Morocco: Should pre-marital sex be legal?

The editor of Morocco's Al-Ahdath Al-Maghribia daily newspaper, Moktar el-Ghzioui, is living in fear for his life after he expressed support for pre-marital sex during a local television debate.

"The next thing there was a cleric from Oujda releasing a fatwa that I should die," he says.

"I am very scared for myself and my family. It's a real blow to all the modernists who thought Morocco was moving forward."

According to article 490 of the penal code, Moroccans can be jailed for having sexual relations outside marriage.

This is based on Islamic law, which bans unmarried people from engaging in sexual activity.

This is why Mr Ghzioui's televised comments created huge controversy in a society that remains predominantly conservative.

The Moroccan Human Rights Association is calling for an overhaul of the penal code in order to tackle the harassment of women, often by sexually frustrated men.

However, even if the law is changed, sex therapist Abu Bakr Harakat believes that negative perceptions of sex outside the marital home, and the importance many people attach to a woman's virginity, will not change overnight.

"Society forces people to respect laws and not the individual," he says.

'Sharing hotel rooms' 

For example, last year, a judge ordered a 16-year-old girl, Amina Filali, to marry the man who had raped her, in order to preserve her family's honour.

She committed suicide in March after she was severely beaten by her husband.

This incident happened in a poor rural village in the north of Morocco, where traditional beliefs are strong.

A sociologist at the University of Mohammed V, Abdessamad Dialmy, argues that article 490 needs to be removed because human beings have the right to sex.

He says more and more unmarried couples are having sex because they are getting married much later.

"Society may not talk about sex but they think about it all the time," he says.

With pre-marital sex on the increase, some couples are able to sidestep the restrictive laws, such as the ban on sharing hotel rooms.

Loubaba, 25, is an example of the young generation whose attitudes are changing.

"If I want to go and spend a nice weekend with my boyfriend, we will just book two separate rooms," she says, giggling.

But she knows she is running a risk.

'Female hunting'


An unmarried man and woman were recently jailed for six weeks after they were caught having sexual relations.

Imam Hassan Ait Belaid who preaches at a mosque in the commercial capital Casablanca says article 490 is part of the culture of a non-Western society.

"If the code is removed, we will become wild savages. Our society will become a disaster," he says.

Critics of the Islamists argue that the strict sex laws merely increase the harassment of women.

Men often talk of going for "female hunting", as they drive down boulevards trying to pick up women.

Such harassment shows the sexual frustration that persists in predominantly conservative Muslim societies, analysts say.

But Morocco's Justice Minister Mustapha Ramid, from the newly elected Islamist government, has made it clear that he will not change the law.

"Legalising sex outside marriage is an initiative to promote debauchery," he said recently.

When a new constitution was unveiled last year, Western leaders praised Morocco as a role model for democracy and modernity compared to its neighbours.

Many young people want to see a society where liberal freedoms can be expressed in the way Mr Ghzioui has.

But the problem is that it clashes with those who want to stick with the country's deeply embedded Islamic traditions.

Moroccan society seems to be torn between conservative and liberal ways of thinking, just as it is torn between the influences of the East and the West.

However, the fact that the issue is for the first time a hot topic of debate shows that long held taboos are slowly being broken.

HINDRAF stops KL City Hindu Temple Demolishment

Bersih to hold ‘yellow’ gathering on N-Day eve

Amin Iskandar, The Malaysian Insider

Electoral reform group Bersih will hold a public rally on the eve of National Day with the theme ‘‘Janji Bersih” or “Bersih’s Promise” at Dataran Merdeka here, the same venue where thousands of Malaysians had tried to gather on April 28 in defiance of a ban to demand for changes to election laws and rules.

Bersih 2.0 co-chairman Datuk A. Samad Said (picture) said today all Malaysians are invited to jointly participate in this event in conjunction with the countdown to National Day.

“We have heard many promises... we know what people want is a clean and fair Malaysia as a celebration of independence of 55 years” he said.

