G25 fails to moderate Islamophobia of the non-Muslims
By Danial Ariff Shaari, Tanjak
As only to be expected, G25 were quick to laud the government’s withdrawal from its earlier decision to take over RUU355.
The liberal group of eminent geriatrics had decried the proposed 355 legislation, which they alleged would alienate Sabah and Sarawak.
In their March 30 press statement, G25 also expressed concern RUU355 might make “the minority races feel that they do not count”.
G25 consider Abdul Hadi Awang’s draft amendments to the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 as something “divisive” as well as “a first step towards the implementation of hudud’.
With due respect, RUU355 does not make non-Muslims comparably negligible in the eyes of the law, in contrast to Muslims.
Nor does 355’s inapplicability over non-Muslims mean that the Chinese and Christians are neglected. It just means non-Muslims are subject to fewer personal laws in Malaysia on top of enjoying lighter punishments for identical crimes.
So why all the fuss and noise?
After all, non-Muslims do not and cannot be forced to enter an appearance before syariah judges.
G25 truly trying to out-DAP the DAP
Most recently a G25 member, Mohamed Tawfik Ismail (pix above) sought a declaration from the court that Hadi Awang’s proposed 355 amendments are in violation of the federal constitution.
In his 27 March affidavit, Tawfik declared that 355 would promote “discrimination and inequality”. This, he claims, is ultra vires the constitution’s Article 8 guaranteeing equality before the law.
Tawfik forgets that this very same sentencing power of the Syariah Courts, enabled by 355, has been in existence for more than 50 years. Why does he choose to raise an objection only now?
In fact, to put in constitutional context, the rights of Muslims are special compared to the non-Muslims.
As upheld by justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad (now Tun) in the case of Kamariah Ali v the Kelantan state government & Anor [2002] 3 CLJ 761, Islam is the only religion that is mentioned expressly in the federal constitution.
Thus the constitution gives specific powers to the state assemblies to enact laws relating to any act or omission which is considered against the precepts of Islam.
The states’ enactments are variously passed through their respective legislative assembly or the Federal Act through parliament. Implementing syariah is still very much a democratic process.
That is what RUU355 is all about and therefore it can’t be unconstitutional, can it? The one that is challenging the constitution is you yourselves, G25!