By Shannon Teoh
The Malaysian Insider
Sep 27, 2011
KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 27 — The DAP accused The Star today of falsely reporting that Lim Guan Eng had threatened to pull the party out of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) if hudud became part of the pact’s joint policy.
Zairil Khir Johari, Lim’s political secretary, wrote in an open letter to the English daily that the party secretary-general had merely promised that “the entire central executive committee (CEC) would resign to take full responsibility if hudud” became PR policy.
“An initially correct report had come to be replaced by one that was imaginatively concocted,” Zairil (picture) wrote.
He said that a correct version of the article was uploaded on thestar.com.my on September 25 in which the reporter quoted Lim as saying that the party’s CEC would resign if anyone could prove that hudud law was in the Common Policy Framework (CPF) or Buku Jingga.
But a second version was uploaded the next day which changed the headline from “Guan Eng: DAP top leadership will quit if hudud law included in Pakatan policy” to “DAP leaders threaten to quit Pakatan council”.
Zairil said the second article “implied wrongly and falsely that Lim had threatened the resignation of the party’s top leadership” from PR.
PR issued a gag order yesterday on all PR parties, barring their members from speaking on the hudud issue until the pact’s leadership meets tomorrow.
The hudud issue reared its head again recently, reigniting the longstanding squabble among PR parties over whether the Islamic law, which prescribes stoning, whipping and amputation as punishment for criminal offences, should be implemented.
Major newspapers front-paged yesterday the declaration by Lim that his entire DAP central leadership would quit if the controversial law was made a part of PR’s Buku Jingga agenda.
Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who opposed hudud when Kelantan passed the law in 1993, recently reignited the issue when he dared Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat, the state’s mentri besar, to implement hudud now that he was no longer in power.
The PAS spiritual leader then called on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to propose amendments to the federal constitution to allow the Islamic law.
Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim also backed PAS’s stand on introducing hudud in Kelantan but the DAP has insisted that it is not part of their common policy, leading to PR’s unity being questioned.
Deliberate twisting of PR leaders’ speech has become a hallmark trend among the mainstream pro-bn media. And the BN govt is encouraging this dirty tactic by closing an eye, no, both eyes, on this issue because it can be used to break up the PR alliance.
I remember a show whereby a politician mentioned, “That’s a figure of speech” but the reporter twisted the sentence into “She has the figure of a bitch”. Will tua pui poh take that as a compliment or an insult?
The paper’s actions is totally in line with the ‘…best democracy in the world…’ and the 1Malaysia concepts to deceive the people through underhand tactics, slants and ‘subliminal messages’ (as one MP might put it).
Maybe Mr Kuah of The Star might have a comment on this. Anybody called the Chairman?
In Saudi non-muslim people statement is not valid/is not acceptable in court case
Take note
The Star – “The MCA Paper”.
Now what can we expect from this paper. The editor is MCA president. That’s why they have been playing up the issue on Page 1.
Some believe God allow to punish with violence
It is act of God
What kind of world will be if every enemy claim the act of god?
All break free of crime
You charge them with crime they claim you are against the act of GOD
What kind of world will be?
/// He said that a correct version of the article was uploaded on thestar.com.my on September 25 in which the reporter quoted Lim as saying that the party’s CEC would resign if anyone could prove that hudud law was in the Common Policy Framework (CPF) or Buku Jingga. ///
Oh boy how could umno people get the meaning so so wrong.
Look umno what guan eng said is this: If anyone could prove that hudud was in the CPF or Buku Jingga then he would clone tunku abdul rahman using tunku’s dna to lead the country again.
Stupid umno. Huh? Mca? Oh Mca is umno. Its one and the same body.
Oh boy. You still dont see the connection umno? Look idiot. CEC would resign if anyone …
There. He said it. CEC would resign means he would use tunku’s dna to clone a new tunku and and … oh my god. I am just wasting my time. You umno is just too stupid.
Juxtaposition of conflicting traditions (pacta sunt servanda & al-Hudaybiyyah) defines the current discourse in Malaysia on Muslim unity, an obligation in Islam polity; and towards this end, PAS, UMNO and PKR are destined to unite, forcing DAP, MCA and Gerakan to consolidate.
The degree to which non-Muslims underestimate this contingency is the degree to which they misapprehend the doctrine.
http://tommypetersbicycles.blogspot.com/2009/07/conflicting-traditions.html
You face a group with an agenda to replace the secular constitution with its religious doctrine and says it has divine sanction to do so. Which of two groups you reckon would be effective against the agenda. One who is distinctly mono-ethnic speaking the unpopular ‘race and culture’ linguistic or the group with the multi-ethnic ‘one human race’ vernacular infused with elements of the very group with the agenda within.
The question in the Malaysian context is which of two groups would be effective against the theological cloak slowly but surely enveloping the nation? The MCA (Malaysian Chinese Association) who is distinctly mono-ethnic speaking the unpopular ‘race and culture’ linguistic or the DAP (Democratic Action Party) that speaks the multi-ethnic ‘one human race’ vernacular but has elements of the very group with the agenda infused within.
http://tommypetersbicycles.blogspot.com/2011/07/mono-and-multi-ethnic-in-malaysian.html
///Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who opposed hudud when Kelantan passed the law in 1993, recently reignited the issue when he dared Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat, the state’s mentri besar, to implement hudud now that he was no longer in power.///
The reason why hudud is to be implemented or not is not based on whether hudud is actually needed or good for the society but it is based on how politicians think voters would vote for or against the party for implementing hudud. It is politicking on religion. It was bad to use ethnic difference for politics and now religious practices are being played about.
General election is an agreed method to choose the winner to govern. In sports there are rules to the contest. In a democracy the people choose the party to govern based on clear understanding of how the contesting parties would govern, and there are rules on how the election should be conducted. The Election Commission is charged with the responsibilities like a referee. But the Election Commission has clearly failed in its duties as evidenced by the call by BERSIH. The fact that the government should prevent BERSIH’s procession showed that the current election practices have been in favour of the ruling parties. And worse, it is using race and religion to fool voters.
Hi Kit,
I am very upset and surprised at all you senior politicians. You all know full well that the all main print media are hostile to you. They will surely add pepper and salt to your statements and yet you people speak about such sensitive subjects publicly.Were all of you born yesterday!!!! Now all the good work that we have been doing may have been partially undone by this “hudut” thing.
Do you people want to go t Putrajaya or not???
Anyway, no point crying over spilt milk. Just have to work harder, that’s all.
Please wise up, all of you leaders. Show us some maturity. Do not major over minors. We have to throw these bunch of UMNO goons out. That must be your first and foremost priority.
We must change the tenant at Putrajaya. GE 13 is our best chance. Failure is not aan option. We must work very very hard.
Ok The Star has given a spin. Has mainstream media also spun when it was reported that PAS’s Nik Aziz has recently revived its commitment to Hudud shortly after its declaration of the “welfare/benevolent” state and that Anwar has more or less agreed with Muhyuddin’s position that Hudud for Muslims (without application to Non Muslims) is OK some time in the future when time is appropriate? When Lim Guan Eng said that DAP’s CEC would resign if anyone could prove that hudud law was in the Common Policy Framework (CPF) or Buku Jingga, does not this tantamount in substance to a rebuttal, albeit indirect, of Nik Aziz/Anwar’s position if indeed what they said were correctly reported? At the end of the day DAP’s position, as I understand it, is that its participataion in PR will not be based on any support in principle, for Hudud –which is why it is not in the Common Policy Framework- regardless whether it is applied to Muslims only or not.
The argument that Hudud is Ok if it were applied to Muslims only in exemption of Non Muslims is entirely irrelevant (in the context of DAP versus PAS’s ideological positions). The reason is because DAP is articulating a multicultural platform – so called Middle Malaysia- for all moderate and mainstream Malaysians of whatever race, creed or religion (Muslims or Non Muslims). It is also the view most compatible with Globalisation, Modernity and the forward direction of the nation. Also once the line is crossed that Hudud is accepted in principle as applied to Muslims only there is no telling whether as a matter of time we’re all down the slippery slope when it will also slowly be applied unto Non Muslim. For eg where a Muslim commits adultery with a Non Muslim: it might then be argued why hudud applied to Muslim should not be extended to Non Muslim partner as it takes two hands to clap, and without enticement from Non Muslim at equal fault, the Muslim would not be in this predicament!
Right from the beginning DAP would participate in PR based on Common Policy Framework (CPF) that excludes specific mention of either the Islamic state or Hudud associated with it. After formation of PR and in aftermath of 308 PR’s 3 component parties have announced their commitment to a reformist policy agenda called the much vaunted “New Politics”. Does the reform agenda of this New Politics include changing secular criminal law (as presently applied to Muslims and Non Muslims alike) to Hudud for Muslims? For Anwar or Nik Aziz to say that Hudud as applied to Muslims only is in principle acceptable albeit sometimes in the future (if reports of what they said were true) is clear reneging of the common tripartite understanding underpinning the CPF. It brings to the fore the irreconcialable ideological divisions that are not and cannot be bridged, no matter that it is swept under the carpet for political expedience. It also goes to the root of credibility or lack thereof when it comes to this issue.
For instigation …leave it to MCA apple polishers and shoe shine boys …doing work to please Najib.
Never seen MCA stoop so low before.
Anyway…all are back door ministers and the Star paper???..what do you expect?
///Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who opposed hudud when Kelantan passed the law in 1993, recently reignited the issue when he dared Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat, the state’s mentri besar, to implement hudud now that he was no longer in power.///
Beware of the devil’s cunning devices to create disharmony among Pakatan members.
We all know STAR’s quality and few people really read it except for its adverts. With MCA and GERAKAN devoid of any rational topics to talk about, it ventures into anything to make PR feel bad. Anyway, PR leaders should have known better than to talk to them. As much as BN wanted to hide all the corrupt practices, PR should just curculate by any possible means on such issues! Someone just circulated an international report on Crime rate in Malaysia; indeed we could be the champion in this sector in ASEAN!
///Anwar has more or less agreed with Muhyuddin’s position that Hudud for Muslims (without application to Non Muslims) is OK sometime in the future when time is appropriate?///–Jeffrey
They have not said why it would be appropriate sometime in the future to implement hudud laws. Is it because by then the population will have a higher proportion of Muslims; with the government encouraging that eventuality? Is it because the country would become more Islamic, whatever the definition? Is it when the non-Muslims are totally marginalized that the majority race can do what it pleases?
Malays are free to choose the religion though if they give up Islamic faith they would no longer be Malays. But in choosing between keeping their limbs and the Islamic faith, some might prefer the former. Would the provision of freedom of religious choice in the constitution supersede hudud? Further, as the timing when one gives up one’s religion cannot be challenged, there would then be a call for the extension of hudud to all persons.
Hudud have been said to be only applicable in a just society. Does PAS agree that Malaysian society, even among the Muslims, is just?
PR O PR, show rakyat your sincerity, integrity, maturity – Y ding dong, flip flop too like UmnoB/BN? Y keep shooting yourself in d foot? Nanti no more feet, like after hudud1