Why a one-to-one fight is not the “magic potion” to defeat Barisan Nasional without a common policy commitment

There has been a vehement reaction to my suggestion that the results of the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections may be justification to revisit an earlier proposal that  PAS concentrate in Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah and Perlis while AMANAH  focus on all the other states, subject to adjustments to the arrangement by two political parties.

PAS Vice President and MP for Bukit Gantang Idris Ahmad described the suggestion as “illogical” and that PAS should be allowed to contest in areas it had previously contested in to “maximise victories for the opposition” – as in last Saturday’s Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections.

He said there would not have been an issue in the first place if PAS was up in straight fights against the Barisan Nasional in the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections.

Idris cannot be more wrong, for the recent two by-elections are good examples why after the break-up of Pakatan Rakyat because of the refusal of the Hadi-led PAS leadership to honour the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework and the Pakatan Rakyat consensus operational principle, the one-to-one fight is not the “magic potion” to defeat the Barisan Nasional.

During the by-election campaigns, I had predicted that PAS would lose by 10,000 votes in Sungai Besar and 5,000 votes in Kuala Kangsar compared to the 2013 General Election results.

In the event, PAS lost by 11,394 votes in Sungai Besar and 7,452 votes as compared to the votes polled by PAS candidates in the 2013 General Election.

If the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections had been a one-to-one fight between BN and PAS, the Barisan Nasional majority in the Sungai Besar by-election could have increased from 9,191 votes to over 16,000 votes and in Kuala Kangsar by-election from 6,969 votes to over 11,000 votes.

This is because some 80 per cent of the voters who voted for the Amanah candidates in the two by-elections would not vote for PAS and its policies after the break-up of Pakatan Rakyat and would be open to persuasion to vote for BN instead!

It is therefore fortunate that the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections were not straight one-to-one fights between BN and PAS, for far from “maximising victories for the  opposition”, the Barisan Nasional would have won by an unprecedented humongous majorities of over 16,000 in Sungai Besar and over 11,000 in Kuala Kangsar – giving the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak  stronger grounds to claim that his leadership as well the RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” global scandals have received not only thumping votes of confidence by the people  but even  divine blessing.

There are useful lessons to be drawn from the twin by-elections but let us ask the right questions and  draw the right ones, for instance:

(i)	why PAS was not even able to achieve what it polled in 2004 General Election in both constituencies, polling only 6,902 votes in the Sungai Besar  by-election as compared to 7,988 in 2004GE; and  5,684 votes in the Kuala Kangsar  by-election as compared to 5,748 in 2004GE;

(ii)	whether it is true that going by the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-election results, PAS will be completely wiped out in Selangor and Perak –  reduced from the 15 State Assembly seats won in Selangor and the five seats in Perak   in the 13 GE to zero in both Selangor and Perak  as in the 2004 GE; and

(iii)	why the  65-year-old PAS is defeated by nine-month-old AMANAH in Sungai Besar by-election and only 901 votes ahead of AMANAH in Kuala Kangsar?

The Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections are good lessons why one-to-one fights is not the “magic potion” to defeat the Barisan Nasional without a common policy framework and commitment against the Barisan Nasional.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 June 2016, 4:54 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Parti Amanah
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A paradox, but two by-election victories make UMNO/BN leaders more desperate for general election victory and there will be greater demonization campaign against the  opposition – such as painting me as anti-Malay, anti-Islam or even anti-Chinese

This is a paradox – but the two by-election victories in Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar have made UMNO/BN leaders more desperate for victory in the 14th General Election and I expect a greater demonization campaign against the Opposition – such as painting me as anti-Malay, anti-Islam and even as anti-Chinese.

I will give three examples post  twin by-elections:

Firstly, I would place in such a category the statement by the former Chief Justice Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad who  alleged that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s support of opposition parties DAP and Amanah in the recent by-elections were “detrimental to Malays”.

He said that the former prime minister could try and oust Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak from within Umno, but should steer clear of lobbying for support within the Pakatan Harapan opposition alliance as the chances of Malays retaining power once they have lost it is “very slim”.

Could the former Chief Justice answer the two questions which had  been posed by the National Laureate Pak Samad:

“How are Malays under threat? How can religion (Islam) and Malays be threatened when those in power have been Malay for over five decades?

“What have they (Malay leaders) been doing for five decades (if Malays can be under threat)?”

Whatever happens in the 14th General Election, whether Najib is toppled as Prime Minister or UMNO loses the Federal Government, the Malays in Malaysia will continue to exercise political power in Malaysia as there is no way they will lose their political power.

The demographic reality is the surest guarantee that the Malays will not lose political power whatever happens to Najib or to UMNO in the next general elections.

In 1970 Malaysia’s population comprised 44.32% Malays, 34.34% Chinese, 8.99% Indians, 11.89% non-Malay Bumiputeras, 0.67% others.

In 2010, the percentage of Malays in the Malaysian population increased to 55.07%, Chinese reduced to 24.34%, Indians dropped to 7.35%, non-Malay Bumiputeras maintained at 11.94% and 1.3% others.

During the 13th general election, 52.63% of the voters were Malays, 29.68% Chinese, 7.31% Indians, 8.96% non-Malay Bumiputeras and 1.43% others.

Out of the 165 Parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia, 114 are Malay majority seats representing some 70%, 22 Chinese majority seats (13%) and 29 mixed seats. There is not a single Indian majority seat.

With the triple factors establishing overwhelming Malay predominance in the Malaysian political scene – the demographic make-up of the general population, the electorate and the parliamentary constituencies – can Tun Abdul Hamid explain how the Malays will lose political power, whatever the scenario in the 14GE?

How Malays who dominate in 70% of the parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia will lose political power to the Chinese, who are in the majority in only 13% of the parliamentary seats?

Surely Tun Hamid is not insinuating that the Malays in the country are simpletons, who have no intelligence or capability, that despite comprising some 60% of the population in Malaysia and being the majority voters in 70 per cent of the parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia as compared to 13% of the seats where there are Chinese voter-majorities, the Malays can lose political power to the Chinese – especially with a decreasing Chinese population as compared to the Malays?

The stark facts are for all to see – political power in Malaysia is not going to fall out of Malay hands, whether to the Chinese or any other ethnic community, whether Najib or UMNO is toppled in the 14GE or not.

The 14GE is not a battle between UMNO and DAP; it is not a showdown between the Malays and Chinese and other communities, but between the Barisan Nasional coalition versus the Pakatan Harapan coalition.

Secondly, there is a concerted attempt by the UMNO/BN owned and controlled media  to paint me as anti-Islam by  distorting  my comment on the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s  by-election victory statement last Saturday as anti-Islam.

Only those with twisted minds like some UMNO Ministers and propagandists could distort my criticism of  Najib as mocking Islam – and worse, extrapolating it to mean that I have no  respect or regard for all  religions.

For the information of these twisted minds and perverted politicians, I have full respect and regard for Islam and all religions, as I fully agree and accept the fundamental Constitutional provisions on Islam as the official religion and freedom of religion entrenched in the Constitution.  I fully believe that Malaysia’s religious diversity is an asset and strength for Malaysia and 30 million Malaysians and not a liability or weakness.

I believe that all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or political affiliation, should be able to pray together for national unity and harmony, good governance, democracy, save Malaysia from the national trajectories towards a failed and rogue state, and liberate the country and Malaysians from the rampant corruption, abuses of power, widespread socio-economic policies and nation-building failures presently plaguing the country.

Will any Minister propose at the Cabinet that such inter-religious prayers be held all over the country for Malaysians, regardless of their faith, to come together in unison to pray for these common Malaysian goals?

I will fully participate in such prayer sessions.

Will all Barisan Nasional Ministers and top UMNO/Barisan Nasional leaders make a commitment to take part in such  National Inter-Religious Prayers sessions throughout Malaysia  for national unity, democracy, good governance and social-economic justice in Malaysia?

Thirdly, there is even an attempt post twin by-elections to picture me as anti-Chinese and having betrayed the Chinese community, like the lie and falsehood presently spread  by the Deputy Education Minister and MCA Youth leader, Chong Sin Woon that I have invited PAS to rejoin Pakatan Harapan after the two by-elections.

Pakatan Harapan have suffered setbacks in the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections but this must be taken as part of the ups and downs of a political struggle and can be no excuse for opportunism or unprincipled short-cut to the chimerical objective of victory for victory’s sake.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 June 2016, 9:51 am and is filed under
Constitution
,
Elections
,
Islam
,
Malays
,
Pak Samad
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Political Islam will go the same way as nationalism and communism

Moncef Marzouki

Middle East Eye

15 June 2016

After the demise of nationalism, pan-Arabism and communism, Islamism is now facing its inevitable decline

Over the past half century, throughout which time I have been politically active, I have witnessed the rise and decline of three waves of political thought: nationalism, pan-Arabism and communism. Today, I am about to see the decline of a fourth wave, Islamism, after witnessing its launch in the early 1970s and reaching its peak in the late 1990s.

Some might argue the contrary, pointing to the increasing numbers of bearded men and veiled women visible in streets all over the world. They’d point to news reporting the actions of armed religious groups. Or direct my attention to the Islamic resistance Hamas, charities helping the poor, the uncorrupt ruling party in Turkey, or the Muslim Brotherhood’s standing up to the Egyptian dictatorship.

I am not disputing any of that. But many will remember that when we were young in the 1970s, the Soviet Union was seen as a power that will stay for the next thousand years. That communism will conquer the world and take hold of the future, leaving all other ideologies in the dustbin of history. Some intellectuals might remember the days when you couldn’t appear as politically intelligent or ethical if you weren’t Marxist or at least trying to be.

Who would forget the fashion of miniskirts for women or the long hair and leftist beards for men, invading all cities of the world? Or the spread of communist armed movements in Europe, Latin America and reaching even Japan?

All of this collapsed like cardboard, albeit gradually, but not many people foresaw it. That’s exactly what is happening today with regards to the Islamist current.

But before going further, let me note that I am not talking about Islam: the religion of our fathers and forefathers, the backbone of this nation, the spiritual relationship between Muslims and the Creator, the cultural relationship that binds the faith with its followers.

Also, I am not talking about preaching Islam: the education necessary to strengthen morality, which the great Prophet came to spread among people. What I am referring to is the wave of Islamic political movements – of all variations – that has made Islam its reference and its banner for mobilising people and reaching power.

Like other political currents, Islamism expanded as a result of society’s wish to solve all or some of its problems after trying other alternatives. Add to it a sense of optimism with honest faith that society has finally found “the solution”: the key theory to understanding all problems and a practical guide to solve them.

But as movements have their climax, they too eventually decline. After their trial period, societies ask awkward questions: Have you fulfilled all of your promises? Did you live up to the high hopes that were placed on you? In the end, what did you achieve?

Unfortunately, the norm has been the failure of those movements in the most difficult of trials. They are tested by a tough reality that has an astonishing ability to resist change and alter paths, leading to people’s disparity before looking for a new current.

