Malaysia's General Election 13 to be survival of the fittest

It’s all a matter of endurance. Given the stakes, tensions have also heightened. Both sides have a great deal to lose. 

WE are entering the final straight. Whether the date of the actual polling day is in June, July, September or even next year, the finishing line is fast approaching.

It’s all a matter of endurance. Who can best manage their own resources and minimise their weaknesses? Whose “messaging” is the most focused and sustained?

Given the stakes, tensions have also heightened. Both sides have a great deal to lose.

As Tun Daim Zainuddin said a few months ago, the contest between Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional is much like an extended game of tennis – with victory going to the side that commits the least unforced errors.

In this respect Barisan would appear to be gaining the lead. Pakatan’s lack of access to the mainstream media further undermines the challenger’s chances.

Last week’s resignation of DAP Senator and vice-president Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim and PAS’ continued call for the introduction of the syariah have raised doubts about Pakatan’s ability to hold the middle-ground.

But there are also real dangers in trying to “read” the election outcome from the mainstream media. Official controls will always tend to magnify Pakatan’s mistakes whilst minimising Barisan’s missteps and only a fool would ignore the Internet’s ubiquitous presence.

At the same time, the vast numbers of new voters have injected an enormous degree of uncertainty into the game.

It is as if Tun Daim’s tennis game had been crossed with a Sony Wii as well as a Pentagon battle-ground simulator: permutations are the new “norm”.

No one knows for certain where these young people will cast their ballots. As Ben Suffian of Merdeka Centre explains: “They lack the loyalty of their parents. They are better informed and more sceptical: arbitraging on news and events.”

But when all is said and done, the voters are faced with four fundamental decisions when they’re dealing with Barisan, which are as follows:

> Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak: Should the Malaysians reward or punish him? Have his reforms satisfied the voting public? Conversely, has he been too weak in the face of non-Malay demands? Does Bersih 3.0 accurately reflect popular sentiment? Does he deserve to better Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s 2008 result? Will we reward him with the constitutional majority? Can his personal popularity (much like Abdullah’s at the same stage of the 2008 scenario) strengthen his hold on power?

> Umno: For over five decades – the United Malays National Organisation has been the parti kerajaan – the party of Government with its supreme council meetings surpassing Cabinet in terms of “real” authority? Is the automatic identification of party and government (along with all the attendant patronage) coming to an end? Or is it merely a case of the parti kerajaan becoming a parti politik no different from PAS and PKR? Is Umno’s supremacy finished?

> Barisan Nasional: Can the alliance remain intact if the country’s second largest community, the Chinese, remove their support? Is an Umno-dominated coalition sustainable? Are we witnessing the end of the so-called unwritten consensus that has brought us thus far? What will be the substitute?

> Malaysia: Will the 13th General Election see the firming up of the two-coalition system or its demise? Are we Malaysians comfortable with the level of checks and balances that have entered our political lexicon since 2008 or do we wish to return to the past – entrusting the Barisan, unreservedly with our future?

March 8, 2008 was a surprise result. It upset our (and especially my) lazy assumptions.

Will the upcoming polls see this becoming the new normal or will we return to the status quo ante? I will try my best to cover these dilemmas. But then again, if we refer to Tun Daim’s tennis analogy and the doubts raised by Bersih, another major question surrounds the “rules of the game” – who determines the players, especially the millions of new voters?

CERITALAH  By KARIM RASLAN

Practise 'Addin', a Malaysian way of life? PAS Vows Hudud for Malaysia!

The PAS leader's statement that Islam's status in the Federal Constitution would be changed from official religion' to Addin' if Pakatan Rakyat captures power is the latest example of the party pushing its Islamic agenda without consulting its coalition partners.

PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang needs a quick lesson in history and the best person to give him that is his colleague and fellow traveller in Pakatan Rakyat DAP national chairman Karpal Singh.

Abdul Hadi had told a press conference in Terengganu last week that the status of Islam in the Federal Constitution would be changed from “official religion” to a “way of life” if Pakatan Rakyat captures power in the next general election.

