Rafizi Ramli wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Mohammad Najib. It was published on the 17th of October 2016, at 17:48 to be precise on his Facebook page. He mentioned the reason behind the letter, “I wrote this to remind Najib Razak of his duty to act swiftly to stop the pitting of Muslims versus non-Muslims on RUU355”.
It is a bit too simplistic to blame one person on the action of others. The issue rose, when non-Muslim parties started to object the Private Member’s Bill tabled by Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi. The parties include, MIC, MCA, Gerakan, DAP to name a few. It is not possible for the PM or anyone else to single handedly decide on other people’s opinions.
If it was possible to control the thoughts of everyone, the PM would have garnered support for the Bill instead of departing the Muslims and non-Muslims on the matter as claimed by Rafizi. Is it possible for the PM, to determine the narratives of the opposition parties such as DAP, PKR and PAN?
The Bill was presented by PAS and hence the burden of proof is on them. Being fair to PAS, they have conducted many forums and talks to clarify the issue. On the other hand, being fair to UMNO as well, the Minister and the Deputy Minister at the Prime Minister’s Department have gone great lengths to explain the bill to the masses.
We hope the clarification provided for the bill will allow for some understanding of the Bill. Those opposing the Bill have all the rights to do so since we live in a democratic country. We do not question the rights to oppose. Hence, in fulfilling our responsibilities as citizens, we hope to make some clarifications regarding the issue.
The Bill seeks to elevate the ceiling for punishments under the Syariah Courts. The current ceiling is at, RM 5,000 fine, 3 years jail and 6 whips. This was last amended in 1984, and is long due. The punishments are no longer relevant to this time and age. A good punishment serves as a deterrence for crimes.
It is better to avoid vice in the first place. There are arguments on chastisements failing to curb crime. Enforcement and the law go hand in hand, if there is no law to punish then there can be no enforcement, but if there is a law and the enforcement is flawed then the result is the same.
There are many things that can be mended in the existing Syariah Enactments and associated enforcements. If punishments are no longer relevant then crime will be easy. I agree that education is the best way to produce and sustain a civilised society. What happens if education fails?
Nothing is fool proof when it comes to the human desire and resulting action(s). There has to be a credible punishment mechanism to impede crimes from occurring in the future. Another purpose of disciplining is to serve as an example for others. If people see what happens to criminals and the fact that crime does not pay, many will refrain from such vices.
Some have given the suggestion to include community service as a form of punishment. Very good indeed, but the Act needs to be amended to include this sort of punishment. After there is an agreement to amend the Act in the Parliament, only then other forms of punishments can be added or reduced from an Act.
That said, those who oppose should give credible reasons for doing so. Many excuses have been given but none that are strong enough to warrant opposition. We have to reiterate that the Syariah Courts are only for Muslims and cannot enforce punishments on non-Muslims. We hope that, at least all Muslim MPs can support the Bill. Everyone has a collective responsibility towards the nation of their residence.
We hope that the denizens of Malaysia can support this bill for hopes of a better future.
Rehan Ahmad Bin Jamaluddin Ahmad
Research Fellow, Institut Kajian Strategik Islam Malaysia (IKSIM)
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of, and should not be attributed to, Isma or Ismaweb.