Nationalist states have failed by becoming oppressive and corrupt regimes, which forgot that that there is no meaning in nationalism without the citizens of the nation. They have also failed by showing that independence – which is necessary – does not automatically lead to freedom and prosperity. That the people most of the time replace a foreign occupation with a domestic one.

Pan-Arabist states have failed, not only in unifying the peoples of the (Arab) nation but by tearing apart the ill-fated parts that were under their control. So you can forget about liberating Palestine. Today, we are witnessing the fall to the absolute abyss when a regime destroys its people and nation just to hold on to the ruler’s chair – floating on a sea made from the blood of Syrians.

Communism failed when the Chinese Communist Party has become the protector of capitalism. When the communist parties in Italy and France lost their presence after initially being the nemesis of conservative regimes in those two countries. And I’m not even mentioning the former Soviet Union and the states of the Eastern Bloc.

It would be arrogant to say that the Islamist political current would be immune from the laws of rise and decline. The symptoms of failure are now evident. They are threefold:

The ruling political Islamists

In most cases, they use an ideological cover for a tyranny that is no less repressive and corrupt than any other system of government that rules in the name of nationalism, pan-Arabism or communism.

The armed Islamist opposition

If we exclude legitimate movements of resistance, such as Hamas in Gaza, Lebanon’s Hezbollah up to 2006, or the groups that are fighting the Syrian tyrant, we can say that the rest of the armed Islamist groups constitute the biggest contemporary disaster that the Arab and Muslim nations – and even Islam – are facing.

In their absurd adventures abroad, such groups have not only succeeded in giving the West an excuse to impose a military presence on our land, but they have also poisoned the lives of tens of millions of Muslims living in Europe and America. Thanks to them, the whole world regard us as a nation that has nothing to add other than breeding terrorism. We are perceived as a threat to the rest of the world even though 90 percent of the victims of such groups are Arabs and Muslims.

In addition to their infighting, sectarian clashes, and bloodshed – which defies the teachings of Islam – such groups have given authoritarian regimes the greatest gift. They’ve allowed these regimes to carry the “war on terror” banner while having the support of the West. These groups have helped bury the Arab Spring, as they realised that peaceful popular uprisings are the real alternative to oppression and not them.

Political Islamists’ civil opposition

It is ironic that we see today that the branches of political Islamism, whether armed or civil, are effectively supporting the ancient regime, albeit in their own different ways. Instead of making alliances with the forces that have projects for the future, we see political Islamists in more than one Arab state becoming a partner with the establishment that the people of the Arab Spring had revolted against. After failing to replace the old order, they have decided to join it.

Here lies another great gift to the ancient regime, which no longer sees these movements as a threat as it wins them over in exchange of a symbolic participation in power.

We need to pay close attention to the significance of abandoning the Islamic name in such parties. This is the first phase. The second would be their abandoning of the Islamic reference itself. Communist parties have previously made similar moves: with the name change came disowning the dictatorship of the proletariat. They are now dressed in the garment of democracy, while adopting a rosy form of socialism that does not frighten anyone. But these moves do not prevent decline but rather speed it up.

In the end, most of these Islamist parties would mutate into right-wing parties looking for a place in power, even if it’s at the price of being in harmony with foreign dictates or corrupt – or uncorrupt – capital. In other words, by all the classical, political Machiavellian means. It’s the final phase of their fall. These parties have failed to “moralise” politics, as they have been claiming is their aim for a long time. Instead, politics have managed to “Machiavellise” Islamist parties.

It would be wrong to assume that I wish readers to give up belief in all political ideologies, as a bid to promote my belief – that is democracy. I think that democracy will not be exempt from the laws of rise and decline that applies to other political ideas, and for the same reasons – despite my belief that it is the least bad solution and despite my holding on to it.

There is a big gap between the shining theory of “by the people for the people” and the sad reality of corrupt money taking charge of the media and politicians. People are easily misled: they had elected Hitler before and tomorrow may vote for Trump. We see the example of the new president of the Philippines, who wants to throw human rights in the bin.

It would be a bigger mistake to assume that I am settling personal scores as a result of the failure of previous alliances I had with political Islamists. This was a necessity in the era that Tunisia went through and has now ended indefinitely.

I am neither totally pessimistic nor unreservedly optimistic, but instead somewhere in the middle. Pessimists do not know that the power of good never stops while optimists underestimate the will of evil powers. I know that holding onto hope does spare you hardship but I also never surrender to illusions even in times of victory.

If I’m permitted to remind readers that I am a medical doctor, and hence I view all ideologies as prescriptions designed to cure societies of their ills. A doctor does not remain in despair for long if a remedy has failed. Nor would a doctor take pleasure in or make false accusations against his peers should they fail. It is suffice that he learns from his experiments so that he can continue his research – most importantly for the lives of people.

Humanity will continue trying all sorts of ideologies. This means that the future will hold unimaginable new political waves. Some might not be as successful as others before them. But that process will only stop with the end of humanity itself.

I don’t know if liberalism will follow the natural course of other ideologies. But what I am sure of is that the demands for freedom, dignity and justice will never die.

– Moncef Marzouki was the president of Tunisia from 2011 to 2014. A neurologist by profession, he spent many years defending human rights during the dictatorship of former Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, which was toppled by the Arab Spring uprising. He founded the Congress for the Republic party but in 2015 he launched a new political party named Al-Irada (The Will).

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 June 2016, 7:42 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


BSI Appealing Swiss Regulator Actions Against It Over 1MDB

by John Letzing

Wall Street Journal

June 23, 2016

BSI says Finma actions are “unlawful” and “disproportionate”

ZURICH—BSI SA, a Swiss bank embroiled in the legal controversy surrounding Malaysian state investment fund 1Malaysia Development Bhd., said on Thursday that it is appealing “flawed” actions taken against it by Switzerland’s financial regulator.

The Swiss regulator, Finma, issued a sternly worded statement in May, saying that BSI had committed “serious” breaches of money-laundering regulations in its dealings with the Malaysian fund, 1MDB, and had executed a number of large transactions for the fund “despite clearly suspicious indications.” Finma ordered BSI to pay 95 million Swiss francs ($99 million) in profits tied to its business with 1MDB to Switzerland’s public coffers.

Finma also said it was starting enforcement proceedings against two unidentified former managers at the Lugano-based bank.

On Thursday, BSI said Finma’s communication about actions taken against the bank “has severely harmed the reputation of the bank and its employees.” BSI added that it “challenges Finma’s assessment of the facts, and holds that the measures [Finma] ordered are unlawful and disproportionate.”

BSI said it has lodged its appeal with the Swiss Federal Administrative Court. A BSI spokesman declined to comment further on what remedies the bank is seeking.

A Finma spokesman said that its decisions can be challenged and are subject to judicial review, and declined to comment further.

Finma’s action against BSI in May corresponded with related action taken by authorities in Singapore—which was the locus of BSI’s business with 1MDB, as The Wall Street Journal has previously reported. Singapore’s central bank revoked BSI’s local banking license and asked prosecutors to investigate some of the bank’s senior employees.

BSI — which is being acquired by EFG International, a Zurich-based bank — said later that its Singapore subsidiary continues to operate normally, adding that its license would only be pulled in the future as BSI is absorbed by EFG International.

Finma’s action also came alongside an announcement from Switzerland’s Office of the Attorney General that it was opening criminal proceedings against BSI. The attorney general’s office said its decision was based on evidence it had gathered as part of its investigation of 1MDB, and on issues raised by Finma.

Investigators are gathering evidence about 1MDB in at least seven countries. Some investigators believe as much as $6 billion was siphoned from 1MDB, much of it funneled through BSI in Singapore, according to court records, documents viewed by The Wall Street Journal and people familiar with the probes, the Journal has reported. 1MDB was established several years ago by Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak to spur economic development.

Mr. Najib has denied wrongdoing or taking money for personal gain. He has said money he received was a legitimate donation from Saudi Arabia and that most of it was returned. Malaysia’s attorney general agreed the money came from Saudi Arabia legally and that most of the money was returned, and cleared Mr. Najib of wrongdoing. 1MDB has denied wrongdoing and said it is cooperating with investigations in Malaysia and abroad.

Finma has said that BSI failed to adequately monitor its relationships with clients who had ties to 1MDB and maintained about 100 accounts at the bank.

BSI said on Thursday that all of its client relationships related to 1MDB were closed in early 2015. Since the fall of 2013, the bank said, it had been “in continuous and transparent contact with Finma relating to…1MDB and related matters.”

“BSI acknowledges certain internal shortcomings in the past,” the bank said. “Where deficiencies have been recognized, BSI has taken, and continues to take corrective measures.”

                This entry was posted on Friday, 24 June 2016, 6:41 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Goldman Sachs, a ‘Nama letter’ and the links to a $6bn fraud probe

Simon Rowe

Irish Independent

19/06/2016

When a Wall Street star left under a cloud, the ‘smoking gun’ was a letter destined for our bad bank

A senior ex-Goldman Sachs banker who quit the Wall Street firm after being investigated over a falsified assurance letter – which, it is believed, he had sent to a European bank to assist a Malaysian tycoon’s bid to purchase property from Nama – has become embroiled in a $6bn global embezzlement probe.

Tim Leissner, who had close ties to the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund 1MDB and was considered Goldman Sach’s point man in Singapore dealing with the fund, was interviewed on January 19 this year in relation to “inaccurate and unauthorised statements” made by him in a June 2015 reference letter.

According to filings with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the US securities industry’s self-regulating body, the letter was written without Goldman Sach’s knowledge or approval.

Sources close to the case said Leissner’s letter had included details about the finances of his client, who is believed to be well-known Malaysian tycoon Jho Low, while overstating the extent to which Goldman Sachs had done due diligence on him.

The letter, which vouched for Low and his finances to a financial institution in Europe, was to be used to help Low reach a deal to buy real estate from the National Asset Management Agency, it is believed.

A day after Goldman Sachs quizzed Leissner over the unauthorised assurance letter, he tendered his resignation with immediate effect. It is not clear if Low progressed any deal with Nama on foot of the letter.

Based in Singapore, Leissner had been a chief advisor to the state investment fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad, or 1MDB, that netted Goldman Sachs hundreds of millions of dollars in commissions for bond sales. The investment bank earned an estimated $593m in commissions and expenses from three bond sales totalling about $6.5bn since 2009.

The fund is one of the biggest investment groups in the world, with advisers including French billionaire Bernard Arnault.

Goldman has severed ties with the controversial fund that is now the subject of a $6bn international embezzlement investigation covering five countries including France, Switzerland and the UK, and allegations that $681m was routed to private bank accounts owned by Malaysia’s Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Mr Razak has denied accusations of corruption, which have dogged his government for months. US investigators probing the troubled Malaysian state investment fund have subpoenaed Leissner, Goldman Sachs’ former chairman for Southeast Asia. He denies any wrongdoing.

1MDB has said all its investments are accounted and that it would co-operate with any investigations.

Goldman Sachs hasn’t been accused of any wrongdoing.

