Zul should take his fight all the way and propose that the present Secular system of choosing the government be abolished. After all, this Secular system was introduced by the Kafir British and is certainly un-Islamic.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Zul Noordin wants constitution amended to clarify country’s status
(Bernama) - The government has been urged to amend several articles in the Federal Constitution to clarify certain issues including the status of the country which adopts a dual-system (a hybrid legal system) and not a secular state as claimed by some quarters.
The amendments to the constitution were also necessary to draw up the differing line between the constitution as the main federal law and the implementation of Islamic law and syariah.
The call was among the 24 lists of private members’ bills submitted by the Member of Parliament (MP) for Bandar Baru Kulim, Zulkifli Noordin, listed in the Meeting Procedures of the Dewan Rakyat which is currently in session.
Zulkifli said Article 3 of the Federal Constitution must be amended to ensure that the facts on the position of Islam were not manipulated and misinterpreted by certain groups to give the impression that Malaysia was a secular state.
The controversial PKR MP had proposed that the words “Islam is the religion for the Federation, including in terms of the law and syariah” be included to remove any doubt on the status of the country.
“The fact is that Malaysia is not a secular state, but a nation that puts Islam as the religion for the federation, thus the amendments to Article 3 of the Federal Constitution, as suggested, will clarify the position with regard to the status of the country without any doubt,” he said.
He said Article 4 of the Federal Constitution must be amended to add in the words “the Constitution is the primary law of the Federation and except for the Islamic law and syariah, any other law that is passed and that contradicts it must be void for as long as it is contradictory”.
“The House must take cognisance that in many instances the Islamic syariah law has become void or cannot be enforced because Article 4 of the Federal Constitution places the country’s law above other laws and regulations.
“These include Islamic and syariah law such as the ban on the use of the turban in national schools, the wearing of the purdah and jilbab in government departments, the enforcement of the syariah law such as for ‘khalwat’ (close proximity), zina (adultery), ‘qazaf’ which contradicts the syariah law and others,” he said.
Also suggested for amendment was Article 11 (1) of the Federal Constitution on the question of changing the religion for Muslims.
In this matter, Zulkifli proposed the inclusion of the words “including changing his/her religion except for Muslims which must comply with the Islamic law and syariah. For the followers of Islam, the question of converting into or abandoning Islam must be determined by the Syariah Court which has absolute power over it”.
In addition, Zulkifli also submitted a private member’s bill to urge the government to enforce a law or to prohibit or impose conditions on the sale of liquor and condoms at convenience stores, including 7-Eleven and KK Mart.
“There have been many cases where Malay teenagers and youths who are Muslims who have abused the sale of liquor and alcoholic drinks and the availability of condoms at convenience stores for immoral activities,” he said.
In a separate proposal, Zulkifli urged the Home Ministry to initiate investigation immediately on Sisters In Islam (SIS) because it was feared that its activities were contradictory to Islamic syariah.
He called on the ministry to investigate how the organisation was allowed to use the label Islam whereas its registered name did not state so.
*************************************************
Here we go again. Zul has opened a Pandora’s Box by tabling this private members’ bill in Parliament to stipulate in no uncertainty that Malaysia is NOT a Secular State, as some people claim, but is in fact a Hybrid State.
Now, before we take this argument further, first let us understand the meaning of the word hybrid.
Main Entry: hybrid
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: composite, mixture
Synonyms: amalgam, bastard, combination, compound, cross, crossbreed, half-blood, half-breed, half-caste, in-cross, miscegenation, mongrel, mule, outcross
Antonyms: homogeneous, pedigreed, pure, purebred, thoroughbred, unmixed
Yes, that is what the Thesaurus has to say about the word hybrid. So, a Hybrid State, as opposed to a Secular State, Theocratic State, Republic, Monarchy (meaning absolute monarchy and not Constitutional Monarchy), and whatnot, would mean it is a state that is a mixture of two or more systems.
Malaysians have a name for this. Malaysians call it rojak. And rojak would be similar to the English salad, except that it is hotter (meaning spicy rather than temperature), a mix of many types of fruits and vegetables. Hey, is the tomato a fruit or vegetable? The jury is out on that one as is the argument about whether the chicken or the egg came first. Did the chicken come from an egg or the egg that came from a chicken?
I will let Zul sort this one out as I am sure if he can make sense from a Hybrid State then he can certainly answer the question as to whether the chicken or the egg came first.
