Sam Kian Seng, who has already spent 27 years in prison and who is making a difference in the lives of his fellow prisoners, harbours hopes of being a free man again.

IN the course of my work, I have met all kinds of people. From kings to prime ­ministers to even former terrorists but one person – a prisoner – has remained very much in my mind.

In fact, his case has continued to haunt me ever since I met him a few years back. It started with a telephone call from a very senior Kajang Prison official.

He said I should meet up with Sam Kian Seng as he seemed to have a gift that has fascinated him and other prison officers.

It isn’t every day that prison officials would call up a journalist to help seek the release of a prisoner, whom they feel has transformed himself into a model citizen.

“We see him every day from the day he stepped in here. We know him better than anyone in the Pardons Board. He has changed and, more importantly, he has been changing the lives of other inmates,” the official told me.

The long-serving prisoner is able to do what many prison wardens and counsellors cannot do – he turns hardcore criminals into church mice, literally.

He readily gives away soap and toiletries to other prisoners and he encourages inmates to go for rehabilitation.

He counsels the inmates, leads daily worship and conducts Bible classes in cells, and provides information about non-governmental organisations like Malaysian Care and halfway houses to prisoners about to be released.

Every Sunday, over 60 inmates, including former hardcore criminals, spend their time in worship under his leadership.

But Sam is serving a natural life jail sentence where he will have to die in prison. He was also given six strokes of the rotan. (A normal life sentence only requires a convict to serve 20 years with the usual one-third remission.)

In short, Sam who was arrested for gun possession in a 1988 robbery will never be able to get out from prison alive. The authorities said he should have been sentenced to death, by right, but he escaped the gallows because he was not the principal offender.

He has continuously appealed to the Pardons Board to have his punishment reduced to life imprisonment but he has not been successful.

His appeals file is thick with letters written by the most prominent lawyers and even prison officers who see his work and know him, but it has not worked.

When his parents died, he was not given a chance to attend their funeral. After all, he is a nobody, not a popular politician.

Every warden in Kajang prison, who are mainly Muslims, and almost every counsellor who does prison work, knows of this man, Sam Kian Seng. There is plenty of sympathy and support for him but it remains just there.

When I visited this man, the prison officials told me I could have all the time I wanted. After all, time passes by very slowly behind prison walls.

There was plenty of awkwardness as I barely knew this man. I was asked to read up all the appeal letters before I met him. Some, who wrote these appeals passionately on his behalf, have themselves passed way.

He spoke to me in English, which he taught himself, as he was told that I could not speak Mandarin. He was also told that I would struggle with my Cantonese or Hokkien. But we managed well. I was facing a man who would most likely die in prison and yet, he spoke about his plans to carry on with his counselling work once he was released from jail.

I let him speak, not interrupting at all, and when he finally ended, I told him that I would try my best to help him.

I have sought the audiences of two Sultans to alert them of this case. Unfortunately for Sam, the crime took place in Kuala Lumpur – and any appeals for a lesser sentence, or even pardon, would have to come from the King.

The Pardons Board, which includes the Attorney-General, would have to make their recommendations to the King but unfortunately I have no access to His Majesty The King.

But the process to grant a pardon is the same, whether at state or federal level, so I felt sharing my views with the two Rulers would help as they have direct access to their fellow Rulers.

The two Sultans have suggested that he should write, or at least I should write on his behalf, to the Conference of Rulers and that they would bring this matter up for discussions with their fellow Rulers, if there is a merit to the case and whether what I have heard is the truth.

I have not met Sam since our one meeting. Church workers who regularly meet up with him said he always asked about me. They swore that Sam is a changed man. His conversations with them have always been about God, forgiveness and how to help others.

Sam’s dilemma is constantly on my mind because of the recent audience I had with His Royal Highness the Sultan of Johor.

On the occasion of his coronation, Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar had issued a royal pardon for a man on death row who has been in prison for the past 11 years. The pardon was for the 29-year-old man who was sentenced to death for murder in 2004.

Johor State Secretary Datuk Ismail Karim said the state government hoped that the released prisoner would put to good use the second chance given to him to improve and develop his life, his family and also for the country.

Sultan Ibrahim also reduced the death sentences of 10 other prisoners to life imprisonment and natural life sentences.