Billionaire tycoon Jho Low, who helped set up 1MDB, has strongly denied that he benefited from alleged improprieties linked to the fund.

Low is well-known in Irish property circles after his Wynton Group firm became embroiled in the bitter and highly public boardroom battle that broke out between Paddy McKillen and the Barclay Brothers for control of the landmark Claridge’s, Connaught and Berkeley hotels in London.

The Malaysian-based investor, with backing from 1MDB, approached Nama over buying Derek Quinlan’s loans.

According to court filings in the subsequent court action between McKillen and the Barclays, Low “acquired a debt due from Mr Quinlan to Nama in April 2011 which was secured on part of Mr Quinlan’s shareholding in the company, bidding more for the debt than the Barclay interests were prepared to pay. The debt was acquired through an associate company called JQ2”.

A letter from Wynton Group to shareholders in the hotel group in January 2011 stated that financing for the offer had “in principle been fully underwritten by Malaysian government-backed investment funds”.

However, media reports at the time stated that Nama was initially reluctant to engage with 1MDB despite the size of its coffers.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 24 June 2016, 8:32 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on Najib to convene special Parliament meeting before National Day on August 31 to debate the  country’s burning issues, including Najib’s twin global scandals, the NSC Act and worsening racial/religious polarisation highlighted by Pahang mufti’s incendiary “kafir harbi” statement

I call on the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak to convene a special Parliament meeting before National Day on August 31 to debate the burning issues in the country, including Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin global scandals, the National Security Council (NSC) Act and the worsening racial/religious polarisation in the country highlighted by the Pahang mufti’s incendiary “kafir harbi” statement.

Parliament adjourned on May 26 and is next scheduled to reconvene on Oct. 17 – a recess of some five months.

In an era of fast-changing developments, especially with many burning national issues crying out for answers and solutions, it is the height of irresponsibility for Parliament to adjourn for as long as some five months and this is why Najib should convene a special meeting of Parliament before National Day on August 31, where the two newly-elected MPs from Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar can officially take their oath of office.

There are many national burning issues  awaiting answers or resolutions, and I will touch on three of them.

First, there are Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin global scandals.

There are  those who think that Najib’s twin mega scandals have been  buried  good and proper as a result of BN’s victories in the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections, and if this is also Najib’s thinking, he will find that this may be his greatest mistake in his political life.

Najib’s twin mega scandals are not Malaysian-level  scandals which can be swept under the carpet by the powers-that-be in Malaysia  by intimidating or silencing journalists  and critics or by   closing down local publications, but global scandals with at least seven countries carrying out independent investigations into the the multi-billion ringgit 1MDB embezzlement, money-laundering and corruption at the global level, and which are completely outside the reach and  ability of the Malaysian Prime Minister to influence or close them down.

In fact, in the week after the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections which UMNO/BN leaders are claiming should bring an end to the controversy over the 1MDB and donation twin mega  scandals, there have been at least three 1MDB developments making global news, including the role of the Penang billionaire Jho Low in the 1MDB scandal.

As the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report on 1MDB has only revealed the “tip of the iceberg” and even its weak recommendations had not been fully implemented by the Najib government, a special Parliament meeting is warranted to deal with the worst global scandal in the nation’s history.

Secondly, Parliament must also convene urgently to deal with the National Security Council (NSC) Act, as both the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General had not acted on the advice of the Conference of Rulers to refine the NSC Act before it became law, which both of them had undertaken to do in February.

Thirdly, the worsening racial and religious polarisation in the country, highlighted by the Pahang state mufti’s incendiary and seditious statement classifying non-Muslim Malaysians as “kafir harbi” who could be slain.

What is the Prime Minister and the  Cabinet’s stand on the Pahang mufti’s statement, and in particular its appearance on the front-page of the UMNO mouthpiece, Utusan Malaysia?

If I had made a similar statement suggesting that Malaysians, whether Malays or non-Malays, could be  easily slain, I would be arrested within  a matter of hours for commission of a serious criminal offence – and rightly so.

Do we still have the rule of law in Malaysia?

In fact, going by the Pahang mufti’s statement, all the first five Prime Ministers would have fallen under his condemnation, for Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein, Tun Mahathir and Tun Abdullah had never agreed with PAS’ hudud proposals.

Are the first five Prime Ministers so guilty and culpable that they would deserve similar condemnation as made by the Pahang mufti?

The Pahang mufti’s incendiary and seditious statement on “kafir harbi” would give an extra fillip to the secessionist movement for Sarawak and Sabah, which would already have  been greatly encouraged by the Brexit victory in the UK referendum for the United Kingdom to leave the European Community.

Is this what UMNO and Barisan Nasional want, as the Pahang mufti’s incendiary and seditious statement on “kafir harbi” was given front-page treatment by the UMNO mouthpiece, Utusan Malaysia?

It is no exaggeration to say that the Pahang state mufti’s seditious and incendiary statement on “kafir harbi” is the most irresponsible statement made by any state mufti in the nation’s history, and unless immediately rectified, will cast a long shadow over the 59th National Day celebrations on August 31 and 53rd Malaysia Day celebrations on Sept. 16.

(Speech at the Johor Jaya kopitiam ceramah  in Johor Bahru on Saturday, 25th June 2016 at 11 am)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 June 2016, 7:57 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Islam
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Three cries for Malaysia – that in run-up to the  53rd Malaysia Day  and 59th National Day   celebrations, a state mufti could classify non-Muslim Malaysians as “kafir harbi” who could be slain

I cry for Malaysia – firstly,  that in the run-up to the 53rd Malaysia Day on Sept. 16 and 59th National Day celebrations on August 31, a state mufti could classify non-Muslims Malaysians as “kafir harbi” who could be slain.

I further  cry for Malaysia that the state mufti’s statement was made a day after the Islamic State IS) released a new propaganda video where a Malaysian identified as Mohd Rafi Udin from Negri Sembilan warned that there would be “no peace” for police personnel in the Bukit Aman headquarters, and urged IS supporters in Malaysia to employ whatever means necessary to kill non-believers – “Kill them wherever you meet them…if you have a car, hit them…Use your weapon and knives to stab them in the chest”.

The state mufti’s statement has prompted the reaction, “Daesh is already in Malaysia”, among many Malaysians.

My third cry for Malaysia is that the mufti’s statement  was made as part of a high-level UMNO/BN political conspiracy after the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections to incite hatred and animosity among the diverse races and religions to accummulate political capital, spearheaded by the UMNO propaganda mouthpiece, Utusan Malaysia, as if there is no rule of law in Malaysia and in utter contempt of six decades of nation-building efforts.

For 59 years from 1957 to 2016, under the premiership of the first five Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein Onn, Tun Mahathir and Tun Abdullah, no state mufti would have made such an incendiary statement and be carried on the front-page of the UMNO mouthpiece – virtually declaring war not only on non-Muslims but on Muslims as well, as the first five Prime Ministers of Malaysia, their cabinet Ministers as well as their MPs, including UMNO MPs for some 60 years, had not agreed with PAS’ hudud proposals.

The UMNO Supreme Council met last night but  it was only interested in sacking former Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and the former Kedah Mentri Besar, Datuk Mukhriz Mahahtir as UMNO members over Dajtuk Seri Najib Razak’s  RM55 billion 1MDB  and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin global scandals but it has no word about state mufti’s incendiary statement – which would be completely unthinkable during the times of the first five Malaysian Prime Ministers.

PAS version of hudud is not only opposed by DAP, but also by other component parties including MCA, MIC, Gerakan as well as Sarawak’s PBB including its president and Sarawak Chief Minister, Adenan Satem and federal minister, Nancy Shukri.

Are they to be killed as well?

The Brexit victory in the UK referendum yesterday will give a fillip to the secession movement for  Sarawak and Sabah and the state mufti’s incendiary and divisive statement will give further justification for such a movement,  with the strengthening of forces to undermine the  fundamental   principles and features of the Malaysian Constitution and the Malaysia Agreement 1963.

Quo Vadis, Malaysia?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 June 2016, 8:38 am and is filed under
Islam
,
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meeting should be convened to declare the BN stand on Pahang state mufti’s incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement

When I suggested last month that an emergency meeting of the  Barisan Nasional Supreme Council should be requisitioned over what happened in Parliament on May 26, where the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, fast-tracked Hadi’s hudud motion and violated the 43-year Barisan Nasional stand and consensus that PAS’ hudud proposal was not appropriate for Malaysia’s plural  society and against the fundamental provisions of the 1957 Merdeka  Constitution and 1963 Malaysia Agreement, there was not a single leader  from the 14-party  Barisan Nasional coalition who dared to take up the suggestion.

Since then, the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar parliamentary by-elections had been held with unexpectedly big victories for the UMNO/Barisan Nasional candidates.

But what do the twin Barisan Nasional by-election victories mean in terms of Hadi’s hudud motion, which will need another Ministerial motion to “fast-track” it in the parliamentary agenda when Parliament reconvenes on Oct. 17, so that it could be given priority over government business to be presented to Parliament for resolution.

Will the twin Barisan Nasional by-election victories mean that there will be another Ministerial motion at the end of the year to fast-track Hadi’s hudud motion, or will it mean that there will no Ministerial motion to fast-track Hadi’s hudud motion and that it will left in limbo as had  been the case with Hadi’s hudud motion in the past?

All the leaders of the other 13 parties in the Barisan Nasional coalition are keeping mum on the subject as none of them know what is going to happen  in Parliament at the end of the year as it will all depend on what would best serve the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s interests to ensure his own political survival.

This is a sad commentary that the Barisan Nasional has long ceased to be a coalition of equals, where the Prime Minister is ‘primus inter pares’ but a very lop-sided political coalition where the UMNO President and  Prime Minister, can singly, unilaterally and arbitrarily disregard 43-year-old Barisan Nasional consensus and decide what should be Barisan Nasional policy as happened in Parliament on May 26.

The Barisan Nasional Supreme Council should be convened to declare the BN stand on Pahang state mufti’s incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement, which not only violates Barisan Nasional policy and consensus,  but threatens the unity and solidarity of the Malaysian Federation especially with reference to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 – apart from being a most  contemptuous disregard of 59 years of Malaysian nation building and the fundamental Rukunegara principle in upholding the Rule of Law.

Is there  any Barisan Naisonal leader  who will come forward to requisition a Barisan Nasionl Supreme Council meeting for BN to take an unequivocal stand on the Pahang state mufti’s incendiary and sedition “kafir harbi” statement, which tantamounts to inciting an open declaration of war against both non-Muslims and Muslims  on the ground of not supporting Hadi’s hudud motion?

This does not appear to be likely, as not a single Minister, not even the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister,  has demanded that the Pahang State Mufti should  be an exemplary Malaysian and  must retract his seditious and incendiary “kafir harbi” statement.

Who will be the first Ministers to speak up to repudiate and  completely dissociate from the Pahang state mufti’s seditious and incendiary “kafir harbi” statement?

(Speech at the DAP Pengkalan Rinting kopitiam ceramah in Johor Baru on Sunday, June 26, 2016 at 9 am)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 26 June 2016, 7:47 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pahang Mufti Abdul Rahman should repent – or let him state specifically whether I am “kafir harbi” who should be killed

The Pahang Mufti Datuk Seri Dr. Abdul Rahman Osman should not twist and turn and should repent or let him state specifically whether I am “kafir harbi” who should be killed or slain.

May be Abdul Ramabn should also state  when I became “kafir harbi”?

I have taken the oath as a Member of Parliament 10 times to “faithfully discharge my duties…to the best of my ability” and that “I will bear true faith and allegiance to Malaysia and will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”.

Can a Malaysian who had subscribed 10 times to the oath as an MP to “bear true faith and allegiance to Malaysia” and to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution” become a “kafir habir” to be killed or slain?

Or did I become a “kafir harbi” when I stood up in Parliament in 1978 to  defend PAS to oppose the UMNO-controlled Barisan Nasional government’s declaration of state of emergency in Kelantan to topple to PAS state government?

Or did I become a “kafir harbi” when in 1985  I  deplored the government handling of the tragic Memali incident which killed 18 people and called for a Royal Commission of Inquiry?

Or did I become a “kafir harbi” in 1998 when my son,  Lim Guan Eng went to jail for defending the honour and dignity of an underaged Malay girl, losing his position as MP for Kota Melaka, his parliamentary pension as well disenfranchised and deprived of right to vote or to stand for elective office for five years from release from Kajang Prison in August 1999?

Or did I become a “kafir harbi” in 2000 when I denounced the Federal Government for hijacking the five per cent oil royalty of Terengganu because PAS  had won the Terengganu State Government in the 1999 general election and Hadi Awang had  become the state’s Mentri Besar?

I do not often agree with the Perkasa President, Datuk Ibrahim Ali, but I acknowledge and thank him for speaking up for what is right and wrong when he said that the Pahang Mufti was excessive to label DAP as “kafir harbi” simply due to political and other differences.

I am really surprised that on the eve of the 59th National Day celebrations and 53rd Malaysia Day celebrations, the Pahang State Mufti could make such an irresponsible,  incendiary and  seditious statement as to classify DAP as “Kafir Harbi” whose leaders, members and supporters  could be killed or slain for opposing Islam when DAP had never opposed Islam or any other religion as we fully subscribe to the Malaysian Constitution and the Rukunegara principles recognising Malaysia as a multi-religious nation with freedom of religion and Islam as the official religion.

Had the Pahang Mufti been given assurance that no action would be taken against him for his incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement, and is this why there is complete silence from Cabinet Ministers and Barisan Nasional leaders requiring Abdul Rahman to retract and apologise for his statement – why the MCA President, Liow Tiong Lai,  avoided press questioning on the issue?

What is of concern is not only Pahang Mufti’s incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement, but that it was given front-page treatment by Utusan Malaysia, the official mouthpiece of UMNO.

Had the UMNO President and Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, given his nod and blessing  to Utusan Malaysia to give Abdul Rahman’s incendiary and seditious statement national prominence and  front-page treatment?

Malaysians regardless of race, religion, region or political affiliaiton, expect the  Cabinet meeting on Wednesday to take a stand on the Pahang Mufti’s incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement.

A refusal or avoidence by the Cabinet to take a stand on the Pahang State Mufti’s statement, which has such far-reaching consequences not only for the Malaysian Constitutiton and Rukunegara principles, but the future of Malaysian plural nation-building, will be an eloquent statement by itself.

The issue of Cabinet reshuffle becomes of no consequence if the Cabinet is not prepared to take a stand on the Pahang Mufti’s incendiary and seditious statement on “kafir harbi”.

Will the Cabinet pass or flop this crucial test on Wednesday?

(Speech at the  Gelang Patah kopitiam ceramah at Taman Impian Emas, GP on Monday, June 27, 2016 at 9 am)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 27 June 2016, 11:55 am and is filed under
Islam
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


UMNO/BN must be voted out of Putrajaya at least once if Malaysia is to become a normal democratic country and break the  present national trajectory trending down the slippery slope towards a fractured, failed and rogue state

Many are asking about the future of Malaysia after the two big Barisan Nasional wins in the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections a week ago, with the backdrop of the BN landslide victory in the Sarawak State General Election and the previous Teluk Intan by-election.

Is it still possible  for Malaysians to hope for political change in Putrajaya at  the 14th General Election whether in 2018 or a year earlier in July or August next year or in the near future?

Let us have a reality check as we have travelled quite a political distance in Malaysia. Only eight years ago, before the 2008 General Election, if any Malaysian was asked if it was possible foresee a change of Federal Government, the answer would be an unanimous and and unambiguous “No”.

But the “political tsunami” of the 2008 General Election had completely changed the political landscape, and what had been “unthinkable” and “impossible”  had been transformed into a “thinkable”,  “possible” and “achievable”, and the question of a  change of Federal Government  has taken the quantum leap from “whether” to “when” and “how”.

The 2013 General Election was fought on the platform of a change of Federal Government, and although 53% of the voters voted for change, victory was denied them because of the undemocratic electoral system which allowed Datuk Najib Razak to become the nation’s first minority Prime Minister by winning 60 per cent of the parliamentary seats though only securing a minority  of 47% of the popular vote.

Malaysia is now  an extraordinary paradox – on the one hand,  Najib Razak an increasingly more powerful and unshakeable  Prime Minister of Malaysia inside the country , while internationally he is under increasing siege perceived  as corrupt, haunted and hounded by the RM55 billion 1MDB global scandal (which contained within it the RM4.2 billion “donation” scandal) which is being investigated by seven other countries.

Is it possible to resolve this paradox of a Prime Minister of Malaysia who seems to be  getting stronger in the country while at the same time under increasing siege in  the world stage as a corrupt political leader, dragging down the good name and standing of the country  in gaining notoriety as one of the world’s top countries for global corruption.

We can ignore this paradox if we can isolate ourselves from the rest of the world, but  as we are in a global society and our economy is greatly dependant on the world economy, we cannot pretend that this does not present Malaysia with a grave national crisis with global repercussions.

The incendiary and seditious statement on “kafir harbi” by the Mufti of Pahang, which had never been uttered by any state mufti in  59 years of the nation’s history since Merdeka in 1957 and 53 years of formation of Malaysia since 1963, should be a warning signal that Malaysia is falling  dangerously down the slippery slope of a fractured  and failed state, and why it is urgent and imperative  to save Malaysia from the fate of a  fractured, failed and rogue state.

UMNO/BN must be voted out of Putrajaya at least once if Malaysia is to become a normal democratic country and break the  present national trajectory trending down the slippery slope towards a fractured, failed and rogue state.

Malaysia  has yet to become a normal democratic country where voters can change the party or political coalition in  government peacefully and democratically through the ballot box like other mature democracies without inviting national catastrophes.

In the past 60 years, there had been six democratic and peaceful changes of government in the Untied Kingdom, but not a single time in Malaysia. Even Philippines and Indonesia have more democratic traditions and practices than Malaysia, as Filipinos and Indonesians can use the ballot box to change the party or political coalition in power without any national disaster or calamities.

The UMNO/BN coalition must lose the  Federal government at least once if the present national trajectory towards a fractured, failed and rogue state is to be stopped.

No country in the world can become a great nation if globally it is regarded as an increasingly corrupt and dictatorial regime while at home it tightens its grip on power controls to allow for rampant  corruption and widespread abuses of power.

Nobody wants UMNO to be destroyed, and I do  not believe that UMNO is so frail and faulty that  if it  is evicted from Putrajaya in a general election,  UMNO will perish and die.

On the contrary, I believe  UMNO will have the vitality and resilience to reform and renew  itself when it is out in the political wilderness to  transform itself from a party serving the interests of UMNO leaders and their cronies into a  a party  genuinely dedicated to the welfare of the three million UMNO members, the Malays and Malaysians at large.

This is a  route which had been taken by other political parties or coalitions in other countries  which had been ousted from political power after decades in government as the party which had brought about the nation’s independence or founding, like Taiwan, South Korea and India, and there is no reason why UMNO is incapable of reform and renewal like the Kuomintang of Taiwan or Congress Party of India.

If UMNO Is defeated once in national elections, it will be  great national service for it will enable Malaysia to become normal democratic country, end the national trajectory trending down the slippery slope towards a fractured, failed and rogue state while allowing UMNO to renew and reform itself to be more democratic and competitive to regain national power in future general elections.

If Malaysia is to become a normal democratic nation, we must debunk the various political myths which had allowed the politics of race to dominate the politics in the land since Merdeka.

The myths that  the Chinese in Malaysia will perish if MCA is defeatedly badly  and that the Indians in Malaysia will suffer if the MIC is given an electoral beating in general elections have been debunked in the 13th General Election.

But the evil sway of the politics of communalism will not end  unless the third myth that Malays will lose political power and become strangers in their own land  if UMNO is defeated is also exposed and debunked.

Only five days ago, the former Chief Justice Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad was trotted out to repeat the canard that if UMNO is defeated, Malays will lose political power which they cannot recover in the future.

This is a double lie, for the Malays will not lose political power if UMNO is evicted from Putrajaya, so gh  question of the Malays recovering political power never arises.

The  former Chief Justice cannot answer  the two questions which had been posed by the National Laureate Pak Samad to expose the lie of such a political myth, viz:

“How are Malays under threat? How can religion (Islam) and Malays be threatened when those in power have been Malay for over five decades?

“What have they (Malay leaders) been doing for five decades (if Malays can be under threat)?”

The demographic reality is the surest guarantee that the Malays will not lose political power whatever happens to Najib or to UMNO in the next general election, as the Malays in Malaysia will continue to exercise political power in Malaysia as there is no way they will lose  political power.

In 1970 Malaysia’s population comprised 44.32% Malays, 34.34% Chinese, 8.99% Indians, 11.89% non-Malay Bumiputeras, 0.67% others.

In 2010, the percentage of Malays in the Malaysian population increased to 55.07%, Chinese reduced to 24.34%, Indians dropped to 7.35%, non-Malay Bumiputeras maintained at 11.94% and 1.3% others.

During the 13th general election, 52.63% of the voters were Malays, 29.68% Chinese, 7.31% Indians, 8.96% non-Malay Bumiputeras and 1.43% others.

Out of the 165 Parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia, 114 are Malay majority seats representing some 70%, 22 Chinese majority seats (13%) and 29 mixed seats. There is not a single Indian majority seat.

With the triple factors establishing overwhelming Malay predominance in the Malaysian political scene – the demographic make-up of the general population, the electorate and the parliamentary constituencies – can Tun Abdul Hamid explain how the Malays will lose political power if UMNO is defeated in a general eleciton?

