When Zealotry forces a clash between Faith and Democracy

Last time I checked, Malaysia is a Parliamentary Democracy. Whatever flaws it has, it is neither an Islamic state nor any form of theocracy. Islam being the official religion does not mean any one, including the state, could impose his or her belief unto others. Even the Quran has the injunction that states there is no compulsion in religion. The democratic system of governance that Malaysia practices- a Westminster Legislature style representative democracy- is one of many flaws; however it is one that has been determined and agreed by its people. Like any legislative democracies, all matters of law and legislation must be bought to the August house of legislature, specifically to be challenged, disputed, critiqued and attacked. It is believed by democrats that it is only through parliamentary debates and challenges that any law or policy would be truly representational, inclusive and accommodative of people from all walks of society. Fundamentally, democracy is a system where a predetermined group of people, together craft the parameters, laws, rules, culture, order in which they wish to co-exist under. All that is done through a contestation of ideas. It is a system where citizenship and one’s affiliation to it as a stakeholder, is the predetermined part; it is the laws, practices, traditions, order and construct, that are variables. When a religious matter, is brought into the democratic framework, with a view of it being passed as law; there better be readiness of even the very existentialistic basis of the religion being questioned and critiqued, even torn to shreds. It is after all what the system is founded for; to contest and challenge anything introduced into its framework.

The clash of democracy and faith The MP for Marang’s recent private member’s bill to amend Act 355 opened up a Pandora’s box for many a political practitioners and commentators. On the surface, the move was made to enable State Assemblies to legislate criminal laws for the State Shariah Courts, a move welcomed by conservatives and the religious. With the amendments, sentencing limits will be jacked up many folds to a maximum of 100 lashes of the whip, a RM100,000 fine or a 30-year prison sentence, from the current six lashes, RM5,000 fine or a three-year jail sentence Though the conservative echo chamber is filled with noble and religious justifications, and endless parsonic rhetoric of unification of the larger religious community, transcending political differences to do God’s work here on Earth, it is difficult to see as anything other than what it actually is- A political smokescreen. It is a move that has put religious laws into a democratic framework without any of the necessary perquisites that will ensure a healthy conclusion. Contrary to popular view however, I feel that Marang is a mere bishop on UMNO’s chess board. He may have tabled the private members bill, seemingly triggering off this chain reaction that led to a metaphoric ‘duet’ between him and Jamil Khir Baharom on stage, but this star-crossed romance is toxic for Marang and his party. Apart from much of his party’s ‘base’ being ultra-allergic to the notion of an UMNO-PAS bromance, he has also failed to feel the resonance of the rational Muslims who occupy the silent middle ground who are mindful and aware that the ones who will suffer from the inhumane punishments of the 355 amendments are the ordinary Muslims, not the corrupt politicians. The ones who will be used as pawns to advance dreams of those out to gain or preserve power. UMNO’s excuse of all this being a back-hand return to a strong serve by Marang-eventually turning into an ongoing rally reluctantly continued by UMNO is waning in credibility. Starting with The technical committee for implementation of Hudud initiated by Jamil Khir Baharom, to the bilaterally agreed blueprint between Putrajaya and the Kelantan State Government. Note here that amendment of 355 afore us now is but a small part of the entire blue print to Implement Hudud. This continued with a private member’s bill unprecedentedly hitting the Parliament floor to the Padang Merbok demonstration participated by Jamil Khir himself are all concrete proof that UMNO has been precision-engineering this all along with PAS oblivious to their being played. The hypocrisy of those behind the bill Some politicians and their supporters are obsessed with spying on unmarried couples in hotel rooms and whipping them, yet completely silent and acting oblivious about the most powerful of thieves at large with RM 2.6 billion worth of “Arab donated” public funds. These are the same politicians who are the ones labelling anyone who has a different opinion from theirs as apostates if they happen to share the same faith. Those who do not share their political views as infidels that must be waged war against (kafir harbi). The same group are also the ones who used to cite the federal constitution as the highest law of the land when it suited them once upon a short time ago; yet today dare to mislead fellow Malaysians by their expressed insults and demeaning of the constitution as an infidel construct and ball-and-chain remnant of our former colonial masters. These political zealots who once committed to the principle of first solving social problems such as unemployment first –on national TV- before considering Hudud, this was when their party was in government in several states. Yet now anyone who says the same are labelled as infidels, godless liberals, apostates, deviant, enemy proselytisers, deserters, and all sorts of nastiness. Let democracy (people power) right the wrong As to their hypocritical bringing of their Piousness packaged politics of division and destruction into the democratic framework, only you the voters and the Malaysian people can repair the damage they will cause. The only path to saviour from this nightmare coming true is to ensure that PAS and UMNO MP’s couldn’t form even a simple majority in the next Parliament. Only then can we save it. In the meantime, we can only hope that not too much damage can be done between the bill passing and parliament’s dissolution.