BY
If there is anything unmistakably clear from the
recent muktamar or general assembly of
the Islamic Party of Malaysia – PAS – is that despite the acceptance of the
concept of tahalluf siyasi or political consensus among the
three major components of the opposition front – Pakatan Rakyat – PAS’
ambition in establishing an Islamic State and implementing hudud laws
is unwavering, if not more resolute.
It appears rather incongruous that despite the acceptance
of Buku Jingga or Orange Book as a comprehensive
framework of the opposition front on how to govern the country when they come
to power, PAS seems to have a higher agenda – to transform the multiracial and
multi-religious country into a full-fledged Islamic state with Islamic laws.
Islamic laws and hudud were never mentioned
in Buku Jingga and neither was the establishment of Islamic
State. PAS even came out with its own manifesto “Nation of Care and Opportunity”.
However this concept of a benevolent state is not well received by many PAS
members themselves. Reason being, the so-called Erdoganists in PAS mainly
mooted it. Recent spate of debate about the concept of Islamist Democrat – a
term popularised by the Erdoganists – between the ulama faction and the young
Turks clearly proved that they are considered contaminants in the “pure and
pristine” PAS struggle.
The changing trend
While PAS has been in existent since 1951, it has remarkably
shown to be very consistent in its struggle ever since, no matter how
insensible it could have been to many. PAS has tried to restore Islam’s place
as a central reference point for all social, cultural, economic and political
life in Muslim society. In the words of Bobby Said in his book “A Fundamental
Fear: Eurocentrism and the Emergence of Islamism”, he said: Islamism is a
project that attempts to transform Islam from a nodal point in the discourse of
Muslim communities to a master signifier. In particular, the Islamist project
is an attempt to make Islam the master signifier of the political order.
However this project of political Islam has taken a new turn
after what is known as the Arab Spring or the Arab Awakening. The discourse now
is not about establishing an Islamic State or implementing hudud laws.
The aspiration now is to nurture pious Muslims within a democratic polity.
Rachid Ghannouchi, leader of en-Nahdha in Tunisia has
categorically rejected Islamic State in favour of parliamentary democracy. His
party en-Nahdhah is committed to social justice, multiparty
democracy and religious pluralism.
A Professor of Sociology at the University of Illinois, Asef
Bayat termed this shift as post-Islamism. There was a clear shift from the
age-old slogan of al-Islam huwa al-hal – Islam is the solution
to all problems – to a more practical approach and solution.
As put forward by Rachid Ghannouchi in interpreting the
saying of the Prophet: “You are the best people to know what is beneficial for
you in your worldly affairs” meaning to say that it is not the duty of religion
to teach us agriculture, industrial or even governing techniques. Reason is
qualified to teach this truth through the accumulation of experiences. The role
of religion, however, is to answer the big question for us, those relating to
our existence, origins, destiny and the purpose for which we were created. It
is to provide us with a system of values and principles that would guide our
thinking, behavior and the regulation of the state to which we aspire.
Same old rhetoric
For those who followed closely the recent Muktamar,
it is evident that PAS is still trapped in the age-old agenda.
Implementing hudud laws still remain a priority in its
struggle. Obviously this is a clear contradiction to the mutually agreed Buku
Jingga. Whether they are aware of the repercussion or not, it
definitely provides ammunition to the ruling party that PAS has an ulterior
motive to change this country into an Islamic State.
The patronising speech by Head of Dewan Ulama or
the Religious Council in saying in a jest that hudud will
create more job opportunities since training is needed in order to chop off
hands and that training is also needed for caning of alcohol drinkers only
showed that they are not serious about the current economic problems faced by
the nation. It is as though by simply implementing hudud, all the
economic woes and social ills of the society will be solved.
Nothing serious was discussed about the idea of nation of
care and opportunity. PAS seems to have lost interest in pursuing the welfare
state agenda. The main tone that vibrates especially among the Islamic scholars
was nothing more than hudud and their unyielding push for this
agenda and not in the least worried about going public about it.
