By Ravinder Singh
The Islamist party’s information chief Nasruddin Hassan has done his duty well by clearly sending the message that there is nothing religious about PAS as it does not uphold the ideals of the Islamic faith. Nowhere in the religion is it stated that Muslims should stab in the back non-Muslims who helped them or sheltered the party in their time of need.
Nasaruddin himself would not be what he is today if not for the non-Muslim voters in Temerloh who threw their weight behind him, not because of his religious beliefs, not because he was a man of God, not because his opponent Umno’s Saifuddin Abdullah was not a good person. He was not representing PAS, but representing the Opposition coalition. He won because the voters wanted Umno out, even though Saifuddin stands much higher than him as a politician.
Saifuddin was one of Umno’s MP’s for whom the public i.e. including the non-Malays, had much respect for. He was the voice of reason, not a racist and clearly not a “pak turut” of Umno. He was beaten by Nasaruddin simply because the rakyat was fed up with Umno and Saifuddin happened to be in Umno, while Nasaruddin was in the Opposition.
Today, Nasaruddin is stabbing the backs of non-Muslims who supported PAS in the last two elections by demanding that Opposition parties that wish to cooperate with PAS leave DAP before negotiations are held because “the reality is that DAP is still opposed to PAS’s Islamic struggle”.
In 2013, Nasaruddin campaigned stating: “What matters most is that we ensure a change in system and policies which destroy many things in politics. For example, the question of equity, the revival of a democratic system, freedom of expression. In terms of economy, we are looking at breaking the monopoly, spending wisely.”
Nasaruddin, please tell us in clear terms what your “Islamic Struggle” is today? In 2013, according to you, it was “systems and policies which destroy many things in politics e.g. the question of equity, the revival of a democratic system, freedom of expression and in terms of economy, breaking the monopoly and spending wisely”.
Today, PAS’ Islamic struggle seems to be an obsession to get RUU 355 passed by Parliament to pave the way for the implementation of hudud that would allow the severing of limbs in the name of God for “controlling crime” by the religious police.
Hudud is NOT God’s law. It is preposterous for humans to make such a claim. It is a 100 per cent man-made law and that is why it has to be drafted by man, tabled in Parliament by man, approved by man to be enforced by man. Is it, therefore, not blasphemous for man, any man, however religious he projects himself to be, to claim that a law made by him is the law of God?
Since all secular laws are also made by the same process that hudud is made, why are the secular laws not also the laws of God?
Nasaruddin, Hadi and others in PAS who are so obsessed with hudud should come up with facts and figures to dishonour the study by Hossein Askari, Professor of International Business and International Affairs at George Washington University and his colleague Dr Scheherazde S Rehman who conducted a study applying an ‘Islamicity Index’ to the nations they researched for their list, based on the ideals of Islam in the areas of a society’s economic achievements, governance, human and political rights, and international relations.
In their study, Ireland came up tops, although it is a Christian country. According to a report by The Irish Times, (June 9, 2014), Professor Askari had said: “We must emphasise that many countries that profess Islam and are called Islamic are unjust, corrupt, and underdeveloped and are in fact not ‘Islamic’ by any stretch of the imagination.”
“If a country, society, or community displays characteristics such as unelected, corrupt, oppressive, and unjust rulers, inequality before the law, unequal opportunities for human development, absence of freedom of choice (including that of religion), opulence alongside poverty, force, and aggression as the instruments of conflict resolution as opposed to dialogue and reconciliation, and, above all, the prevalence of injustice of any kind, it is prima facie evidence that it is not an Islamic community.”
PAS’ “rise” was possible because of the support of the non-Muslims. Had it been selling hudud at that time, PAS would not have got the support of the non-Muslims.
I believe non-Muslims would have no issue with an “Islamic struggle” if it was to fight corruption, oppression, injustice and inequality before the law etc as listed by Professor Askari.
If it is to turn Malaysia into the likes of Middle Eastern Muslim countries where the Mullah’s reign supreme,then even true Muslims will not approve of PAS’s “Islamic struggle”.
Applying Professor Askari’s study and conclusions, DAP could stand out to be more Islamic than PAS. – FMT
Ravinder Singh is an FMT reader.