Floods, Hudud and Whatever!

Idealistic Malaysians still cannot see how Pakatan Rakayt leaders have an unholy and disunited coalition their forced marriage of convenience – a mockery of the word ‘Pakatan’.

Never before has it being as glaringly clear as it is today that DAP, PAS and PKR have their own agendas and never have they agreed to disagree or to find middle ground.

The country is now facing floods in many areas and the status quo are trying their best to help the rakyat as effectively as they can but all Pakatan Rakyat leaders can do is to hide behind their party flag and condemn the government and worse still, condemn their supposed partners in PR as well.

Lim Kit Siang was born with one mission – to spew filth and to deride anyone who is not on his side.

Donning the thickest blinkers ever created, Lim Kit Siang has bungled big time with his senseless tweet about KLIA2 and despite facing the wrath of netizens, has continued his merry way to castigate anyone but his own party members.

As long as anything can put the status quo in bad light, LKS will jump at the opportunity to make baseless accusations, which supporters will cling to as if it were messages from heaven.

Today, LKS amplified the problems in Manek Urai, Dabong, Kuala Krai and many other places in the east coast. At no point in time, has Lim Kit Siang or his party leaders ever outlined or announced what DAP has done for flood victims. No and NEVER. They are NOT concerned about the victims.

Their main concern is two-fold – magnify the problem and to accuse the government of doing nothing or to put the Prime Minister and his leaders in very negative light.

DAP specializes in SPINNING myths and distorting reality via misperceptions. They are experts in diverting attention from real problems that DAP is facing – such as how they are losing the hudud war against PAS and how Chinese will finally realize that DAP is ever ready to make friends or enemies as long as they can reap benefits and mileage.

For example, when the CEC issue exploded and DAP faced the prospects of being deregistered, they were ready to contest under the PAS flag. DAP even convinced Chinese voters to support PAS using the rationale that PAS would not forge ahead with its hudud plan. In addition, what have we today?

PAS has announced its hudud amendment in Kelantan on Dec 29 and there has been little news about what it is doing in Kelantan for the flood victims.

In that respect, PAS and DAP are similar – both are not concerned about the rakyat, only about themselves. Both are ready to be friends today and enemies tomorrow whenever it suits them.

PAS is not ashamed that Kelantan is one of the poorest states in Malaysia nor are they worried about imposing gender segregation or how tourism and investments in the state have been dwindling.

As for PKR, where was the Kajang adun Dr. Wan Azizah when the flood broke out and what has she done since?

Conveniently, Lim Kit Siang chose to keep a holy silence about this because he needs to warp the perception of citizens. Truth, justice, being concerned and doing what they were ELECTED to do is never a priority. DAP supremacy is THE one and only priority.

Therefore, whether it is floods, hudud or whatever issue plagues the country, you can bet PR leaders will throw temper tantrums because each leader wants to be Frank Sinatra – to do it THEIR way, not the coalition’s way. No wonder, LKS threatened to quit Pakatan meetings if PAS insists on hudud.

However, why didn’t people ask – why quit meetings only? Why not quit the whole coalition and go solo if they always want things their way, if they always feel DAP is THE best party in this nation?

Why are they playing to the galley whenever it suits them? Why are they diverting attention from their failure in the hudud wrangle by slamming the government when DAP has done nothing for flood victims?

It is because they cannot do anything else as it is beyond their ken.

It is time Lim Kit Siang takes lessons from IKHLAS that has achieved milestones in the way they have helped flood victims in Pahang. Scolding, cursing and blaming is not the IKHLAS way (pun intended) – that is reserved for DAP. Real citizens reach out, turun padang and help victims but alas, Lim Kit Siang cannot get his shoes dirty – his mouth is dirty enough and he would like to keep it that way.

Scoring Political Points With Hudud

The motion to debate hudud for Selangor has been withdrawn from the State Legislative Assembly but the gamesmanship between PAS and Umno over who is a bigger champion of Islam is likely to grow more intense.

There was relief all round when Barisan Nasional decided to pull back their motion to debate the prospect of hudud in Selangor.

Many Selangoreans were unhappy when Kamarol Zaki Abdul Malim, the Sungai Air Tawar assemblyman, submitted the hudud motion last week and the Chinese vernacular papers, who see themselves as the watchdog of Chinese cultural rights, had been going to town on the issue.

They could see that it was Umno’s way of saying that it is just as Islamic as PAS. It was about Umno testing PAS’ sincerity over the question of hudud – whether the PAS’ push for hudud is about the faith or about holding on to political power in Kelantan.

The Umno contention was that if it is really about the faith, then PAS should not stop at Kelantan and it should also consider implementing hudud in Selangor.

In other words, what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Umno was also telling PAS that if it wants Umno’s support in Parliament on the hudud Bill, then it should show support for Umno’s motion on hudud in Selangor.

The opinion among many non-Muslims is that the gamesmanship between PAS and Umno is getting too much and that Islam should not be politicised this way.

But just as many people were upset with Selangor Speaker Hannah Yeoh when she announced that she was allowing the motion.

If she knew that Umno is playing “a game” as it has been called, then why allow it to be played in the House?

It left many wondering if she was also into the gamesmanship thing.

The Speaker’s justification for allowing the motion was that she wants to be fair and that the issue should be discussed in the House rather than have “everybody talking about it outside”.

The “fair” part is good but people will go on talking regardless of whether the motion is on or off. In fact, the debate outside would get even louder if the motion went on in the State Assembly.

The sophisticated Selangoreans could see that she was playing politics like everyone else.

The Speaker is from DAP and the perception was that allowing the motion would allow the DAP assemblymen in the House to voice their opposition, to show that they are against hudud.

She should have put her foot down and nipped the whole in the bud.

State government sources said that Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim had been quite upset about the hudud motion.

Yeoh had apparently not informed his office about the move.

Technically, she is not obliged to inform him but social conventions call for it. It is what is known as a matter of courtesy.

Yeoh is still quite new to the job and, thus far, she is still in the shadow of her predecessor Datuk Teng Chang Khim, who is a seasoned lawyer and assemblyman.

It is no secret that relations between the Speaker and the Mentri Besar’s office have been tense following the Bible seizure issue.

Yeoh, who is a vocal Christian, had blamed Khalid for not pushing the matter whereas Khalid’s office suspected that she instigated several junior assemblymen to criticise the state government on the Bible issue.

Relations between Yeoh and the Mentri Besar’s office plunged further following talk to amend the Standing Orders so that the Mentri Besar or State Exco Member could be referred to the powerful Privileges Committee if they did not answer questions raised in the State Assembly.

State government sources said that despite claiming that she wanted to be neutral and fair, Yeoh had been part of a meeting on the State Assembly sitting where the assemblymen who attended were asked not to allow the hudud motion to be passed and where she allegedly suggested the grounds for rejection.

The sources also indicated that she had made inquiries with the Selangor Palace before deciding to allow the motion to be tabled.

Neither side has really scored any real point on the matter.

But Yeoh, by allowing the motion, may have unwittingly set a precedent for her counterpart in Parliament when PAS tables the Private Members’ Bill later this year.

“DAP may have lost the moral authority to pressure the Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat not to allow the motion. She (Yeoh) has opened the gate and the next state to follow will probably be Kedah. I am talking about a domino effect,” said a Penang lawyer who has been following the developments.

The lawyer pointed out that if Yeoh had stopped it in Selangor, she would have set a precedent of sorts in safeguarding the Constitutional rights of Malaysians.

In the meantime, the hudud gamesmanship between PAS and Umno will intensify as each tries to appear holier than the other.

Joceline Tan, The Star

Who Is Playing Hooded Political Stunts?

On June 12, 2014, the Speaker for Selangor Assembly approved the motion to discuss implementing the Islamic penal code in the country's most developed state. ( http://tinyurl.com/puqhc4x)

Why would someone from a party that supposedly opposes hudud do such a thing? 

DAP Damansara Utama assemblywoman Yeo Bee Yin then questioned if MCA would be able to stand up to Umno on the issue of hudud in the recent motion submitted by Umno Sungai Air Tawar assemblyman Kamarol Zaki Abdul Malik for debate in the coming state assembly sitting. (http://tinyurl.com/n4j9lkz)

Why would a representative from a party that supposedly opposes hudud APPROVE a motion to discuss hudud and then allow other members to talk down to MCA?

MCA has since demanded that Umno president Datuk Seri Najib Razak punish the Selangor representatives who submitted the motion and demand that it be withdrawn. (http://tinyurl.com/knndssb)

Today, DAP’s Tony Pua asked today if MCA was admitting to be nothing but a voiceless “flower vase” in Barisan Nasional (BN) when its leaders called on the DAP to trash the hudud motion even though it was tabled by its own allies in Umno. ( http://tinyurl.com/q4kau9f)

Why are DAP members picking on MCA regarding hudud when its Speaker herself allowed the motion for the debate? 

Why didn't DAP members themselves speak up in tandem with their supposed stand on hudud?

PJ Utara MP Tony Pua has come forward in defence of Selangor State Assembly Speaker Hannah Yeoh saying motions from all representatives would be heard in a proper democracy. (http://tinyurl.com/k9svl6v)

If that be the case, why did Tony Pua refer to MCA as a flower vase in BN if he believes in 'proper' democracy?

