There are a few undeniable facts concerning the origins, philosophical foundations and practice of syariah law in general and hudud in particular.

The first, and probably most important, is that syariah law is intrinsically linked to the Holy Quran as its philosophical anchor. Just as laws in the United States are based on philosophies forwarded in the American Constitution and English common law is closely linked to historical precedent, so too a similar relation exists between syariah law and the Quran; in effect, the Quran is the constitution of Islam. This may be the reason why some have argued that the hudud aspect of syariah law contradicts the Federal Constitution: there can only be one law of the land.

Secondly, historical accounts show that the Prophet Muhammad successfully ran a state based on syariah laws. He was able to do this because syariah law regulates all aspects of human interaction and activity: politics (e.g. the structure of the legislature and government), economics (e.g. usurious interest or riba is illegal) and social issues (e.g. marriage and divorce).

Advocates of syariah law today cite his example as positive proof of the 'implementability' of syariah law, including the hudud. The point here is to examine whether or not conditions that contemporary society face today would allow for a similar exercise of successful implementation.

There has been a lot of argument that the laws of Islam are not bound by the effects of space and time  in the 11 years that it has existed in Kelantan, we don't see an abundance of public executions or stonings. Either Kelantan is an extremely crime-free state, or hudud laws are unenforceable.

Fifthly, hudud law can be very successful in reducing crime rates as seen in the Zamfara state, northern Nigeria. Ever since syariah law was adopted by the local government two years ago, crime rates have dropped by more than half. It has been so successful in reducing crime that 10 of the 36 states in Nigeria are planning to introduce syariah law in the near future; people are putting democratic pressure on their local governments to follow the example of Zamfara.

But grumbles have begun to appear among the people that the fear of crime is beginning to be replaced by the fear of government oppression. The issue in the implementation of hudud law has always been the ability to find a balance. That balance seems to have eluded many places that implement syariah to its fullest.

Could the same happen in Malaysia? And what would be the consequences of a loss of balance in the multi-racial, multi-religious society that Malaysia is?