Debat RUU 355: Kanun Keseksaan unsur Kristian, umat Islam tiada pilihan

Facebook
Facebook
Google+
https://hakam.org.my/wp/2017/03/18/debat-ruu-355-kanun-keseksaan-unsur-kristian-umat-islam-tiada-pilihan/
SHARE

Sumber: FMT News

Langkah meminda undang-undang sedia ada untuk meningkatkan hukuman mengikut ajaran Islam akan membolehkan umat Islam menerima pakai prinsip-prinsip moral mengikut agama mereka, kata peguam Aidil Khalid, pendebat menyokong RUU 355.

(From left) Bebas activist Azira Aziz, Aidil Khalid, Lukman Sheriff Alias, Bebas activist Boo Su-Lynn, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, Haris Ibrahim, and moderator Azrul Mohd Khalib, at the 17 March 2017 public debate on the motion “RUU355 amendments should be made into law” organised by non-governmental organisation Bebas. Pic taken from The Star Online.

(From left) Bebas activist Azira Aziz, Aidil Khalid, Lukman Sheriff Alias, Bebas activist Boo Su-Lynn, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, Haris Ibrahim, and moderator Azrul Mohd Khalib, at the 17 March 2017 public debate on the motion “RUU355 amendments should be made into law” organised by non-governmental organisation Bebas. Pic taken from The Star Online.

PETALING JAYA: Seorang ahli panel debat mengenai pindaan Akta Mahkamah Syariah (Bidang Kuasa Jenayah) 1965 mendakwa Kanun Keseksaan yang diguna pakai di Malaysia terdiri daripada unsur-unsur Kristian, namun umat Islam tidak pernah menjadikannya satu isu selama ini.

Sehubungan itu, peguam Aidil Khalid berkata, langkah meminda undang-undang sedia ada untuk meningkatkan hukuman mengikut ajaran Islam akan membolehkan umat Islam menerima pakai prinsip-prinsip moral mengikut agama mereka.

Beliau berkata demikian pada debat anjuran badan bukan kerajaan Bebas di PJ Live Arts di sini, malam tadi.

“Umat Islam di negara ini tertakluk kepada undang-undang sivil,” kata beliau semasa debat mengenai pindaan Akta Mahkamah Syariah (Bidang Kuasa Jenayah) 1965 (Akta 355) sambil menambah, beliau tidak pernah mengadu mengenainya, terutama peruntukan yang terkandung dalam Kanun Keseksaan.

“Ini adalah undang-undang diimport dari India, yang diambil dari sistem undang-undang British. Ada yang berdasarkan prinsip moral dan prinsip Kristian.

“Orang Islam tidak pernah mengadu (mengenai undang-undang sivil),” kata beliau sambil menambah, walaupun pemakaian Perlembagaan Persekutuan dikenakan ke atas semua rakyat di Malaysia, undang-undang Syariah hanya untuk orang Islam.

“Dan, kita tidak mahu mengenakan ke atas orang bukan Islam,” kata beliau yang mengecam pihak yang menentangannya sedangkan ia hanya akan memberi kesan ke atas umat Islam.

Beliau berkata, sepatutnya tidak harus ada perasaan takut kerana pindaan disyorkan ini bukan kali pertama disaksikan di negara ini.

Beliau berkata, akta itu telah dipinda pada tahun 1984 selepas pertama kali digubal pada 1965. Ia dikuatkuasakan di Sabah dan Sarawak pada 1989.

“Bukan satu isu besar. Apa yang kita minta sekarang, semata-mata satu penambahbaikan (ke atas akta sedia ada).”

Dalam pada itu, seorang lagi ahli panel Lukman Sheriff berkata, pindaan dibenarkan oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan bagi membolehkan peranan Mahkamah Syariah dipertingkat di peringkat negeri.

“Pindaan dibuat di Dewan Rakyat. Undang-undang ini hanya untuk orang Islam. Berapa banyak orang bukan Islam pernah ditangkap kerana tidak berpuasa pada bulan Ramadan? Berapa banyak orang bukan Islam didapati bersalah kerana tidak pergi solat Jumaat?

“Ia tidak akan digunakan ke atas bukan Islam kerana Perlembagaan memberi perlindungan (kepada mereka).”

Aktivis Haris Ibrahim berkata, beliau menentang pindaan kerana ia akan menyebabkan Malaysia beralih daripada menjadi sebuah negara sekular.

Haris memberi contoh tiga kesalahan yang berkaitan dengan Akta Kesalahan Jenayah Syariah Wilayah Persekutuan 1997, yang menurutnya tidak bersandarkan prinsip Islam.

Beliau berkata, kesalahan di bawah Seksyen 12 menyatakan bahawa mana-mana orang yang mengembang atau menyebarkan apa-apa pendapat tentang ajaran Islam, undang-undang Islam atau mengenai apa-apa fatwa, dianggap telah melakukan kesalahan.

Sambil menegaskan beliau telah membaca karya-karya abad kelapan ahli undang-undang Islam Iman Al Shafie, beliau berkata: “Pada masa itu, terdapat hujah-hujah balas, ada pendapat.”

“Tetapi apa yang undang-undang ini (akta Wilayah Persekutuan) berkata, jika sesiapa mempunyai pandangan bercanggah dengan fatwa, anda sebagai orang Islam tidak dibenar untuk mempunyai pendapat anda sendiri. Pendek kata, ia berkata, jangan fikir.”

Haris berkata, kesalahan-kesalahan lain seperti tidak menunaikan solat Jumaat di masjid selama tiga minggu berturut-turut dan tidak boleh makan atau minum di khalayak ramai semasa bulan Ramadan walaupun uzur.

Haris berkata, komuniti Kristian di Sabah tidak dibenar menggunakan kalimah Allah semasa pembaptisan sedangkan ia merupakan sebahagian daripada budaya mereka selama berabad-abad.