This afternoon, The Star said: Selangor Barisan Nasional has withdrawn a motion to debate the possibility of implementing hudud law in the state. (http://tinyurl.com/nja2aoq)

Lo and behold, what happened?

The Selangor Speaker has put Barisan Nasional (BN) on notice, telling the coalition to stop playing political games with the state assembly after Selangor Umno withdrew a motion on hudud.

Hannah Yeoh, who received a lot of flak over her decision to table the motion, said she felt the move was a political stunt. 

“The State Assembly is not a place for any member to play political games. I view this move by the assemblyman from Umno as a blatant political stunt. 

“If an assemblyman is not ready or prepared to debate or stand by his motion, he should never have wasted the state assembly’s time by tabling it in the first place,” she said. 

Yeoh said that every assemblyperson had an inherent duty to uphold the integrity and preserve the sanctity of the state assembly by not treating it carelessly and haphazardly. 

“No reason was provided for his decision to withdraw the motion. A member may, by notice in writing to the Clerk, withdraw any notice of motion previously given by him, as per Standing Order 29 (1). (http://tinyurl.com/kzuxdv2)

If she has such strong feelings about the motion, why did she approve it in the first place??????

Democracy? 

Lawyer Tommy Thomas yesterday said he was shocked that she allowed the debate as it was unconstitutional, arguing that state assemblies have no business discussing a criminal issue outside their legislative competence.

Thomas said hudud is a revolutionary concept that should be nipped in the bud, instead of encouraged.

BN component party MCA also joined the fray and urged Yeoh to reject the motion, with its state deputy chairman Datuk Donald Lim Siang Chai saying the debate on hudud is not important and a discussion on the possibility of implementing it in Selangor is a waste of time.

(http://tinyurl.com/kzuxdv2)

And now the latest news:

 MCA today claimed “victory” over Selangor Umno’s withdrawal of a motion to debate on hudud in the state assembly sitting scheduled to reconvene on Monday.

“With the withdrawal of the motion which was straightforward, MCA has proven its mettle in functioning as a gatekeeper to ensure the spirit of Barisan Nasional (BN),” MCA deputy president Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said.

“Similarly, we hope DAP in Pakatan will play a more prominent gatekeeper’s function on hudud law issues to prove that DAP has some form of power within and outside Pakatan.”

Wee said, however, DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang’s move in rushing to Kelantan to clarify that DAP did not blame PAS nor hudud for the defeat of the party’s candidate Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud at the Teluk Intan by-election, showed that DAP was so powerless that it was unable to defend its own words and position.

“In the same vein, I urge DAP to play a bigger role within the Pakatan coalition, ie, DAP must curb PAS from its plan to table a Private Member’s Bill during the September session of the Dewan Rakyat to formally implement hudud in Kelantan,” Wee said in a statement today.

Wee added although Selangor Umno’s motion only required a debate on the study on the probability of implementing hudud law, Pakatan leaders had deliberately distorted the motion likening it to an intention to implement, which Wee said was not the case.

“Pakatan leaders had deliberately twisted the truth while Selangor Umno had no desire to implement hudud law.”

He added DAP which held the largest Opposition bloc in the Dewan Rakyat with 37 seats, should play a better role on national issues.

This, he said, was to prevent the country falling under a theocratic regime through the implementation of hudud.

“DAP should implore PAS to abandon its hope of achieving a theocratic rule. The first step is for PAS to give up its proposal to table a Private Member’s Bill to implement hudud law in Kelantan.”

Today, Selangor BN assemblymen agreed to withdraw the motion asking the state government to study the possibility of implementing hudud, the Islamic penal code.

Opposition leader in the state assembly, Datuk Mohd Shamsudin Lias, said the move was to allow the 15 PAS assemblymen to table the motion themselves as implementing hudud was in PAS’ agenda.

(http://tinyurl.com/jvkbjug)

Well done, MCA!

So, after this series of unfortunate events, who is the one playing hooded political stunts on hudud?

You be the judge!

*Haden Hoo is NOT a member of MCA or any political party.

Can We Have An Honest Answer Please, Dyana?

Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) should remain a Malay-only institution, said its pro-chancellor, Tan Sri Dr Abdul Rahman Arshad.

Tan Sri Dr Rahman was responding to a call by DAP's Teluk Intan by-election candidate, Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud, for equal access to public institutions of higher learning in Malaysia.

Tan Sri Dr Rahman argued that UiTM was set up based on Article 153 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and stressed that Bumiputera privileges should not be questioned.

 This is clearly a move by DAP to court the Chinese voters who are said to be divided as to whether to vote for DAP or Barisan Nasional in the by-election. However, to touch sensitive matters such as UiTM and Article 153 of the Constitution is a very risky strategy because this just turns the campaign into a Malay versus non-Malay contest.

Dyana Sofya had also earlier made a statement regarding the Islamic Sharia law of Hudud. In that statement, which Malaysiakini published on Youtube, Dyana Sofya indicated that she is opposed to Hudud, as this is her party’s stand.

Today she refused to comment on the matter, probably realising that her earlier comment was counter-productive.

An election or by-election is the platform and opportunity for candidates to explain their party’s policy and ideology to the voters. This is where you inform the voters as to what your party’s stand is. You cannot tell the voters you refuse to comment about this or that when asked because that would mean you are not being open and are hiding certain things from the voters.

If DAP is opposed to Article 153 and UiTM as a Malay-only institution, plus you is opposed to PAS pushing for Islamic laws, then this must be very clearly stated so that the voters will know the stand of the party they are being asked to vote for.

It is dishonest for the party to ask the voters for their votes but then refuse to tell the voters what their stand is regarding very sensitive issues like Article 153, UiTM and Hudud.

Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) should remain a Malay-only institution, said its pro-chancellor, Tan Sri Dr Abdul Rahman Arshad.

Tan Sri Dr Rahman was responding to a call by DAP's Teluk Intan by-election candidate, Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud, for equal access to public institutions of higher learning in Malaysia.

Tan Sri Dr Rahman argued that UiTM was set up based on Article 153 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and stressed that Bumiputera privileges should not be questioned.

 This is clearly a move by DAP to court the Chinese voters who are said to be divided as to whether to vote for DAP or Barisan Nasional in the by-election. However, to touch sensitive matters such as UiTM and Article 153 of the Constitution is a very risky strategy because this just turns the campaign into a Malay versus non-Malay contest.

Dyana Sofya had also earlier made a statement regarding the Islamic Sharia law of Hudud. In that statement, which Malaysiakini published on Youtube, Dyana Sofya indicated that she is opposed to Hudud, as this is her party’s stand.

Today she refused to comment on the matter, probably realising that her earlier comment was counter-productive.

An election or by-election is the platform and opportunity for candidates to explain their party’s policy and ideology to the voters. This is where you inform the voters as to what your party’s stand is. You cannot tell the voters you refuse to comment about this or that when asked because that would mean you are not being open and are hiding certain things from the voters.

If DAP is opposed to Article 153 and UiTM as a Malay-only institution, plus you is opposed to PAS pushing for Islamic laws, then this must be very clearly stated so that the voters will know the stand of the party they are being asked to vote for.

It is dishonest for the party to ask the voters for their votes but then refuse to tell the voters what their stand is regarding very sensitive issues like Article 153, UiTM and Hudud.

 ________________________

BOLEHKAH DYANA SOFYA MEMBERI REAKSI YANG JUJUR?

Oleh SSK

Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) perlu kekal sebagai satu-satunya institusi Melayu, kata Pro Canselor Tan Sri Dr Abdul Rahman Arshad.

Tan Sri Dr Rahman mengulas gesaan calon DAP dalam pilihan raya kecil Parlimen Teluk Intan Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud agar peluang samarata diberikan kepada semua untuk memasuki institusi pengajian tinggi awam di negara ini.

Justeru itu, Tan Sri Dr Rahman berhujah bahawa UiTM ditubuhkan berdasarkan peruntukan Perkara 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia dan seterusnya menekankan bahawa hak atau keistimewaan Bumiputera tidak harus dipersoalkan.

Jelas sekali, ini merupakan taktik DAP untuk meraih sokongan pengundi Cina yang kini berada di persimpangan jalan sama ada menyokong DAP atau Barisan Nasional (BN) pada pilihan raya kecil itu. Bagaimanapun, strategi kempen yang menyentuh isu sensitif bakal mengundang risiko kerana kemungkinan ia akan merubah senario kepada persaingan Melayu lawan Cina atau bukan Melayu.

Sebelum ini, Dyana Sofya telah membuat kenyataan mengenai Hudud -- Undang-Undang Syariah Islam. Dalam kenyataan itu, yang Malaysiakini muatkan di Youtube, Dyana Sofya menunjukkan dia menentang Hudud kerana itulah pendirian parti yang diwakilinya.

Hari ini Dyana Sofya enggan mengulas mengenai perkara itu mungkin kerana menyedari komennya sebelum ini tidak memberi impak yang diharapkan.

Pilihan raya atau pilihan raya kecil merupakan platform dan peluang untuk calon-calon untuk menerangkan dasar dan ideologi parti mereka kepada pengundi. Disinilah mereka memperjelaskan kepada pengundi tentang pendirian parti. Mereka tidak sepatutnya memberitahu kepada pengundi "tidak mahu memberi komen" apabila ditanya tentang sesuatu perkara kerana ia bermakna mereka tidak bersifat terbuka dan menyembunyikan sesuatu perkara dari pengetahuan pengundi.

