Continuing the topic as per my previous post God proposes, Priests dispose do you recall how Sheikh Ghazali Abdul Rahman, the syariah adviser to the AG's Chambers, claimed it would be compulsory for Muslims to support the proposed amendments to the Shariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act?
 |
PAS talking, wakakaka |
Well, that's another example of an ulama (not Allah swt) dictating what a Malaysian Muslim must do.
Compulsory, must, mandatory, etc etc. Those ulama really don't give Muslims in Malaysia a choice, do they?
I'll come back to this shortly after we review once again the case of JAWI persecuting (not just prosecuting) Nik Raina.
Yes, Sheikh Ghazali Abdul Rahman's edict on the so-called compulsory requirement for Muslims to support the Hudud Bill is not as bad as JAWI persecuting and prosecuting Nik Raina even though Sweetie didn't do any wrong.
Just to recapitulate for those who aren't aware of how poor sweetie Nik Raina, a manager at The Borders book store was made a victim of those ulama.
Her store was selling a book titled “Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta”, translated from the English Version written by Canadian author Irshad Manji. At that time it was NOT a banned book.
Nonetheless, she was arrested and charged for being a Muslim manager at a bookstore which sold that book.
The Home Ministry only banned the book 6 days later, yes, a week after the sale.
She was charged under Section 13 (1) of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territory) Act for allegedly selling and distributing a book that is contrary to the Islamic laws.
That completely and deliberately ignored a simple plain truth that her bookstore sold that book six days before the ban by the Home Ministry, meaning at the time of the sale, the book was NOT a banned/illegal item.
How the f**k was she to know the book would be banned six days later? But JAWI didn't care a shit. It's all about the ulama's intent to punish punish punish kau kau.
Almost a year later, the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled that JAWI had acted illegally in raiding Borders, seizing the books and charging Nik Raina. It was then ordered to withdraw its charges against her in the Syariah court.
But JAWI, despite and in spite of the fact that the Home Ministry ban wasn't published until 6 days after the same, and ignoring the logic of the court's ruling, still appealed against the ruling.
Not only that, the syariah court Chief Sharie Prosecutor (KPS) Mohamad Adib Husain also took the unusual step of serving the notice of the appeal directly to Nik Raina at her place of work in the Mid Valley shopping mall when he should have send the notice to her lawyers, thus breaching the rule that they should not communicate with Nik Raina directly.
According to Roslie Dahlan, sweetie's lawyer, JAWI's actions showed "arrogance" in deliberately wanting to intimidate Nik Raina by serving the notice directly to the bookstore manager instead of the lawyers representing her in the case, a wicked case probably a la "buatkan dia panic lah, syiok saje!".
Rosli added that the latest appeal puts Mohamad Adib the KPS and JAWI’s DG in contempt of both the civil High Court and Court of Appeal’s orders directing that the prosecution against Nik Raina be discontinued due to illegality.
The Court of Appeal had ruled the prosecution against Nik Raina was “unreasonable, irrational” and done in bad faith, and that it was against the “principle of fairness and justice” for JAWI to prosecute Nik Raina for an offence in the Shariah court simply because she was a Muslim and because it could not charge the company and her non-Muslim supervisor.
(1) JAWI wanted a victim to punish punish punish kau kau and Nik Raina was a Muslim which fitted the bill because her Borders boss was not a Muslim and beyond their unforgiving claws. Just imagine what would have happened to her non-Muslim boss if Malaysia was under full syariah laws? Aiyoyo, amah!
(2) JAWI deliberately ignored the fact that at time of sale of the book, no ban on it existed. Yet JAWI wanted to punish punish punish someone kau kau and Nik Raina was just there, innocent as she might have been. There was undeniably an evil intent then, and nothing to do with the great religion of Islam or the noble teachings of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). Those f**king JAWI officials shamefully desecrated the good name of Islam. They should be flogged with at least 100 lashes and then re-circumcised, wakakaka.
(3) The above were prosecutions but that they continued appealing for more than a year after it was painfully obvious Nik Raina was innocent and the court had repeatedly said so could only be termed as PERSECUTIONS, not just legal prosecution.
