Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this
Quran swearing: 'The innocent have no fear...
Published:  Jul 9, 2008 9:16 AM
Updated: 8:47 AM

your say ...the guilty have no conscience. Please drop all this pointless swearing on the Holy Book. It does not resolve anything. The problem is created by man, so it must be solved by man.

On Swearing on Quran: Najib too

Hopeful Malaysian: In this world of deceit, deception, corruption and crime committed in pursuit of power, I am still sceptical if all parties involved will agree to swear by the Quran.

If they are capable of crimes of this high order, I am sure it would amount to nothing to swear by the Quran if it can change the people's negative perception of them.

We have to remember we are dealing with intelligent and capable leaders and our only hope is that they belong to the good side.

This is just like watching a movie and we always hope that goodwill prevail over the bad ones. This is one ‘movie’ that I am again watching and praying that the good ones will prevail.

Kenny Gan: If Anwar were to swear his innocence on the Quran, will all charges against him be dropped? Otherwise, what is the point?

If Saiful swears on the Koran as well, who should we believe? Clearly one if them must be lying and we are none the wiser.

Please drop all this pointless swearing on the Holy Book. The innocent have no fear, the guilty have no conscience. It does not resolve anything.

The problem is created by man, so it must be solved by man.

CK Chim: The suggestion from the chairperson of Putera Umno only goes to show that the folks in power are fast running out of ideas.

The esteemed religion has been abused and tarnished enough by politicians in Islamic countries as it is.

The guilty parties will swear on anything just as they will make up any stories for power. These guys see religion as a convenient tool to achieve their means.

Islam cannot cover for the shortcomings of the system. If we have any doubts, just look at the amount of corrupt and mis-governance out there.

Clean out our law enforcement agencies by recruiting world-class law enforcers. Empower and give the judiciary their independence.

Only then can we regain the confidence of the rakyat and the global community. Leave God and Islam out of this.

John: I have my doubts that swearing on the Quran would solve the problem. What happens if all of them swear maintaining their stand? We are back at square one!

We have not run out of investigative options to prove the matter one way or the other.

The main problem seems to be, the investigation officers who seem to accept as the gospel truth statements made by a powerful political figures. They don't go behind the words to prove it one way or other.

Ahmad Kamal: All this 'swearing on the Quran' business is unholy. Why involve the Holy Book of Muslims at all?

Anwar's call to have the charge made under Malaysian Islamic criminal law is problematic. If the alleged anal sex is not consensual, then there appears to be an allegation of violence and victimisation.

The Malaysian Islamic evidentiary rules (based on classic zina (hetero sexual intercourse proof) does not help a victim at all. How can a victim (of sexual assault) bring forth four male eyewitnesses to give evidence on the act of anal penetration?

If one cannot proof as above, then the accuser-victim may face a charge of defamation and receive 100 lashes. If it is consensual sex, it is nobody's business and certainly not the state’s.

I cannot support the call by Anwar and his supporters for the case to be heard in the Syariah Court, because the evidentiary rules adopted by the state in its Islamic criminal justice system is questionable. That anal sex is equated as zina per se should be questioned.

SH Huang: There are four seasons as we understand; but now it looks like another season, the fifth, of swearing in the name of God has found its place in this current, turbulent period of Malaysian history!

We should not take His name lightly. So, should any one use the Quran or the Bible to swear and prove a point ?

Assuming we could swear on the Quran or the Bible, what happens if two parties take the oath? What does the swearing prove? (The Chinese kill a white cockerel to swear; the only one that suffers is the cockerel. Does this prove a point?)

If swearing on the Koran or the Bible is the right approach, don't you think that all parties on specific matters should simultaneously swear?

  • Anwar Ibrahim on the subject of sodomy;
  • Najib on the subject of the his relationship with the Mongolian lady;
  • Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on the subject of the Oil-for-Food UN programme;
  • Rosmah on the subject of her presence at one murder site.
  • Eusoff Chin on the subject of a trip to New Zealand;
  • Ahamd Fairuz on the subject of the Lingam Tape.

Perhaps you might have other names.

If such swearing could solve problems, we do not need to have courts to solve problems. We need not have the ACA or police to do any investigation. We do not need statutory declarations.

We could lead simple lives. And the man in the street will be very happy indeed.

Percy Chan: We have had enough of theater. Swearing on the Quran in public is pure theater. I don't believe in any religion but I believe in respect for all people who may feel religion is their reason to live.

However, it should never be used to judge anyone in the name of God. We are certainly not God though some may make such claims.

These guys are already sinners, so what is there for them to sin one more time or 10,000 times on the Quran or not?

The government should provide us with our basic guarantee - a rule of law and incorruptible enforcers and independent, learned judges.

All this conflicts will be resolved if only we have this one basic guarantee.

Abrocadabro: My cold sweat rolled down when I heard that both Anwar Ibrahim and Saiful Bukhari were prepared to swear on the Quran over the sodomy allegations.

It's not that I hate Anwar more and love Saiful less or love Anwar more and hate Saiful less, but I don't want to lose either one of them.

They are great actors; and with the PI, P Balasubramaniam, they make a threesome - the three stooges of the Malaysia's political drama.

Now they want to prove they are telling the truth by swearing on the Quran. But there can't be two rights, right? Definitely one of them is a liar. The question is who?

Whoever is telling the truth or lying, we are bound to lose one of them. Losing them? I mean losing them to hell.

Swearing on the Quran is a not a ‘play thing’. It's a very, very serious act, and is not a show just to prove one's is right. The one who is lying shall face the wrath of Allah SWT - possibly in hell.

Donny Asmy: Some try to use the ‘Kalam Allah’ to prove who is wrong and who is right without thinking of what the consequences of this action.

Before swearing on the Quran, they should ask themselves, are they ‘holy’ enough to swear in the name of Allah?