When the political myth that UMNO is the protector of the Malays are debunked, just like the myths that MCA is the protector of the Chinese and MIC the protector of the Indians had been debunked, then Malaysia will have liberated itself from the excesses of the politics of race and embark on the new Malaysian politics based on issues, whether Malaysia can end its trajectory towards a fractured, failed and rogue state to find a new direction to fulfil Malaysia’s destiny as a show-case as to how a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-cultural society  could succeed as a united, harmonious, tolerant, democratic, progressive and prosperous nation in a very divided and troubled world.

(Speech at the DAP Pekan Nenas kopitiam ceramah in Pekan Nenas on Sunday, 26th June 2016)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 27 June 2016, 6:58 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kafir Harbi atau Warganegara?: Kepelbagaian Dalam Bingkai Kesatuan.

Prof Dato Dr Siddiq Fadzil

Pengerusi Institut Darul Ehsan (IDE)

27.6.2016

Pembinaan bangsa dalam konteks Malaysia harus berasaskan formula kepelbagaian dalam kesatuan. Kita harus dapat bersikap positif, melihat dan menerima kepelbagaian kaum, agama dan budaya bukan sebagai sumber konflik, sebaliknya sebagai aset kekuatan, kekayaan, kreativiti dan dinamika kemajuan. Bangsa tidak dapat dibina menerusi formula melting pot atau kawah besar peleburan. Tidak ada golongan yang rela jati dirinya dilebur. Kebinekaan atau keragaman budaya tidak menjadi masalah, andainya ia diletakkan dalam bingkai keekaan atau kesatuan.

Formula kepelbagaian dalam kesatuan adalah selaras dan serasi dengan fitrah dan sunnatu’Lah. Tema inilah yang dihuraikan dengan cukup menarik oleh Dr.Muhammad `Imarah dalam bukunya, al-Islam wa al-Ta`addudiyyah: al-Ikhtilaf wa al-Tanawwu` fi Itar al-Wihdah (Islam dan Pluralisme: Perbezaan danKepelbagaian dalam Bingkai Kesatuan).

Segala kewujudan yang kita saksikan pada alam dan kehidupan semuanya memancarkan hakikat kepelbagaian dalam kesatuan–keesaan Pencipta dengan kepelbagaian makhluk ciptaan-Nya; kesatuan keinsanan dengan kepelbagaian bangsa, warna dan bahasanya; kesatuan agama Allah dengankepelbagaian syari`atnya; kesatuan syari`at dengan kepelbagaian fiqh, mazhab dan ijtihadnya.

Fitrah sunnatu ‘Llah berupa kepelbagaian dalam bingkai kesatuan itulah yang diaplikasikan oleh Rasulullah s.`a.w. dalam pembinaan ummah negara Madinah sebagaimana yang tercermin dalam perlembagaan ulung Sahifah Madinah, sebuah perlembagaan yang dilatari kepelbagaian kabilah, agama dan budaya warganya.Lewat Sahifah tersebut Rasulullah s.`a.w. telah membentuk ummah: ummahdiniyyah (umat keagamaan) dan ummah siyasiyyah (umat politik).

Ummah diniyyah bersifat eksklusif dan terbatas hanya untuk kaum Muslimin (annahum ummatun wahidatun min duni ‘n-nas), sementara ummah siyasiyyah bersifat inklusif meliputi kaum Muslimin dan orang Yahudi (wa anna Yahuda Bani `Awf ummatun ma`a ‘l-Mu’minin). Kata kunci dalam ungkapan pembentukan ummah politik ini ialah kata ma`a (bersama) iaitu orang Yahudi bersama kaum Muslimin membentuk satu umat(um at Madinah). Ungkapan ma`a al-Muslimin (bersama kaum Muslimin), bukan minal-Muslimin (sebahagian daripada kaum Muslimin), bererti bahawa masyarakat Yahudi tidak menjadi bahagian daripada umat (keagamaan) Islam, tetapi menjadi bahagian daripada umat (politik) Madinah bersama dengan umat Islam.

Peruntukan dalam Sahifah tersebut jelas memberikan status kewarganegaraan penuh (al-muwatanah al-kamilah) kepada masyarakat Yahudi.Se bagai warga umat dan negara Madinah status, hak dan tanggungjawab mereka sama dengan umat Islam.Mereka bukan warganegara kelas dua. Persamaan hak dan tanggungjawab tersebut dicatat dengan ungkapan li al-Yahud dinuhum wa li al-Muslimin dinuhum (Yahud idengan agama mereka, dan kaum Mukminin dengan agama mereka). Ertinyanya perlembagaan ini memberikan hak kebebasan beragama dan membenarkan para penganut pelabagai agama mengamalkan agama masing-masing dan mengekalkan jatidiri keagamaan masing-masing.

Persamaan tanggungjawab pula dicatat dengan ungkapan wa anna al-Yahuda yunfiquna ma`a al-Mu’minin madamu muharibin (masyarakat Yahudi dan kaum Mukminin sama-sama membiayai peperangan apabila negara Madinah diserang). Hak dan tanggungjawab yang sama juga diberikan kepada kabilah-kabilah Arab yang ikut menjadi warga Sahifah Madinah.

Persamaan hak dan tanggungjawab kewarganegaraan antara Muslim dan bukan-Muslim itulah yangkemudiannya terumus dalam prinsip lahum ma lana, wa `alayhim ma `alayna (mereka berhak mendapat apa yang kita dapat, dan memikul tanggungjawab yang sama kita pikul). Demikianlah antara yang tercermin dalam Sahifah Madinah, sebuah perlembagaan Islami yang disemangati kepelbagaian dalam bingkai kesatuan (al-tanawwu` fi itar al-wihdah).

Terdapat anggapan bahawa Sahifah Madinah tidak dapat dijadikan model sebuah negara yang moden, lengkap dan terperinci. Memang perlembagaan nabawi tersebuttidak digubal untuk tujuan itu. Bagaimanapun ia tetap relevan sebagai contoh penterjemahan prinsip dan nilai kenegaraan al-Qur’an ke dalam bentuk sebuah perlembagaan sesuai dengan realiti zaman dan lingkungan. Yang perlu dilihat bukan rinciannya, tetapi prinsip-prinsip dan nilai-nilai dasarnya.

Dengan demikian Sahifah Madinah tetap relevan sebagai acuan menangani masalah pluralisme masyarakat,termasuk isu persamaan status, hak dan tanggungjawab kewarganeraan antara Muslim dan buka Muslim.

Perlembagaan nabawi itulah yang menjadi rujukan Dr.Fathi Osman ketika membahaskan isu tanggungjawab warga bukan-Muslim dalam pertahanan negara.

Katanya,

“The military service may have some religious character for Muslims, but it meanwhile signifies national defense for non Muslims. Non Muslims were allowed to share with Muslims the responsibility of defending Medina in the Prophet’s Constitutional document which he drew up just after his migration there. This did not particularly work, but it cannot affect the validity of the principle.” (Fathi Osman, 2002:153).

Tentunya dari semangat Sahifah Madinah jugalah beliau mendapat keberanian mendukung prinsip persamaan penuh (full equality) Muslim dengan bukan-Muslim dari segi hak dan tanggungjawab,

I do not think Muslims have any legal problem with regards to full equality with non-Muslims in rights and obligations. What emerged as the status of “dhimmis” (non-Muslims within the Muslim state) was historically developed rather than built in the permanent laws of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Many scholars, including the Westerners, admit that the status of non-Muslims in the Muslim world during the Middle Ages,was better than what the Jews or other religious minorities received in the Christian countries in those ages. The important question is: Are Muslims now ready to go further to secure and sanction full equality for the non-Muslim withthem in a contemporary Islamic state? When reservations and “ifs” and “buts” are raised, how can Muslims expect that non-Muslims would be convinced of, or be loyal to, the concept of Islamic state, while they are offered full equality without reservations in a secular democracy? (Fathi Osman,2002:152).

Perbincangan tentang kewarganegaraan orang bukan-Islam selalu dikaitkan dengan status kafir harbi dan dhimmiy yang terkesan tidak disenangi oleh masyarakat bukan-Islam.Sebenarnya telah ramai ulama dan sarjana Muslim yang menganggap pengkategorian tersebut sudah tidak relevan lagi.

Status kafir harbi dan dhimmiy pada hakikatnya tidak membawa pengertian negatif warganegara kelas dua. Ia lebih membawa makna jaminan umatIslam untuk melindungi warga bukan-Islam dari sebarang bentuk penindasan.Bagaimanapun dari segi hukum fiqh tidak ada halangan menggugurkan istilah dhimmiyyun untuk digantikan dengan istilah muwatinun.

Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawiy mengatakan bahawa para fuqaha’ silam umumnya menganggap kaum dhimmiy sebagai ahl al-dar (warga negara Islam) yang bererti mereka bukan orang asing.

Jikademikian mereka sebenarnya adalah ahl al-watan dan seharusnya disebut muwatinun sama seperti warga Muslim. Seterusnya al-Qaradawiy menyarankan agar istilah-istilah tertentu dalam sejarah masa lalu seperti dhimmah dan ahl dhimmah dipadam sahaja dari kamus masa kini kerana tidak lagi dapat diterima oleh masyarakat bukanIslam. Beliau berhujah bahawa Khalifah `Umar ibn al-Khattab r.`a. telah bersetuju memadam istilah yang lebih penting iaitu jizyah apabila kaum Nasrani Bani Taghlib meminta agar ia digantikan dengan istilah sadaqah. (Al-Qaradawiy, Yusuf, 2010:40-42).

Dari segi realitinya status dhimmiy sudah tidak ada sejak abad 19 (zaman Turki`Uthmani). Mengenai fakta ini Al-Ghunaimi menyebut,

“When sultan Abdel Majid issued the Khatti-Sherif of Gulhane, in 1839, proclaiming the principal of equalitybetween the Muslims and the Christians, the classical legal status of the dhimmis, presumably, was to disappear.” (Al-Ghunaimi, Mohammad Talaat, 1968:213).

Bagi rantau ini kepelbagaian dan kemajmukan sudah menjadi bahagian daripadasejarah dan kebudayaannya. Hampir semua agama dan tamadun besar dunia -Islam, Kristian, Hinduisme, Buddhisme, Konfusianisme – telah hadir dan hidup berdampingan dengan harmonis selama berabad-abad. Keunikan rantau ini sebagai daerah terkaya dengan pengalaman dialog ketamadunan memberikan harapan dan optimisme kemampunan membina kesatuan bangsa berlandaskan kalimatin sawa’ dalam pengertian perkongsian suatu set nilai yang disepakati.

Sebagai sesama warganegara, hak dan tanggungjawab – Muslim dan bukan Muslim — pada asasnya adalah sama. Demikianlah ketetapan yang berasaskan prinsip: lahum malana, wa `alayhim ma `alayna (mereka berhak mendapat apa yang kita dapat, dan mereka memikul tanggungjawab yang sama kita pikul). Agama memang tidak menghalang memberikan pelayanan yang baik dan adil kepada warga bukan Muslim,andainya mereka tidak memperlihatkan sikap permusuhan dan penentangan terhadap kaum Muslimin.

