MCA says Setting up a RC on Hudud Law would be an unconstitutional act and therefore not lawful.Ibrahim Ali and UMNO explicitly planning to go against the Constitution, which protects the rights of all citizens/residents of Malaysia to practice their own faith? Even any discussion to consider implementing one’s religious beliefs on another is proselytisation, which the BN regime has clearly objected to after recent cases Even the royal institutions have reservations to is practicality in the current local and global context. Foreign investors will shun Malaysia like cow-dung. Almost 40% population will probably ‘revolt’. Sabah and Sarawak will definitely shred their agreements and leave the federation. Islam in M’sia is not the true Islam. It is the political Islam. Then there is no need to implement hudud law in M’sia. M’sia is a secular state. All those who are harping on this hudud law are stupid and ignorant of the constitution. No 1 stupid guy is Ibrahim Ali. He needs a kick in the ass.The laws will only become meaningful when everyone abide to it. Especially the leaders from the ruling party to set as an example .
Can Malaysians get this into their thick skull ? Hudud comes under ‘family law’ and not ‘criminal law’. The Malaysian constitution does not allow for a dual criminal code. There is no constitutional provision to accomodate Hudud because as citizens we are equal before the law. Why is PAS and UMNO wasting time talkign about Hudud? Why not focus on Truth and Justice?Hudud law or whatever laws is meaningless when the ruling party’s leaders never heed it and created their own system to abusing it!e Instead, katak Ibrahim, there should be a RCI to investigate the selling of the country;s defence secrets to foreigners and other major scandals plaguing the nation. Hudud is not a pressing issue now. It is good when Hudud is implemented for the muslims so that people like you, katak, can be brought to the book. You are a first class two timer. This is blatant disregard and disrespect for the basic rights of others. Nobody is begrudging you the freedom to implement hudud for yourself but to impose on others who do not adhere to it or believe in it, that’s sheer DISRESPECT for other people’s right to their own beliefs.
MCA the biggest hypocrites of all time. ‘Hypocrite’ in Arabic is ‘munafiq’ have supported the proclamation of an Islamic state by former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad. So what’s stopping you?PM Najib Razak’s effort to walk the middle path is going to waste, as more of his people are going towards the right – extremely.When PAS had proposed this idea, the hypocrites cried that it was backward, extremist, cruel and what not. But when a leader from Umno proposes hudud, the munafiq are suddenly all for it.a big plus point for PAS, and even for Pakatan Rakyat (although some may disagree).
The Umno leaders are now saying they opposed PAS’ brand of hudud because the Islamic law is for Muslims only. Whereas Umno is suggesting hudud for all.So for Chua Soi Lek and his supporters, their tails are now caught between their legs. This is a slap in the face for the MCA chief.instead of asking DAP or Karpal’s stance on PAS and hudud, now let’s put the question back to Chua and gang in MCA.Puteri Umno chief Rosnah Abdul Rashid Shirlin you great So, instead of asking DAP or Karpal’s stance on PAS and hudud, now let’s put the question back to Chua and gang in MCA.The government should set up a royal commission to draft the hudud law for the country, urged Malay rights group Perkas The party that has itself admitted to money politics and is embroiled in many scandals is now campaigning for hudud laws.’ wonder what MCA has to say about this. For a while they chastised DAP for not opposing PAS’ hudud ideology, when party chairperson Karpal Singh has openly and repeatedly voiced his opposition to the idea. Now MCA’s big brother Umno is pushing for the same thing. MCA chief Chua Soi Lek, where are you? How about a debate between MCA and Umno this time on the implementation of hudud?Umno-BN has said all along that in a multiracial country like ours, there is no room for hudud or an Islamic state it looks like you can never trust Umno and wonder why the other BN coalition parties are keeping quiet on this matter, whilst when it comes to DAP/PAS, they dance to a different tune
Can Malaysians get this into their thick skull ? Hudud comes under ‘family law’ and not ‘criminal law’. The Malaysian constitution does not allow for a dual criminal code. There is no constitutional provision to accomodate Hudud because as citizens we are equal before the law. Why is PAS and UMNO wasting time talkign about Hudud? Why not focus on Truth and Justice?Hudud law or whatever laws is meaningless when the ruling party’s leaders never heed it and created their own system to abusing it!e Instead, katak Ibrahim, there should be a RCI to investigate the selling of the country;s defence secrets to foreigners and other major scandals plaguing the nation. Hudud is not a pressing issue now. It is good when Hudud is implemented for the muslims so that people like you, katak, can be brought to the book. You are a first class two timer. This is blatant disregard and disrespect for the basic rights of others. Nobody is begrudging you the freedom to implement hudud for yourself but to impose on others who do not adhere to it or believe in it, that’s sheer DISRESPECT for other people’s right to their own beliefs.