Jika DAP tidak bersetuju dengan peruntukan Perkara 153 dan UiTM sebagai sebuah institusi Melayu, dan menentang usaha PAS menggunapakai undang-undang Islam, maka ini perlu dinyatakan dengan jelas supaya pengundi akan tahu pendirian parti yang mereka undi.

Adalah tidak jujur bagi parti untuk meminta sokongan daripada pengundi tetapi enggan menyatakan pendirian sebenar mengenai isu-isu yang sensitif seperti Perkara 153, UiTM dan Hudud.

By Salleh Said Keruak 
Timbalan Pengerusi Badan Perhubungan Umno Sabah

‘Penang CM gave tacit support for hudud’

Independent candidate for the Bukit Gelugor by-election Mohamed Nabi Bux claims Lim secretly made it known to the PAS leadership

GEORGE TOWN: Bukit Gelugor independent candidate Mohamed Nabi Bux Mohamed Abdul Sathar alleged today that DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng tacitly supported the implementation of hudud in Kelantan.

Claiming that he had received the information from reliable PAS sources, Nabi Bux alleged that Lim had secretly made the pledge to the PAS leadership, and that he had never rejected it.

Thus, he questioned why Lim rejected the implementation of hudud in Penang when he supported it in the east-coast state of Kelantan.

“I’m certain that Lim would eventually support the implementation of hudud in the country,” said Nabi Bux after a morning walkabout in the constituency here.

Nabi Bux allegation is shocking given Lim’s open declaration that the DAP would never support implementation of hudud in the country.

Lim had promised that his Pakatan Rakyat state government would never allow the Islamist criminal law to be implemented in Penang.

Lim has also vehemently objected to PAS’ plan to table a hudud parliamentary bill to implement the law in Kelantan. But Nabi Bux claimed that Lim was using the anti-hudud sentiments to fish for votes.

‘Ramkarpal has no say in DAP’

Pix 1Nabi Bux alleged that Lim and DAP publicly put on a show as if they were against hudud when in fact they were secretly supporting it, playing a political game.

“As a PAS member, I know Guan Eng has never opposed implementation of hudud, But he does not declare it openly. He is using it to gain support from PAS and the people,” alleged Nabi Bux.

Nabi Bux, 63, faces DAP’s Ramkarpal Singh Deo, Parti Cinta Malaysia (PCM) vice-president Huan Cheng Guan and another independent, Abu Backer Sidek Mohamad Zan, 46, in the fight for Bukit Gelugor parliamentary constituency.

The federal seat fell vacant after incumbent MP and Ramkarpal’s father Karpal Singh was killed in a highway accident near Kampar, Perak on April 17.

According to Election Commission latest data, Bukit Gelugor has 82,431 voters comprising 61,267 or 74.33% Chinese, 11,913 or 14.46% Malays, 8,848 or 10.73% Indians and 403 or 0.49% others.
Pix 7The late Karpal polled 55,839 votes to score a massive majority victory of 41,778 votes against Barisan Nasional candidate Teh Beng Yeam, who could just garner 14,061 votes, in the 2013 general election.

Polling day is on Sunday May 25.

Nabi Bux also fired broadside at favourite Ramkarpal, claiming that the DAP candidate would not have much say or standing in the party, unlike his late father, even if he was elected as MP next week,.

“Lim’s stand on hudud is far more important as he is DAP secretary general. Ramkarpal is just an ordinary member so his stand does not count. He just joined the DAP. He has no standing in the party,” claimed Nabi Bux.

FMT

Malaysia's hudud whodunit

As celebrated science fiction writer and visionary Isaac Asimov once warned us, ignorance should not be the basis of opposition to a thought or idea; if you want to oppose something, make sure you know what it is that you are opposing, and more importantly your reason for it.

As he once said: “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge’.”

It is a lesson that some critics of the proposal to implement Islamic penal code of hudud law in PAS-held Kelantan, for many of them it seems are shouting this same line Asimov warned us of, “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge”.

The topic was explored in his fictional works in the Foundation series, on how critics of a planet spanning “foundation” worlds would criticise the charter by which their civilisation operated, at times without real understanding of the problems or any real concern at all, to many it was politics.

One character, if I remember correctly, was even proud to say how he was opposing the document without even having any real knowledge of its details.

Similarly some parties made much ado about hudud without even actually understanding what it is, after Pakatan Rakyat component PAS sought to table two Private Member’s Parliamentary Bills to give legal weight to a 1993 Kelantan state enactment that allows the Islamic party to implement hudud in the state it administers.

The most glaring of this are the warnings from various critics, mostly political players from Pakatan and the BN with something to gain by their protest of hudud, as it is leverage for support of the non-Muslims, and perhaps Muslims who live not by the tenets of their faith.
They have formed the misconceived notion that under hudud, victims of rape must provide four witnesses who saw the act with their very eyes, using this as a bogeyman of their anti-hudud campaign, or worse intentionally proceeded using the misinformation in their protest to stir up the hornet’s nest, so to speak.

A misconception between the standard of evidence required to convict Muslims for out of wedlock sex and the altogether different set of rules for treating the crime of rape and violence against women which is abhorrent in Islam.

In rape cases, Muslim learned judges have written that the physical and investigative evidence of the crime is sufficient as is a confession by the perpetrator.

And therein lies the problem as hudud is but a small portion of the Islamic justice system. The real breadth of which even I as a Muslim does not really know as it is a system unfairly reviled for being linked to chopping of hands and beheading and has not been practised by most Muslim countries in its real form.

It is at the extreme end of the spectrum, the harsh punishment as deterrent but the standards of evidence required to convict under hudud are also very high.

Whereas, if the cases fail the strict hudud test of evidence, they shall be judged under takzir, which relies on the wisdom and justice of independent judges, a less restrictive system that is much like the English system of justice ours was built on, giving the judge leeway to choose from punishments available and if to suspend any sentence.

Indeed, even the seeming monster of hudud is also apparent in many Western justice systems where there is mandatory capital or corporal punishments with no alternative or recourse.

But in a way, one cannot blame critics of hudud for the way it is being practised in some countries that call themselves Islamic like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia showcased problems when cultural and patriarchal elements creep in leading to whipping of rape victims or laws prohibiting women from driving.


Indeed Asimov’s warning on knowing what you oppose should in reverse also apply to those seeking to implement what they say is God’s law.

Those who are looking to implement hudud should also be sure that they know what they are doing. As the cases in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have shown, even God’s law, when implemented by human hands can be corrupted and misused.

Which brings us to the real concern about hudud -- the fear that manipulations and miscarriage of the legal system by the powers that be will see hudud become another draconian law. With Umno-led BN at the federal helm, this fear is not unfounded.


And most dangerous of all, there has been no news at all of how hudud will be implemented and how the takzir part will be handled, nor is there any detailed explanation of how hudud is to be adapted into the system of not only the courts but also enforcement.

Because it is not only the courts that need to be prepped but also the police and religious enforcement officers, for Muslims to be investigated will require a separate set of laws if they are to be tried under hudud for what would normally be Penal Code offences.

Are the police prepared? Do we have the judges trained and ready? Are there correctional department personnel trained to administer hudud punishments?

One must consider, police are not even trained up on most regular laws, our courts are already strained and what more our prisons. Can we do it in one day? I doubt.

What is needed here is a round table for all sides to meet, the hudud proponents, its detractors, legal experts and religious scholars, to come up with a framework in detail on what they plan to do, addressing the fears of those opposing it.

If those from PAS so eager to implement hudud were to remember, they and Pakatan made the same argument against the Goods and Services tax (GST).

The government needs to sit down and plan and explain GST, they said. Well, PAS should do the same with its hudud plan.

Don’t get me wrong, as a Muslim I am all for hudud, but I would rather see it done right than implemented wrongly and all the more shame Islam and tarnish its image.

I remember what the PAS Kelantan government under former MB Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat said when asked why they did not implement hudud years after the enactment was passed.

The state government wisely responded that the problem was not really implementation but dakwah and education. They believe it is time first to show Muslims and non-Muslims what hudud is and the Islamic justice system really is, to explain, to educate and to get their feedback.

I think the same applies to the current state authorities. It is time for dakwah and education, or else risk having what is supposed to be the Islamic way of life under God’s law becoming the misbegotten creation of the very human traits of impatience and ignorance.



- Hazlan Zakaria, The Ant Daily-

Pakatan to break up soon?

‘Pakatan split inevitable, says Zahid’ – that was one of the stories carried in one of our local English dailies dated May 6, 2014.

Much has been talked about the health of the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) coalition these days especially in regard to the hudud issue.

Although the mainstream media has made a big issue of the so-called impending split, Nizar Jamaluddin, the PAS Changkat Jering state assemblyman, is of the view that as long as PR does not fall into the enemy’s trap, it is PR who will remain strong while the enemy will experience a rift in their working relationship.

The key to the hudud issue is for all of PR’s component parties to stay calm and not react to the instigation or provocations of the enemy.

Khalid Samad, the PAS Shah Alam MP, commented that “Pakatan will not break up if everyone works together in order to handle the hudud issue well.”

Added Khalid, “Moreover DAP opposing hudud is nothing new as DAP has been opposing it since Day 1. We agree to disagree on this issue and we will most definitely be going all out to help DAP win their upcoming parliamentary by-elections in Bukit Gelugor and Teluk Intan.”

Whatever is said up till this point in time, it must be noted that DAP and PKR both knew of PAS Islamic struggle even before PR was formed in April 2008.

Therefore the hudud issue should never act as a catalyst for the breaking up of Pakatan Rakyat and it would be tragic if PR was to go the way of Barisan Alternatif 10 years ago.

Mistakes should never be repeated.

Former Kuala Selangor MP, Dzulkefly Ahmad of PAS, remarked that he is the eternal optimist and what PR is going through now will only serve to strengthen the coalition.

The enemy will surely capitalise on the hudud issue to weaken Pakatan by saying that the late Karpal Singh who held the Bukit Gelugor seat was a strong opponent of hudud, never mind that he was opposing it based on arguments from the Federal Constitution.

Therefore DAP and PAS must work together to counter this point that will surely be raised a thousand and one times during these by-election campaigns.

In actual fact, hudud aside, DAP and PAS have a very good working relationship. Take for instance in the 2008 general election when they worked well together to capture the very tough Changkat Jong state seat which falls under the parliamentary seat of Teluk Intan.

This seat which was won by PAS in 2008 was lost to BN in 2013 when the 30% Indian voters in Changkat Jong who had wanted M Manogaran (the incumbent) to contest in Teluk Intan had protested by not coming out to vote.

(M Manogaran was instead sent to Cameron Highlands late wherein he acquitted himself well, losing only to MIC’s G Palanivel by 462 votes with 877 votes being spoilt.) This shows that the contributions of every race is equally important in PR.

And PR leaders must therefore learn from this and not allow any issue to become a contentious issue in Pakatan.

PR will hold firm

At this point in time, MCA is still pushing DAP to stop PAS from attempting to implement hudud in Kelantan via a tabling of a Private Member’s Bill in Parliament next month.

A PAS insider who spoke on condition of anonymity had informed this columnist thus, “Don’t worry, let PAS go ahead, I cannot say more but I dare to say that PR will hold firm.”

Still, the general public is getting a bad impression of PR as an unstable coalition because no one knows what is really going on behind the scenes.

The best thing for everyone in PR to do would be not issuing statements every now and then because these statements confuse the rakyat or worsen the situation.

The more statements that are issued by PR leaders, the more fodder is given to the enemy to spin about.
From now on, any response from Pakatan on the hudud issue should be a united statement. Otherwise, silence is golden because some of these statements are quite unsettling to the public and the supporters of PR.

PR leaders must strive to control the hudud issue or else they will be controlled by the hudud issue.

Currently PR leaders seem to come across as losing focus and losing direction. The hudud issue has taken up much of their time when they should be working the ground to explain the GST (Goods & Services Tax) to the rakyat as the government will be employing 500 people to do so.

Pakatan leaders must focus their attention on urgent issues at hand. Otherwise they will lose the support of the rakyat.

To-date, PR is the most viable coalition acting as a check and balance against the BN federal government. It would be a great pity if PR is dissolved.

Indeed it would be a very sad day if Pakatan ceases to exist because the people’s hopes for a two-party system would then be gone forever.

FMT

Punish DAP over hudud, Bkt Gelugor voters told

Bukit Gelugor voters must punish DAP if it fails to stop PAS from tabling a Private Member’s Bill on hudud, Parti Cinta Malaysia vice-president Huan Cheng Guan said today.

The Gerakan former vice president, who declared his intention to contest the parliament seat last week, was speaking to reporters after launching his by-election operations centre in Air Itam today.

Huan said the recent hudud push by PAS has left Penangites worried and urged DAP to  immediately stop its ally from tabling the Bill, which would see the implementation of the Islamic criminal jurisprudence in Kelantan, when Parliament resumes on June 9.

"Since DAP has 38 MP seats, almost double that of PAS’ 21, it is certainly within DAP’s influence to stop PAS and it is definitely DAP's responsibility to fulfill their pre-GE13 reassurance that PAS will not implement hudud law.

"If DAP is unable to stop PAS by voting day (May 25), voters of Bukit Gelugor must take the opportunity of this by-election to withdraw support for DAP and send a strong message to the party that if it cannot stop PAS then DAP should be prepared for heavy loss of support in the 14th general election," he added.

During the launch of his centre, Huan (left) also presented a moving eulogy for the late Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh, who died in a road accident on April 17.

Nomination day is on Monday, and to date, the Penang Front Party - a coalition of 44 anti-DAP NGOs and Jelutong resident Yacoob Mohd Noor, have offered themselves to contest the seat, other than DAP.

MCA, which lost heavily by 41,778 votes to Karpal in the May 5 polls last year, have yet to confirm if it would be contesting the seat.

Five pressing issues

Meanwhile, Huan said he would withdraw his candidacy if the Penang government can assure him that the state is in "good hands".

He said the state needs to give him this assurance between now and voting day as he is concerned about five pressing issues that pose "a major threat to Penang and her citizens".

Huan questioned if the Penang government can honour and fulfill the late Karpal's last two requests to the state leadership which have gone unheeded.

The first request, he noted, was in July last year, when Karpal wanted tougher punishments for the culprits responsible for the famous Bukit Gambir "bald" hill incident.

Huan said Karpal's second request was in January this year when he wanted the Penang government to use its two-thirds majority to challenge the banning of the use of 40 words for non-Muslims which was enforced on April 29, 2010.

Other concerns about Penang is the state's investment which have "plummeted" more than 73 percent and from number one position in 2011 to sixth place in 2012 and fourth place in 2013, just barely ahead of Sabah.

Huan said the figures for January to March this year shows Penang at a distant fifth place with top-place Sarawak getting almost 10 times the investments of Penang so far.

"Even more worrying is that most of the investment into Penang these past years have come from domestic sources and related to property development and not the foreign investments that can generate high-quality jobs for Penang people.

"The chief minister is on record to say that IKEA is a 'critical economic catalyst' for Penang. I fail to see how a furniture seller can be considered as such," he added.

"If the Penang government finds it hard to work with the federal government to push up the state's investment, perhaps I could help if I were elected the MP," Huan quipped.

Other concerns Huan raised included the "worrying trend" where the state's yearly expenses have almost doubled from 2008 to 2012, while normal tax revenues have essentially remained flat and  declined in 2012.

He claimed that Penang is able to cover this doubling of expenses by generating revenue of more than 1,000 percent from sales of state land and assets in 2012 compared to 2008.

He also urged the Penang government to immediately declassify and release the agreement for the controversial proposed Penang tunnel project.

"I understand that there is a Freedom of Information Act within Penang that allows this," he added.

Hudud portends bad news for DAP in coming polls

For the DAP, which feels obliged to retain its parliamentary seats in Bukit Gelugor and Teluk Intan in the two by-elections this month, the exacerbation of the debate over hudud is portending some worse things to come for the party.

While Bukit Gelugor and Teluk Intan are Chinese-majority constituencies, comprising 75 percent and 42 percent of Chinese voters respectively, the controversy over hudud is expected to be “trump card” for DAP's rivals, given that mudslinging occurs widely during elections.

DAP will be facing MCA in Bukit Gelugor and Gerakan in Teluk Intan.

Should the two Chinese-dominant parties of the BN attack DAP by playing up on hudud, there is no chance for the country’s biggest opposition party to avoid addressing several questions, such as how to stop the implementation of hudud, and to resolve the fissure between Pakatan and PAS in particular.

Working closely together among the Pakatan component parties DAP, PKR and PAS is crucial for the mixed seat of Teluk Intan, which comprises 38 percent Malay voters, as DAP will need the assistance of PAS to penetrate those areas.

‘DAP has failed to protect the Chinese’

Penang MCA’s deputy chairperson Tan Teik Cheng is of the opinion that the Bukit Gelugor by-election is the opportunity for MCA to tell the Chinese that “DAP has failed to protect the Chinese” and that “PAS is beyond DAP's control”.

“PAS insists on tabling a Private Member's Bill on hudud in Parliament, but DAP can't do anything about this... the Chinese must see this clearly,” Tan (right) told Malaysiakini when contacted.

He said MCA leaders would go all out to tell the Chinese how DAP “betrays” the community by asking them to support PAS that proposed hudud bill which is pervasive to non-Muslim.

However, the late incumbent MP Karpal Singh's thumping victory with a majority of more than 42,000 votes in the 2013 general election could well indicate that MCA only has a slim chance of taking the tiger's den.

The intense debate on hudud took on another angle when Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom told Parliament on March 27 that Putrajaya was willing to assist the PAS-led Kelantan government to implement hudud.

After Kelantan government gave positive response by proposing the tabling of a Private Member's Bill in the forthcoming session of Parliament, it went on to form a joint technical task force with the federal government to push for hudud.

DAP must explain the ‘mess’ to the people

In Perak, the state DAP secretary Wong Kah Woh said the urgent task for the party leaders now was to explain to the Chinese constituents that Umno was the one that initiated the mess.

“We need to explain to the voters, once again, that DAP is against hudud, and they need to know Umno is the first that challenged PAS (to table the hudud Bill),” said Wong (right), who is the Canning assemblyperson.

