Keadilan president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail has openly clarified that the party respected the right of Terengganu and Kelantan to enact the controversial hudud law.

Since hudud is contrary to the 1957 Constitution, its pretenses of being a moderate party in promotion of social equality and justice have been unveiled ( Keadilan backs PAS' right. to impose hudud

Unless Keadilan can show to the contrary how:

Hudud is not an infringement of the provisions of the Federal Constitution; or

Hudud does not discriminate against women; and

Syariah is superior and above the Federal Constitution and Malay Muslims are subject to syariah first and constitution a poor second with syariah prevailing over the constitution in a conflict.

Keadilan's multiracial and cultural image as a moderate party promoting social justice and equality is irreversibly compromised and tainted by its support of PAS' hardline stand on hudud.

Keadilan's stand may be challenged from three standpoints.

"Keadilan believes that no Muslim can reject syariah laws, of which hudud is a part, as it is in line with the religious obligations of Muslims"such as "praying five times a day or paying zakat (tithe).

It is questionable whether religious obligations of "praying five times a day or paying zakat (tithe)" under syariah may be permitted to be extended, as in PAS' form of syariah, to medieval punishments that beheaded adulterers, executed apostates and amputated limbs of thieves.

Wan Azizah further stressed that "the party acknowledges that all laws in the country must be in line with the Federal Constitution and 1957 social contract, which assures all the major ethnic groups in this country are allowed freedom to profess their own faith".

The constitution covers not only non-Muslims but Muslims too. The rights conferred by the constitution are not confined to just freedom for non-Muslims to profess their own faith but freedom too in the case of Muslims from arbitrary application of man-made laws and cruel punishments under the guise of hudud — and freedom from unequal and discriminatory application of laws with regard to Muslim women as in the case of rape proof requiring several male witnesses present.

Although Muslims are subject to syariah, they, like non-Muslims, are guaranteed certain basic rights and safeguards under the Federal Constitution that cannot be hijacked in the name of religion. Where Syariah, of which Keadilan claims hudud is part of, conflicts with constitutional provisions, the constitutional safeguards, as applied to even Muslim Malaysians, must prevail over syariah enacted by PAS.

Finally, Wan Azizah explained that Keadilan respected the right of Terengganu and Kelantan to enact the controversial hudud law as the two governments were "democratically elected".

State governments are no more democratically elected in than the federal government, nor are they more powerful.

The issue here is whether Keadilan should support PAS state governments in Kelantan and Terengganu — just because they are "democratically elected" — to enact laws in confrontation with and violation of the basic law of the land, the Federal Constitution. Since when has our Federal Constitution diminished in its supremacy of application?

Our constitution is a sacred document that until now has stood supreme for 45 years since Merdeka. It enmeshes a matrix of rights and obligations that glue common bonds and shared norms of the different communities in order that they may live, and have lived so far, in harmony.

PAS may be democratically elected in Terengganu and Kelantan but that is not a justification to allow it to enact laws against the constitution and treat it with impunity.

It is therefore indefensible why a party like Keadilan that claims the importance of social equality, justice, importance of laws, independence of judiciary can express understanding for, condone and publicly take a stand in support of PAS' position on hudud in challenge of our Federal Constitution.