Six prisoners were spared the gallows through the royal amnesty by only serving life imprisonment. They were originally sentenced to death under Section 39B (1) (a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and Section 3 of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971.

Four others who also faced the death sentence were granted amnesty where they will serve natural life sentences. They were previously sentenced to death under Section 3 of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971 and also Section 302 of the Penal Code for murder.

Early this month, the Sultan of Perak, Sultan Nazrin Shah, pardoned a prisoner and granted a commutation of the death sentence of two prisoners to life imprisonment, in conjunction with his enthronement.

Perak Pardons Board secretary Datuk Razali Othman said the decision was made by the State Pardons Board conference chaired by the Sultan at Iskandriah Palace.

Razali said the Sultan had issued a reminder that any appeals from prisoners must be submitted by the prisoners themselves or through the channels prescribed and not forwarded by a third party using other channels.

He said the Sultan also decreed that a sentence was imposed to act as a lesson to the public to respect the laws of the country.

He added that a pardon or lessening of a sentence that had been decided by the court would be considered when prisoners who filed the appeal showed remorse, had repented and apologised, with promise of good behaviour and would not repeat the same offence.

Reflecting on these remarks on when a pardon can be issued, my mind goes back to that day with Sam once again.

It has been hard for me, after that meeting, to simply put his case aside and to tell myself that there’s only so much I can do as an ordinary person.

But as I pressed my hand on to the panel which separated us to say goodbye, he told me that he believed that he would walk out of prison one day and continue his mission work outside.

When I asked him why he should be optimistic, he looked and me and said: “Sir, even the word hopeless begins with hope.”

I learnt something from Sam, the ­prisoner serving a natural life sentence, that day. Surely, there is a need to strike a balance between the interests of the public and the interests of the offender. A ­repentant person deserves a chance in life, especially if he has paid his debt to society.

I do not know what else I can do but to make a direct plea to the powers that be, those with influence and authority at the Federal Pardons Board. You have been put there by God; I hope that this article will strike a chord among all members of this Pardons Board.

Please revisit the case of Sam Kian Seng – Number 1000 2901 – who has already served 27 years. Let his hope to walk out of prison a free man not be in vain.

Rohingya migrants waiting inside a boat off the coast of Thailand in the Andaman Sea. -AFP

MALAYSIA has to be real careful in sending the right message to the migrants from Myanmar and Bangladesh. If we are seen to be soft and seemingly ready to accommodate them, our shores will soon be filled with them.

Malaysia and Indonesia are preferred destinations because the perception is that both these countries are Muslim-majority and have shown sympathy for the Rohingya people in the past.

And this is further accentuated by the presence of a huge foreign workforce in Malaysia, comprising both legal and illegal workers, that gives the impression that Malaysia is an attractive destination to eke out a living.

The recent events where boatloads of these migrants have suddenly made it into Malaysian territory have made us more aware of the different ways through which these migrants have landed on our shores.

First, it shows how porous our borders are. It is so easy for foreigners to enter our seas and our shores with little prevention or detection by our authorities. That is, of course, nothing new with Malaysians already, especially in Sabah.

The Abu Sayyaf has long found out how easy it is to come over to Malaysia and to grab a few Malaysians and foreigners and hold them for ransom.

It is a lucrative business for these kidnappers who amazingly still think of themselves as freedom fighters in the name of religion. In reality, they are not even terrorists, but just plain criminals.

Much more brazen are the recent reports of how the Thais involved in the syndicates, using fishing boats, had unloaded these migrants on our shores, treating Malaysia as a dumping ground.

Who were these people who brought them to our shores – Thai fishermen, Thai army personnel or the Thai courier service? Again, how did they enter our coastal jurisdiction with such ease?

Unlike the Indonesians, who have sent these migrants off after giving them water and food, Malaysia has actually taken them into the detention centres with no time frame of when they will be asked to conti­nue with their journey.

The Indonesians seem to have spun their story pretty well – they are saying that these migrants do not really want to stay in Indonesia but their destination is Malaysia.

Arrmanatha Nasir, a spokesman for Indonesia’s Foreign Ministry, reportedly said an Indonesian ship had given provisions to a migrant boat it encountered on patrol in the Straits of Malacca before the boat continued its way to Malaysia, which he said was its intended destination.

