http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/harsh-islamic-law-malaysia/

Harsh Islamic Law Loses Momentum in Malaysia
Written by Our Correspondent 
FRI,11 JULY 2014 

 


 
Amputation and stoning disappear into a committee


It is beginning to look like the issue of implementing seventh-century Islamic 
law requiring the amputation of limbs and stoning of adulterers has crested in 
Malaysia and is receding.

The issue attracted widespread concern among human rights groups and the 
international investing community as well as within the country itself, with 
Chinese, Indians and other minorities loudly objecting to any attempts to enact 
such a law, not only because they deemed it as barbaric, but because they fear 
it would spread from Muslims to wider segments of the population.

Parti Islam se-Malaysia, the rural-based fundamentalist Islamic party with its 
roots in the poverty-stricken east coast of the country, had threatened to 
introduce two private member’s bills in the parliament in June when Parliament 
reopened its session. PAS, as the party is known, had been pushing for 
introduction of hudud, the Islamic system of punishment under Shariah law, in 
the state of Kelantan, which it controls. It needs federal approval for 
implementation, however.

Under its provisions, hudud would impose age-old punishments for certain 
classes of crimes under Shariah law including theft, sex out of wedlock, 
consumption of liquor and drugs and apostasy. As an indication of the modern 
inapplicability of the laws, there appear to be no punishments for corporate 
crime, which is rife in Malaysia. Corporate crime hadn’t been thought of when 
the Shariah laws were written hundreds of years ago.

But with a rising crime rate and concerns especially over violent street crime, 
the issue caught fire with the Malay public, egged on by such Malay nationalist 
organizations as Perkasa. One United Malays National Organization source said 
UMNO members of parliament were being intimidated into agreeing to vote for it 
or being thought of as “bad Muslims” by the country’s rural population.

However, it has horrified the 35 percent of other races that make up the 
country’s polyglot population of 29.6 million. It also posed a huge problem for 
the Pakatan Rakyat, the three-party opposition coalition made up of the 
Chinese-majority Democratic Action Party, the moderate urban Malay Parti 
Keadilan Rakyat headed by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, and the 
fundamentalist PAS.

How much real political momentum was behind the measure is uncertain. PAS 
President Abdul Hadi Awang announced in April that he would introduce a private 
member’s bill in the Dewan Rakyat, or parliament, to pave the way for the 
introduction in Kelantan. Shortly after, despite the fact that PAS is an 
opposition party, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Jamil Khir 
Baharom told local media that the Federal Government would back PAS on the 
matter, an almost unheard of parliamentary action, especially in Malaysia.

Muhyiddin Yassin, the deputy prime minister, later proposed the establishment 
of a national-level committee to study the effect of the law, including 
bringing in experts from overseas, and that PAS and UMNO would participate in 
the formation of the committee. But three months later, no committee has been 
announced, and it appears unlikely that it will be.

There is some thought that the threat of backing the hudud bill was a 
subterfuge on the part of UMNO strategists because of its potential to split 
the opposition. Especially the Democratic Action Party headed by Lim Kit Siang 
and his son, Lim Guan Eng, were outraged by the thought of such a law, as were 
most urban Malays. Indeed, referring an issue to a committee is a time-honored 
and effective way to bury such a plan. The threat of implementation drove 
Chinese voters to stay from polls in an Perak by-election when DAP, in an 
effort to widen its appeal, ran a Malay candidate. Although she was attractive 
and intelligent, she lost.

The UMNO source said at the time Hadi Awang was considering introducing the 
bills that he feared the northern tier of Malay-dominated states would likely 
implement it on their own if it passed for Kelantan.

It was also to apply only to Malays and not the Chinese, who make up 23 percent 
of the population, Indians, who make up 8 percent, or ethnic groups in East 
Malaysia, most of whom are Christian.

But, as former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad – who became a prominent voice 
against enactment of the law, said: “There are Muslims and non-Muslims in our 
country. If a Muslim steals, his hand will be chopped off but when a non-Muslim 
steals, he goes to jail. Is that justice or not?"

Mahathir has been perhaps the strongest voice opposing any such law, ironically 
despite the fact that he has been a moving force behind the strident Malay 
nationalists who have been calling for its passage. It has once again shone a 
spotlight on Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who has once again backed away 
from taking a strong stance.

Najib stood in the presence of President Barack Obama while Obama praised the 
country as a modern, moderate Malay society, but he has sent contradictory 
signals. He has said there would be no hudud in Malaysia but at a meeting of a 
religious group in June, Najib said the federal government has never rejected 
implementation of hudud although there are “loopholes and shortcomings” that 
must be addressed. He called for a meeting of Islamic scholars to interpret 
shariah law to ”scrutinize and to exercise ijtihad (an Islamic term for 
independent reasoning) so that justice can be served.”

“When they ask Najib to stand up, he holds his balls and looks the other way,” 
said a longtime western observer who asked not to be named.

In recent weeks, a wider spectrum of Muslims has come out against 
implementation. Anwar, who himself has been relatively muted on the subject, 
has come out against it in force as well, telling the PAS contingent of his 
coalition that any attempt to pass it would wreck the coalition.

As Mahathir has said, although the law would apply only to Muslims, it sets up 
the specter of a dual class of punishments, with a Chinese, Indian or other 
minority facing perhaps two months in jail for theft, for instance, and a Malay 
facing the prospect of losing his hand. Adultery in Malaysia is rarely punished 
today for any of the races and although it is not talked about, it is rampant 
among the leaders of UMNO. Under hudud, ethnic Malays would face death by 
stoning.

Other Islamic organizations with a less harsh agenda have suddenly found their 
voices. That has included Sisters in Islam, whose executive director Ratna 
Osman said hudud punishments were not necessarily Islamic but instead were 
common in medieval society. Islamic Renaissance Front chairman Ahmad Farouk 
Musa questioned whether hudud is applicable in today’s society.

Kirim email ke