I refer to Chan Kai Poh's letter Moderate Keadilan bared .

Firstly, I must congratulate Keadilan president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail for her honesty and fair-mindedness in addressing the hudud issue. In a multi-religious society such as ours, it is admittedly difficult to appease everyone, but Keadilan has stated its stand with moderation and responsibility.

As a Muslim, I am very pleased with the Keadilan stand, although it falls short of full endorsement for the Kelantan and Terengganu hudud legislation, but Keadilan's position is fair. I cannot say the same for Chan Kai Poh's testy and pontificating response.

The writer declares with such sweeping 'authority' on the unconstitutionality of the hudud laws against the Federal Constitution, and by the same token, expects us to believe his or her understanding of hudud is the correct one.

The writer has the audacity to even separate syariah laws from hudud laws, by posing the self-serving proposition that it is questionable whether "religious obligations" (praying five times a day, paying zakat , etc.) may be permitted to be extended to PAS' "form of syariah".

For all the talk of constitutionality, the writer has glossed over various intricate provisions in the Federal Constitution, notably List II, item 1 of the Ninth Schedule, which includes the jurisdiction of the states in the area of "creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of that religion".

Now is not the time to pontificate, since the matter is before the courts. The constitutionality issue is not what the writer thinks it is. I get the impression his copy of the Federal Constitution is not the same copy which I have, but then, may be the writer is not reading it right. With blinkers, perhaps?

As a Muslim, I certainly do not need the likes of the writer to tell me hudud is unconstitutional even to Muslims. If applied to non-Muslims, it will definitely be unconstitutional, and will even not find support in syariah. It is a great pity that people like the writer cannot see the moderation and accommodation of differing views attempted by Keadilan. He chooses instead to chastise the party with half-baked ideas about constitutionality and syariah.