“The people on the boat did not want to go to Indonesia, but they asked for help, clean water and food,” he said. “After the aid was given, they parted.”

That’s brilliant, Pak, and certainly very much in the spirit of Asean solidarity and the much touted brotherhood ties between our two countries. It was only later that the Indonesians took in about 1,400 immigrants in Acheh.

Let’s face it, Malaysians are people with loads of sympathy and compassion. Then, there is the added dimension of religion.

But we have to use our heads too, not just our hearts, in dealing with the increasing number of migrants coming to Malaysia.

We cannot afford to give the impression that we will take them in, even temporarily, because news will soon travel back home that they were welcomed in Malaysia.

Yes, it is painful to read news reports of overcrowded traffickers’ boats with their human cargo including women and children, but Malaysia is already overflowing with immigrants, many of whom are illegals.

Older Malaysians will recall that in May 1975, the first boat of 47 Vietnamese refugees arrived in Malaysia from Vietnam.

Pulau Bidong in Terengganu was used as a refugee island to house the trickling boat people but two years later, boats arriving from Vietnam became a near daily occurrence.

It was reported that by January 1979, there were 18,000 Vietnamese on the island and by June 1979, it was said to be the most heavily populated place on earth with about 40,000 refugees crowded into a flat area hardly larger than a football field.

The Pulau Bidong camp was finally shut down in 1990 and the refugees were moved to Sungai Besi in Kuala Lumpur. It took Malaysia 20 years before the last of the 250,000 Vietnamese refugees here finally left the country.

But compare the situation then to the estimated millions of registered and illegal foreign workers in Malaysia now. It would not be wrong to say that it has become a security issue.

The majority of Malaysians are sick and tired of the huge influx of foreigners, mostly unskilled, into Malaysia.

It is reassuring for Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wan Junaidi Jaafar to say that Malaysia cannot welcome them here. He has rightly said that “if we continue to welcome them, then hundreds of thousands will come from Myanmar and Bangladesh”.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has so far registered over 35,000 Rohingya migrants in Malaysia but most people believe the number is much higher.

Turning these migrants away would invite criticism by non-governmental organisations and activists but no country has joined in the chorus of support because governments know they cannot simply accept them and, if they do so, it would be hugely unpopular with their electorate.

Despite the hypocritical criticism by the United States against Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand, the US will surely not accept these Rohingyas and Bangladeshis.

In fact, the US appears reluctant to even provide direct help in search and rescue, with US State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke saying “this is a regional issue, it needs a regional solution in short order”. We will be quite happy to send these refugees to the US.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak meanwhile has said that Malaysia will not tolerate any form of human trafficking, adding that the government would take the “necessary action” and that anyone found to be perpetrating this injustice and contravening Malaysian laws would be held accountable.

“I am very concerned over the plight of migrants in our region, some of whom have already reached our shores and still others who are trying.

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Council are taking the necessary actions to deal with this humanitarian crisis,” the Prime Minister reportedly said.

Najib is right in condemning the human traffickers who have given false hopes to these helpless people but no one should interpret this concern as a sign that Malaysia is welcoming these people.

The source of the problem is Myanmar. Malaysia should exercise its authority as the chairman of Asean to deal with Myanmar for its persecution of the Rohingya minority who are effectively stateless.

No one would leave his country in a rickety boat, gambling with his life, unless the situation is so desperate.

Worse, it is shocking to read of extremist Buddhist monks calling for the killing of these Rohingya people.

With the Malaysian and Thai authorities cracking down on the smuggling of these people via the jungles, the sea which is more dangerous has become the optional route. But Malaysia should chart its course correctly too because it is one problem that Malaysia does not need.

Don’t we have enough problems already?

It is tough enough for the government to deal with an electorate still adjusting to the GST. But it puts itself in double jeopardy when it does not provide more information on the 1MDB.

EVERY businessman knows that April would be a tough month with the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) but many have been hit much harder than they had anticipated.

I know of one watch dealer who did not make a single sale for a day in April – it has never happened before in his entire career.

The hardest hit were the electrical appliances dealers, where profit margins are already low, with many consumers joining in the pre-GST rush to buy these products. So in terms of sales, April was practically a dead month for them.