“Janji Bersih’’ will commence at 10pm at the Dataran Merdeka fountain with poetry readings by the National Laureate.

“To celebrate the theme ‘Janji Bersih’ we also recommend people of all races, all over the country — young and old — wear yellow at the same time as at this gathering place,” he said.

Empower executive director of Maria Chin Abdullah, who is also a member of the coalition, said the gathering was not a demonstration but was instead a celebration of independence.

According to the organisers, “Janji Bersih” aims to remind the public the eight demands for clean and fair elections made by Bersih, which organised the mass gathering on April 28.

“The eight demands for Bersih have yet to be fulfilled which is why we want to remind the government of this celebration of independence.”

“It is possible ‘Janji Bersih’ will be attended by many parties,” said Badrul Hisham Shaharin, who is chairman of Solidariti Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM).

Hudud: Satu Lagi Hipokrasi UMNO

Whence Comes Another Mahathir?

Mahathir Mohamad is an angel. A perfect being. He is incapable of doing wrong. He is a model to all Malaysians. He is wise. He is incorruptible. He never took a sen while in office. He saved his salary for his old age. Whatever goodies he received when he was prime minister, he gave to the Government. He only ate some of the fruits given as gifts because they would otherwise go bad.

During the Royal Commission of Inquiry on V K Lingam and the fixing of federal judges, he answered many of the questions with “I don’t remember”. He genuinely didn’t. He’s a geriatric, for goon-ness’ sake! Cut the old man some slack! How can he be expected to remember so many things in the 22 years of his premiership?

His administration was the best ever, and of course the cleanest. There were some scandals, but that happens with any administration in any part of the world. What’s more, Mahathir had nothing to do with them. Others were culpable; he was above it all. There were some bailouts, but the bailouts were necessary – no, critical. Without the bailouts, the country would have been hurt.

There has also been talk that he was involved in a plot to give citizenships to illegal immigrants in Sabah. This scheme started in the 1990s so that the grateful recipients would vote for Barisan Nasional (BN) and keep it in power there. Some call it Project IC, but others call it Project M, with ‘M’ standing for Mahathir.

But of course there is no evidence to link him to it. That’s why he can now come out to say that giving citizenships to immigrants in Sabah is right, and that those who oppose it are unfair and doing so for political reasons.

He says the immigrants have lived in Sabah a long time and they are fluent in Bahasa Malaysia, so why shouldn’t they be made citizens? Yes, indeed. What more solid reasons could there be?

Of course, he may have overlooked the fact that many spouses of Malaysians have been living in Malaysia as long, if not longer, and are as fluent in Bahasa Malaysia, if not more so, but they have not even been granted permanent residence (PR) – even though they have applied a few times.

But then maybe for PR, the Government needs to be more stringent. Could it be that PR also stands for Pakatan Rakyat, and that is something the Government doesn’t want to touch?

Whatever it is, the time is opportune for Mahathir to bring this matter up. Prime Minister Najib Razak has declared he will be visiting Sabah on Aug 11 to finally announce the terms of reference for a long-awaited Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into the very same issue. If Mahathir is hinting that this would be a mistake, that in fact there should be no RCI, Najib should perhaps listen to the wise old man.

Or maybe Najib could come up with terms of reference that would just probe the issue superficially. After all, he just needs to make the Sabahans happy that an RCI is carried out at all; he doesn’t have to upset anyone’s applecart.

When Mahathir was PM, he never upset anyone’s applecart. And he also tried to make a lot of people happy. He created a number of Bumputera billionaires but he also gave the Chinese ample opportunities to be rich.

As he has always maintained, the media was free. He has said he never told the media not to be critical of him; it chose by itself not to be critical. The fault was not his; it was the media’s. He didn’t castrate the media owners and editors; they castrated themselves.

It is a measure of the man that he allowed media freedom although he himself believes that freedom can be a problem. Only last month, he said in the Philippines that freedom is enjoyed “at the expense of others, often at the expense of the community as a whole”.