As for by-election strategy, he reminded Pakatan leaders not to follow the tones set by BN, but to keep highlighting issues of corruption, the much criticised goods and services tax and the country’s education system.

Despite calls from several top DAP leaders for PAS to quit Pakatan if did not back down on its theocratic goals, some Pakatan leaders maintained that the allies remained cooperative with one another.

Perak PAS deputy chairperson Nizar Jamaluddin told Malaysiakini that his party would “do its level best” in the campaign for the Teluk Intan seat.

“Umno tries to split us (Pakatan), but look, the revolts from non-Muslim parties in BN, like MCA and Gerakan, and the Christian leaders in East Malaysia, are greater than (opposition to hudud from) DAP and PKR... there is no rift within Pakatan,” Nizar said.

The former Perak menteri besar pointed out that the voters in semi-urban Teluk Intan were concerned about local issues, rather than hudud.

Meanwhile, PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu said hudud “is far from the implementation stage” and this would not bring any negative impact upon the DAP in the coming by-elections.

“Hudud remains at the discussion stage so far, without any concrete outcome... PAS will go all out to campaign,” said Mat Sabu, who is also Penang PAS commissioner.

'Hudud not a key issue in mixed seats'

However, Gerakan remains cautious about using the hudud issue as one of its weapons in the Teluk Intan campaign.

This is due to considerations to ensure that the 38 percent of the Malay voters in the mixed seat are not offended by Gerakan's aggressive objection against the Islamic penal system, as this may result in a possible loss of Malay votes.

To this, Teluk Intan Gerakan division acting chairperson Choo Weng Kee said the party should note that the Changkat Jong state seat under Teluk Intan a Malay-majority area.

“We must explain to the Malays mildly. We are not anti-Islam by being against hudud, but that such a system is not suitable in Malaysian context,” Choo said.

Malaysiakini

The maze of hudud: its politics and its implications

PAS has expressed its intention to table a Private Member’s Bill in Parliament next month to pave the way for the PAS-led Kelantan government to implement hudud law in the state. The PAS-dominated Kelantan state assembly had passed the Islamic penal law in 1993.

In 2002, the PAS-controlled Terengganu state assembly too passed the Hudud Bill for implementation in the state. Recently, the Umno-led Perlis state government also expressed its intention to implement hudud law in the country’s smallest state. Even the Selangor Umno chief Datuk Noh Omar has openly voiced his support for hudud.

Given this trend, many of us are beginning to voice our concerns over the proposed implementation of hudud. It looks like hudud is slowly getting its foot in. Some said that hudud is unconstitutional, against human rights and does not serve any “proper justice”.

Arguments aside, there are also vast differences between theory and practice. One will find instances of criminal categories, procedures and punishments that do not really conform to the reality.

Our Federal Constitution has again shown its weaknesses by allowing states to come up with many kinds of religious laws that may or will come into conflict with one another or even with the civil laws. There are concerns on whether the religious authorities now could take over with regard to criminal matters and what the roles of the police and other law enforcement agencies are.

There is also the question of which law should take precedence and how the laws should be interpreted.

The other issue here is whether the religious or civil law may be weaker or greater in terms enforcement, punishment and applicability. As such, irresponsible people may take advantage of this kind of situation by way of converting to the said religion. We had witnessed the most recent custodial battle which has been turned into a religious battle just because one parent had converted and taken advantage of his religious standing.

So, is there any proper law which is supreme to neutralise the situation if such confusion continues to disrupt some legal process here? Worst of all, there is the danger of an alternative Syariah kind of federal constitution emerging if the extreme situation is not checked and resolved.

Then on the political side, when PAS’ intention to proceed with the Private Member’s Bill on hudud was made known, both sides of the divide, Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat, raced to either support or condemn the idea.

Umno in the early stage had opposed PAS’ hudud plan but suddenly shifted its view and gave its support for the Syariah law to be implemented. As of today, MCA and Gerakan, which are both component parties of the Umno-led BN, have strongly criticised and blamed PAS’ partners in Pakatan -- DAP and PKR -- for their failure to stop PAS from going ahead with its hudud plan.

It has also been noted that MCA and Gerakan dared not oppose Umno over its support for hudud. So far, the other non-Muslim BN component parties, namely PPP, SUPP, SPDP, PRS, LDP, Upko, PBS and MIC, have not been actively opposing the hudud.

DAP has shown that it has been an equal partner in Pakatan by strongly objecting to the PAS hudud, even to the extent of calling on the Islamist party to quit the coalition if it is adamant about going ahead with its plan.

PKR has not shown its official stand but some of its leaders have voiced their objections to hudud individually. Currently, PKR has been preoccupied with its internal party elections.

Will MCA or Gerakan dare to caution Umno on its support for hudud, bearing in mind that Umno has 88 members of parliament (MPs) compared to PAS which has 21 MPs? This clearly shows that Umno is a willing kingmaker of the hudud plan.

Umno has officially voiced its support for hudud and for PAS to go ahead with its Private Member’s Bill for the same. One wonders if MCA, which has seven MPS, and Gerakan with one MP are going to break ranks with Umno to vote against the bill. Opposing the bill in public with all their press conferences is insufficient. Are MCA and Gerakan MPs brave enough to set aside their traditional “toe the line” policy and vote against Umno’s support in Parliament?

As everyone is aware the hudud has been heavily politicised and taken advantage off. Not only Umno is now supporting hudud, but racist and extremist groups such as Perkasa and Isma have also jumped onto the bandwagon, thus complicating an already sensitive subject.

What now? Just let the hudud undergo the democratic process in Parliament next month. Only then can we see the true colours of the politicians. From there on, all political parties which are involved in this battle should clearly redraw their political lines to ensure the public interests are looked into.

By Viktor Wong, a socio-political analyst who wants a better Malaysia, one that is run by a clean government that respects the people, human rights and the rule of law that does not politicise issues of race, religion and the rulers.

- The Ant Daily-

Citizens of equal status, not trespassers

Translated by SOONG PHUI JEE
Sin Chew Daily

President of newly emerged radical group Ikatan Muslim in Malaysia (Isma), Abdullah Zaik Abdullah Rahman recently made a statement, calling Malaysian Chinese "trespassers". He claimed that the British were in cohorts with the Chinese to oppress and bully the Malays, while questioning the citizenship and wealth given to the Chinese.

Prior to this, Abdullah had also warned non-Muslim not to fight against the implementation of hudud.

Although claiming itself a religious group, it is actually an extreme rightist group like Perkasa. Based on racism and narrow-minded religious view, it puts itself on a supreme position. Particularly on political and religious issues, its viewpoints tend to be conservative and closed. It excludes the status and interests of other races, while being hostile to the liberals.

The country's politics has shown a trend of polarisation and during the times with the rise of religious conservatives, groups like Isma and Perkasa are attractive in the conservative community and recognised by many people who are dissatisfied with the status quo. Once they gain support, they become more distorted and make more sensitive remarks excluding and slandering other races.

Such "trespassers" remarks are actually more lethal than "immigrants" remarks in the past, bringing a stronger intention to stir up racial sentiments.

Abdullah Zaik takes the Chinese as "trespassers" instead of citizens of equal status and he has also been trying to deny the contribution of the Chinese in the formation of the country. He claimed that the Chinese obtain citizenship and wealth through oppression and bullying others.

Such a distorted argument is not only a slander to the Chinese, but also a provocation against the national idea. Under the constitution and the national founding spirit, the status and rights of all Malaysians must be respected, and not be violated.

Calling the Chinese "trespassers" has not only hurt the feelings and dignity of Malaysian Chinese, but also misled the perception of some Malays. If such remarks are left to ferment, it will definitely destroy social harmony and trust.

It is a correct and necessary move for the police to investigate Abdullah Zaik under the Sedition Act 1948, and the people are waiting to see whether he will be charged after the investigation is completed.

If he is only investigated but not changed, it will not bring a deterrent effect. No legal action has been taken against those involved in similar cases in the past and thus, various sensational and extreme remarks have been made, challenging the rule of law, harming social harmony and unity, and victimising the country and the people.

Along with legal actions, leaders of the ruling and alternative coalitions must also publicly make clear their stand of opposing to Isma and Abdullah Zaik. It is not only to express their stand, but also convey a message that as a multi-cultural country, Malaysia must shape a united and harmonious society to maintain stability and promote progress.

Don't make rash decisions, Khairy tells MCA

Speculation has been rife that the hudud controversy may rip apart Pakatan Rakyat. But similar fissures are appearing in BN as well.

In an attempt to contain a possible fallout, Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin has urged MCA not to make any rash decisions regarding this matter.

He was commenting on MCA deputy president Wee Ka Siong's remark that the party should review its position in BN given that Umno is backing PAS' plan to implement hudud.

However, Khairy said Wee's statement was made based on assumptions since government had yet to make any decision.

"So I hope there is no ultimatum from any quarters based on assumptions regarding the Private Member's Bill (on hudud) to be tabled in Parliament.

"As for Umno, we have stated our stand that we accept hudud as the law prescribed by Allah but we are studying the question of implementation," he was quoted as saying by Bernama.

The youth and sports minister also requested MCA not to issue statements or make decisions that could sour ties between BN component parties.

