Malays, don't be afraid of Perkasa, Isma hotheads - GO AHEAD & BE #26

I was recently roped in to support the “I Am #26” petition, a reaction to the open letter from G25, a group of eminent Malays who long for thorough moderation and not just words without action.

Put up four days ago, the petition has gained 3,760 signatories at the time of this writing.

I agree with what it stands for because it is, in fact, what an Islamic society is supposed to be – thorough, enlightened and imbued with the spirit of brotherhood and sisterhood.

The five points of the petition to the Prime Minister requires urgent and immediate attention, and I am wondering why he is hesitating.

First, it calls for a review of the Syariah Criminal Offences laws in the country, which make sinning criminal. Is it not in the best interest of the entirety of the Islamic population in Malaysia to see what sins should be criminalised?

Is it not necessary to standardise all these laws in all the states in line with the Federal Constitution?

A review would also shed light on a lot of issues that have been plaguing the dual legal system.

The second point in the petition is a call to ensure that parliamentarians and the public know the limitations to the syariah legal system as set by the Federal Constitution. Yes, there are limits to the state-specific religious legal system as defined by our founding laws. Perhaps this has gone forgotten for far too long, or has been left without clarification for everyone to note.

Shouldn’t we, the public at large, know what limits the religious authorities have? And since Islam itself promotes speaking from a point of enlightenment and encourages the sharing of knowledge, how can we say this point is an attack on Islam?

The third point is to allow civil society to debate on the topic of using Islam as a source of public law and public policy. Again, this is necessary. Malaysians are now exposed to multiple facets of Islam. Everything and anything can be accessed online.

Islam has evolved, and we should evolve with it. In addition to this, how can we make laws and policies without contribution from civil society? We do it for everything from economics to education to welfare. When did Islam ever tell us to avoid having intellectual discourses on law and policy?

Is that not what a syura, or a political congress or a muktamar is all about? How can you not have the same for the government?

The fourth point of the “I Am #26” petition has to do with what I said in explaining Point 3. Islam has now evolved to be multifaceted, to the point that nobody truly has a monopoly on determining which or what the right Islamic laws and policies are.

For example, what has been implemented in Turkey is of a different brand from what is implemented in Saudi Arabia. Commonalities abound, true, but there are important differences, suiting different cultures. Still, we are united in worshipping one God.

So, how can we not allow the inclusion of all information from the different interpretations and juristic schools of thought?

The final point raised in the petition is leadership, or as I interpret it, a call to have a moderator for the intellectual debates on Islamic jurisprudence and the review of syariah laws and policies.

As I read it, we do not expect the Prime Minister himself to lead this move, but to appoint someone who is knowledgeable enough in both legal systems and has enough credibility as an intellectual to lead it to fruition.

Is this not what we want?

For too long, Islam and the Malays have been made the bogeymen of Malaysia. We have been blamed for nearly everything, including veiled threats of violence against non-Muslims.

Transparency, moderation, intellectual discourse, wisdom – these have been the hallmarks of the best of Islamic governance throughout history. Look at the rich history of Islam and you will find that the intellectuals in arithmetic and medicine were often the same intellectuals in philosophy and jurisprudence.

Muslims were historically the renaissance men. This has been historically recognised since the days of Kublai Khan, even. How can we ignore knowledge in any form?

With all this in mind, how can Malays reject a petition which truly stands for the best of what Islamic culture has offered in the past?

There is nothing in this petition that is against Islam. In fact, it encourages the use of the best qualities of our religious culture to combat ignorance and the hijacking of our religion by those who treat it as a monopoly. These are the unIslamic tendencies that the petition wants to combat.

And thus, I urge my Muslim brothers and sisters to support it. - http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com