He was always thinking of the whole community, the community that makes up the nation of Malaysia.

By the same token, he was guarded about freedom of information. As he also said in the Philippines: “Secrets, including sensitive military secrets, are being leaked in the name of freedom of information. The whistle-blowers are hailed as heroes... When you create a problem by revealing people’s official secrets, something has to be done about it.”

One cannot be sure if he meant the alleged leaking of secrets during the purchase of the Scorpene submarines, but it’s doubtful that he did.

As for whistle-blowers, he could have meant Rafizi Ramli and Johari Mohamad, both of whom were recently charged for leaking information related to the National Feedlot Centre (NFC) scandal.

If he meant those two, of course he was right. They were not thinking of the community when they exposed the NFC scandal. They were not thinking of the shame and ridicule it would bring. At the expense of a Cabinet minister and her family. No wonder the Government acted against Rafizi and Johari. They deserved it.

Under Mahathir’s watch, there could never have been exposés like the Scorpene submarine deal or the NFC scandal.

That must explain why when he was prime minister, he had to stick with the Official Secrets Act – even though critics claimed it was protecting the corrupt. They wanted transparency from the deals the Government made on mega-projects. They blamed Mahathir for forsaking the tender system in favor of negotiated contracts.

They were misguided. Negotiated contracts were a necessity. He had to be certain that the big jobs were entrusted to people he knew; how else could he ensure that the projects would be successfully completed?

These naïve critics never understood that Mahathir’s responsibility was greater – and that was to look after his own people.

(So that you don’t misunderstand, “people” here refers to the rakyat of Malaysia.)

Now some people are saying that he was a dictator. How can this be? No wonder he is asking for proof that he was one. Calling him a dictator must be the unkindest cut of all.

Sure, Operation Lalang happened during his premiership and 106 people were detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) then, but that was to prevent a potential racial riot. Well, don’t forget most of them were released soon enough. And if he did extend the detention of 40 of them to two years, it was because he genuinely thought they were a security threat.

At the very least, you have to admit that he’s consistent – last April, he still said the ISA was a good law because it “could curb potential threats”. He said it kept the country safe. See? He is always thinking of the country.

He was also doing the same when seven months earlier, he supported the repeal of the ISA because it would place Malaysia “on the moral high ground”. It meant that our country would be one notch higher than Britain and the US because now “they are the ones” involved in “detaining people without trial”.

We should also take note of what he said about Malaysia: “Not all those who opened their mouth were immediately detained under the ISA... and the perception that there was no freedom in Malaysia was also not correct.”

Simply put, how could he have been a dictator? Not all who spoke up were detained. And those who were did not get detained immediately. What more freedom do we want?

Mahathir is perfect. He is always right. He was and still is a leader nonpareil. He has been the best prime minister we’ve ever had. To quote a line from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar: “Here was a Caesar! Whence comes such another?”

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians. The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the writer.

Pledges Fulfilled Theme Based On Demand Of Islam, Not Political Rhetoric - Najib

KUALA TERENGGANU, Aug 9 (Bernama) -- The theme of the National Day celebrations this year, 'Janji Ditepati' (Pledges Fulfilled) is not a political rhetoric but based on the religious demand.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the theme was proof that the Barisan Nasional (BN) government was guided by the Quran and Sunnah in discharging its responsibilities to the people as a whole.

"The theme is based on religious principles. We (BN) struggle to fulfil our promises to the people.

"We will fulfil our pledges to give confidence to the people. We want to prove that our country is a model of an Islamic nation," he said at a breaking of fast with the people in Kampung Padang Nenas, here Thursday.

Also present were Menteri Besar Datuk Ahmad Said and about 10,000 people.

Najib said that in Islam if any pledge was not fulfilled, it could be construed as being hypocritical.

"So as a government, we will fulfil the pledges. We are prepared to be rejected by the people if our pledges are not fulfilled," he said.

As such, he said, there was no need for anyone to be afraid about the theme of the National Day.