“Ia adalah sebahagian daripada usaha memperluaskan kuasa Mahkamah Syariah. Jika ini berterusan, ia akan memberi kesan kepada bukan Islam,” katanya sambil menambah, “ia sedang berlaku.”

Bersih yang bulan lalu menganjurkan perhimpunan membantah rang undang-undang persendirian Presiden PAS, Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang untuk meminda Akta Mahkamah Syariah (Bidang Kuasa Jenayah) 1965, telah menganjurkan debat ini malam tadi.

Pada 18 Februari lepas, Bebas mengadakan perhimpunan di Petaling Jaya sebagai tindak balas terhadap perhimpunan anjuran PAS yang berlangsung di Kuala Lumpur pada hari yang sama.

Pada bulan lalu, Bebas meminta semua wakil rakyat menolak usul rang undang-undang persendirian Hadi itu. Ia dijangka dibahaskan ketika sesi Parlimen yang sedang berlangsung sekarang.

Pada 24 November lalu, Hadi meminta Dewan Rakyat menangguhkan perbahasan RUU 355 ke sidang Mac ini bagi membolehkan pindaan dilakukan terhadapnya rang undang-undang itu.

Antara pindaan dicadangkan ialah hukuman “penjara tidak melebihi 30 tahun atau denda tidak lebih RM100,000 atau 100 sebatan” berbanding maksimum 3 tahun penjara, denda RM5,000 dan 6 kali sebatan yang boleh dijatuhkan Mahkamah Syariah ketika ini.

 


Lawyer: Penal code with Christian values imposed on all
Source: FMT News

Aidil Khalid says proposed shariah amendments necessary as Muslims want to enforce principles of morality according to Islam without enforcing them on non-Muslims.

(From left) Bebas activist Azira Aziz, Aidil Khalid, Lukman Sheriff Alias, Bebas activist Boo Su-Lynn, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, Haris Ibrahim, and moderator Azrul Mohd Khalib, at the 17 March 2017 public debate on the motion “RUU355 amendments should be made into law” organised by non-governmental organisation Bebas. Pic taken from The Star Online.

(From left) Bebas activist Azira Aziz, Aidil Khalid, Lukman Sheriff Alias, Bebas activist Boo Su-Lynn, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, Haris Ibrahim, and moderator Azrul Mohd Khalib, at the 17 March 2017 public debate on the motion “RUU355 amendments should be made into law” organised by non-governmental organisation Bebas. Pic taken from The Star Online.

PETALING JAYA: A speaker at a debate on the proposed shariah amendments has claimed that the Penal Code has elements of Christianity but Muslims in Malaysia had not complained about the issue.

Lawyer Aidil Khalid said through the move to amend the law to enhance punishment according to Islamic principles Muslims would get to enforce principles of morality according to their religion.

He said this at a debate organised by secular group Bebas and held at the PJ Live Arts last night.

“The Muslims in this country have been subjected to civil laws,” he said during a debate on the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 (Act 355) amendments, adding that he had not complained about it, particularly provisions contained in the Penal Code.

“These are laws imported from India which were taken from the British legal system. Some are based on the principle of morality and under the Christian principle.

“The Muslims never complained (about civil laws),” he said, adding that while the Federal Constitution was imposed on all Malaysians, the Shariah laws were only for Muslims.

“And we don’t even want to impose it on the non-Muslims,” he said, lamenting that there was opposition to the move although it would only affect Muslims.

He said there should not be any fear mongering as it would not be the first time the act was being amended.

He noted that the act was amended in 1984 after having been established in peninsular Malaysia in 1965. It was further applied to Sabah and Sarawak in 1989.

“There was no big fuss. What we are asking now is simply for further improvement, he said.

Another speaker, Lukman Sheriff, said the amendment was allowed by the Federal Constitution to allow Shariah courts to be run at the state-level.

“The amendments are done in the Dewan Rakyat. And the laws are only for Muslims. How many non-Muslims are caught for not fasting during Ramadan? How many non-Muslims are convicted for not going for Friday prayers?”

“It will not be applied on non-Muslims because of the constitutional safeguard (on them).”

Activist Haris Ibrahim said he opposed the amendment as it was causing Malaysia to move away from being a secular state.

He gave the example of three offences in the Shariah Criminal Offences Federal Territories Act 1997 which he said were not according to the precepts of Islam.

He said the offence under Section 12 states that any person who propagates or disseminates any opinion concerning Islamic teachings, Islamic laws or concerning any fatwa, shall be guilty.

Stressing that he had read the works of 8th century Islamic jurist Iman Al Shafie, he said: “In those days there were arguments and counter-arguments going back and forth, there were differing opinions. But what this law (FT law) says is if anyone holds an opinion contrary to fatwa, you as Muslim are not allowed to have your own opinion. In short, it says don’t think.”

Haris said other such offences were on not performing Friday prayers in a mosque for three consecutive weeks and not eating or drinking in public during the fasting month despite being unwell.

Haris said Sabahan Christians were being deprived of using the word Allah during baptism which was part of their culture for centuries.

“It is part of expanding the powers of shariah courts. And if this continues it will impact the non-Muslims. Please wake up. It is happening.”

Aidil retorted by questioning Haris’ expertise in Arabic. “Any Tom, Dick and Harry cannot be defining Islamic jurisprudence,” he said.

Lukman added that the majority of Muslims did not share Haris’ view and such a clash of opinions was not healthy.

PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang  has, through a private member’s bill tabled last year, sought to amend Act 355, allowing for stiffer punishments for shariah offenders, The increased sentences proposed include a maximum punishment of up to 30 years’ jail, 100 lashes of the cane and a RM100,000 fine.