On MCA Youth chief Chong Sin Woon's request to meet with Umno Youth over this matter, Khairy said he has asked Youth exco Dr Fathul Bari Mat Jahya to meet Chong.

"We want all component parties to understand each other and this issue (implementation of hudud) was raised by PAS and not the BN government," he said.

PAS' plan to implement hudud law in Kelantan has also drawn flak from its ally DAP, which argued that it goes against the Pakatan common policy framework.

-Malaysiakini-

Hudud: M'sia Will Lose Big

Politicians on both sides of the divide are only trying to play their cards to win popularity in the hudud game to achieve their goals without any thought about the macro or world impact it will have.

The opposing side has given all the reasons why hudud should not be implemented and the legal aspect which contravenes the Federal Constitution.

One of the main reasons is that the Islamic penal code is not suitable for a secular country like Malaysia.

What will the world reaction be if the Hudud Bill is passed and Islamic law implemented in Kelantan?

Brunei, which introduced Islamic law a few days ago, has come under international scrutiny. Celebrities, including Virgin group founder Richard Branson, have vowed to boycott a hotel chain linked to the Brunei sultan.

Branson said over the weekend that Virgin employees would not stay at the Dorchester luxury hotel chain, which includes The Dorchester in London and the Beverly Hills Hotel in Los Angeles.

Others who have called for a boycott include comedian Stephen Fry, TV host Sharon Osbourne and comedian Ellen DeGeneres.

The US group Feminist Majority Foundation said it had also pulled its annual Global Women’s Rights Awards, co-chaired by Jay and Mavis Leno, from the Beverly Hills Hotel in protest.

These are only a few who have come out strongly against Brunei for now. The chorus of opposition to the law will grow louder in the days ahead.

Malaysia can expect a similar reaction if the Hudud Bill is passed.

Foreign investment will affect not only in Kelantan but other states, too, because the world will conclude that it will be a matter of time before the whole country adopts such a law.

There can even be a boycott of Malaysian products and investments abroad, and this will have a devastating effect on the economy, which the country can ill-afford.

Brunei being a rich country, and small, can absorb what is thrown against it but not Malaysia.

Promote equality

Human rights organisations the world over will be the first to react, followed by foreign consumer associations, feminist groups and other NGOs.

These groups are significantly large and will cause a great impact if they decide to boycott goods, investments or travel.

The brunt of the impact will be felt in Kelantan with no domestic and foreign investors willing to step in the state and the tourism industry coming to a standstill.

The younger generation in Kelantan growing up in the era of Facebook, twitter, and other social media will soon migrate to other states or even other countries. With no local or foreign investments what will happen to Kelantan?

Western countries will be cautious in any trade investments and link the country to terrorism, because of the extreme Islamic views.

The world is also watching closely after the disappearance of flight MH370, and the recent seizure of Malay Bibles, the banning of Malay books, the persecution of Shi’ites and sedition cases against the opposition will not be seen in good light by foreign countries.

Overall, Malaysia will be looked at as an extremist Islamic nation and this will hinder the growth of the country.

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has portrayed to the world that the country is a moderate Islamic state and his image will take a beating internationally or he will be seen as a weak leader.

Even the second home plan to attract foreigners to take up residence in Malaysia will be affected.

There is so much to achieve such as eradicating corruption, crime, wastage of government funds, instead the country is deviating from the serious issues and concentrating on petty ones.

More focus should placed on creating a just society where every citizen is treated equally.

By Rama Segar, a FMT team member.

'Hudud plan disruptive'

PETALING JAYA: PAS’ attempt to introduce hudud does not augur well for national unity, integration and harmony in the country, said Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Joseph Kurup.

He said arguments over hudud were not good for the building, strengthening and integration of national unity.

“Unity is the essential ingredient for us to advance as a nation. It is the bedrock for us to lean on for development, prosperity, harmony and happiness and we should preserve this,” Kurup, who is in charge of national unity, told The Star yesterday.

He said since the tragedy of May 13, 1969, the Government had introduced various programmes and initiatives to unite the people in Malaysia.

“We are a multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural society. When talk about hudud is brought up, it sends shivers among non-Muslims and they are not happy about it,” he said.

Kurup, who is also Parti Bersatu Rakyat Sabah (PBRS) chairman, said his party would reject any attempt to introduce hudud.

He said Sabah and Sarawak had agreed to the formation of Malaysia on the understanding that the country would remain a secular state.

He said three conditions were set before Sabah agreed to accept the formation of Malaysia in 1963: freedom of religion; the Sabah government to have full powers on matters related to the state; and that Sabah traditions and cultures be respected and preserved by the Government.

“We did not just talk about it, these were engraved on a stone, which still sits in the interior of Keningau.

“These were the undertakings when we agreed to form Malaysia, so any changes to this will be looked at very unfavourably,” he added.

Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) deputy president Datuk Seri Dr Maximus Ongkili said any move to implement or support hudud was against the spirit of the Federal Constitution and 1Malaysia.

Dr Ongkili, who is also Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister and Kota Marudu MP, urged other Barisan Nasional parties, including Umno, to make a strong stand against any move to introduce hudud.

“We are concerned that if we allow hudud in Kelantan, it will open the door for the law to be imposed on other races and in other states. We do not wish for it to come to that for the sake of Malaysia, all Malaysians and 1Malaysia,” he said.

Sabah Barisan National secretary Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan said “extensive discussions” would be held among component parties if the contents of PAS’ proposed Private Member’s Bill were revealed.

“We need to scrutinise every sentence, word and comma so that we can have a better understanding of what the Bill is all about.”

The Star

Torn between racism and hudud

MALAYSIA'S Independence, first as Malaya in August 1957 followed in September 1963 as Malaysia, was based on a Federal Constitution agreed by all the communities respecting all the ethnic groups and people of all religious beliefs to live in peace and harmony in our beloved nation.

Peace and harmony it was for the first decade. Then came the book The Malay Dilemma which brought fear amongst the Chinese community and later caused fear amongst the Selangor Malays when one seat separated the control of the state government.

When we look at the past knowing the present day system of political problem, the May 13th, 1969 political strife became the 1st 'rupture' in the peaceful racial harmony. Compromise was somewhat reached when the New Economic Policy (NEP) came in for implementation. With this many Chinese in urban areas joined opposition parties in protest of the NEP.

Though the NEP was a noble effort to help the Bumiputras, the seventies being the period of NEP implementation saw the start of cronyism benefitting only selected  Malay entrepreneurs who were given boosts in government mooted companies.

In my opinion, many could have done well if they were made to rise the hard way. Loading them even after failures, in my opinion, is the cause  of not reaching the targeted equity for the Malays!

However, some good progress was made in the education field, when the late 70s and 80s were great years affter  universities, colleges and Mara Science colleges were flooded with large and sometimes full intake of Malay students risking very often the quality of education.

Weaknesses in this crash programme were most obvious when many of the graduates were not able to be employed in the private sector, even in Bumiputra firms.

Therefore, most government departments were packed to the brim with one race.

With PAS coming into the limelight, the ruling government went on an Islamisation policy which brought fear to the non Muslims, with the ruling party entering the religious field. This further drove more non Muslims into the opposition.

Tough actions against Islamic leaders such as that  seen in the Memali incident further boosted Muslim support for PAS.

The racism problems of 70s have slowly turned in the late 80s into a religious dilemma to be faced by non Muslims. This came with the speedily passed amendments to the Federal Constitution creating two parallel courts giving much powers to the Syariah Courts through Article 121 (1A) in 1988. The non-Muslim MPs in the ruling party, claiming to be assured that it would not affect non Muslims, voted in favour to achieve the two thirds majority required to approve an amendment to the Federal Constitution. The non-Muslim MPs in the opposition  voted against the amendments.

PAS' victory in Kelantan and Terengganu prompted the party to campaign to implement the Hudud Laws in Kelantan in the early 90s. The MCCBCHST went all out to resist this move by meeting all political parties urging them not to support Hudud laws.

Our meeting with Kelantan Menteri Besar Tok Guru Nik Aziz was a landmark item. It was then that a government head was willing to discuss in detail on the proposed laws.

He even offered to consider any proposed laws for respective non-Muslim religions. The delegation was jointly led (in alphabetical order) by Ven Seet Kim Beng (Buddhist). Father Chan of Kelantan (Christian), Sri A.Vaithilingam (Hindus) and Sardar Joginder Singh (Sikhs).

Taoists were not in the Council then. It must be emphasized that we insisted that we would only recognise the existing civil laws for non-Muslims because it was common for all. We emphasised that that there should only be one set of criminal laws for the nation i.e. the present laws. Tok Guru agreed to consider our views.

Within a week he sent us a note that Hudud laws will not be imposed on non-Muslims if they were implemented.

However, the nation saw an open UMNO turmoil in late 90s when Anwar Ibrahim was sacked as Deputy Prime Minister. The birth of a new opposition party led by Anwar sympathisers saw a grand battle royal for the 1999 General Election.

The non-Muslim voters played a role, giving general support to the ruling party against the opposition mainly because they feared PAS.

The new Prime Minister's liberal views gained much support to the extent of receiving overwhelming support in the 2004 GE. He had some good dialogue with non-Muslim leaders And was generally agreeable on places of worship of non-Muslims and some other reforms.  

However, this show of support was short lived because the ruling party's former leaders were not comfortable with the reforms and liberal policy of the PM.