"Among the people, we too must meet the promises made. Even in business, we want to deal with people who fulfil their pledges and in terms of the government, we also want a government that fulfils its pledges," he said.

He said the people should be grateful for the blessing that they were living in a prosperous nation like Malaysia.

"During the fasting month, we can carry out our religious obligations properly unlike in some other countries.

"The BN has succeeded in looking after the welfare of the people through various programmes and hope that the people will continue to give their support to the BN," he said.

Najib later gave away Ramadan contributions to orphans, the handicapped, senior citizens and single mothers.

Later, he performed the Maghrib prayer at Masjid Kampung Padang Nenas and the terawih prayer at Masjid Wakaf Tembesu before returning to the federal capital.

Waytha - the Hindraf game changer?

"Pit race against race, religion against religion, prejudice against prejudice. Divide and conquer! We must not let that happen here." - Eleanor Roosevelt

COMMENT As someone who is despised by Hindraf supporters or rather their online cultists (Pakatan Rakyat too have their kool aid drinkers), it's uncanny how I have the ability to articulate the general drift of Hindraf's various attempts at dealing with those who have power and those who want to claim it.

Hindraf leader P Waythamoorthy's strategy (which seems to be in direct opposition of elder brother Uthayakumar's) of dealing with BN and Pakatan for the betterment of a certain class of Indian Malaysians, is something I have written about in my various Hindraf pieces.

I wrote that one possible strategy for Hindraf was to discover which coalition gave them the best deal when it came to the voting block they claimed to represent.

At first glance, this seems like running with the hare and hunting with the hounds and no doubt the extreme mercenary nature of this proposition puts whichever class Hindraf claims to represent as being either racists opportunist or shiftless wastrels always on the lookout for handouts from groups in power.

But as I argued in countless other pieces, we are still playing a race game and the only difference between Hindraf and the other players is that Hindraf is displaying their race cards for all to see.

So, while the comment section of Malaysiakini is littered with Pakatan partisans who have no problem with the championing of Chinese rights (sic) with regards to education and the systemic discrimination the (Chinese) community faces, all done under the guise of multiculturalism, these same defenders of ‘human rights' bristle at the gumption of Hindraf for doing the same for the Indian poor.

Of course, Hindraf does itself no favours. Visit the Human Rights Party website and you'll discover everyone except Indians are racists. Indians who do not agree with them are ‘mandores' or ‘mandorinis'. All this is beside the point and I'm just going over old ground.

Waythamoorthy's (right) drama-filled return and subsequent refinement of strategy has earned him the scorn of some within Hindraf who see him as a pretender to the throne, and of course some Pakatan supporters who see him as some sort of Umno stooge.

Just like when Uthayakumar declared he would stand for election against Pakatan, there was the usual deluge of rumours that he was bought over by Umno.
Unbridled partisanship

What I find hilarious is that the idea of non-partisanship seems anathema to certain Pakatan supporters.

If an organisation is willing to work with the federal government, then the said organisations are Umno stooges. Don't get me wrong, I am aware that Malaysia is filled with proxy Umno NGOs that are there as the unofficial voices of Umno or BN but who claim non-partisanship.

However, just as there are many groups which claim non-partisanship thar are aligned with Umno-BN, there are many groups claiming the same but aligned with Pakatan.

I'm of the opinion that a group like Hindraf works best as an advocacy group instead of a political party. When you are focusing on communal issue affecting a particular racial group, you cannot attempt the moral high ground and claim that you are fighting for the rights of all Malaysians regardless of race or that getting what your community wants will benefit the all Malaysians.

This is the problem with a political entity like the Human Rights Party. Nobody takes its or Hindraf's claims that it is fighting for the rights of all Malaysians seriously. Nothing in its rhetoric suggests this.

However, when it comes to Waythamoorthy's plan of dealing with BN or Pakatan, each comes with its own specific set of problems. Waythamoorthy's belief that PM Najib Razak regime's handing out of goodies to Indians is indicative of the administration's acknowledgment of the problems facing the Indian community is rather bizarre.

