The meeting between Kelantan Menteri Besar Ahmad Yaacob and Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak will be on the implementation of hudud, and not Malay unity as widely speculated.

“We will inform him of our proposition and the state government’s intention to implement hudud,” he was reported by the New Straits Times as saying at his office yesterday.  

The daily reported that Ahmad will also raise the issue of infrastructure development in the state.

“As the new menteri besar, I look forward to the courtesy visit as part of government-to-government relations,” he said.

He added that he had sent a letter to Najib to ask for an appointment to make a courtesy call two months ago, following his appointment as Kelantan MB after the May 5 general election.

As such, the meeting will not be a dialogue on Malay-Muslim unity or between Umno and PAS, as heavily speculated in the Bahasa Malaysia press.

Yesterday Najib said he is open to talks ( muzakarah ) with PAS or the Kelantan government, but asked for elaboration on what the talks will be about.

This follows the passing of a resolution at the PAS muktamar last weekend to push the federal government to support the implementation of hudud in states which have such enactments.

Delegates also urged PAS leaders to meet with the prime minister to have a “heart-to-heart discussion between Muslims” on hudud.

To date, Kelantan and Terengganu have passed state enactments to implement the Islamic criminal code, but the enactments have not come into force.

Legal opinions are split on whether an amendment to the federal constitution is required to allow states to put the enactments into force.

The Islamic penal code includes the hudud , takzir (discretionary), qisas (retribution) and diyya (compensation).

The hudud are crimes for which punishments are fixed by the Quran while takzir are offences which are not specified in the Quran.

The crimes for which punishments are set include apostasy, theft, illicit sex, making unproven accusations of illicit sex and intoxication.

However, the burden of proof is very high and would include eyewitnesses.