MMO
