Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Raziz Writes About Religious Harmony



Perhaps Datuk Seri Ti Lian Ker should first of all study thoroughly all about the proposed amendments to the Syariah Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 or Act 355 and the previous amendments before lashing out at Datuk Ab Aziz Kaprawi.

As a respected chairman of MCA Religious Harmony Bureau, Ti should always kept an open mind when it's come to discussing one of the most sensitive matter in this country, hence he should be more harmonious and should not bash out at anyone disagreed with his boss.

Ti tried to explain that one of the main implication to be had is that it will remove the Federal laws' check on state legislatures which is quite a bit wrong.

I will not try to explain anything about the entirety of the proposed amendments as it was already well explained by Asyraf Wajdi back in June 2016. (Link is here)

I suggest Ti should spend more time with Asyraf Wajdi in order to be more harmonious on this issue.

So I will try to throw a few curve balls about the Federal Constitution.


There are three (3) particular articles in the Federal Constitution that need to amend if 'Hudud' (Act 355 is not Hudud) were to be introduced. They are article 76A, article 8 and List II Ninth Schedule.

Ti's major concern is about article 8 (1) which states that "All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law."

This will be his legit concern because people of different religions will not be equal before law in six (6) particular crimes which are zina, qazaf, liquor consumption, murtad, stealing and robbery.

But again, the amendments to article 8 will not happened because we are not talking about hudud.

Hadi Awang's private bill is to seek maximum punishment in accordance to syariah laws except of death penalty for the crimes that were already under the jurisdiction of current Act 355.

The easier way for saying it is there will no tampering of the Federal Constitution at all if Act 355 amendments to be taken into place.

So Datuk Aziz's argument that MCA had supported the existence of Act 355 and it's two (2) previous amendments are not lame. (1984 & 1989)

Mind that in 1965 when this act was first introduced the maximum penalties were only up to RM1000.00 fine or 6 months jail time or both.

The amendments in 1984 increased the maximum penalties to RM5000.00 fine or 3 years jail time or 6 times caning or any of the above combination.

(Note that there were no hudud laws introduced after this amendments)

It has been 33 years since the last amendments to this act taken place and it is timely for this act to get amended.

Ti's last argument said that the MCA is cautious about the proposed amendments to Act 355 will be a backdoor for PAS or provide any other political party an opportunity to table another Private Member's Bill seeking full-blown implementation of hudud enactments unto all Malaysians.

This is lame Datuk Seri Ti.

You should not be fear mongering about this issue. You have admitted that amendments to Act 355 is not hudud and you also said your concern is about having two (2) sets of law going concurrently for people of different religions (this will not happen) but in the end you have said that you are worried that a full-blown implementation of hudud enactments will be imposed to all Malaysians.

Why use all Malaysians if you really understood what hudud is all about.

In the end Datuk Seri, what is your real concern?

Note: If in anyway I had misquoted Datuk Seri Ti Lian Ker, I had referred his statement as per published by The Sun Daily online portal dated 25th January 2017. Also this is my own personal thoughts.

No comments:

Post a Comment