The unilateral statement was also justified by an attack on the Reid commission, which drafted our constitution in 1956, with Abdul Hadi claiming that there were no Muslim members among its five members, headed by Lord William Reid.

As Karpal Singh has rightly pointed, Hadi was wrong on both scores.

Political analysts and political parties, including the MCA, followed suit in severely criticising Hadi for wanting to unilaterally amend the constitution.

The matter was certainly not brought before the Pakatan Rakyat leaders' council for discussions.

Pakatan leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who advocates a pluralistic approach to religion, was noticeably missing in the controversy because Hadi and PAS, while colleagues in Pakatan Rakyat, have an entirely different approach in that they believe Islam is the only true way to God.

On his part, Hadi has always been pushing for more recognition for Islam and its primacy as the only path to God.

“In the world today, people know of two ways to describe the faith: one is what is adopted by the West by calling it a religion, which denotes the spiritual relationship between human and God, without mentioning it as a way of life,” Hadi was quoted as saying after launching the Terengganu PAS Youth annual meeting in Kampung Kubang Lembek, Manir.

“The second option is by calling it Addin the way of life which is more apt as it includes everything, from the spiritual to all other aspects of life.

“It is not right to say Islam is a religion. The right way is to describe it as Addin, a way of life,” Hadi said.

His interpretation of Islam clashes with the country's multi-ethnic society populated by different races practising different religions.

If an amendment is done it can seriously affect non-Muslims and their way of life which is radically different from that of Muslims.

Although all religions have similarities in moral values and concepts of human justice, their methods and practices differ greatly.

When religion is imposed as a way of life on the majority, the amendment will impact on the rest who practise different faiths and cultures.

It will create many “dos and don'ts” issues like the banning of alcohol, rules on entertainment, dressing and also the intermingling of sexes.

Such amendments will be a recipe for disaster as it can result in the various races drifting further apart and living separate lives instead of coming together into a harmonious, multi-ethnic melting pot.

Hadi also argued that the current definition of Islam as “the official religion of the Federation” did not do justice to Islam and suggested that legislation in this country be interpreted according to the tenets of Islam.

While PAS is under pressure from its Islamic clientele to speak up for Islam, it is also under pressure from its non-Muslim supporters club to desist and behave like PKR or DAP, in wanting to be better than Barisan Nasional at ruling.

Unlike them, PAS is a party that has dreams of creating an Islamic theocracy, something that is unsuitable in this multi-racial society.

This is one reason why PAS is obstinate and unyielding on implementing hudud law and speaking up on many other social issues and the current one to amend the constitution.

PAS' increasingly “superior behaviour”, however, is a by-product of unquestioning support from the DAP.

It shows that neither the DAP nor even the PKR can control PAS any longer and its acquiesce to its demands, like the statement from Hadi that PAS will implement hudud law if elected to Putrajaya.

PAS has a tendency to declare its Islamic agenda without due consultation with its coalition partners and in doing so, it is impinging on non-Muslims' right to freely practise their religion and rights that are guaranteed under the very constitution the party wants to change.

Originally, PAS championed an Islamic theocracy but later following pressure from PKR and especially DAP, it changed to championing a welfare state.

Now the party has come up with its “Addin” or Islam as the way of life proposal, with hudud law included.

The motive is to win the conservative Islamic vote but at the same time, try to satisfy non-Muslim voters.

Comment by BARADAN KUPPUSAMY

Islamic Party Vows Hudud for Malaysia

OnIslam & Newspapers

"If we have enough majority (of seats), if Pas is stronger than our allies, we will implement hudud," Harun said. >>

CAIRO - Seeking to lure more voters in next year’s election, Malaysia's main Islamic party has pledged to amend the constitution to allow the application of hudud in the Asian Muslim-majority country.

"We will implement hudud and amend the Constitution even if (it is) not with the current partners we have in Pakatan...may be there will be other pacts (Pakatan) that will lend us their support,” Harun Taib, chief of PAS Ulema Council, was quoted as saying by the New Straight Times on Saturday, May 12."If we have enough majority (of seats), if PAS is stronger than our allies, we will implement (hudud and the amendment to the Constitution)."

Hudud (Penalties) in Contemporary Legal Discourse

The issue was first raised when the Islamic party’s president Abdul Hadi Awang said that PAS had never backtracked on their intention to put hudud (Islamic penalties) to law and that it will seek to implement it if it takes federal power.

But the staetments drew fire from Karpal Singh, the national chairman of the secular Democratic Action Party (DAP).

Harun reiterated the party support for Hadi on the issue of hudud, saying that the party views Karpal’s criticism as a “personal opinion as a lawyer.”"I think whether it is against the Constitution or not is just his (Karpal's) personal opinion and comment as a lawyer,” Harun said.

"As a PAS member, I am fully behind Hadi."

With an estimated 800,000 members, PAS is the main rival of Prime Minister Najib Razak's United Malays National Organization.

A few years ago, PAS has enacted the hudud laws in Kelantan, to be imposed only on Muslims who represent about 90 per cent of the state's 1.5 million population.

The laws introduced Shari`ah punishments for theft, robbery, adultery, liquor consumption and apostasy.

Adamant

The leader of PAS Ulema council confirmed that hudud can only be implemented through a parliamentary majority."If we have enough majority (of seats), if Pas is stronger than our allies, we will implement (hudud and the amendment to the Constitution)," Harun said.

He added that hudud remains PAS’s intention despite the criticism it received from both its allies in Pakatan and rivals Barisan Nasional.

The Islamic party had already enacted the law in Kelantan and Terengganu but faced constitutional restraint in its implementation.

"We are a party that is championing Islam,” Harun said.

“Of course we will implement what is required by Islam. Pas will always be behind Hadi and the party's struggle to uphold Islam in the government and administration of the country."

Malaysia’s parliamentary elections are due in 2013, but expectations are high that the polls could be called much earlier.

Muslim Malays form about 60 percent of Malaysia's 26-million population, while Christians make up around 9.1 percent.

Buddhists constitute 19.2 percent, Hindu 6.3 while other traditional Chinese religions make up the rest of the population.

Related posts:
Politics, Religion don't mix!
Don't let the sun go down on our rights; those mess up politics ...
Malaysian Politics: Chua-Lim Debate Sets New Standard
Malaysian Chinese at a Political Crossroads forum ...
MCA do-or-die at 63 in sarong politics
Speaking up for religious tolerance 
Is the Two-Party-Sytem becoming a Two-Race-System ... 
Get set for Malaysian politics of the young!

PAS will close Genting casino if it takes over Pahang

Tweet

PAS stands by its plan should Pakatan take over Pahang in next election

By ROSLINA MOHAMAD and NIK NAIZI HUSIN newsdesk@thestar.com.my

FATE UNKNOWN: The casino in Resorts World may take its last bets if the Opposition wins at the polls — Pic: 1Malaysia Travel Blog

 KUANTAN: PAS is pushing ahead with its plans to shut down the casino in Genting Highlands if it takes over Pahang in the next general election.

Pahang PAS Youth chief Sharil Azman Abdul Halim said the only thing the party would allow the Genting Highlands resort to run was the theme park and other parts except the casino and gambling-related facilities.

“PAS has no intention of closing the whole place down as the highland resort is a major tourist attraction,” he said, reiterating the party’s stand on the matter.

Sharil Azman is the third person to state the party’s stand after two PAS assemblymen, Syed Hamid Syed Mohamad (Kuala Semantan) and Syed Mohammed Tuan Lonnik (Beserah), stated recently that the party could not tolerate gambling and would close the casino if the Opposition took over the state.



Sharil Azman said this in response to allegations in the state assembly that PAS intended to close down the resort if the Pakatan Rakyat coalition captures the state at the next polls.

Backbenchers Datuk Chuah Boon Seong (BN–Mentakab) and Datuk Pang Tsu Ming (BN–Semambu) had raised this matter on Wednesday.
Syed Mohammed had clarified to the two Barisan Nasional reps that only the gambling facilities would cease operations while other tourism-related activities would continue.

Shahril Azman said it was the PAS Youth wing that had come out with the proposal to shut the gambling business.

