This is for a discussion with PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang who was reported (The Sun June 2, 2016 ‘Chinese groups say no to hudud’) to have said that “the bill is there to improve the infrastructure of the Islamic judicial system, which shows that Allah (God) is the greater justice than the law of man and its punishments are more to educate criminals rather than punish them”.

To put it straight to the point, I don’t understand how humans can enforce the law of God for humans are not infallible beings.

We have seen how humans who are judges interpreting and passing judgements based on human-made laws have made blunders and caused injustice. One outstanding case of injustice was that of Adorna Properties in 2001 which was decided by the highest court in Malaysia, i.e. the Federal Court, and was overturned by the Apex court in 2010 ruling that there was an “obvious and blatant error” in the 2001 judgment.

Then there was a murder case where the accused was sentenced to death but freed when a witness confessed to have given false evidence.

In another murder case, the humans sitting on judgment found it not necessary to establish the motive for the killing although in such cases establishing motive is very important so as to ensure justice in passing judgment.

The list of errors in judgments made by humans, even in the highest courts, can go on and on.

What all these show is that humans are not infallible creatures even when perched on the benches of the highest courts.

Are the human who will be implementing hudud laws any different from all other humans? Who are those humans and who says they are not infallible?

If hudud is the law of God, then humans cannot be qualified enough to enforce it simply because only someone of the same standing as God himself would be qualified to enforce God’s law. Which human has that qualification?

And mind you, in case of misinterpretation or any injustice arising from its implementation by infallible humans, the victims will not be able to refer the matter to God for the correct interpretation.

Further, if humans implementing God’s law cause injustice, the injured cannot apply to God for a judicial review.

If justice stops at the hands of infallible humans implementing God’s law, then they are actually implementing man’s law.

If hudud is God’s law, then why do you need Parliament or any other body of infallible humans to ‘legislate’ it? Then how can infallible humans debate it, amend it, put it to the vote, pass it or reject it?

God should not be dragged into infallible man’s politics.

Isn’t it the greatest injustice to claim that hudud is God’s law when everything about it is being done by infallible humans?

Judging mortals by God’s law should be the prerogative of God himself and not of any infallible humans no matter how pious they are, how learned they are, as they can never match God’s qualifications as a judge of humans.