A new fear of Malays losing their rights was created and a new racist NGO named Perkasa was launched with a former PM as its patron. Lots of racist seditious statements were coughed out by Perkasa with the AG and the police just ignoring all reports against such seditious  actions. The non-Malays were pushed towards the opposition, and the opposition gained tremendous boost taking over Selangor, Penang, Kedah and Perak in addition to Kelantan in the 2008 GE. Sabah and Sarawak saved the ruling coalition.

The act of vengeance was enough to force the reformist PM out the following year.

Many wondered why non-Muslims favoured PAS of the opposition coalition to a race based party of the government in the 2013 GE! Perkasa's consistent racial actions, candidature of its 2 leaders in the GE by the ruling Party, biased police actions, dubious decisions of the judiciary in some cases drove vast majority of non- Malays to a 52% support to the opposition.

Once again the Borneo states saved the ruling party. An interesting point to note  is that a good proportion of urban Malay votes went to the opposition.

Hudud was brought as an issue but the racist statement by Perkasa and a former PM  overrode this, and it was noted that PAS had been liberal on issues like non-Islamic places of worship. For instance, the centre of Kota Bharu has new tall church and a 3 storey Hindu temple when their bids were rejected by the previous BN government.Kelantan also lifted the ban on cultural lion dances and cultural building structures.

The Prime Minister gave generous handouts and development grants to non Malay groups.But he failed to realise that the non-Malays need security and not donations. His silence on slanders against the non-Malays was the other factor.

Since GE 2013, Perkasa turned on the onslaught of religious issues. The target now is PAS. Some leaders of this party seem to panic thus going into defense by reverting to Hudud issue.

This party must realise that they will never have been in the national scene had it not been for non-Malay support. It will in the end meet the fate of losing the grip it has gained outside Kelantan.

In the meantime the non-Malay and non-Muslim political parties must refrain from accusing each other especially on religious issues. Lack of concentration on Article 121(1A) has made it possible to bring in new discriminatory laws.

In this country no political party can reach a national level success unless it can work together with all races and religions.

Our forefathers, including the original mover of Independence Dato Onn Jaffar and lovable Father of the Nation Tunku Abdul Rahman, showed us the path. The open and friendly approach of Tok Guru Nik Aziz also must be noted. It is most essential that the ruling and opposition parties follow and abide towards that direction.

Let common sense prevail!

By Datuk A Vaithilingam, FZ

Datuk A Vaithilingam is the former President of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism.

Must read: Defending the basic structure

IT appears that PAS will be seeking to give effect to the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code Enactment II of 1993 by way of a Private Members Bill in Parliament. Through this, PAS aims to introduce hudud laws in Kelantan for Muslims living in the state.

The term “hudud” (literally “limits”) refers to offences (and their corresponding punishment or sentence) that are considered by jurists to have been prescribed by the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad. Punishments include death (by stoning), flogging and amputation.

It may be recalled that the 1993 Enactment, like its counterpart the Terengganu Syariah Criminal Enactment of 2003, which additionally introduced Qisas (retaliatory) offences and punishment, have been the subject of controversy since their inception. These laws, many thought, were not only unconstitutional; they sought to codify impressions of Islamic criminal law that were not necessarily universally accepted.

Both the Kelantan and Terengganu Enactments did not come into force, in part because of challenges to their constitutionality and public outcry. In 2003, Zaid Ibrahim was given leave by the Federal Court to challenge the validity of these enactments on the basis that the Legislative Assemblies of Kelantan and Terengganu did not have the competence to enact these laws.

I appeared as counsel for Zaid Ibrahim. The government of Malaysia, through the Attorney General, supported the applications. Though the petitions were ultimately withdrawn, the matter was thought to have ended there. The subject remained within the realm of politics and political brinksmanship.

Or so it was thought. The recent initiative to implement the Kelantan Enactment, albeit with the endorsement of Parliament, calls for a reappraisal of the matter, in particular its constitutionality and lawfulness.

No matter how many times the politicians say otherwise, Malaysia is not an Islamic state from a legal standpoint. The Federal Constitution declares itself the supreme law of the land. All actions by all organs of the State, including the Legislature and the Executive, at the Federal and State levels, must act consistently with that supreme law.

Legislative power is divided between Parliament and the respective state legislative assemblies. The delineation of legislative powers is prescribed by the Federal Constitution itself, the 9th Schedule of which sets out in three separate lists — the Federal, State and Concurrent Lists — the fields of legislative competence of these lawmaking bodies.

Criminal law, as the term is commonly understood, is within the domain of Parliament. The aim was to allow for the creation of a uniform system of criminal law applicable to all persons in Malaysia, a state of affairs required by the guarantees of equality before the law, equal protection of the law, and the equal protection of life and liberty.

A minor exception was allowed for. Recognising the place of Islamic personal law in pre-Merdeka Malaya (later Malaysia), State legislative assemblies were vested with the power to create Islamic law for personal law purposes. This included the power to establish Islamic courts, and create offences against Islamic precepts.

In deference to federal control over matters of criminal law, the Federal Constitution required that sentencing powers for such offences be vested in the Islamic courts by Parliament. As things stand, a federal statute — Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 (Revised 1988) — limits the sentencing powers of the shariah courts to imprisonment of three years, any fine exceeding RM5,000 or with whipping exceeding six strokes, or with any combination thereof.

Although we have yet to see what it is that the Private Members Bill is aimed at, it stands to reason that it will seek to amend the 1965 Act in so far as Kelantan is concerned to allow for hudud offences and sentences, with particular reference to the 1993 Enactment.

From media reports it would seem that some PAS Members of Parliament are of the view that a simple majority of members present in the Dewan Rakyat would be sufficient to push the bill, and as such hudud in Kelantan, through. I beg to differ.

For one, this viewpoint ignores the fact that the Kelantan legislative assembly was not competent to enact the 1993 Enactment. In creating the offences and prescribing the sentences that it does, it has encroached into the domain of Parliament for having created criminal offences. It has in effect created a parallel system of Islamic criminal law that goes beyond the constitutionally contemplated scheme of personal law offences.

This not only violates the legislative provisions of the Federal Constitution, it offends the various guarantees of fundamental liberties accorded by the Federal Constitution to all citizens, including the Muslims of Kelantan. It would wholly undermine the constitutional arrangement of this nation and irreparably damage its basic structure.

If this is what the Private Members bill seeks to achieve, then it is clearly misconceived. Leave aside concerns about the basic structure, such an effort would be tantamount to an attempt to amend the Federal Constitution. In the ordinary course, this would require a majority comprising two-thirds of all members of both Houses of Parliament.

As I understand it, private members bills are not treated as matters of priority. I cannot recall when we last heard of one being debated in Parliament; they are pushed to the end of the list and called up only on the completion of government business. Chances are that the proposed bill would never see the light of day.

The political climate is however murky, and extremism appears to be lurking on the fringes. A declining economy, continuous emphasis on race and religion and an ineffective education system have collectively served as an incubator for a reactionary mindset amongst a large number of Malaysians. I am concerned that desperate ambition may make an alliance with Pas on this subject seem acceptable to its political arch rival Umno.

If so, and I hope it not to be the case, then it cannot be emphasised enough that the context makes this a matter of great seriousness. The implications are tremendous.

This is not about Islam, or being anti-Islam. I do not think it is open to anyone to suggest that the legal framework of this country has done anything other than to serve and promote the interests of the religion. Muslims in this country have every resource at their disposal to profess and practise their faith.

Rather, this is about standing by a shared commitment that we undertook in 1957 when we declared ourselves citizens of an independent nation.

By Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, FZ

Malik Imtiaz Sarwar is a practising lawyer and the immediate past president of the National Human Rights Society of Malaysia (HAKAM). This comment is dedicated to the memory of the late Karpal Singh who fearlessly and untiringly defended the basic structure of this nation.

PAS: The Game Plan Changes

PAS and Umno are the two biggest Muslim-Malay parties in the country and, together, they have the numbers needed for PAS to realise its dream of hudud law in Kelantan.

TAN Sri Muhyiddin Yassin had arrived at Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat’s house with little fanfare. It was a social visit and he had brought along his wife Puan Sri Noorainee Abdul Rahman. The VIP couple were inside for about an hour with the men – Muhyiddin, Nik Aziz and his politician son Nik Abduh – chatting in the main living room and the women in another room. By the time the host and his visitors emerged, a curious crowd had gathered outside the modest kampung house, many of them holding up their cellphones to record the occasion.

It is not every day that the Deputy Prime Minister and his wife come to visit and Nik Aziz was wearing the broadest smile that anyone has seen in months.

Muhyiddin had been wanting to visit Nik Aziz after hearing that the elderly former Mentri Besar was in poor health and the opportunity came when he had some free time between functions in Kota Baru.

Muhyiddin was dressed just right for visiting a Tok Guru – long-sleeved shirt, no tie, not too formal and with just the right touch of respect. Moreover, he was wearing a kopiah. Everyone knows Muhyiddin is more of a songkok man and he usually dons a kopiah when he is headed for the mosque or a religious event.

But there is very little in Kelantan that does not have a tinge of politics about it, and the social visit was quickly read as yet another sign of the warming ties between the country’s two biggest Muslim-Malay political parties.