Meanwhile, when met on the sidelines of the assembly sitting, Syed Mohammed said he stood by the Islamic teaching that gambling is a sin.

“The party’s stand on gambling is also clear,” he said, adding that the country did not need to include in its coffers revenue from gambling.

He said it would be up to the Pakatan leaders to reach an amicable decision on Genting Highlands and its gambling activities should the Opposition alliance rule the state.

He said non-Muslims were free to drink and gamble and Islam did not prevent them from doing so, such as at their homes and other places of their own.

Chua: Casino closure plan shows hudud will affect non-Muslims

PUTRAJAYA: PAS is contradicting itself when it claims the implementation of hudud is not likely to affect non-Muslims.

MCA Young Professionals Bureau chairman Datuk Chua Tee Yong said its intention to close the Genting Highlands casino would surely affect some of the 15,000 people working there.

He said the tourism industry would be severely affected if Pakatan Rakyat went ahead with its decision as the resort received some 20 million visitors yearly.

“How can PAS claim the implementation of the law would not affect non-Muslims?

“What would happen to the people working there? Wouldn’t they become jobless?” he asked yesterday.
Chua said the country would also lose about RM1bil in tax revenue if the casino was closed.

He hoped the rakyat would scrutinise PAS’ claim on the matter as the party was fond of changing its stand to suit the situation.

“DAP should state its stand now and not say the matter would be discussed if Pakatan Rakyat took over the state,” he said.

PAS’ intention to close down the casino was disclosed by a government backbencher at the Pahang state assembly sitting on Wednesday.

Mentakab assemblyman Datuk Chuah Boon Seong asked whether PAS had considered the fate of the resort’s workers should it implement the move.

Related post:

How Malaysia's politics stay true while reinventing?

Insap forum on Hudud leaves public still grappling with fears

Tweet

Chua: Be clear on hudud

WANI MUTHIAH, FLORENCE A . SAMY and JOSEPH KAOS Jr at the ‘Hudud and its Implications on Non-Muslims in Malaysia’ forum in Kuala Lumpur

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek has challenged Pakatan Rakyat to include its stand on hudud and its implementation in its general election manifesto and common agenda.



Pakatan, especially PAS, he said, should be transparent in its stand.

“Right now, there are conflicting signals from Pakatan leaders. Hudud should be in their common agenda since they always never do anything without consulting their partners.

 

Making a point: Dr Chua delivering his keynote address during the forum at Wisma MCA Sunday.

“If the rakyat votes for PAS, DAP or PKR knowing full well that they will implement hudud law, then we should respect it as it is the voters' choice,” he said at a forum entitled “Hudud and its Implications on Non-Muslims in Malaysia” yesterday.

Dr Chua lambasted DAP for its contradictory stand and for misleading the Chinese community, especially with its “agreeing to disagree” statement.

“On one hand, DAP says it opposes hudud. On the other hand, in the last general election and subsequent by-elections, DAP campaigned vigorously to ensure the PAS candidate won,” he said at the forum organised by MCA's Institute of Strategic Analysis and Policy Research.

The forum was moderated by Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee.

Dr Chua reiterated MCA's opposition to hudud and its implementation, adding that hudud law would adversely affect both Muslims and non-Muslims.



“It is a lie that it will not affect us. We have the right to talk about it as it does affect us.

“We do not accept hudud and its implementation in a multi-racial country,” he said.

Explaining the ramifications, Dr Chua said that the implementation of hudud law would affect the country's foreign direct investment, revenue as well as rights of non-Muslims, including gambling and drinking activities.

He dismissed claims by Pakatan that hudud law could not be implemented even if it came into power but did not have two-thirds majority.

He said Muslim MPs from both sides of the divide would be forced to support the Bill although they might not agree with the implementation as hudud was part of Islam.

Dr Chua pointed out that hudud law could not be implemented without amending the Federal Constitution.

“How then can the rights and freedom of non-Muslims be safeguarded? Which court will have jurisdiction which involves both Muslims and non-Muslims as hudud law cannot exist without the existence of Islamic law?'' he asked.

