Mahathir slams PAS for acting in draconian manner
(The Star) – Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has criticised PAS for its call to ban Sisters in Islam (SIS), saying that the opposition party was behaving in a draconian manner.
“I am saddened that PAS should suggest banning SIS. I do not always agree with the views of SIS but the group has not negated Islam,” he said yesterday in response to PAS’ call at its 55th muktamar on Sunday.
“In most instances, they cite verses of the Quran and Hadith to support their views. If we don’t agree then give the reasons why we don’t agree. But to resort to banning is draconian,” he said in his blog chedet.co.cc.
“We can imagine what a PAS government for Malaysia would be like,” he added.
PAS passed the resolution demanding the banning of SIS and urging the National Fatwa Council to probe SIS for allegedly misrepresenting Islam, ban the group and send its members for “rehabilitation” if it was proven guilty.
SIS, together with 42 organisations as well as 279 individuals, have issued a statement urging PAS to retract its call for a ban and to reconsider its position.
“The demand for action against SIS culminating in a ban is not easily reconciled with PAS’ public rhetoric in favour of a more democratic and inclusive Malaysia,” it said, adding that the demand was “wholly anti-democratic”.
“We reiterate that although members of PAS are entitled to their views, the call for the banning of SIS is wholly unacceptable.
“As a matter of principle, the question of banning any organisation purely for their views should not arise at all. Differences of views must be respected and, if at all, be resolved through constructive engagement.”
It said the call to silence SIS and send its members for rehabilitation was an act of violence against those freedoms and their constitutional underpinnings.
“It also lends itself to further closure of the already narrow space of public discourse and debate that a slew of anti-expression laws have allowed Malaysians.”
It added that no one person or organisation had a monopoly over the right to express views on matters of public importance.