Little Napoleons
One of the most worrying trends during the Muktamar is
the voices of little Napoleons who tried to silence Harakah and
the online Harakahdaily who had been accused
to give more space to progressive figures in PAS and sidelining conservative
forces.
Harakah is accused to have strayed away from its original
intent and aspiration of PAS. Such an act would have been seen by many who
understand freedom of the press as stifling with the most fundamental foundation
of freedom of speech.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that
everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression: this right
includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information
and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.
Now this act by the little Napoleons only showed how much
they understand and respect human rights and what the future may hold if they
come to power. There will not be any room left for dissension and differing
opinions than what is being held by them.
The political reality
Perhaps the most important thing that PAS should appreciate
and understand is that the appeal for hudud and Islamic State
is not there anymore in the post-Islamism period. PAS should not misunderstand
the votes they received as amounting to the support for their Islamic agenda.
More than a hundred thousand went to the street for
demonstration during Bersih 3.0 recently. The demand was not to implement hudud or
establishing an Islamic state. People of various races and religions from all
walks of life marched together for a better democracy. They wanted a clean and
fair election and a government free of corruption. It was an act of defiance to
the draconian and unconstitutional Act that prevented people from any peaceful
assembly.
It must be heard loud and clear that the people want a truly
democratic state. Not a state ruled by a group of Mullahs who
considered themselves to be above the law. The precedent was already set when
one state under PAS passed an enactment that a fatwa or
religious verdict from a Mufti cannot be challenged in the
court of law.
It has to be understood that the state is not something from
God but from the people. The state has to serve the benefit of the people and
not just a certain group based on their faith. The state has to be neutral in
all aspects. It must also be made clear that a state is a human product and
managing a state requires human endeavor and not divine inspiration. The
governance of a state falls under the realm of political and is not in the
realm of revelation.
Any observance of religious values must never be through
coercion. A state should respect personal beliefs and moral values and not
imposed itself on its citizens. Unfortunately, the current situation in states
under PAS rule failed to prevent this obtrusion of the state into private
sphere. A state should not dictate how we should wear in public as this falls
under personal affairs. However to regulate how women should dress seemed to be
the first agenda under many Islamic governments; PAS not excluded.
Matters of the heart such as faith should be left to
individuals. It is not the state to meddle in matters of the heart. There is no
value in observing a faith that was made through coercion. Coercing people to
believe in a faith they have no believe anymore through state’s coercive tools
only turn them into hypocrites. People are created free and any effort of the
state to coerce people from embracing or leaving a faith is worthless and
futile.
The road forward
As a concluding remark, it must be re-emphasised that Islam
in one way or another has always influenced a state under Muslim rule
throughout history. Islam has not known a separation between state and religion
in the sense of excluding religion altogether from public life. However a clear
demarcation must be made between what belongs to the realm of ad-deeni or
religious and those that fall under as-siyasi or political.
Great Islamic jurists like ash-Shatibi and Ibnu Ashur have
agreed that the highest objective of all divine messages is to establish
justice and attainingmaslahah by realizing people’s interest. The
pursuit of justice and public interest is done merely through the exercise of
reason. And religion only provides values and guidelines in this pursuit.
Hence it is wrong to envisage that governing a state must
follow a fixed manual and that manual is none other than the Qur’an. The domain
of state governance falls under as-siyasi – the political –
that will require human intellect to establish justice and equality.
Thus justice cannot be achieved unless human rights are
secured for every individual and group in this country. And primary among human
rights are rights to belief and to express one’s belief.
In a country that has achieved independence since 1957, the
sovereign nation was founded upon the principles of justice and freedom as
stated in the Declaration of Independence. Unfortunately, the principles of
justice and freedom were forgotten and the provisions of fundamental liberties
enshrined in the constitution were progressively compromised and eroded by the
ruling elite.
Our aim now is to recover the lost hope, of justice and freedom,
and not to turn this country into another repressive state that claims to rule
with a mandate from God.
Dr. Ahmad Farouk Musa is a director at Islamic Renaissance Front.
No comments:
Post a Comment