MCA the biggest hypocrites of all time. ‘Hypocrite’ in Arabic is ‘munafiq’ have supported the proclamation of an Islamic state by former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad. So what’s stopping you?PM Najib Razak’s effort to walk the middle path is going to waste, as more of his people are going towards the right – extremely.When PAS had proposed this idea, the hypocrites cried that it was backward, extremist, cruel and what not. But when a leader from Umno proposes hudud, the munafiq are suddenly all for it.a big plus point for PAS, and even for Pakatan Rakyat (although some may disagree).
The Umno leaders are now saying they opposed PAS’ brand of hudud because the Islamic law is for Muslims only. Whereas Umno is suggesting hudud for all.So for Chua Soi Lek and his supporters, their tails are now caught between their legs. This is a slap in the face for the MCA chief.instead of asking DAP or Karpal’s stance on PAS and hudud, now let’s put the question back to Chua and gang in MCA.Puteri Umno chief Rosnah Abdul Rashid Shirlin you great So, instead of asking DAP or Karpal’s stance on PAS and hudud, now let’s put the question back to Chua and gang in MCA.The government should set up a royal commission to draft the hudud law for the country, urged Malay rights group Perkas The party that has itself admitted to money politics and is embroiled in many scandals is now campaigning for hudud laws.’ wonder what MCA has to say about this. For a while they chastised DAP for not opposing PAS’ hudud ideology, when party chairperson Karpal Singh has openly and repeatedly voiced his opposition to the idea. Now MCA’s big brother Umno is pushing for the same thing. MCA chief Chua Soi Lek, where are you? How about a debate between MCA and Umno this time on the implementation of hudud?Umno-BN has said all along that in a multiracial country like ours, there is no room for hudud or an Islamic state it looks like you can never trust Umno and wonder why the other BN coalition parties are keeping quiet on this matter, whilst when it comes to DAP/PAS, they dance to a different tune
We’ve entered the silly season in our run up to the quadrennial television marketing extravaganza known as the US Presidential Election, but our do-nothing-but-pad-the-pockets-of-those-whose-pockets-are-already-padded Congress has truly stepped up the past two weeks.The Emir of Kuwait is faced at this very moment with the decision of approving a law that would impose the death penalty against unrepentant Muslims (and varying prison sentences upon others) who exercise their religious freedom of speech in a way deemed blasphemous. So far, this is the most extreme version of such a law in the region, and it is very surprising that it makes its appearance in enlightened Kuwait.Furthermore, similar though less draconian versions of this law have been recently adopted in Egypt and Tunisia. One year ago, hopes were high for these countries to usher in a new age of freedom, but the Arab spring is being viewed increasingly as an eruption of serious local, regional and global dimensions that will take a long time before its true character and impact is understood. In the meantime, we are witnessing unprecedented excesses, such as these anti-blasphemy laws, that must be addressed thoughtfully and effectively.
It is not sufficient to advise these countries to restrict their anti-blasphemy laws to cases of incitement to imminent violence or national security. In the era of the Arab spring, these criteria are often satisfied. Take the example of the young Egyptian Copt Gamal Abdou Massoud. His religiously offensive comments about Islam on Facebook led to riots in his village that soon spread to neighboring ones. Seven houses were burnt, both Muslim and Coptic, and a high level meeting between Muslim and Coptic religious leaders was convened to calm the situation. The court sentenced him to three years in prison. One could argue that the anti-blasphemy law was justified in this case. In fact, in reaching its verdict, the court in the Massoud case specifically mentioned the twin grounds of incitement to violence and threatening national security.
It is not sufficient to advise these countries to restrict their anti-blasphemy laws to cases of incitement to imminent violence or national security. In the era of the Arab spring, these criteria are often satisfied. Take the example of the young Egyptian Copt Gamal Abdou Massoud. His religiously offensive comments about Islam on Facebook led to riots in his village that soon spread to neighboring ones. Seven houses were burnt, both Muslim and Coptic, and a high level meeting between Muslim and Coptic religious leaders was convened to calm the situation. The court sentenced him to three years in prison. One could argue that the anti-blasphemy law was justified in this case. In fact, in reaching its verdict, the court in the Massoud case specifically mentioned the twin grounds of incitement to violence and threatening national security.
Thus a demand upon Egypt that it only criminalize speech that incites to imminent violence may help in some cases, but would not change the result in this case. This speech incited riots. The same can be argued for other cases. In dealing with anti-blasphemy laws in this tinderbox, it is not enough to propose our standards. We need to be cognizant of the local circumstances and tailor a more effective solution to the problem. For example, Amba Yisanti of the Coptic Orthodox Church demanded parity of treatment in blasphemy cases, so that the law applies equally to Muslim offenders. That is a demand we American Muslims should vigorously support along with the previously mentioned standard. It is not only fair through the lens of international justice but also through an Islamic one, a fact that is important in Muslim countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment