PAS has come under fire again, this time for its ruling about bikinis. At a glance, those critical of the Islamic party argue that why on earth should the way a person dress, in a manner which is 'universally' acceptable by modern standards, be regulated?

Whether from the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition — advocates of a 'secular Islamic state' (don't ask me to define) or from DAP — a fervent critic of the Islamic state — all express their opposition for PAS' decision.

As a Muslim who sees myself as an Islamist, allow me to tackle this issue using 'common sense' (paraphrasing Dr Farish A Noor), using perfectly rational arguments to shed some new light on this issue.

Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir equated PAS with the Taliban. Government figures as well as DAP leaders such as Karpal Singh and Dr Chen Man Hin expressed their fears on the effects on the tourism industry.

Kadir also expressed his perception on the Islamic ideal of not imposing Islam on other people while encouraging self discipline. I can accept DAP talking about human rights, but BN? Talk about irony.

But then, the question is, if these people are so concerned about human rights and personal choice, why don't we open topless beaches in Malaysia? Some countries designate specific places as topless beaches and discos, but overall, going topless in public would get you into trouble for indecent exposure, even under secular law.

There are human rights, nudists and feminist groups that even oppose this! They say that if males are allowed to display their chests anywhere they want, why should it be different with females? If males and female are indeed equal, shouldn't they deserve the same right, right up to the right to display the same amount of skin?

Herald Price Fahringer writes, "Men have the right to cover or expose their chests as they see fit — women do not. Few men would be willing to give up this right. Then why shouldn't women enjoy the same advantage?"

Political suicide

Surely it would be said that, well, this is not universally acceptable. This argument again has its flaws. The idea that being nude, or to a lesser extent, displaying one's breast in public is a taboo, is based on the perception of certain cultures including Islam and the Judeo-Christian West.

But the Suk culture in Kenya, Africa, or closer to home, several Sabahan, Sarawakian and Orang Asli tribes consider females displaying their breasts as something acceptable.

But does any one from the BN or DAP dare to fight for the right to go topless? I think not. Politically, it would be suicide.

Again, to simply attribute the bikini to Western culture is perhaps a mistake. Western culture did not always view wearing such minimal amount of clothes as acceptable. Bikinis only grew acceptable in the Western mainstream following the sexual revolution and heightened by the flower power and hippies of the sixties.

In fact, the word bikini (in reference to clothing) was only coined in 1945, when Louis Reard designed, in the words of Steve Rushin, "an exotic, bold and eye-opening" two-piece bathing suit, and searched for a name to personify those qualities. When he finally launched the bikini, he adopted the name of the Pacific atolls that were attracting attention due to US nuclear tests of the time.

As in many things, culture changes. Today, the West accepts the bikini, as much as they accept topless beaches, licensed brothels and such. Let the West have their bikini, as their society, or at least the majority of their society, deems it as acceptable.

The BN claims themselves as nationalists — always criticising Western culture (when it comes to democracy and civil society) while DAP claims to be social democrats.

Ideologically, both should recognise the rights of the local population who work in the tourism industry, whose lands are surrounded by chalets and hotels to protect their own culture as well, just as much as individual rights.

Right to regulate

Bikinis are something of a norm to the West and to the Westernised, but if it is deemed offensive to the people of Terengganu, than it is their right to regulate a dress code.

Just because the multinational operators of hotels such as Hilton, Sheraton and Holiday Inn find bikinis healthy for attracting US dollars, without considering the sensitivities of the local populace, does not make wearing bikinis right.

The government should also reinstate the petroleum royalty to make up for any hypothetical loss in the tourism industry!

Before anyone misunderstands, I am not saying that since PAS won in Terengganu, they can do whatever they want. They are tied to the Federal Constitution.

It is like saying that it is okay for BN to use the ISA since they have the mandate from the people. But having a dress code is similar to the principle of indecent exposure that is enshrined in Western democracies.

If you want to talk about pure individual human rights, even the law of indecent exposure goes against it, but society has right to feel offensive, and within the bounds of the Constitution, they should be allowed to legislate any ruling for it.

The majority of the people in the West finds it unacceptable for a woman to walk in the streets bare-chested and thus, the principle of indecent exposure.

The people of Terengganu find it unacceptable for women to wear de facto undergarments in public, and thus they should be able to legislate a dress code.

If the Suk in Kenya had their own government, perhaps they would not legislate any indecent exposure legislation. But that is their right.

This is more than just a PAS issue. Dr Lo'Lo' Mohd Ghazali of PAS, said that when she was studying in Australia, what made an impression upon her was the willingness of Australian local authorities to take into account Muslim sensitivities about the swimming pool.

Closer to home, it was voiced by Penang hoteliers (as explained by Dr Syed Azman) to take into account of Middle Eastern tourists.

In my own college which claims itself as liberal and headed by a British headmaster assisted by a half-British teaching staff, the use of the swimming pool is alternated between the sexes.

This did not came due to a ruling from the government or anything like that, but due to opinions voiced by the local staff as well as the multiracial student population.

Yet, we attract little controversy — but using the arguments of those critics, we are infringing individual human rights.

If this is a religious school owned by PAS, perhaps it would have been a different story.

NIK NAZMI NIK AHMAD is a youthful exco member of the Political Education Unit of the Institute for Political Research (UPP-IKD) and editor of SuaraAnum.com

.