Voting for an “Islamic state”

More Umno than PAS Members of Parliament (MPs) we interviewed said Malaysia should be an Islamic state. Out of the 24 Umno MPs who responded, 13 said Malaysia should be an Islamic state. In fact, most of the 13 said Malaysia was already an Islamic state.

Jacqueline Ann Surin, The Nut Graph

ACCORDING to MCA, a vote for DAP equals a vote for PAS equals a vote for an Islamic state and hudud. The Chinese-based political party has over the past weeks resumed its warning to voters that any vote that allows Pakatan Rakyat to occupy Putrajaya in the next general election will inevitably result in Malaysia being turned into an Islamic state because of PAS’s ideology.

This would be detrimental to Malaysians because there would purportedly be a loss of at least 1.2 million jobs if hudud was implemented, and non-Muslim women who don’t cover up apparently deserve to be raped by Muslim men. We can expect that this argument against voting for DAP and/or PR will be ramped up as the general election approaches.

What’s wrong with MCA’s fear-inducing scenario? Is there truth to any of these charges and predictions? And is MCA being completely honest about what the Barisan Nasional (BN) itself, of which it is the second largest component party, has been responsible for?

How about Umno? [i]

As far as I’m concerned, we already have an “Islamic state” in the making.  We are already living in a state with an expansion of religious bureaucracy and controls.

And this expansion of religious bureaucracy is abundantly evident in the amount of controls exerted on citizens’ rights in Islam’s name. There is the prohibition of the use of “Allah” by non-Muslims to the arrest of publishers and book store managers over a translated title that was banned for contravening “teachings of the Al-Quran and Hadith”. And let’s not forget the ongoing and painful issues of conversion affecting Muslims and non-Muslims, whether adults or children, deceased or alive.

And although various kinds of moral policing happened in the past especially in relation to khalwat, women’s dressing and prostitution, these have all intensified since the mid-1990s. And citizens of different sexual and gender identities have, over the past years, been villified and threatened with violence, and had their rights denied, all in the name of religion.

These examples should not come as a surprise because there has been an increase in syariah laws in Malaysia, just as there has been a rise in the size, scope and budget allocations for government Islamic authorities.

Prior to 1980, only one religious law existed — the Administration of Islamic Law Enactment. Today, there are other syariah laws, including Islamic Family Law, the Syariah Criminal Offences Act, the syariah civil and criminal procedure codes and the Syariah Court Evidence Enactment.

Government Islamic authorities have also been given more muscle. In 1970, for example, federal expenditure on Islam focused on two items — the National Mosque, and the annual Quran reading competition. In 2010, the national Islamic budget is estimated to be the third largest budget component of the Prime Minister’s Department.

Additionally, in the past, what existed was the Majlis Kebangsaan bagi Hal Ehwal Islam (MKI). The MKI still exists and its secretariat eventually grew and morphed into the Department of Islamic Development or Jakim in the 1990s.  Today, Jakim has for company several other national Islamic bodies. These bodies include the Jabatan Kehakiman Syariah created in March 1998, the Attorney General’s Chambers’ syariah section introduced in 2003, and the Jabatan Wakaf, Zakat dan Haji founded in 2004. The AG’s Chambers’ syariah section was set up, among others, to ensure that civil laws are consistent with Islamic laws, even though we’re not a theocracy. Additionally in 2009, a Jabatan Penguatkuasaan dan Pendakwaan Syariah was proposed.

Mind you, Islam is a state matter. And this is what makes the evidence above even more compelling. Although religion falls under states’ jurisdictions, in all these instances, it is the Umno-led federal government that has clearly invested in expanding Islamic bodies’ powers and scope in what may be described as a slow boil.

Hence, MCA can charge all it wants that it is PAS that will bring about an Islamic state if voted into power. The evidence shows it was under Umno where there has been a steady inflation in the way Islam is and can be used to control citizens’ lives.

And if Umno is clearly a culprit, what is MCA doing supporting Umno? Shouldn’t MCA and other BN component parties also be held accountable for the state Malaysia is in today since obviously, they did little or nothing to stem Umno’s Islamicisation of the government bureaucracy?

Umno and PAS: What’s the difference?

Yes, it is true that PAS’s raison d’etre is to set up an Islamic state. And while MCA tries to unconvincingly distinguish the difference between PAS’s and Umno’s brand of Islam, there are more similarities between the two than MCA is admitting.

Read more at: