The Terengganu government, in its haste to implement the Hudud Bill, has failed to clearly define the limits of its scope and properly assess its consistency with the Federal Constitution to which the state is bound, said a human rights organisation today.
In a press statement, Suaram denounced plans by the Terengganu PAS government to eventually extend the religious law to cover non-Muslims, although the state government had initially proposed for the bill to be applicable to Muslims only.
"Statements were made by PAS leader to the effect that victims of a crime can also elect for the crime to be tried under hudud (Islamic penal code) laws, even if the accused is non-Muslim.
"More alarming, it was said (at the state assembly after the passing of the Bill) once non-Muslims have understood and fully been informed of the hudud laws, it would be extended to cover them," said the non-governmental organisation.
According to Suaram, the Hudud Bill violates several key principles under the Federal Constitution starting with the principle of equality and non-discrimination (Article 8) by allowing for different rules to apply to Muslims and non-Muslims, and different treatment for men and women.
Suaram said the bill also deprives a person from the right to an effective remedy by a competent tribunal, the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.
Outmoded thoughts
The organisation said the near "mission impossible" requirement for a conviction of zina (illicit sex, or rape as under the bill there is no distinction between consensual sex and forceful intercourse) which "blatantly 'presumes' that women cry rape all the time" may result in the silencing of rape victims and witnesses for fear of being accused in return.
Furthermore, Suaram pointed out that the provisions in the Hudud Bill allowing for exceptions to punishment under zina , including if the offender marries the victim and if the victim's hymen is intact also reflect the weakness in the implementer's conception of sex-related offences.
"The ideas are based and indeed perpetuate the outmoded "traditional" thoughts, for example, the outrageous idea that an offender of zina should or wants to marry the other party and the obsession with the hymen as the barometer of chastity of virtue," added Suaram.
The Hudud Bill is also said to contravene the freedom of religion principle stated in Article 11 of the Federal Constitution as it contains provisions allowing for punishment against Muslims who want to renounce their religion.
"Religion is a matter of personal choice between a person and God. The demarcation between the State and religion is clear; the State cannot impose its will on such personal matters but on recognised matters of public and private laws," Suaram asserted.
The human rights organisation also expressed concern over modes of punishment stated in the Hudud Bill which provided, among others, death by stoning, crucifixion, amputation of limbs and whipping ranging between 40 lashes for the consumption of intoxicating drinks to 100 lashes for unmarried zina offenders.
Violates right to life
"Such sentences violate the right to life, the right to live in dignity and the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhumane or degrading punishment."
Suaram added that although the idea for such harsh punishments is crime deterrence, credible studies and research have disproved the correlation between the effectiveness of severe penalty and the rate of crime.
"Even in Malaysia, with the highly publicised mandatory death penalty for drug traffickers and heavy jail sentence for drug possession, have not lowered the number of drug-related offences in Malaysia," it stressed.
According to Suaram, the implementation of hudud laws in other countries such as Nigeria, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, have also resulted in "tremendous controversy".
"Many credible reports have shown that far from being crime-free as has been hoped for, the implementation of the system has persistently caused injustice, discrimination and gross abuse of human rights."
"The apparent haste in the passing of the bill and its attempted implementation starkly illustrates the Terengganu state government's failure to address the substance and spirit of Islamic laws in its most non-compulsive, fair, understanding, compassionate and peaceful form," Suaram added.
.