I suppose I would be considered a hybrid seeing that I am not pure, as the Thesaurus indicated. And so would Anwar Ibrahim, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Tun Hussein Onn, Tun Abdul Razak, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Najib Tun Razak, etc. – all hybrids. And the list goes on. Zul, however, would be considered a pedigree, as his blood is not tainted like the rest of us.
Anyway, back to the issue of the Hybrid State. If Islam is the issue and Zul’s only interest is to ‘protect’ Islam from those who wish to ‘challenge’ it, how can a Hybrid State solve this problem? Why not go all the way and get Malaysia proclaimed a Theocratic State. Then Islam will not only be the ‘official’ religion but the laws of the land as well. Then, when someone ‘challenges’ Islam, he or she can be properly and severely dealt with.
The added advantage to this would be that all the other Holy Books other than the Quran can be banned and anyone found smuggling Bibles into the country could be arrested and whipped with a stint in jail. No places of worship other than mosques will be allowed. And so on and so forth.
Islam will now be fully protected, insulated and isolated from the influence and contamination of the other religions. Islam will truly be served and Muslims will be saved and their souls guaranteed heaven.
Malaysia is facing a serious problem. Every year, the Auditor-General’s report repeats the same thing. Corruption, abuse of power, mismanagement of public money, wastage of public funds, and so much more. And every year the report is like a photocopy of the pervious year’s report. And for decades the same thing is reported. But it never improves. It just gets worse.
I am sure this was on Zul’s mind when he proposed that Malaysia be declared a proper and genuine Hybrid State.
Detainees still die in police stations. In fact, the extra-judicial killings in Malaysia are very high. We only focus on those killed in police stations. What about those killed ‘resisting arrest’, which is as high as those killed under custody? And then there are those killed under remand in prisons. And now, people even die when called in as witnesses to have a friendly talk with MACC officers. Imagine if you are not just a witness called in for a friendly discussion but are actually a suspect.
Should we propose that PDRM and MACC be issued a lottery licence to help them improve their revenue and reduce the financial burden to the taxpayers? Then, when you are called in by the PDRM or MACC for interrogation, you can buy a lottery ticket and place a bet on whether you will be able to walk out again alive.
Zul should take his fight all the way and propose that the present Secular system of choosing the government be abolished. After all, this Secular system was introduced by the Kafir British and is certainly un-Islamic. The Prophet never held elections. Neither did the four Caliphs who came after him. The Umayyad, Abbasid and Ottoman Empires never held elections either. So why is Malaysia holding elections like what Secular States normally do?
And we must establish which version of the Shariah Zul is talking about. Talking about the Shariah is well and fine. However, as I have written in the last few articles, the Shariah is not constant and neither standardised. The interpretation of the Shariah developed over 300 years from the mid-600s to the mid-900s. And there are variants to the interpretation, depending on time and place.
Sudan, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, the UK, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc., all have different variants to the interpretation of the Shariah. Some even combine the Shariah with Roman, Greek, English, French, Italian, etc., laws. So which version is Zul talking about?
If you want, I can go into detail on the different interpretations of the Shariah. But this will take, maybe, 20 or 30 pages and I am sure many of you would just skip it without bothering to read it because you will find it boring or not of concern to you.
Nevertheless, the Shariah is actually many laws encompassing family laws, inheritance laws, contract laws, and whatnot, and the bone of contention to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, criminal laws known as Hudud.
Let us take just one such law, the law of divorce. In some Muslim countries the women can apply for divorce and in others they can’t. In some countries if the husband abandons the wife and disappears for two years she can apply for a divorce and in other countries she can only file for divorce if the husband who disappeared is 90 years old from the time of his birth. In other words, if he disappears at the age of 40, then the wife has to wait another 50 years to file for divorce.
In some countries the divorce becomes final after three menstrual cycles. In others it must be two years and in some countries nine years. And in some countries the wife can continue living in the husband’s home while awaiting the finality of the divorce while in others she will be considered still married and therefore can’t get a divorce if she continues living in her husband’s home.
So you see, it is not merely a matter of amending the Constitution by adding a few extra words. Much work needs to be done in establishing the correct system. And the key to this whole thing would be, how can Malaysia become a better place and corruption, abuse of power, etc., be eradicated, plus more freedom of the press, and so on be achieved which adding a few extra words in the Constitution will not solve?
No comments:
Post a Comment