Is The Malaysian Insider on a crusade against Hudud?

Raggie Jessy

Journalism is sometimes best described as the art of turning dignitaries into money. And just recently, The Malaysian Insider may have stamped its seal to that portrayal with a report it published on the 25th of March, 2015. According to the report, the Conference of Rulers had rejected proposed amendments to the Shariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 during a meeting on March 11, an allegation since denied by the Keeper of the Ruler’s Seal.

So basically, the Insider appears to have gotten itself in hot water.

But their pants were on fire anyway, although, this does not explain the hot water. Just a day earlier, the portal appeared to put words into the mouth of Datuk Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, Mufti of Perlis. As a matter of fact, I’m beginning to wonder if the Insider loves getting its ass whopped for no rhyme or reason.

But that’s not the anomaly, no. The real anomaly is manifest when they enjoy widespread publicity even as they’re accused of speaking untruths. Such is the level of ignorance among our people, that it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if some of you believe me should I tell you that Najib is really a chimpanzee in a human suit.

1. What the Malaysian Insider said

The Malaysian Insider embroiled itself with the Mufti of Perlis over an editorial it ran on the 24th of March 2015. The controversial article appeared to grant Muslims the right to take issue with or reject Hudud laws altogether, in the manner of an admission by Mohd. Asri.

Let me state my case.

The editorial began with an abstraction of what appears to be a message by Mohd Asri. According to the Insider, “Mufti Perlis, Datuk Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin berkata tidak salah umat Islam tidak bersetuju atau menolak hukum hudud yang cuba dilaksanakan PAS di Kelantan, selepas Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) meluluskan pindaan enakmen sebulat suara tanpa bantahan.”

At this juncture, one might argue that “…hukum hudud yang cuba dilaksanakan PAS di Kelantan…” stands to mean “…Hudud laws as PAS intends to implement them in Kelantan..”, which to some, may suggest the existence of variants to Hudud laws.

Now, that would be a grave misconception, because you only have one set of Hudud laws, as defined by and described in the Holy Quran and Hadiths. However, there may be precedents in cases where jurists aren’t able to adjudicate solely based on the teachings of the Holy Quran and Hadiths. These precedents are derived through the process of independent reasoning (or Ijtihad, to be examined in a proceeding article) by Mujtahids, resulting in decisions that may be perceived as judicial extensions to the Syariah Criminal Code. Suffice to say, such precedents can and must never be misconstrued as variants of Hudud laws.

Therefore, “…hukum hudud yang cuba dilaksanakan PAS di Kelantan…” can only mean “…Hudud laws that PAS intends to implement in Kelantan…”, which is tantamount to saying “…Hudud laws…”.

You see, if a Muslim can take issue with or reject Hudud laws in Kelantan, he or she can do the same for any state in Malaysia, simply because there exists only one set of Hudud laws.

So we can now proceed to rephrase the expression by commuting ““…Hudud laws as PAS intends to implement them in Kelantan..” with “…Hudud laws…”

And there you have it; a Muslim in Malaysia can now take issue with or reject Hudud laws, according to the Mufti of Perlis. At least, that’s what the Insider seems to be implying.

Put differently, just say “No, I don’t agree with Hudud laws,” or “I reject the implementation of Hudud laws,” and that is that. This right, of course, is contingent upon the religion you profess. That is to say, you have to be a Muslim to exercise this right.

Now, the basic construct of the Insider’s article goes to whack and ruin as proceeding arguments begin to paint an entirely different picture.

Asri was quoted by the Insider to have said, “Walaupun kita tidak boleh membantah asas hudud dalam Islam, namun kita boleh berbeza pendapat, tidak bersetuju ataupun menolak pemilihan pandangan-pandangan sarjana dalam penetapan hukuman bagi sesuatu enakmen.”

Going by what the Insider now says, you may not object to Hudud after all. So now, you may only have a different opinion on the choice of views by Islamic scholars, or disagree with the choice. In fact, you may even reject the choice of views altogether. Based on the editorial, these choices appear limited to the determination of punishments as far as a given enactment is concerned.

By extension, this would mean that you could disagree with or reject precedents that were derived off certain Ijtihads in determining punishments, or propose precedents from different Ijtihads by different Mujtahids.

The Insider appears to have gone everywhere and nowhere with the piece, which really brings me to the question; was the editorial an attack on Hudud, or was it a genuine misconception by the portal?

Well, this is the question we should be asking Insider’s editors, who were arrested last Monday, 30th of March 2015. Ironically, they were arrested over a report bearing on Hudud, which seems to corroborate opinions on the portal’s artifice. And where an opinion is general, it is usually accurate.

So perhaps, the Insider really is on a mission to paint a negative picture of Hudud. Perhaps I’m wrong. Either way, it seems to be triggering public dissension on the matter.

2. What Mohd. Asri really said

Dr. Mohd. Asri has since come out to set the record straight, crying foul over what he claimed was an attempt to manipulate the Hudud issue.

An excerpt from his clarification reads as follows:

Hasrat ingin melaksanakan ajaran al-Quran dan al-Sunnah mana-mana pihak hendaklah dihormati. Peranan kita memberikan pandangan balas dan menolong hasrat baik seperti itu agar kebaikan atau niat baik benar-benar mencapai maksudnya.