In his closing address, Dr Chua urged non-Muslims to reject the implementation of hudud law because it had great implications on them.

“We also heard the panellists say that the PAS version of hudud does not represent the true essence of Islam.

“Malaysians must make a choice of either choosing Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's vision of a high-income nation by 2020 or a failed state run under hudud law,” he added.

On Saturday, Dr Chua had said in Malacca that he had no problem having a public debate on hudud with Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng provided the latter answered two questions first.

He said Lim must first explain to the people if he could ensure the implementation of hudud law would not affect the non-Muslims.

Second, he said Lim must explain if the implementation of hudud law would affect the norms and life- style in Malaysia, especially the economic, education and social system aspects.

Related Stories:
Chandra: Some have narrow interpretation
Look, Hu's at the forum

MCA hudud forum leaves public still grappling with fears

Puline Wong
newsdesk@thesundaily.com

(l-r) Ustaz Fathul Bari Mat Jahaya, Ustaz Mohd Kamal Saidin, Lim Chee Wee, Edmund Bon and Prof Dr Chandra Muzaffar meeting MCA president Datuk Seri Chua Soi Lek during a hudud forum organised by Institute of Strategies Analysis and Policy Research (Insap) at Wisma MCA today.

 KUALA LUMPUR (Dec 4, 2011) : Legal and Muslim religious experts tried to discuss the effects of the implementation of hudud law in Malaysia to a public forum comprising mainly MCA members today but stopped short of of answering the fears of the non Muslims.

The panel of speakers which comprised of International Movement of a Just World (Just) president Dr Chandra Muzaffar, special religious advisor to the Terengganu Mentri Besar Ustaz Haji Mohd Kamal Saidin, and Umno Young Ulama working committee chairman Ustaz Fathul Bari Mat Jahaya was moderated by the Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee.

It discussed the implementation of hudud in the country but stopped short of saying whether it should or should not be implemented.

Chandra stated that although some Muslims in the country are for the implementation of hudud as part of their identity, there are many Muslims who have yet to agree.


He said criminal punishments under the hudud law is not the vortex of what Islam is nor what it means to be a Muslim.

"There is an obsession, and a preoccupation with a literal interpretation of hudud and of Islam," he said, adding that this kind of narrow interpretation does no justice to the religion itself.

He warned that should there be a hudud-obsessed state in Malaysia, we might end up as Saudi Arabia or Sudan.

"In many hudud-obsessed countries, their interpretation of hudud emphasises prohibition and punishment, when it should be educate and enlighten.

"To endorse this hudud-obsessed mentality will mean the destruction of the nation," said Chandra.

The issue of hudud, which crops up occassionally, ever since PAS passed the Hudud Act in 1993 in Kelantan, has seen much debate among the ruling Barisan Nasional and opposition parties.

Hudud is the criminal law under Islamic laws and the main fears by non Muslims are on the various forms of punishment which include cutting off hands for stealing and stoning for adultery. PAS had stated that if it comes to power, it will implement hudud in the country for Muslims.

Fathul Bari, although from Umno which has openly opposed hudud, stated that "a misunderstanding is that in hudud, someone caught committing a crime, stealing for example, will have his arm cut off. But this is not true. Islam is a forgiving religion, and Allah s.w.t is a forgiving God."

The he goes on to say "Crime must be punished but the punishment should be appropriate," he said, dismissing the notion that the punishments should always be "an eye for an eye".

"Hudud practised by PAS does not take into consideration the multi-racial society of the country. They want to implement it on everyone," said Kamal, condemning PAS for not interpreting the hudud laws accurately.

From a legal perspective, however, implementing hudud is not possible, said Bar Council member Edmund Bon,

Bon, a human rights lawyer, said hudud law cannot be implemented because the Federal Constitution has not provided for the punishments listed within hudud, nor has the federal government approved hudud.

"Hudud cannot be implemented unless the federal government approves or allows for it, which is why the hudud Bill of Kelantan, which was created since 1983, is still not law.

"Questions of religions are extremely emotional. Because there are so many interpretations of hudud, a moratorium must be established for calm, careful debate on these issues," he urged.

