I read Ridhuan Tee’s recent comment labelling “MCA is anti-Islam and Umno knows it” with great dismay. If MCA is indeed anti-Islam as he had described, then the Alliance that fought for independence would not have agreed to make Islam as the religion of the federation.

For the pot calling the kettle black, one has to examine his own conscience. Are not the majority of MCA members also tax-paying citizens of this country? Is not the tax contributed by MCA members gone for nation-building including building of mosques and suraus? If yes, does Ridhuan Tee have a locus standi to even mention the slightest ever remark that MCA is “anti-Islam”?

Perhaps I should re-emphasise what our founding father and the first prime minister of Malaysia Tunku Abdul Rahman said in Parliament on May 1, 1958, “Saya ingin menjelaskan bahawa negara ini bukan sebuah negara Islam seperti yang difahami secara umumnya; kita hanya menyatakan bahawa Islam hendaklah menjadi agama rasmi negara". Period.

As a lecturer at Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, I am sure Ridhuan Tee will understand fully the statement above. If MCA was against Islam, I am sure the then MCA president at that time, Tan Cheng Lock, would have not even agreed with the late Tunku Abdul Rahman on his statement above.

Perhaps Ridhuan Tee can stop his rhetoric and stop bashing MCA and the Chinese community for those uncalled for remarks. Demonising the Chinese does not solve the country’s woes but just adds on onto it.

Statistics for vice and ill health climbing in ‘no-no’ Kelantan

Perhaps what is more startling, Ridhuan Tee should figure out what he can contribute to lower the rates of crime, Aids and HIV in Kelantan. PAS despite being an Islamic party and upholding its own brand of religious governance and having ruled Kelantan for more than 30 years, it has failed miserably.

They are always the first to say “no” to this and “no” to that, “no” to Valentine’s Day, “no” to concerts, cinemas, “no” to alcohol, “no” to lottery and the list continues. With all these curbs, one might think that Kelantan which is under PAS rule would have been a model state with a low crime rate, with morality to the highest degree, as well as other positive attributes thrown in.

However, frightening statistics reveals otherwise. Drug abuse in Kelantan has increased by more than 100 percent from 4,255 in 2010 to 9,124 in 2011. Another startling revelation is that Kelantan has the highest number of HIV cases for three consecutive years from 2008 to 2010.

Take for instance in 2010, the number of Kelantanese diagnosed with HIV was 28.2 persons for every 100,000 population. In comparison to the national ratio, it is only 12.9 people for every 100,000 population. Back in 2009, a total of 616 HIV/AIDs cases were detected of which 16 percent were women. Of the figure, 40 percent were housewives.

So perhaps Ridhuan Tee can tell us how, by passing a Private Member’s Bill tabled by PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang to amend the Shariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, will conditions in Kelantan be much improved? Are not current laws sufficient enough to curtail all these illnesses?

Perhaps Ridhuan Tee, my Chinese brethren, should understand why we, MCA oppose the Bill due to the impending conflict with the spirit and intentions of our Federal Constitution.

PAS and Azalina Othman Said say, “The Bill has nothing to do with Kelantan’s hudud enactments.”

Based on Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, all Malaysians should thus be subjected to one criminal legal system and are equal in the eyes of the law. Malaysian being unique in culture and diverse ethnic backgrounds cannot work with two sets of Penal Codes.

Take for instance, a Muslim-owned/dwelled house is robbed by a non-Muslim, which court of laws should the non-Muslim suspect be subject to? Or the other way round, a non-Muslim-owned/dwelled house was robbed by a Muslim, which court of law should the Muslim suspect be subject to?

Is there a definite answer? Meanwhile the answer is “no.” Since then, to satisfy the masses’ hunger for an answer, it is imperative Ridhuan Tee be able to confront these complicated issues before saying “MCA is anti-Islam.”

Perhaps what Ridhuan should do now is to give hudud a fresh interpretation as even Professor Abdullahi A An-Na’im, a law professor from Emory University in the United States said the term “hudud” is a “misnomer” and there is no obligation for Muslims to support hudud as it is not mentioned in the Quran.

Currently no limits to sentencing established in proposed amendments to bill

What should be done now is to ensure everybody’s needs are satisfied by the state and I urge Ridhuan Tee to be forthright in demanding no separate criminal codes for crimes, demand to know the ceiling of punishments PAS aspires, instead of focusing purely on enhancing the sentencing as the judges may create all sorts of punishment that they themselves interpret fit.

By the way, Umno doesn’t know that MCA is anti-Islam but what Umno knows is that every decision made to amend a Bill or enact Acts are made with consensus within Barisan Nasional. If MCA is truly “anti-Islam”, then they would have separated a long time ago, and without MCA, Umno wouldn’t have won some of the most anti-climax elections in 1955, 1974, 1990 and 1999.

CHRIS DANIEL WONG is Bangsar MCA Youth chairperson and MCA Religious Harmony Bureau secretary.