[Persecutions mean the acts of 'to pursue with harassing or oppressive treatment, especially because of religious or political beliefs, ethnic or racial origin, gender identity, or sexual orientation']
(4) Were Mohamad Adib the KPS and JAWI’s DG in contempt of both the civil High Court and Court of Appeal’s orders? Don't bother to answer.
As I said, god might have proposed, but it's men, those priests, ulama, preachers who dispose.
Okay, let's return to Sheikh Ghazali Abdul Rahman's edict on the so-called compulsory requirement for Muslims to support the Hudud Bill
Sudanese Professor Dr Abdullahi A. An-Naim said Muslims have no obligation to support hudud as the Islamic criminal code is not mentioned in the Quran.
Got that - not mentioned in the Quran. Again we are reminded of what our own Kassim Ahmad said of the priesthood caste. Malaysiakini reported two plus years ago:
Speaking at an event organised by the Perdana Leadership Foundation, he said that Islam in Malaysia has been abused through a “priesthood caste” system.
“This priesthood caste did not exist at the time of the Prophet or the four caliphs. They only emerged about 300 years later by appointing themselves as interpreter of religion for Muslims,” he said.
“They (Muslims) view their religious leaders like gods and goddesses, that these leaders are seen to be protected from maksum (protected from sin) and must decide on everything about their lives.” [...]
He called on Muslims to return the Quran as the sole and highest source of information in Islam, and to reinterpret the holy book to suit modern times.
“I have said before that the Quran explains itself. The old method to use the hadith (Prophet's saying and actions) to explain the Quran is not very good, as this means we are saying that the Prophet Muhammad knew everything. This is ridiculous, as he is just a messenger of Allah,” he stressed.
Kassim was once accused of being anti-hadith, a charged he has denied.
Referring to the first verse of the Quranic chapter al-Munafiqun, he said Muslims are wrong to beatify the prophet.
He also questioned the wearing of the tudung (headscarf) by Muslim women, arguing that hair is not part of the aurat (parts of the body which need to be covered).
[By the by, art activist Raja Aminullah who also spoke at the forum with Kassim Ahmad, expressed disappointment with the absence of scheduled panelist and PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar, who had pulled out at the last minute. Wakakaka]
OK, back to our Sudanese Prof - the Prof, believe it or not, said a secular country [presumably he meant Malaysia] would protect freedom of belief, including among Muslims. Wow!
He said: “The term 'hudud' itself is a misnomer. The Quran doesn't mention the term 'hudud'. It's not in the Sunnah.”
He challenged “Give me a Quranic text that gives this obligation”, referring to Hudud and undoubtedly Sheikh Ghazali Abdul Rahman's edict.
The Malay Mail Online then reported: An-Naim said today that a secular state was not a Western objective but about protecting freedom of belief given the “wide variety” of Muslims.
The scholar of Islam and human rights pointed out that the Shiites in Sudan are forced to live under Wahhabism, an austere branch of Sunni Islam, which they consider heresy, while Iran enforces the Shiite doctrine that must be followed by Sunni Muslims.
“Separating the state from religion is necessary for Muslims to believe with conviction and honesty,” said An-Naim.
Local hudud proponents claim that Malaysia is an “Islamic” country. Malaysia, which practises Sunni Islam, labels other denominations like Shiism as deviant.
An-Naim said the term “Islamic state” does not appear in the Quran and was not practised in the history of Islamic civilisation until the 20th century, noting that the idea of a separate state for Muslims only emerged in the 1930s for a state in colonial India to break away as Pakistan.
An-Naim, who wrote a book on Islam and the secular state, said the government should enforce a single law on all citizens equally.
He described the dual legal system in Malaysia, in which Muslims can be punished for “personal sins” like “khalwat” (close proximity), as confusing.
“A crime should not be made a crime just because it’s a sin to some people” ...
... differentiating succinctly between a crime (eg. an adult raping a 13-year lil' girl) and a sin (having naughty thoughts about Gemma Atkinson, wakakaka) ...
... unless of course those people are the unchallengeable ulama in Malaysia, wakakaka, who (not Allah swt) love to prohibit, persecute and punish to ensure Muslims get the message that they the 'high priests rule the Earth and must NOT be challenged.