At this juncture, one must be ready to greet Mohd. Asri over his convictions, and not go off on a tangent like the Insider did. His disposition in favour of attempts to enforce Islamic teachings seems to me as salient a virtue as any could ever be.

Put simply, the Mufti of Perlis advanced a viewpoint that encouraged attempts at enforcing the word of god or the teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad. According to him, one should work constructively towards realising such noble desires.

If one were to pore over remaining contexts within which Mohd. Asri articulates his point of view (posted below, herein), one would immediately become aware of an attempt to guide Muslims towards a practical and constructive approach in bringing Hudud laws to fruition in Kelantan.

But at no point would one perceive Mohd. Asri to have recognised the right for Muslims to disagree with or reject Hudud laws altogether, under any circumstances. Thence it becomes difficult to fathom how the Insider could have arrived at such an implausible conclusion, particularly since it portrays itself to be a viable and credible alternative to mainstream media.

3. Is Islam the enemy?

Like I said, editors from the Insider appear to enjoy widespread publicity over their arrest. That is to say, many have claimed their arrest to be an abuse of their civil liberties.

These liberties border on the freedom of press, which is just the problem. You see, almost everyone who is anyone in Malaysia seems to talk about freedom of press in an absolute sense. To wit, freedom of press has been misconstrued to denote your right to say or publish just about anything and everything you see fit under the sun.

If that is the case, I may now proceed to publish an article claiming Najib to be in negotiations with the US over prospects of a military base in Pahang, and get away scot free.

You see, I needn’t adduce evidence to substantiate my claim, considering that I’m at liberty to tell you just about anything I wish. Given circumstances, the legitimacy of my claim isn’t the desiderata for a good editorial in view of my absolute right to publish an opinion, which borders on freedom of press as many Malaysians deem it to be. Thus, the authorities should not impute blame to me for inciting a rebellion against the government, even if it were the impetus.

So I may now start telling people to be wary of Najib who may be helping Americans establish a base in Malaysia. I can then proceed to instigate a people to overthrow the government, and yet, should be given a free hand to do just that. In fact, I should be granted the freedom to say anything that may antagonise the people further towards a revolt.

And where does that get a person like you?

Well, it gets you to a brand of journalism that lies somewhere between the dumps and that place you usually take a dump. It does, because absolute freedom of press is never a good thing, regardless if it remains the touchstone to exemplary journalism anywhere else in the world.

But that’s just the alpha and omega where and when it concerns opposition friendly media circles. With shoddy editorials and less-than-accurate reports, they seem to have shortened the road from legitimate suspicion to rampant paranoia almost as fast as you can say crap.

Ironically though, a lot of issues being spun have to do with Islam. From the use of ‘Allah’ to the implementation of Hudud, these portals seem to come alive whenever Malay unity appears to be on a lapse. And given the incessant state of discord between the various Islamic based parties in Malaysia, these portals seem to be having a field day doing what they do best; keeping Malay liberalists estranged from Islamists.

In fact, they’ve begun to twist Malay liberals around their little finger, turning them against themselves. In the process, they’re pulling liberalist factions apart over each other’s political and doctrinal convictions. At the rate they’re going, it is no wonder when one succumbs to the anticipation of an impending religious upheaval, when even the moderates seem to be at loggerheads with each other over Hudud.

****************************************

Full text of statement by Dr. Mohd. Asri (as posted in his facebook page, DrMAZA.com):

Tentang Isu Hudud Yang ‘Dipermainkan’.

1. Umat Islam wajib menghormati hasrat baik jika ada pihak yang ikhlas untuk mengkanunkan hudud yang adil, saksama lagi MEMENUHI maqasid syariah.

2. Enakmen Jenayah Syariah Kelantan satu usaha yang bersejarah dalam negara ini. Ia telah melalui proses yang demokratik di DUN Kelantan, maka kita hendaklah hormati proses yang dibuat secara berperaturan itu.

3. Hasrat ingin melaksanakan ajaran al-Quran dan al-Sunnah mana-mana pihak hendaklah dihormati. Peranan kita memberikan pandangan balas dan menolong hasrat baik seperti itu agar kebaikan atau niat baik benar-benar mencapai maksudnya.

4. HARAM muslim menggabungkan diri dalam apa-apa aktiviti yang bertujuan menghina ajaran al-Quran dan as-Sunnah.

5. Oleh kerana Enakmen Hudud Kelantan itu mempunyai banyak pandangan dan ijtihad yang dipilih oleh pihak penggubal, ia mungkin selaras, juga mungkin tidak selaras dengan maqasid syariah berkaitan hudud dalam Islam terutama pada zaman ini, maka masa yang cukup hendaklah diberikan untuk enakmen itu DISEMAK oleh pakar-pakar MAQASID syariah di pelbagai peringkat. Kegagalan perlaksanaan hudud di beberapa negara sebelum ini diharap tidak berulang di sini.

6. Sikap majoriti umat Islam Malaysia hari ini yang menghormati undang-undang itu secara dasarnya, merupakan satu sikap yang baik. Ini berbeza dengan keadaan era 80an dahulu. Kita patut bersyukur dengan sikap ini.

7. Kita hendaklah berhati-hati portal portal berita tertentu yang cuba menimbulkan permusuhan dan salah tafsiran terhadap isu ini.