PR Hudud Laws vs BN Hooded Laws

The next GE is round the corner and instead of mulling over what we want, many have gone off-track debating about Hudud. Seriously, what do Malaysians want? We don't want Hudud but do we want a corrupt government?

Remember that voting for Pakatan Rakyat is NOT a fast track to the implementation of Hudud. Neither is there the certainty that we will get Hudud if we vote PR. In reality, PAS will not have enough seats to implement Hudud even if they want to do so.

PAS will be contesting only one-third the 222 seats and they need two-thirds to change the laws in Parliament. Even if they win ALL the seats they contest, it's still one-third. Chances are they will win maybe half the one-third.

But for sure, we WILL get a corrupt government if we DON'T vote for Pakatan Rakyat.

To put it simply, if it come down to voting for Hudud versus corruption, which do we want?

If we hate or fear Hudud so much, then let's reject PR. Then, let's vote the status quo and continue to 'enjoy' the same recipe of racism, discrimination, abuse of power and corruption IF we feel that this may be better than the risk of getting Hudud.

Remember Albert Einstein's words: Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Before we continue to be swept away by the strong waves of debate, remember that the certainty of Hudud is NOT there.

If we choose to do the same thing, walk down the same path in our voting, the likelihood that racism, discrimination, abuse of power and corruption we will certainly get, no doubt about it.

Think carefully about what we want. Are we being influenced by the uncertainty of Hudud to capitulate in favour for the certainty racism, discrimination, abuse of power and corruption?

Is that what we want? Think carefully. If so, then reject PR and vote BN and face the guarantee of being afflicted by the same social malaise that we have been facing for decades - discrimination, abuse of power and corruption.

Are we being blinded so much by the hooded flaw in the hudud debate that we cannot see the wood for the trees?

The Star recently reported:

Both the Federal Constitution and the current legislative framework do not allow for hudud to be implemented by any state, said the Bar Council.


Expressing its concern over the recent “political posturing” in reviving the possibility of implementing hudud, its president Lim Chee Wee called on all parties to instead uphold the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the land.


“Hudud cannot be implemented within the current constitutional and legislative framework,” he said.


“The Malaysian Bar calls upon all parties to uphold the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the land and cease all rhetoric on the implementation of hudud, which has inevitably caused confusion and division.


“They should focus instead on strengthening the rule of law and democratic process,” he said, adding that a Supreme Court ruling in 1988 had confirmed Malaysia as a secular state.


The Federal Constitution, he said in a statement, only allowed the states to enact laws creating offences by persons professing Islam, against the precepts of Islam, and the respective punishments for such offences.

Read the Malaysian Bar Council press release here.

Is there a reason to fear hudud? Why are we (politicians included) being distracted by the hudud debate? Focus!

What do we really want for Malaysia?

- masterwordsmith