THE debate on “Hudud” is ongoing and as it would appear, cannot be separated from Syariah. Some insist that you cannot talk about Syariah without mentioning “Hudud”. Though Hudud is a part of Syariah but does not necessitate inclusiveness. Syariah can be implemented without Hudud.
In Malaysia, the punishments that can be implemented under Hudud are within the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts. Punishments such as theft, robbery and others cannot be implemented by the Syariah Courts. The idea that Hudud can be implemented via amendment to an Act is fallacious.
Catholic Bishop Emeritus, Dr Paul Tan Chee Ing in an interview with Malaysia Kini talked about “The Bill”. The reference is to the Private Member’s Bill tabled by the Marang Member of Parliament, Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi. The title of the article was “Bishop: Hadi’s bill penultimate step in Islamisation of M’sia”.
We need to understand that in Malaysia there are two separate legal systems, one under State Governments and the other under the Federal Government. Though separate in terms of enactments, the punishments that can be implemented are determined at the Federal level. The Federal Constitution contains an exhaustive list of punishments that can be enforced by the Syariah Courts.
Meaning, the Syariah Courts cannot enforce anything beyond what is explicitly laid down in Item 1 under the State List, of the 9th Schedule of the Federal Constitution. The more interesting bit about the article was its condescending tone towards Islam and Muslims. According to the piece, apparently Syariah legitimises discrimination against non-Muslims, gender inequality, child marriages and hatred of Jews.
Keeping things concise, we would like to ask for reference(s) to such claims. Gender inequality, I still need to work on this one. Though it may appear to be true but reality differs. Despite the accusation, there are many proofs that Islam does not discriminate women. As a matter of fact, Muslim countries have had female Prime Ministers.
America to date does not have one. We can go on about, Spain, Italy and other nations that are predominantly Christian and have never had a woman as the head of government. Child marriages, we need to define the meaning of a child in this case. In New Hampshire, USA, children as young as 13 for girls and 14 for boys can get married. We don’t see any Hudud or Syariah being implemented there.
Scotland has a minimum age of marriage of 16. Now on to hatred of Jews, during the Spanish Inquisition beginning in 1492, Muslims and Jews were banished from Spain and Portugal. Those who insisted on staying where forcibly converted to Christianity, or they were killed.
Before that, during the second Crusade in Jerusalem when the Christian army took over, every single Muslim and Jew was killed. Adolf Hitler was a Christian and we know how he treated the Jews. Apart from killing Jews, there are other incidents that the non-Muslims have indulged in. King Leopold II of Belgium massacred the natives of Congo, the Bengal Massacre by the British, the Allied Massacre of Dresden, and the list goes on and on.
Moving on to the age old question about Jewish Muslim relationship. The hatred Muslims have is towards the Zionists and not the Jews per se. The correct term has to be used when referring to the Palestinian conflict.
About Muslims going to settle in Germany and other parts of Europe as refugees. The number of refugees portrayed by the media is only a fraction of the refugees in Muslim countries. Just because the Western nations control the media, that does not mean they are as diligent in terms of accomplishments.
Turkey, Pakistan, Lebanon and Iran combined harbour more than 6 Million refugees. That number is way more than all the European nations combined. Still think every refugee ends in Europe? The entire European Union claims 1.3 million refugees, that is less than Turkey alone. In Malaysia there are more than 150,000 refugees.
Last but not least on the economy, this very statement “Where in the Islamic world is the model Shariah-governed society that is comparatively better than liberal democratic societies elsewhere in the world?”
Okay let us start with the rankings by the World Economic Forum, Qatar and UAE rank as the second and third safest places in the world respectively. And yes they are not liberal democratic nations. Malaysia ranks higher in safety and security than the UK and USA. The richest country in the world according to CIA is Qatar. In the top ten richest countries ranked by per-capita income, 3 are Muslim nations that are not liberal democracies.
Apparently Syariah did help develop these nations to what they are. Low crime rates, safe and secure communities help boost citizen morale. The results can be seen from the accomplishments of these nations. The Arabian gulf is indeed a place of envy for many wealthy nations.
Christianity might have not helped Europe to glory but that is not the case with Islam. Post Christian Europe is not exactly successful in every aspect either. Ridiculing Islam does not help develop Christianity nor change the realities of life. It would be much better to accept the truth of life and move on.
Fear-mongering based on conjectures and mere speculations is simply wrong. There is no other way to go about it. What could be worse than spreading falsehood and causing disunity among the populace? What more if it comes from a holy man?
Unity cannot be achieved by spreading fairy tales. Amalgamation of a society can only happen when everyone plays their part as a citizen of a nation. We have always worked together in the past, so why stop now? An integrated society can only bring prosperity to a nation, and not the opposite.
Hopefully by working together we can build a better future for our children.
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.