The Muslim brethren thing is a very potent force and should not be underestimated. It is no secret that some in Umno feel they have much more in common with PAS especially after the way the Chinese rejected Barisan Nasional and their continuing attacks on anything to do with Umno.

Besides, Muhyiddin’s visit had come after Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak popped by IJN to visit Datuk Dr Haron Din, the leading theologian in PAS, who was recovering from chest pains.

Dr Haron sat cross-legged on the bed and chatted away with the Prime Minister like they were old friends. When it was time to go, Najib held the older man’s hands with both of his, gripping firmly to wish him speedy recovery.

Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Ahmad Yakob, on his part, was at the Ipoh hospital recently to visit an Umno assemblyman from Kelantan who was injured in an accident near Tapah that killed his wife.

Umno and PAS are still on opposite sides of the fence, make no mistake about that. There is still a great deal of rivalry and distrust between the two sides but the sharp edge has been replaced by a friendlier and more cooperative spirit.

For instance, Kok Lanas assemblyman Datuk Alwi Che Ahmad said federal leaders feel welcome in Kelantan nowadays. The softer tone in their relationship has enabled a number of public projects to take off and this will ultimately benefit the people of Kelantan.

Physical development is one thing. What PAS wants most now is for Umno to help them achieve their quest to implement hudud in Kelantan.

Ahmad and his deputy Datuk Nik Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah are about to pull off what Nik Aziz lacked the political will to do. It looks like the low-profile and soft-spoken Ahmad has been seriously underestimated by all.

If Ahmad gets his way, the PAS claim of Kelantan as the “serambi Mecca” or the verandah of Islam’s holiest city will take on a whole new meaning. It will be second only to the kingdom of Brunei which, on Friday, officially became an Islamic State.

The two Private Members’ Bills that PAS is planning to table in Parliament need only a simple majority to go through.

But PAS is caught in a weird situation – it is unable to rely on its partners DAP and PKR for support. Instead, the party is reaching out to Umno for help to push through the Bills.

And that is why some are wondering whether all that “hello, how are you?” pleasantries going on between their respective leaders may be more than social niceties.

The political storm surrounding the PAS push for hudud law is growing bigger and more thunderous. There has been a tense exchange of words over it among the Pakatan partners.

The most stunning thing about the hudud move is that PAS had happily gone about their plans without consulting or alerting its partners.

It was only after the media started reporting on it that PKR and DAP leaders started taking notice.

Self-denial

But as PAS deputy ulama chief Datuk Dr Mahfodz Mohamed put it: “They (DAP and PKR) implemented policies that PAS did not agree to. If they can do that, we can do the same in Kelantan.”

He was referring to the Penang government passing two enactments – one was an anti-hopping law and the other to facilitate local government elections. PAS was also deeply unhappy about the unilateral move to make Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim Mentri Besar of Selangor via the Kajang Move.

Many Pakatan leaders were in self-denial about the hudud move until recently. For instance, some of them had initially claimed that PAS was not serious and that it was just posturing. They even claimed the Bills would fail because they needed a two-thirds majority to be passed whereas only a simple majority was required.

Several Pakatan politicians even accused the hudud plan of being a game played by Umno.

“Your own partner is the one pushing and you say it is because of Umno. Come on, don’t say stupid things,” said Kapar Umno chief Datuk Faizal Abdullah.

But the one that took the cake was a DAP leader blaming Umno for not stopping PAS. It was like your wife has misbehaved and instead of reprimanding her, you blame your neighbour from across the street for not controlling her.

The Pakatan marriage is still quite intact but it is quite a topsy-turvy scene inside the household.

Nik Aziz has given his blessings for what he called “the beauty of Allah’s law” and told a party leader he is longing to see it happen in his lifetime.

“We won’t do anything to jeopardise the cooperation in Pakatan but we cannot ignore the wishes of the people of Kelantan who voted for PAS,” said PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali.

Party president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang is so keen about it that he wants to be the one to table it in Parliament.

“All our leaders have been waiting a long time for Kelantan to show the goodness and justice of Islamic criminal law. There is no plan to pull the hand brake, we are going ahead. If people are happy and accept it, we can promote hudud all over the country,” said Nik Mohd Amar.

The opinion in PAS is that succeed or fail, their effort will bring them pahala or blessings from the Almighty.

Mustafa said that DAP and PKR have every right to oppose and PAS has every right to implement. And that is the way the cookie crumbles.

It is evident by now that PKR and DAP are quite powerless to stop this grand plan of PAS.

As Karpal Singh said a day before his death: “We cannot stop them from tabling the Bill but we can vote against it.”

But non-Muslim MPs are outnumbered by Muslim MPs and that is why the Muslim MPs in Barisan are now holding the cards.

Najib has put it well in saying that Umno has never rejected hudud and that it wants to study the implementation in greater detail before taking the next step. Hudud is obligatory in Islam but the religion also states that society must be ready and the socio-economic conditions must be there before the beauty of hudud can unfold.

But the reality is that many in Umno are still distrustful of PAS. They think the hudud move is more about politics than faith.

For instance, Pahang state exco member Datuk Sharkar Shamsuddin thinks that PAS wants to change the game because it has been pushed to the side of the football field by its partners.

“PAS is asking us to support a Bill that we have only read about in the newspapers. We want to embrace hudud but we don’t want to be dragged into an issue created by PAS,” said Sharkar who is also an Umno supreme council member.

Selangor’s Faizal put it best: “We are not saying no, but we want to know more before we say yes. This is not a simple yes or no issue because it involves our faith. If it is not done properly, the bad name will not only be on the Kelantan government but also on Muslims and Islam.”

 The Star

Fight to keep Malaysia secular

t is simply wrong for anyone to suggest that non-Muslims have no right to debate on the hudud issue on the basis that they do not understand Islamic laws.

ONE of the biggest misunderstandings in the current debate on the push by PAS to implement hudud in Kelantan is that it will not affect non-Muslims, and that being the minority, they have no say on the matter.

This line of argument ignores the fact that Malaysia is a multi-racial and multi-religious country. Nothing is isolated within one community itself.

Hudud is essentially the Islamic penal code and because a crime can be committed by anyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, there are bound to be consequences on how any criminal offence will be handled.

In the case of rape, what if the victim and the accused are of different faiths? How would such cases be tried and under which law? Must a non-Muslim victim bring four relia­ble male witnesses to prove her case against the Muslim accused if the case were tried in a syariah court?

And what if two buddies, one Muslim and one non-Muslim, are charged with robbery? How will the sentence be meted out, and in which court?

There can never be two sets of penal laws in this country, where hudud can be implemented in Kelantan or Terengganu, for example, while the rest follow the federal Penal Code.

Is PAS also saying that if it were to form the federal government, hudud laws would be implemented entirely?

It is simply wrong for anyone to suggest that non-Muslims have no right to debate on this issue on the basis that they do not understand Islamic laws.

Worse, there are non-Muslim groups who naively believe that non-Muslims are not involved at all. They are either being politically misty-eyed or simply reluctant to enter the fray. Or they do not want to oppose the move by PAS because of political expediency.

Then, at the other extreme, there are groups like the Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma), whose president Abdullah Zaik Abdul Rahman was quoted as saying that “non-Muslims in the country have no right to oppose the plan to implement hudud and they should understand that there are limitations to what they could say”.

Non-Muslims, said Abdullah, “should be thankful that they have more than what they need in this country”.

“I don’t see what their contributions are for them to be given so many privileges in the first place,” he had reportedly said, adding that “their strong stand against hudud gives the impression that they are in a dream world; they must realise that they have no say in determining the future of Muslims in this country.”

Even without hudud, we have already seen how complicated it can be in conversion cases as well as marital disputes involving Muslims and non-Muslims due to jurisdictional issues of the civil and syariah courts.

Until now, we have not seen how the authorities intend to resolve the case of a Muslim convert who has taken away his son from his Hindu wife, whom he has divorced.

The civil court granted a custody order to the Hindu wife while the syariah court issued the same order to the Muslim ex-husband. And the police have said they are caught in the middle as both orders are binding.

After all, the Federal Constitution states clearly that the civil and syariah courts have equal status but perform different functions.

If we extrapolate further, what about business disputes and cases of criminal breach of trust? People of different faiths work together, and they are bound to be involved in such issues at some point.

Surely all Malaysians have the right to ask how these cases would be dealt with?

There are existing laws to deal with these issues, but what if hudud also comes into play?

What if different parties opt to go to different courts, insisting on their religious rights and obligations?

There is plenty for PAS to explain, even if Kelantan is predominantly Muslim and the state government is controlled by PAS, because the stakeholders are not just Muslims.

If its partners in Pakatan Rakyat claim they are not aware of what the Islamist party is up to, then the implications are even more serious.

In Selangor, where PKR leads, the state religious authorities have seized Bibles which carry the word Allah and the state government is powerless in dealing with the issue.

The state religious body, in short, has become more powerful than the Mentri Besar and the other state executive councillors who appear to be sending out the message that there’s nothing they can do.

One lesson that has emerged is that when it comes to religious laws, there are some who will conveniently shut down any argument or dissent from non-believers, simply on the premise that they have no such rights or understanding.

But with secular laws, opposing sides can bring any matter to the open court and argue their cases. Fight to keep Malaysia secular, that’s the only choice to keep the country moderate.

-The Star-