Hudud, my OPINION.

Recently there has been a lot of hue and cry regarding the issue of implementing Hudud & Qisas in Malaysia by the Pakatan Government should Pakatan form the Federal Government. It all started from the recent forum where the infamous KJ (SIL) provoked the unprepared Husam Musa on issues of Hudud, of which Husam Musa replied that should Pakatan formed the Federal government, Hudud will be implemented.

That statement proved to be a time bomb within Pakatan members. Of course, my Party stand is "NO to Hudud or Islamic State". Kit gave a press conference on it explaining the Party stand on the matter and it is not Pakatan's policy. PKR de facto is still (as at to date) silence about it. A lot of other members of Pakatan trying to explain one way or another. Subsequent of course, Husam Musa back-tracted his statement albeit making some people not be too happy about it and worst still it will be a gala time for Beeend to politicise it during the Kuala Terengganu by-election. Read here for Husam's about turn.

MCA and MIC is definitely in a political fiesta mood about it. It is undeniable a time bomb for Pakatan.

So what is Hudud? Now on a quick search in wikipedia. Hudud offenses are defined as "claims of God," and therefore the sovereign was held to have a responsibility to punish them. All other offenses were defined as "claims of [His] servants," and responsibility for prosecution rested on the victim. This includes murder, which was treated as a private dispute between the murderer and the victim's heirs. The heirs had the right to compensation and to demand execution of the murderer like Qisas (retaliation), but they could also choose to forgive.

It is known that Hudud offenses include: drinking alcohol, highway robbery, illegal sexual intercourse, false accusation of zina, Rebellion and Apostasy (Unlike the five offenses listed above, not all jurists consider apostasy to be a hudud offense). Accordingly, in traditional Islamic legal systems, there were very exacting standards of proof that had to be met if hudud punishments were to be implemented.

The punishments vary according to the status of the offender - Muslims generally receive harsher punishments than non-Muslims, free people receive harsher punishments than slaves, and in the case of zina', married people receive harsher punishments than unmarried.

In brief, the punishments include:

• Capital punishments - by sword/crucifixion (for highway robbery with homicide), by stoning (for zina' when the offenders are mature, married Muslims)
• Amputation of hands or feet (for theft and highway robbery without homicide)
• Flogging with a varying number of strokes (for drinking, zina' when the offenders are unmarried or not Muslims, and false accusations of zina')

That is in short what Hudud would mean.

My opinion is simply this, should there be implementation in the future, I think there must be long term and constant discussion and debate on the matter. Non Muslim (the majority) are relatively ignorant of it including myself. It is like implementing a piece of legislation which forcing non Muslims to NOT do like the consumption of alcoholic drinks.

I think Biblical laws through the mosaic laws in the Bible especially in Leviticus is much harsher and comparably the same. So as for me, Hudud or not, it's all about the best marketing skill PAS needed to convince their friends and foes. And it all subject to whether Non Muslim especially is comfortable with such implementation. And should the Non Muslim feel comfortable with it then who knows Hudud and Qisas will be accepted by Malaysians.

On a lighter note, maybe I would like to suggest an amputation of the hand for those guilty of corruption and just imagine when you walk in the streets in KL and found those with limbs amputated, hmmmm, then we probably know that he is either a Division Head or higher in a political party that practices 'politik wang'. Haha.