Idris Ahmad is being naïve about non-Muslim fear of PAS

 

By Terence Netto

PAS vice-president Idris Ahmad’s dismissal of non-Muslim fear of PAS is naïve.

He told FMT that during the 33 years of PAS rule of Kelantan (from 1990 till now) “not a single Chinese was killed” nor “one Indian beheaded.”

Hence, Idris argued, non-Muslim fear of PAS is not based on the realities in the PAS-governed states of the Peninsula.

That’s not how non-Muslims perceive what they would be bargaining for if they vote for PAS, especially in parliamentary elections.

They fear their vote would be seen as endorsing the avowed goal of PAS which is to establish an Islamic state in Malaysia.

Non-Muslims fear that even without the imposition of an Islamic state in the Peninsula, distressing incidents have happened that could only give the affected parties sleepless nights.

These concerned the kidnapping of children involved in custody battles between a non-Muslim parent and a Muslim one, and the enforced disappearances of individuals suspected to have been involved in proselytisation.

Although these incidents did not occur in states governed by PAS, non-Muslims do not see PAS as concerned very much for the human rights of the kidnapped or of the disappeared.

The fundamental reason non-Muslims find PAS’ sense of propriety unsettling is best mirrored by the reasoning given by a PAS leader who many non-Muslims find admirable for his integrity.

The late Nik Aziz Nik Mat, menteri besar of Kelantan from 1990 till his death in 2014, was once asked in an interview what he had done to give women equal opportunity in the government workplace.

He replied he had increased the intake of women into the workplace – not for the pretty ones but for those not well-endowed by nature.

He said the attractive ones could depend on rich men to marry them; not so the unattractive ones whom the government’s increased intake of women would have to favour as a matter of justice.

The PAS spiritual leader insisted that this emphasis in their employment policy for women is the epitome of justice.

Exponents of human rights for women would argue that Nik Aziz’s take on this matter is “sexist” and condescending.

They would insist that women should be employed based on their competence, and not on their looks or lack of it.

Secular reason would hold with the women’s rights advocates’ take on this issue and reject Nik Aziz’s rationalisations as demeaning.

This issue mirrors the gulf in the value-system between both parties to the argument.

This is what non-Muslims — and by extension, believers in secular reason — fear most about Koranic morality, that its upholders may find an action legitimate and justified what conventional morality may find offensive.

Therein lies the rub. - FMT

Terence Netto is a senior journalist and an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT