Please read Karpal Singhs opinion below on hudud law and then procede to debate the issue with Pak Yeh by posting comments.
The current criminal law is better because it is easier to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt, says DAP's Karpal Singh.
Athi Shankar, FMT
Potential criminals will not fear the Islamic hudud law because its
burden of proof was harder than current criminal law in the country,
DAP chairman Karpal Singhs said today.
Hence, he said hudud law could not serve public interests well
because if it was applied, virtually no one could be convicted of crime.
Under hudud, it would be practically impossible to prove a case against an accused without a shadow of doubt.
Comparatively, he suggested that it could be easier to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt under the current criminal law.
instance, he said the requirement that there must be four witnesses to
prove a rape case under hudud would make it impossible to convict a
Thus, it would not be able to deter crime and criminals, he said.
hudud, you have to prove a case beyond a shadow of doubt… practically
100%, unlike the present criminal law, which is beyond reasonable
“Criminals and potential criminals will not fear hudud
because they know it will be difficult to prove the charge against
them. Hudud law cannot be a deterrent,” he said.
He also said he
was never “anti-Islam” because as a MP, he had accepted the Federal
Constitution that stipulated the status of Islam as the official
religion of the country.
He said he was only opposing the implementation of an Islamic state and hudud law because it was unconstitutional.
Karpal has said that he would sue Bachok MP Nasharuddin Mat Isa for labelling him as “anti-Islam”.
said he was also ready to face any counter suit to be brought by
Nasharuddin. “I am prepared to face him in any court, anywhere,” he
Pak Yehs opinion :
The opinion by Karpal Singh is the truth. If it is no the truth,then PAS Ulama or any Ulama should try to debate him and show him that what he say is not the truth. The burden of proof now is on PAS Ulamas who are too eager to implement hudud law when the law itself is not fully developed yet.
I hate to say this,but the Shariah Law is still in its infancy, and has caused a great deal of injustice to women especially. This is because the Ulamas and Shariah Lawyers are doing it dogmatically using hearsay hadis as evidence instead of using the Quran and their logic. The use of dogmas cannot be conceived as truths, because such dogmas based on the reliability of hadis which is collected by hearsay cannot be used in any court of law. A hadis that was never in use during prophet Mohammads time and during 300 years after the prophet died is nothing but hearsay. That is the truth of the issue. As long as the hadis is used, then hearsay becomes truth. The hadis just says "It was reported by Mr A who heard it from Mr B who heard it from Mr C, who heard it from the prophet Mohammad that......". This method is exactly what hearsay means. Law based on hearsay is like law based on mythology and someones figment of imagination. No reasoning is required due to it being illogical.
There is a misconception that Secular Law is not Islamic Law. I disagree with that. I think Secular Law is also Gods law, especially when it conforms to Gods requirements, ie the books of God is used by the swearing on the Bible,Torah,or Quran at a Secular Court of Law. Besides the Secular Law is based on reasoning, which is what the Quran calls for, (refer Quran 39:18 " Listen to all views. Choose the best view.These are the guided and the intelligent"). Is it not what The Judges and Lawyers do to choose the best view as required byAllah in the Quran.??? Hence the Secular Law is also Gods law, developed by Jews and Christians using God's books.!!!
As for criminal laws on rape, murder, Shariah/Hudud Law can never be, even half as good as Secular Criminal Laws because of advanced, science based, evidence collecting process and forensic. You can never prove rape and adultery by 4 witnesses.!!! I believe that the procedures in the Secular law especially on Criminal cases be maintained instead of hudud law.
As for Hudud Laws, I had made my stand clear.( refer http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com/2011/09/hudud-pas-tidak-islamic.html ).
The weakness of the PAS Hudud is that the Ulamas use vain hadis from Bukhari Muslim, to justify the chopping of a kids hand for stealing a blanket. Ironically this hadis implies that the government of prophet Mohammad chops hands even for a paltry offense that do not commensurate with a "proper punishment for the proper offense". As the Quran rightly predicted.Quran 31:6 "Some people use vain hadis to mislead others from Allah's path, without knowledge, and make a mockery of it(Allah's path/Islam"). Proofs : 1) Chopping a hand for stealing a blanket is making a mockery of Islam.
2) Killing the apostate is making a mockery of Islam.
3) Whipping for drnking 4% alcohol in drinks is making a mockery of Islam.
4) Killing a married adulterer is making a mockery of Islam.
That is because the punishment does not commensurate with the crime. Thus an injustice is made in the name of Allah.
Because of these reasons, I cannot accept the use of the Hudud based on Hadis which is of hearsay in nature, as proof or evidence in law. However I shall accept the Quran as the proof, evidence and source of law. And that too after the process of Quran 39:18 is used to debate it. Unfortunately Quran 39:18 had so far been unused by Ulamas who replace it with dogmatic, mythological and hearsay hadis written by liars that make a mockery of Islam.
May Allah give us guidance in our search for the true Islam.