Hidden costs of the Hudud law

The rest of society will bear additional burden of caring for victims of hudud

FMT LETTERS

From: Roger Teoh, via email

First of all, it is important to define hudud. According to the Oxford Islamic Studies Online, hudud is defined as a class of punishments which some Muslims believe are ordained by God. The punishments range from public execution, stoning to death, lashing and amputation of body parts.

Many leaders from all sectors have voiced their opinion on the hudud matter, stating that it is not suitable for a multicultural Malaysian society. It is important to point out that current discussions of the hudud law does not take into account various other consequences after punishments are carried out to a particular individual.

The main economic costs arise from the relegation of an individual to being a disabled person, in other words, becoming an Orang Kurang Upaya. This would almost certainly mean that an amputee will find it more difficult to start their lives again, obstructing their progress to secure a proper job in the future, again contributing to further consequences.

Hudud may serve as a good deterrent and lessen the repetition of crimes, but does this warrant a seriously aggressive punishment such that it could possibly permanently disable a person, figuratively and literally?

Looking at a particular issue, theft, I strongly believe the authorities should first try to understand the cause of a particular individual committing a crime. For instance, it could not be the intention of someone to steal, but due to the bad economy, high cost of living and unemployment, these factors would leave a theft no choice but to commit a crime.

As a result, the aftermath of hudud law is equivalent to removing a potential useful member of the labour force from society. This is not to discriminate against disabled people, but it would definitely hinder the chances of a particular individual from contributing further to society and the Malaysian economy.

The government and society, too, will have to bear the unaccounted and unnecessary cost of permanent lifetime support for an amputee since they would probably have a minimal or no income. This is a double whammy for both the authorities and the convict.

Most religions teach their followers to be forgiving, as well as having an ideology of a forgiving God. However, in comparison with current accepted laws of imprisonment, the hudud law results in an irreversible scar which permanently robs the future and freedom of a convict.

There were even suggestions by Datuk Mohd Amar Abdullah from the Kelantan State Hudud Law Technical Committee in November 2014, suggesting the use of small guillotines to carry out hudud amputations without anaesthetics.

In using such cruel, inhumane, uncivilised and primitive ways to carry out punishments, is there a difference between those who propose hudud and the mindset of the Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria? What would the implementation of hudud law then mean to international observers? This will definitely tarnish the image of Malaysia, who will no longer be viewed as a moderate Islamic country.

Finally, the most important factor is the presence of a free and fair judiciary system. Regardless of any laws or policies that are proposed, it would certainly not work without a fair judiciary system in Malaysia.

The hudud law will almost certainly have the potential to be misused by certain quarters for their own benefits, which the consequences of it will be even greater than current practices.

In this era of globalisation, rather than moving into regression and hindering development of human rights and society, it is vital that traditional ulamas in PAS think of ways to ensure that the values of Islam are upheld and relevant in the 21st Century.

Perhaps too, that the proposers of hudud should look into the modernisation of progressive and moderate Islamic countries around the world such as Turkey, Indonesia, Bahrain and so on, where the countries are able to transform and prosper without negative consequences.

* Roger Teoh is an undergraduate student of civil engineering and an FMT reader *