Demikianlah yang difirmankan oleh Allah:

Allah tidak melarang kamu berbuat baik dan berlaku adil terhadap orang-orang yang tidak memerangimu dalam urusan agama dan tidak mengusir kamu dari kampung halamanmu. Sesungguhnya Allah Mencintai orang-orang yang berlaku adil.

al-Mumtahanah:8.

Merujuk ayat tersebut al-Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawiy menyebut bahawa berbuat baik dan berlaku adil terhadap warga bukan Islam sedemikian itu termasuklah pemberian ruang untuk mereka menganggotai majlis-majlis perwakilan. (Al-Qaradawiy, Yusuf,1999: 195). Dengan semangat ayat tersebut juga kita boleh membuat rumusan bahawa berbuat baik dan berlaku adil terhadap warga bukan Muslim termasuk juga menepati janji untuk saling mendukung dalam kerjasama politik, khususnya dalam pilihanraya.Justeru, menepati janji adalah bahagian daripada tuntutan syara’.

Dalam konteks Malaysia, rakyat bukan Muslim selayaknya dilayani sebagai saudara setanahair. Mereka bukan lagi kaum kafir harbi dan dhimmiy, suatu pengkategorian yang sudah kehilangan justifikasi kesejarahannya. Perubahan sejarah dan realiti politik telah menjadikan istilah tersebut tidak relevan lagi. Realiti inilah yang diserlahkan oleh Fahmiy Huwaydiy, lalu diungkapkan dengan tegas lewat judul bukunya Muwatinun la Dhimmiyyun (Warganegara, bukan Zimmiy). Kesimpulan Huwaydiy tersebut mendapat dukungan penuh dari al-Qaradawiy yang menyarankan agar istilah tersebut dipadam sahaja kerana tidak lagi dapat diterima oleh kaum bukan Muslim.

Lebih jauh al-Qaradawiy menyebut warga bukan Muslim sebagai saudara ketika merujuk kaum Koptik dengan sebutan ikhwanuna al-Aqbat.Rupa-rupanya ada yang keberatan dengan sebutan saudara untuk orang bukan Muslim (Kristian). Dalam penjelasannya al-Qaradawiy menegaskan bahawa memang mereka adalah saudara kita setanahair.

Dalam penghujahannya al-Qaradawiy merujuk sejumlah ayat dari surah al-Shu`ara’ tentang hubungan persaudaraan (ukhuwwah) di antara para rasul (Nuh, Hud, Salih dan Lut `a.s.) dengan kaum masing-masing (Qawmu Nuh, kaum `Ad, kaum Thamud dan Qawmu Lut) yang semuanya kufur dan mendustakan para rasul itu.Namun demikian al-Qur’an menyebut hubungan antara rasul-rasul tersebut dengan mereka sebagai hubungan persaudaraan:

Dari ayat-ayat tersebut al-Qaradawiy merumuskan bahawa selain persaudaraan keagamaan (ukhuwwat al-din) masih ada lagi bentuk-bentuk persaudaraan yang lain: persaudaraan setanahair (al-ukhuwwat al-wataniyyah), persaudaraan sebangsa (al-ukhuwwat al-qawmiyyah), persaudaraan seikhtisas (al-ukhuwwat al-mihaniyyah), persaudaraan seinsaniah (al-ukhuwwat al-insaniyyah) dan seterusnya.

Sebagai saudara setanahair, warga bukan Muslim dapat menjadi komponen pembentukan satu ummah bersama kaum Muslimin. Demikianlah petunjuk nabawi dalam pembentukan negara berbilang kaum sebagaimana yang didokumentasikan dalam Piagam Madani (Sahifah Madinah). Kaum Muslimin adalah satu ummah, sementara Yahudi juga adalah satu ummah.Tetapi dalam konteks kenegaraan, kedua-duanya dapat bergabung membentuk ummah Madaniyyah, tanpa melebur jati diri keumatan masing-masing.

Berasaskan pertimbangan al-siyasat al-shar`iyyah, tidak ada halangan bagi kaum Muslimin mengadakan pakatan politik dengan parti-parti bukan Islam. Asas pertimbangannya adalah maslahah.Tidak ada nass yang menghalang sekiranya pakatan seumpama itu mengandungi masalahah bagi umat. Atas pertimbangan yang sama, juga tidak ada halangan bagi kaum Muslimin berkongsi kuasa dengan warga bukan Muslim. Pada zaman kerajaan `Abbasiyyah, ketika warga bukan Muslim masih dikategorikan sebagai kaum dhimmiy, al-Mawardiy (yang hidup pada zaman tersebut) dalam kitabnya al-Ahkam al-Siltaniyyah membolehkan mereka menjawat wazir al-tanfidh (menteri pelaksana). Dalam konteks realiti kita hari ini tentunya ruang penyertaan warga bukan Muslim lebih luas lagi.

Keharmonian antara golongan yang beragam dan pelbagai diasaskan di atas suatu set nilai: kemanusiaan, persamaan, keadilan dan seterusnya. Tidak ada golongan yang diunggulkan semata-mata kerana darah keturunan. Keunggulan bukan hak eksklusif golongan tertentu, tetapi ditawarkan kepada semua yang sanggup memenuhi syarat.

Dalam Islam tidak ada ketuanan warisan, yang ada ialah keunggulan bersyarat (khayriyyatun mashrutah). Keunggulan seperti itulah yang tersirat dalam ayat Ali `Imran: Keunggulan (khayriyyah) yang disebut dalam ayat tersebut terkait dengan tiga syarat:

1. Komitmen penegakan nilai-nilai kemakrufan.

2. Kesanggupan berjuang melawan gejala kemunkaran.

3. Beriman dengan Allah dalam erti yang seluas dan semurninya.

Ternyata tidak ada ketuanan yang dipusakai, kerana memang keunggulan tidak diwarisi. Keunggulan harus diraih dengan usaha gigih membina kekuatan watak berasaskan iman dan nilai-nilai murni.

Demikianlah, yang ada hanya keunggulan yang bersyaratkan usaha yang serius (khayriyyatun mashrutatun muktasabah). Al-Qur’an tidak menyebut keunggulan yang berasaskan hak warisan perkauman (al-`unsuriyyat al-mawruthah). Justeru, keunggugulan bukan monopoli sesuatu kaum. Ia ditawarkan terbuka kepada semua yang sanggup memenuhi syarat, termasuk golongan ahl al-kitab.

Siddiq Fadzil.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 28 June 2016, 1:14 am and is filed under
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Who is more dangerous and subversive to the Malaysian nation-building process  – ISIS member Mohd Rafi Udin warning Bukit Aman plice personnel they  will have “no peace” or a state mufti spouting “kafir harbi” edict implying that non-Muslims Malaysians can be killed regardless of rule of law?

Who is more dangerous and subversive to the Malaysian nation-building process  – ISIS member Mohd Rafi Udin warning Bukit Aman plice personnel they  will have “no peace” or a state mufti spouting “kafir harbi” edict implying that non-Muslims Malaysians can be killed regardless of rule of law?

Who is more dangerous and subversive to  the Malaysian nation-building process – ISIS member Mohd Rafi Udin from Negri Sembilan warning that there would be “no peace” for police personnel in the Bukit Aman headquarters, and urging IS supporters in Malaysia to employ whatever means necessary to kill non-believers – “Kill them wherever you meet them…if you have a car, hit them…Use your weapon and knives to stab them in the chest” – or a state mufti spouting “kafir harbi” edict implying that DAP and non-Muslims can be killed regardless of the rule of law?

I think it is the latter who pose a greater threat to the integrity and success of the Malaysian nation-building process than the former, for there  is a Special Branch Counter-Terrorism Division whose special responsibility is to be vigilant and prepared for such ISIS threats, but Malaysia seemed to be completely defenceless to ISIS-minded religious  officials preaching doctrines no different from ISIS.

Pahang mufti Abdul Rahman Osman yesterday insisted that he would neither retract his statement nor apologise to DAP over his earlier remarks labelling DAP as ‘kafir harbi’.

I am still waiting for Abdul Rahman’s response to my speech at the Gelang Patah kopitiam ceramah at Taman Impian Emas yesterday, where I asked him to repent or be honest and courageous enough to state specifically whether I am “kafir harbi” who should be killed or slain.

I also asked Abdul Rahman to state when I became “kafir harbi”, whether it was:

— when I stood up in Parliament in 1978 to defend PAS to oppose the UMNO-controlled Barisan Nasional government’s declaration of state of emergency in Kelantan to topple to PAS state government; or

— when in 1985 I deplored the government handling of the tragic Memali incident which killed 18 people and called for a Royal Commission of Inquiry; or

— when  in 1998  my son, Lim Guan Eng went to jail for defending the honour and dignity of an underaged Malay girl, losing his position as MP for Kota Melaka, his parliamentary pension as well disenfranchised and deprived of right to vote or to stand for elective office for five years from release from Kajang Prison in August 1999; or

— when in 2000  I denounced the Federal Government for hijacking the five per cent oil royalty of Terengganu because PAS had won the Terengganu State Government in the 1999 general election and Hadi Awang had become the state’s Mentri Besar?

The state mufti’s incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement is the most serious and dangerous attack on the basis of the Malaysian Constitution and the Malaysian nation-building process, which is why the Cabinet tomorrow must address this issue or all the Ministers, including the new ones, would have abdicated their national duties and responsibilities.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 28 June 2016, 10:43 am and is filed under
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


First job of reshuffled Cabinet is to prove that the Ministers  of the Najib Cabinet 3.0 after the 13GE is  not a “kafir harbi” Cabinet or like the traditional three monkeys, with eyes that see not, ears that hear not and mouths that speak not

The Najib Cabinet 3.0 after the 13th General Election,  announced on Monday with the new Ministers and Deputy Ministers taking  their oath of office yesterday, will meet for the first time today.

The first job of the reshuffled Cabinet is to prove that the Ministers of the Najib Cabinet 3.0 after the 13GE is not a “kafir harbi” Cabinet or like the traditional three monkeys, with eyes that see not, ears that hear not and mouths that speak not.

The Najib Cabinet 3.0 was a great disappointment for four reasons:

•	Failure to end the disastrous combination of the office of Prime Minister and the Finance Minister which catapulted Malaysia to the world’s top nations notorious for global corruption with Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” mega financial scandals.

•	Failure to trim the jumbo-sized Cabinet of 35 Ministers to a lean, smart and professional team based on the Ministers’ ability to end Malaysia’s decline in all fields of human endeavour and to take the nation  to greater heights instead of their sycophancy to the Prime Minister of the day.

•	A slap-in-the-face to Sarawak in dropping a Minister despite Sarawak BN’s “landslide” victory in the recent Sarawak state general elections, and the recycling of “half-past six” and “deadwood” Ministerial material.

•	The inexplicable resignation of more technocratic and professional Ministers like the Second Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah, who must have gone through hell during the few months he was made Cabinet spokesman for the 1MDB scandal, raising the serious question about the moral compass of the present batch of Ministers.

Parliament had failed the nation  – especially when the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) under its  “cari makan” Chairman, Datuk Hasan Arifin dared not even make the important recommendation in the PAC Report on 1MDB for the Prime Minister to relinquish the post of Finance Minister – and will the Executive in the form of Najib’s Cabinet 3.0 after the 2013 General Election be an even greater failure to the nation than the two earlier Cabinet versions in the past three years?

The calibre and placement  of the Ministers and Deputy Ministers in  Najib’s Cabinet 3.0 do not give ground for inspiration or hope – especially with the move  of the Barisan Nasional Strategic Communications Director, Abdul Rahman Dahlan, whose only political  contribution so far are his disastrous “black” operations in the various media to defend the Prime Minister from his mega scandals by orchestrating baseless attacks against Najib’s critics and opponents from the Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government to the only important Ministry in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Economic Planning Unit.

What does Abdul Rahman know about National Well-Being apart from Najib and his own well-being?

But all these four objections pale into insignificance compared to the test for the  first meeting of Najib’s Cabinet 3.0  today, whether it could prove that it is not a “kafir harbi” Cabinet or like the traditional three monkeys, with eyes that see not, ears that hear not and mouths that speak not, the burning issues of the country?

I had been wondering what would have been the reactions of the first three Prime Ministers of Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn, if a state mufti had made an irresponsible, incendiary and seditious statement like the Pahang Mufti, Datuk Seri Dr. Abdul Rahman Osman six days ago, classifying DAP and non-Muslim Malaysians as “kafir harbi” who could be killed or slain and what is worse, such a statement  had been given national prominence and front-page treatment by UMNO’s own mouthpiece.

The least  Tunku, Razak and Hussein would have done would be to get the Cabinet to reaffirm the constitutional principles of the Merdeka Constitution 1957 and Malaysia Agreement 1963 which had not only made such classifications not only  irrelevant but highly dangerous and subversive of the very nation-building process of a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-cultural Malaysia nation.

Going by the Pahang state mufti’s statement, Najib’s Cabinet 3.0 is no different from a “kafir harbi” Cabinet.

Let  the Ministers of Najib’s Cabinet 3.0 individually declare whether they support or oppose Hadi’s hudud motion!

But even more serious and dangerous than a state mufti having a ISIS-mentality is for such ISIS doctrine to get front-page treatment in the UMNO mouth-piece, Utusan Malaysia.

Has such ISIS-doctrines surreptitiously found their way into the higher echelons of the UMNO and Barisan Nasional leadership?

Is the Special Branch Counter-Terrorism Division  of Bukit Aman whose special responsibility is to be vigilant and prepared for  ISIS threats opening a special file and going to interview every Minister of Najib’s Cabinet 3.0?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 29 June 2016, 8:45 am and is filed under
Islam
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Instead of  mobilising world moderate opinion against Islamic State (IS) terrorism through GMM, the Najib government has failed to stand up against ISIS-minded official preachers like  the “kafir harbi” statement by the Pahang mufti

Yesterday, eight people were injured after a hand grenade was tossed into the porch of a nightspot at the IOI Boulevard in Puchong.

Later, a  Facebook page linked to the Islamic State (IS) reportedly claimed responsibility, but the owner of the pub disputed this IS claim.

In the early hours of  this morning, 8,300 kilometres away in Istanbul, three suicide bombers opened fire then blew themselves up in Europe’s third-busiest international airport, killing 36 people and wounding close to 150 in what Turkey’s prime minister said appeared to have been an attack by Islamic State militants.

The attack bore similarities to a suicide bombing by Islamic State militants at Brussels airport in March which killed 16 people. A coordinated attack also targeted a rush-hour metro train, killing a further 16 people in the Belgian capital.

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said the attack should serve as a turning point in the global fight against militant groups.

He said: “The attack, which took place during the holy month of Ramadan, shows that terrorism strikes with no regard for faith and values.

“The bombs that exploded in Istanbul today could have gone off at any airport in any city around the world.”

Malaysians cannot agree more with Erdogan’s condemnation of the violence and terrorism at the Ataturk Airport in Istanbul, especially with the increasing foreboding that Malaysia may not be spared from the horrific and senseless acts of terror perpetrated by Islamic State (IS) terrorists, using the name of Islam but actually  committing a gross blasphemy of Islam.

This is a real anomaly.

Whether the Islamic State was responsible or not for the hand-grenade incident in Puchong early yesterday, why has Malaysia got caught in the coils of global terrorism of IS?

What is even more serious, instead of  mobilising world moderate opinion against Islamic State (IS) terrorism through the Prime Minister’s own brainchild, the Global Movemene of Moderates (GMM0, the Najib government has failed to stand up against ISIS-minded official preachers like  the “kafir harbi” statement by the Pahang mufti.

In various international fora, including his speeches at the UN General Assembly, Najib had made the stirring call  on “moderates of all countries, of all religions to take back the centre, to reclaim the agenda for peace and pragmatism, and to marginalize and reject extremism in all its forms because the real divide is not between East and West or between developed and developing worlds or between Muslims, Christians and Jews. It is between moderates and extremists of all religions”.

What is the use of Najib preaching in international forums on  the three main ingredients of wasatiyyah – justice, balance and excellence – when every day, there are ample examples in Malaysia of the contemptuous disregard or violation of these values?

In this connection, I call on the Prime Minister to give serious consideration to the to views of Catholic Bishop Emeritus Paul Tan Chee Ing who  described Pahang mufti Abdul Rahman Osman’s designation of those who opposed Islam as kafir harbi as an “ominous development which, if not swiftly repudiated, constitutes a threat to national security”.

Paul Tan said: “I know of no statement in recent years, not even the threat to burn the Bible, that constitutes a clear and present danger to national security as this designation by the Pahang mufti as kafir harbi all those who are opposed to Islam.

 “Prior to this, it was thought that only those who fight against Muslims in lands Muslims rule or from territories contiguous with Islamic territories are designated kafir harbi.

“But now with what the Pahang mufti has said, even those who merely oppose the application of hudud for offences against syariah law are lumped with those who wage rebellion or aggression against Muslims.

“This is an expansive interpretation of a bellicose term which serves notice to large sections of non-Muslims and Muslims alike in Malaysia that it is legitimate for defenders of the faith to kill and maim them because they are kafir harbi.”

Bishop Paul said that it is incumbent upon those in authority in Malaysia to denounce this interpretation as a threat to national security because of its potential to foment violence against law-abiding citizens.’

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 29 June 2016, 12:57 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kafir Harbi dan Mufti Pahang

25 Jun 2016 | MUJAHID YUSOF RAWA

Malaysia Dateline

Mufti Pahang dinasihatkan bercermat dalam mengkategorikan orang bukan Islam dalam negara ini sebagai Kafir Harbi atas dasar mereka menentang Islam. Kenyataan umum demikian amat merbahaya dalam konteks pembinaan negara bangsa yang terdiri dari berbagai agama di Malaysia, apatah lagi diisyaratkan kepada parti politik tertentu.

Apakah yang didefinisikan sebagai alasan ‘menentang Islam’ sebelum Kafir Harbi dikategorikan? Apakah Sohibus Samahah Mufti Pahang mengandaikan memberi pandangan dalam konteks demokrasi dalam soal perundangan negara dan perlembagaan negara dalam hal pentadbiran Islam itu menentang Islam?

Mufti Pahang nampaknya keliru antara mengkritik isu pentadbiran Islam dengan menentang Islam, ia adalah dua perkara yang berbeza, malah kedudukan beliau sebagai mufti juga ditentukan oleh perundangan negara yang boleh dikritik dan dipertikaikan dari segi pentadbiran. Apakah Mufti menganggap dirinya yang ditentukan oleh pentadbiran sebagai ‘suci’ tidak boleh dikritik?

Mufti Pahang juga ketinggalan dalam fatwa terkini yang diterimapakai oleh dunia Islam bahawa pengkategorian hubungan Muslim dan bukan-Muslim dalam konteks kenegaraan atau Muwathanah ditentukan oleh prinsip kewarganegaraan atau kerakyatan yang diikat dengan undang-undang negara dalam memberi hak dan keadilan kepada semua warganya. Artikel 8 Perlembagaan Persekutuan menyatakan hak mendapat keadilan undang-undang untuk semua rakyat Malaysia tanpa mengira kaum, agama, keturunan, bangsa dan tempat lahir.

Dr Yusof Qaradhawi dalam bukunya Al Jihad dan lain-lain ulamak berwibawa menjelaskan bahawa tiada sebab wujudnya Kafir Harbi dan Kafir Zimmi kerana hubungan antara negara dan dalam negara ditentukan oleh kedaulatan undang-undang negara masing-masing dan terikat di bawah piagam Pertubuhan Bangsa Bangsa Bersatu. Kafir Harbi dan Zimmi hanya wujud atas sebab dunia dibahagikan atas geo-politik masa itu antara Darul Harb dan Darul Islam. Tiada Darul Islam atau Darul Harb hari ini dalam konteks hubungan resmi antara negara mahupun dalam negara.

Implikasi Kafir Harbi ialah dihalalkan darah mereka dan semua harta dan barangannya dirampas dan mereka boleh dihalau keluar. Apakah Mufti sedar kenyataannya itu? Melainkan IS dan kumpulan pengganas seperti Al-Qaeda dan Taliban, seluruh dunia Islam menafikan pengkategorian Harbi atau Zimmi ke atas bukan Islam dalam negara masing-masing dan digantikan atas pendekatan prinsip kerakyatan. Apakah Mufti Pahang mempunyai pandangan yang sama dengan IS?

Saya menuntut Mufti Pahang menarik balik kenyataan Kafir Harbi dalam konteks negara Malaysia yang menerima pakai pendekatan Fiqh Muwathonah (kefahaman kerakyatan) sebagai asas hubungan berbagai agama di negara ini. Kenyataan Sohibus Samahah menggalakkan kebencian antara kaum dan amat bahaya kepada integrasi nasional yang dipupuk selama ini. Lebih membimbangkan ialah kerangka pemikiran sempit Mufti boleh membawa kepada menularnya fahaman ekstrimisma di kalangan umat Islam sedangkan beliau adalah penjawat awam negeri.

Saya menasihati Mufti Pahang mengemaskini bacaannya tentang konsep kepelbagaian dalam Islam dan hubungan Muslim dan Non Muslim dalam konsep kerakyatan yang telah dibentangkan dalam seminar NUNJI 15 (Nadwah Ulamak Lil Nahdhah Jadidah) oleh Parti Amanah Negara. Malah saya berbesar hati mengundang beliau untuk membentang konsep Kafir Harbi dalam perspektif negara agar orang ramai lebih mudah melusuri pemikiran Sohibus Samahah dalam menjalankan tugasnya sebagai Mufti Negeri yang tertakluk kepada pentadbiran agama Islam negeri.

Sekian semoga Mufti Pahang menarik balik dan memohon maaf kepada seluruh rakyat Malaysia berbagai kaum di negara ini atas keterlanjuran kenyataannya tentang Kafir Harbi tanpa disiplin ilmu waqie (realiti) yang termaktub dalam kerangka negara bangsa Malaysia hari ini.