The forum drew more comments than questions from the 200 strong mostly-Chinese crowd, which urged the speakers to address the issue of whether hudud is fair, or if hudud will be implemented on non-Muslims, to which none of the speakers did.

Related post:
How Malaysia's politics stay true while reinventing?

How Malaysia's politics stay true while reinventing?

Tweet

Much ado about everything

Behind The Headlines By Bunn Nagara

MALAYSIA has braved slogans as milestones with chequered results.

Spanning two decades were the Mahathir-era “Vision 2020” and its “Bangsa Malaysia” component, and the Najib administration’s “1Malaysia” and “high-income nation”. As national goals, they have been positive, inclusive and aspirational.

In 1997 then deputy premier Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim proposed masyarakat madani, translated as but supposedly transcending “civil society”. Much of its potential was however obscured by interpretation issues even in the original Bahasa Malaysia.

Malaysians are generally wary of attempts to tinker with the existing secular (non-theocratic) system. So in the 1999 general election, much of the DAP’s support evaporated over its links with PAS in the Barisan Alternatif opposition pact.

In 2001, then prime minister Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad said Malaysia was an “Islamic state”. This infamous statement panicked some political circles, notably the DAP.

Typical of Dr Mahathir’s rhetorical flourishes, it was meant to counter and challenge, and needed to be read in context. It had come after a wearying tussle between PAS, which had sought to install an Islamic state and amend the Federal Constitution, and its adversaries.



Dr Mahathir later said since (as he had defined it) Malaysia was already an Islamic state, there was no need to amend the Constitution. He had sought to end the debate and preserve the secular status quo rather than to change it.

That was fine as long as Dr Mahathir still headed the Federal Government and dominated the terms of the national debate. Nine months later he went further and declared Malaysia a “fundamentalist Islamic state”, according to his (textually correct) definition of fundamentalism.

But after he retired in 2003, the terms of the debate changed and his past statements encouraged PAS in further Islamisation instead. His successor Datuk Seri (now Tun) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi could not direct or dominate the discourse that followed.

Aware of popular opposition to its theocratic aims, PAS this year unveiled the idea of a “welfare state”, a vague concept that did not impress many. Kelantan Mentri Besar and PAS spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat then announced plans to implement hudud in his state.

Some legal quarters insisted that no state may implement hudud (punishments for “serious crimes”) without amending the Federal Constitution, but that view has been challenged. PAS then said hudud would not apply to non-Muslims, but that has also been questioned.

Hudud is part of syariah law along with qiya (punitive recompense), diyya (compensatory settlement) and tazir (corporal punishment). Hudud covers apostasy, alcohol consumption, theft (or robbery) and illicit sex, with punishments that include amputation and execution.

These offences can involve other people, including those serving or selling the alcohol or those accused of trying to convert Muslims. Thus saying that hudud would apply only to Muslims is unconvincing.

Further, hudud is considered divinely inspired so its punishments are not open to reform, substitution or reduction. PAS has also told non-Muslims that since hudud would not involve them, they have no right to object.

But in July 2002 after the PAS Terengganu government passed the Hudud and Qisas Bill, Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Hadi Awang said hudud would be “extended to all non-Muslims” when they were ready for it. Presumably the party would decide when non-Muslims are “ready”.

Parti Keadilan Nasional at the time had joined protests against the Bill’s impending passage. But this year, PKR adviser Anwar supported Kelantan’s plan to implement hudud.

Beyond DAP chairman Karpal Singh’s personal objections, the party does not oppose Kelantan’s plans for hudud. DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said hudud was not mentioned in Pakatan Rakyat’s Common Policy Framework (Buku Jingga), placing any opposition to it only at Federal level.

But once Kelantan introduces hudud, Kedah as another Pakatan state may follow. Then, acquiescing at state level may be taken as tacit approval for compliance at Federal level.

These and related issues would be explored at today’s Insap (Institute of Strategic Analysis and Policy Research) forum at Wisma MCA in Kuala Lumpur from 9.30am to 2.30pm. Admission is free.