Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this

QUESTION TIME The consequences are frighteningly horrendous with a sure descend into theocracy, first for the Muslims, but quite probably eventually for non-Muslims too. Think Iran for instance and how a takeover of the rule of law by religious authorities radically changed the country, making it a fundamentalist Islamic state virtually overnight.

It will be the first major step towards surrendering the rule of law to religious authorities who neither have knowledge of secular law nor the necessary equanimity to be fair regarding such matters.

It will lead down a slippery slope because power so injudiciously surrendered to unelected representatives will be difficult to recover in future. And it raises a wide range of issues whose outcomes will be difficult to predict and increase the level of uncertainty in Malaysia even further.

But first let’s take a quick look at what the fuss is all about. The current Act 355 Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, amended in 1988, provides that:

“The Syariah Courts duly constituted under any law in a State and invested with jurisdiction over persons professing the religion of Islam and in respect of any of the matters enumerated in List II of the State List of the Ninth Schedule to the Federal Constitution are hereby conferred jurisdiction in respect of offences against precepts of the religion of Islam by persons professing that religion which may be prescribed under any written law: Provided that such jurisdiction shall not be exercised in respect of any offence punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding three years or with any fine exceeding five thousand ringgit or with whipping exceeding six strokes or with any combination thereof.”

It is the italicised portion which is under question. Initially PAS proposed the removal of the limits completely, which would give Muslim state authorities carte blanche to impose any punishment for any religious offence. This would effectively have permitted PAS to implement hudud in Kelantan under laws it had enacted earlier but whose implementation was stopped by Act 355 which limits the punishment for religious offences.

But PAS later amended the bill to 30 years’ jail (10 times the current maximum jail term), fine of up to RM100,000 (20 times) and 100 strokes of the rotan (16 times), which is still a huge increase from the existing legislation.

What was surprising was that the bill was fast-tracked despite it being an opposition bill, an unprecedented occurrence, and it may even be tabled in Parliament this session. Now the government maintains that it will table the bill itself, leading to confusion and apprehension by non-Umno BN component parties in the peninsula and Sabah and Sarawak.

Sarawak leaders have already expressed their concern that the amendment to Act 355 will result in differential punishment for the same offences between Muslims and non-Muslims which goes against the constitutional principle of equal punishment for the same offence.

For BN, cooperating with PAS on this bill enables them to move closer to the Islamist party and recover some of the support lost over 1MDB and other related issues which have really eroded Malay support, according to opinion polls.

But what is PAS’ intentions? Its president Abdul Hadi Awang is on record to say that it will be a test to see whether Muslim MPs are willing to support the introduction of hudud in Kelantan. The ultimate aim is clearly introduction of hudud, eventually for everyone.

Here are 10 things we can expect if Act 355 is amended...

Unlocking Article
Unlocking Article
View Comments
ADS