A series of event in the past such as the PDRM's headscarf requirement to women, M Moorthy's burial tussle, DBKL's moral policing, Lina Joy's conversion hardship, the destruction of Hindu temples and the latest argument on Kongsi Raya have put Islam and syariah in the spotlight whenever issues of equitable social governance surface.

There are a lot of questions unanswered due to highly charged prejudices and unfounded sentiments associated with them due to inaccurate responses to social issues by both sides of the secularist-traditionalist population spectrum.

How can Islam be compatible with universal human rights when its teachings involve the imposition of the syariah to the general population? The right to exercise free will is inalienable to every human being regardless of gender, lineage, ethnic and religious roots, and other uncontrollable inherent factors (Quran 17:84).

Islam (peace in Arabic) is a Way of Life, which enjoins human beings in their submission to God (with core conviction that there is No God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger) as the only means to fulfill mankind's purpose in life and earning God's pleasure in the eternal hereafter through good deeds in the worldly life (Quran 67:2).

It is through divine revelation (Quran with the exegetical guidance of Prophetic Wisdom) that the paradigm that there is No God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger is translated into meaningful prescriptions - or classically termed as syariah - in achieving the purpose of life. The purpose and goals of syariah can be summarised in the preservation and protection of the self, mind, religion, ownership, and honour. Contrary to popular belief, syariah is not a penal code per se.

Like any other law established since the dawn of human civilisation, laws concerning crimes and punishment prescribed by the syariah are established to assert the collective rights of individuals. Syariah's Penal Code can't be indiscriminately imposed on the non-Muslim community as this is contrary with syariah's all-encompassing intention of non-compulsion in belief.

Why can't Muslims adopt the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) - which contains Islamicaly-accepted universal values as well - rather than opting for values based on religious rigidity?

In general, the applicability of the UNDHR for Muslims is not to be questioned as long as the values it promotes do not run contrary with the goals of syariah. Yet, calls to interpret the syariah in accordance to the principles that are labeled universal by the Western countries are unacceptable from the Islamic worldview.

This is because the interpretations of Western-imposed principles can be used to undermine the practicability of Islamic mutual rights and responsibilities framework (part and parcel of syariah) in preserving social equity and justice.

The framework promotes flexible changes in the interpretation and implementation of syariah according to circumstances in order to preserve the attainability of the goals of syariah. Thus, the framework can't be reshaped to fit other man-made frameworks merely in order to acquiesce to paroxysmal pressure from outside.

US human rights activist Dr. Louay Safi says, "Modern human rights scholars are quick to point out that historically, Muslims and non-Muslims were not treated equally under syariah law, in complete disregard to the gulf that separate the nationalist structure of modern political organisation and the communalist structure of pre-modern political societies.

"Likewise, Muslim traditionalists, driven by a similar static outlook, and oblivious to the drastic social and political changes that separate historical and contemporary Muslim societies, insist on embracing the rules expounded by early jurists, even when the application of these historical rules would negate the universal principles of Islam which gave them force in the first place."

Is it true that one who leaves Islam is punishable by death? What about the restriction on religious propagation and conversion in Malaysia, which is seen to be biased towards the Muslims? If freedom of faith is guaranteed, then why are certain groups of people accused of being deviant not being tolerated? Why must certain Islamic moral codes be imposed on the non-Muslim constituents?

Are preventive and punitive measures provided by the law to curtail expressions deemed to be seditious effective in maintaining trust and harmony among people with different political views, ethnic origins and belief systems? Why can't interpretations of the syariah be questioned when the interpretations affect everyone?