Firstly, the regime has been handing out goodies to all and sundry in a desperate attempt to garner votes. The whole 1Malaysia scheme in its various guises is merely state sanctioned bribery which the average citizen laps up, but which would not make a difference to hardcore Pakatan supporters. Take the money (goody) and vote Pakatan, as they say.

Secondly, what exactly has Umno-BN done with regards to the issues raised by Hindraf to demonstrate that they are acting in good faith?

The plight of marginalised communities, be they Indians, Orang Asli, Malays or Chinese, is the last item on the reform agenda. Specific voting blocks are targeted, Felda settlers, civil/military personnel, the urban poor, etc, in the hopes of bolstering ground-level support but the reality is the large masses of economically deprived, no matter which race, are left out of the equation.

Hindraf's reversal of fortune

Is Pakatan any better? Waythamoorthy asks Pakatan to engage in a little introspection. I suggest the same to Hindraf. If 50 percent of the Indian vote has shifted back to BN as Waythamoorthy suggests, the question I think should be asked by Hindraf is, is this a good thing?

Was Pakatan so derelict in its duties that the Indian votes would be better spent in BN, who have been derelict in their obligations for the past 50 years? In other words, has the BN changed so drastically in the past four years that it would be better for Indians to vote BN?

Waythaymoorthy says that it's not his duty to "control people's minds" but he had no problem during the last elections asking people to vote Pakatan and now asking them to vote for either alliance if they help solve the "problems of the poor and underclass".

It's all a bit strange. Either concede that solving the problem of the Indian poor means influencing the Indian vote or take the stance of total non-participation in the voting process as far as Hindraf is concerned and remain true to its non-partisan ethos.

But the most important questions, Hindraf need to ask itself, is why its fortunes has changed so much since the 2008 tsunami? Where once Hindraf was held in high esteem by most Malaysians and by a large section of the Indian voting public, it is now a fringe group involved in its own petty infighting. What happened?

Is its reversal of fortune because Malaysians are racists? Are all the Indians who don't support Hindraf ‘mandores' or ‘mandorinis'? Is everyone wrong and against human rights except Hindraf?

If the various race-based political parties that make up Pakatan can ride the multiracial winds to satisfy their agendas, why can't Hindraf, which claims to represent all Malaysians?

No-win situation

At the end of the day, playing the race card is a no-win situation. Even if Hindraf get everything it wants from whoever is in power it would be based on a race criteria and would be wholly dependent on the whims of the ruling parties.

In effect, what Hindraf or any race-based party which advocates any kind of racialism would create is a permanent mandore-class subservient to whatever racial formula which is in play at the moment.

This, of course, does not mean that I think there is no place for advocacy groups highlighting the grievances of particular communities but rather I believe that there must be a point where race-based considerations are absorbed into a wider class-based approach. For all my criticism of Pakatan, I believe that they at least are attempting something like this.

As it is, the Indian community is far too small to make grand sweeping changes to the political reality of Malaysia but what it is in a position to do (if the community is united) is to tip the scales in way that makes it possible for those grand changes to be made on the communities' behalf which would benefit every Malaysian.

Never mind the revisionist history of some Pakatan bigots that belittle the contribution of Hindraf to the 2008 tsunami, what right-thinking Malaysians must be cognisant of is that there has never been such a radical mainstream movement like Hindraf capable of influencing the future of this country.
What it needs to do now is get its act together.
Writer’s note: Ranjit Singh correctly draws attention to the fact that in all my articles about Hindraf, I have not directed readers to Hindraf.org, which is the party website. Anyone interested in getting a better understanding of Hindraf should also visit that website. I'll end with this rejoinder from Albert Camus whom we are both obviously familiar with: “If absolute truth belongs to anyone in this world, it certainly does not belong to the man or party that claims to possess it.” 

---

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (rtd) in the Royal Malaysian Navy.