Dato’ Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa adalah Naib Presiden Parti Amanah Negara dan Ahli Parlimen Malaysia

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 29 June 2016, 6:44 am and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tuduhan kafir harbi, pandangan ketinggalan zaman

— Muhammad Nur Manuty

Malay Mail Online

27.6.2016

Sesungguhnya, Biro Pemahaman & Pemantapan Agama (BiPPA) Keadilan ingin menyatakan rasa dukacita kami berikutan laporan kenyataan Mufti Pahang, Datuk Seri Abd Rahman Osman di sebuah akhbar perdana yang menyatakan bahawa, penentangan DAP terhadap pelaksanaan hukum hudud dan Rang Undang-undang Persendirian Mahkamah Syariah (Bidang Kuasa Jenayah (Pindaan) 2016 jelas membenci Islam, tergolong sebagai ‘kafir harbi” dan berdosa besar bagi umat Islam bekerjasama dengan mereka.

Kami berpandangan kenyataan ini telah dikeluarkan secara ‘simplistic’, tanpa hujah yang jelas dan tiada fakta yang kukuh untuk membuktikan ketepatan tuduhan dan hukuman yang dikemukakan. Justeru, kenyataan tersebut wajib disanggah, kerana ia amat mengelirukan masyarakat – Islam dan bukan Islam – di negara ini.

Sesungguhnya, kenyataan tersebut boleh mengundang pelbagai implikasi negatif kepada keselamatan negara, menggugat perpaduan umat Islam, memecahbelah keharmonian hubungan kaum, mengundang tingkahlaku keganasan dan mencemar imej agama Islam sebagai agama pembawa risalah ‘alamiyyah’(universal) dan rahmat untuk seluruh insan.

BiPPA kesal dengan kenyataan tersebut yang menampakkan ketinggalan dalam menekuni pelbagai sudut pandang para sarjana dan ilmuan Islam yang bersifat semasa dan kontemporari dan berautoriti seperti Syeikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Syeikh al-Raisuni, Syeikh Wahbah Zuhaili, Syeikh Taha Jabir, al-Ghanoushi, Dr Abdul Hamid Sulaiman, Dr Hassan Turabi, Salim al-Awa, Jaafar Sheikh Idris dan ramai lagi.

Justeru, BiPPA dengan mencadangkan agar para Mufti dan pihak lain yang bertanggungjawab atas urusan Islam di negara ini mengambil langkah proaktif mengadakan perbincangan dan dialog ilmiah dengan para ilmuan yang disenaraikan di atas.

Hakikatnya, persoalan kafir harbi dan zimmi musta’min sudah tidak relevan lagi dengan realiti fiqh ‘fiqh muassirah’ (fekah semasa) yang giat diperbahaskan oleh para ulama’ dan para sarjana Islam seperti yang disebutkan di atas.

Adalah amat malang kepada umat Islam sendiri, apabila kelompok yang diamanahkan kuasa untuk melaksanakan urusan Islam, dilihat kehilangan integriti dan tidak mampu membuat pendirian yang adil kepada semua pihak dan rakyat, tanpa mengira anutan agama dan kecenderungan politik mereka.

Lebih parah, jika dilihat gagal membebaskan diri dari pengaruh aliran politik sempit perkauman sebagaimana yang dituntut di dalam ayat 13, surah al-Hujurat.

Perlu kita insafi, kedudukan geo-politik umat Islam telah jauh berubah. Sistem khilafah Islam telahpun dileburkan oleh Mustaffa Kamal Ataturk pada tahun 1924.

Justeru, al-Qaradawi di dalam karyanya ‘Al-Fatawa al-Shazzah (Fatwa-Fatwa Janggal) telah mengingatkan para fuqaha’ zaman ini supaya menyedari bahawa pembuatan sesuatu fatwa itu adalah mengikut kesesuaian dan realiti yang wujud pada zamannya.

Sheikh Rashid Ghanoushi (Tunisia), dalam beberapa tulisan ilmiahnya menyatakan bahawa idea kafir harbi dan kafir zimmi serta kewujudan Negara yang boleh diperangi (dar al-harb) memang relevan pada zaman keagungan empayar Islam di masa yang silam.

Namun, pada hari ini, ketika umat Islam tergabung dalam sebuah entiti dunia yang terbahagi di antara warga Muslim dan bukan Muslim yang berimbangan serta semakin bersifat global, maka kedudukan kafir harbi dan kafir zimmi sudah tidak praktikal lagi. Justeru, beliau menganjurkan agar konsep al-muwatinun (kewarganegaraan) diguna pakai sebagai alternatif yang praktis.

Fahmi Huwaidi, seorang pemikir Islam dari Mesir, secara khusus, menyetujui pandangan Sheikh al-Ghanoushi. Beliau telahpun menghasilkan sebuah karya yang berjudul “Muwatinun La Zimmiyyun” (Kewarganegaraan Bukan Zimmi).

Karya beliau yang bersifat ijtihadi dalam konteks pemikiran politik Islam semasa ini, amat bermanfaat untuk di telaah secara kritis guna meleraikan polemik yang sedang digembar-gemburkan ini.

Shaikh Taha Jabir al-‘Ilwani (Iraq), Munir Shafiq (Jordan), Shaikh Faisal Mawlawi (Lubnan), Shaikh Jaafar Idris (Sudan) turut membahaskan tajuk ini dengan memberikan pandangan yang serupa.

Umumnya, mereka bersetuju bahawa konsep-konsep berkaitan – kafir zimmi, kafir harbi dan kafir musta’min – memang dicipta oleh para ‘ulama fiqh silam dalam membahaskan isu-isu fiqh siasah syariah.

Walaubagaimanapun, bagi mereka ia wajar dikaji semula kesesuaiannya dalam konteks sistem politik dunia pada masa ini yang sentiasa dinamik dan berkembang.

Sehubungan dengan ini, BiPPA Keadilan sekali lagi mengulangi pendirian kami bahawa konsep kafir harbi (boleh diperangi dan dibunuh) serta kafir zimmi (patuh kepada pemerintahan Islam) perlu diperjelaskan kepada umum secara lebih tepat, bersesuaian dengan perkembangan dunia pemikiran Islam yang bersifat global.

Kita melihat dengan jelas, cara Umno menggarap persoalan ini dengan menggunakan pandangan Mufti di atas adalah ketinggalan zaman dan mengelirukan umat Islam dan rakyat seluruhnya.

Umno dengan sengaja mengambil kesempatan sebegini sebagai satu cara menyiahkan rakyat dari membicarakan isu-isu sebenar dan bebanan yang sedang dideritai oleh rakyat seperti 1MDB, GST, RM2.6 bilion, kenaikan kos sara hidup, kegawatan ekonomi dan sebagainya. Sesungguhnya, sekiranya pendekatan ini diteruskan Negara yang dicintai ini akan berada di ambang krisis yang besar.

Justeru, dengan sikap yang diperagakan ini, nyatalah Umno telah begitu terdesak dan bengkrap dalam menarik sokongan rakyat Malaysia seluruhnya, sehingga terpaksa memperalatkan pandangan seperti ini sebagai alat propaganda politik murahan.

Jelas dan nyata, UMNO tidak layak lagi diamanahkan mengurus Negara lagi,kerana telah kehilangan arah, hilang kawalan diri dan tandus formula mengemudi rakyat kearah kegemilangan masa depan.

* Penulis Dr Muhammad Nur Manuty adalah seorang Senator dan Ketua Biro BiPPA, Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 29 June 2016, 6:09 am and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Guan Eng’s arrest and two corruption charges one of the eight after-effects of Barisan Nasional victories in the twin Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections

DAP Secretary-General and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s arrest and two corruption charges is one of the eight after-effects of the Barisan Nasional victories in the twin Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections on June 18.

The Barisan Nasional twin by-election victories have given the Prime Minster, Datuk Seri Najib Razak confidence to go on an all-out political offensive, believing that he has the licence to do whatever he likes to consolidate his political power position despite creating a paradox for Malaysia – a Prime Minister who is seemingly more powerful and unshakeable inside the country but who is increasingly regarded in international society as the worst Prime Minister for Malaysia who had virtually made Malaysia synonymous with global corruption with his RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” twin mega financial scandals, which are being investigated in seven different countries.

The eight twin by-election effects are:

1.	Giving Najib the confidence and belief that he can sweep the twin RM55 billion 1MDB and RM4.2 billion “donation” scandals under the carpet at home, either by intimidating or silencing critics or dissent, whether in the media, civil society or political front, closing media publications, blocking internet sites,  arrests and  prosecutions, and just ignore growing international clamour for accountability for the 1MDB  scandal of global embezzlement, money laundering and corruption. In fact, in the ten days after the twin by-elections, the world’s media have continued with exposes of the ramifications of the 1MDB global scandal, including spotlighting on the whereabouts of the Penang billionaire Jho Low and his real role in Najib’s twin mega scandals.

2.	 The sacking of Tan Sri Muhyiddin and Datuk Seri Mukhriz Mahathir from UMNO and the suspension of Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal as UMNO member.

3.	Series of actions against former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir, including propaganda attacks, police investigations for his remarks likening Najib to Uganda dictator Idi Amin  and the withdrawal of government funding for Mahathir projects like the Perdana Leadership Foundation.

4.	Major purge in the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) involving the two top men in the MACC, reminiscent of the earlier purges of the key figures in the former Special Task Force on 1MDB, involving topmost officers in Attorney-General’s Chambers, Bank Negara, the Police and MACC.

5.	The campaign to incite  racial and religious tensions in Utusan Malaysia after the twin by-elections, including falsely painting DAP as anti-Malay and anti-Islam.

6.	The irresponsible, incendiary and seditious “kafir harbi” statement by the Pahang Mufti, which is not only given national prominence and front-page treatment by UMNO mouthpiece, Utusan Malaysia, but condoned and “white-washed” by the Prime Minister’s Office, instead of a forthright repudiation by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet.

7.	Cabinet reshuffle to bring in more mediocrity and sycophancy and “yes men” whose sole loyalty are to Najib’s survival and not to the nation or people.

8.	The arrest of DAP Secretary-General and  Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng on two corruption charges in the latest attempt to destroy the Opposition and defend Najib’s political position.

It is  matter of sorrow  and anger that Najib and Cabinet of sycophants do not see the need to check Malaysia continuing its  trajectory towards a fractured, failed and rogue state.

The whole object of the arrest and prosecution of Guan Eng was revealed in a confession made in a statement  issued by the Barisan Nasional Strategic Media Director, Abdul Rahman Dahlan, the new Minister in the Prime Minister’s Departmenht yesterday, who said that Guan Eng’s arrest shows DAP is not so clean after all.

This is the time for all Malaysians to rise above race, religion, region or even political affiliation to Save Malaysia from hurtling onwards towards a fractured, failed and rogue state.

(Media Statement the Penang Sessions Court on the arrest and two corruption charges against Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 30 June 2016, 8:36 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
DAP
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.