I especially agree to this particular suggestion from Raja Petra:
“Run a referendum. 10 million Malaysians are minors. 16 million Malaysians are of voting age. Get the 16 million Malaysians to decide. And let that referendum of 75% tell us what they want. And if 12 million Malaysians, representing 75% of eligible voters, vote in favour of Hudud, then let this be the law of the land. If not, forever hold your tongue and let the matter be given a decent burial.”
I am all for a referendum. Let all Malaysians decide whether they want the Islamic shariah laws or not. If they agrees, then the implementation of the law can be carried out without any noise being made by anyone after that. It’s a law that is specifically agreed upon by Malaysians.
However, there are a few concerns raised by Raja Petra in the article. Here, I will try to address them with historical facts.
Raja says:
“No, Hudud is not evil. Hudud is better than what we have now. But it can be worse if we want to make it so. And chances are the evil in man will make it worse. That is what makes the matter dicey.”
“Hudud” has been in practiced for 1400 years. From the first time it was first implemented by the Prophet, it has never stopped from being practiced until today.
My argument is simple. If Hudud is open to abuse and prone to evil in man, why hasn’t hudud been rejected by Muslims throughout the entire 1400 years?
If Hudud is easy to be abused, then it would not even last for more than 5 years after it was first implemented.
But it is an estadblished historical fact that “hudud” was removed from daily Muslim lives by colonial powers who invaded Muslim lands. Colonial powers like the British, French, Spanish, Portugese, Dutch etc. In fact these colonial powers used to execute and massacare Muslims for resisting their effort to replace “hudud’ with secular laws.
After independence, Muslim lands were ruled by secular elites created by the colonial powers from among the Muslims. These secular elites of the Muslims continued the Colonial anti Islamic law policies. And they are as vicious (if not more) as their former colonial masters. Not to mention more determined and motivated.
Power was always divided between the Ulama and the secular leaders. Power was never concentrated to the executive alone thanks to Shariah.
Muslim Secular Elites Are More Motivated In Preventing Hudud Than Their Colonial Masters
Now, why are the secular elites of the Muslims more motivated? Shariah has been the sole factor in preventing totalitarianism in the various Islamic Caliphates and Governments throughout the 1400 years of Islamic polity.
Throughout the 1400 years, various Muslim rulers are denied total control of their respective government through the implementation of Shariah.
Shariah is always the domain of the Islamic scholars (ulama) and as such Muslim rulers cannot pass laws and regulations as they please.
At the same time, the various Muslim rulers have their rule checked by the Ulama institutions and their movement are always limited.
When secularism is introduced in Muslim lands, the various secular Muslim rulers are aware of the threat that Shariah possess. They know that their total dominance can be compromised the day Shariah is introduced.
So, secular Muslims work overtime to prevent Shariah from being implemented in their respective “countries”. And the former colonial masters knows this and has properly briefed these secular elites of the threat that Shariah holds against their rule.
As a result we hear countless and repeated stories of islamists being jailed, murdered, raped, incarcerated, slandered, detained without trial and many more. Shariah is a threat to the dictatorial rule of various Muslim secular elites of the world. Therefore, Shariah must be prevented or these secular muslim rulers must be subjected to the same fate of the Muslim rulers before them.
Another historical fact that Muslim secular elites are very well aware of is the fact that despite the many times Muslim rulers and government have been toppled in the last 1400 years, the ulama rule was never touched or protested by the Muslim population. Despite the change in government, the same ulama running the shariah remains. The same institution is maintained and the same system is defended.
When the Colonials invaded Muslim lands, the first institution they destroyed was the ulama institution among the Muslim relegating the ulama to the role of mere teachers of Islam and nothing more.
Again, rule of Ulama on the Muslims is the direct handiwork of Western colonial powers who had invaded Muslim lands. Not a move taken by Muslims.
So, non Muslims should not be worried about Hudud or Shariah. It is a tried and tested system and not open to abuse. It’s proven beyond any doubt of it’s ability to deliver justice and to promote security and peace.
Tulang Besi