One jewellery businessman said sales were 30% to 50% down in April compared to the same month last year. In the first week of April, the jeweller recorded a 70% decline in sales.

The media industry has taken a beating as well with slower advertising revenue recorded for the month of April.

There is serious concern now that the weak consumer sentiment will drag on for the next two months, and that the second quarter would not be a happy one.

With the fasting month coming up in June and Hari Raya in July, media houses would traditionally see early bookings but everyone is worried. There does not seem to be any enthusiasm.

In a recent report, the Retail Group Malaysia (RGM) had predicted that Malaysian consumers would buy earlier in the year in anticipation of higher retail prices after April 2015.

However, retail sales performance during the first two months of the year was actually below expectations.

That is from a business perspective but for many Malaysian consumers, the reality is that they now have to pay more, even for their daily needs. Many have resisted spending on items they feel they do not need because of the GST, and the weaker ringgit hasn’t helped either.

Some have however expressed cautious optimism, believing that there would be a correction by next month, insisting that there would be more spending with the Hari Raya festivities coming up.

The reality is that the GST has taken a much greater toll on consumer sentiment than expected.

Yes, we can say that glitches are expected. We can say that Malaysia is among the last countries to impose the GST and that we have to start living with the new tax system.

Malaysians have also been told that the GST is necessary if we want to improve our deficits and to prevent our credit ratings from being downgraded.

But while our leaders expect the ordinary people to make these sacrifices for the national good, we also expect them to live up to our expectations.

Reports of lavish spending on themselves or their family members, whether real or otherwise, are not going to endear them to the people.

In fact, there is a lot of grumbling among the people that some of our leaders have become disconnected and are not hearing the loud murmurings on the ground.

If they were to listen hard enough, they would realise that all those statistical ­figures that have been tossed around to justify how well the country is doing have not shifted the people’s thinking one bit.

In fact, not many people even believe in these magical numbers because the rosy picture is not being felt by the rakyat who are struggling to pay their bills.

The situation is made worse by reports of public money being purportedly siphoned off. To be clear, we are talking about the 1Malaysia Development Berhad issue. No one seems to have been hauled up for investigations even as we eagerly wait for some action to be taken.

All those high-powered teams comprising our top investigators are supposed to have been set up but none of us can tell for sure if they have actually started work.

Instead of going after the whistle blowers, we are sure most Malaysians want to see our police channel their resources and energy pursuing those who have allegedly dipped their fingers or, rather, their hands, illegally into the money pot.

It would help if fresh information is made available regularly on how our police and others have progressed in their work. Instead, Malaysians are getting their daily dosage of allegations via social media but without any rebuttal or strong clarification from those implicated.

Perceptions are important, and if those aggrieved do not respond fast enough, and provide more information, it will have a serious impact on their positions and eventually their legitimacy.

Until these issues are tackled, they would continue to disrupt the running of the government and put the government in a defensive mode.

It is tough enough for the government to deal with a dissatisfied, if not angry, electorate, still adjusting to the introduction of the GST. But it puts itself in double jeopardy when it also has to deal with the detractors with their constant barrage of exposes on the 1MDB.

The concert venue at the Mines International Exhibition and Convention Centre in Seri Kembangan stays empty after the concert was cancelled.

IF you want to watch a good concert without having to worry about our Malaysian authorities throwing a spanner in the works at the last minute, then just head to Jakarta, Bangkok or Singapore.

Talk to concert promoters in Malaysia – there are not that many in this financially risky business – and they will tell you that Malaysia has a bad reputation among artistes in this region. Bad is an understatement, really.

Some Malaysian concert promoters have moved to China to stage shows there as they find dealing with the communist authorities is actually simpler. Not to forget, the market in China is huge, with the potential for larger audiences, like in Jakarta and Bangkok.

Our problem is that just about ­everyone in Malaysia wants to have a big say over how concerts should be organised, or whether they can be organised in the first place. And what is ridiculous is that most of them do not even know who the artistes are, yet they have strong opinions over whether they are “morally suitable” for the impressionable young minds in our country.

The most powerful body is the Central Agency for Applications of Filming and Performance by Foreign Artistes or Puspal.

The agency was set up by the Cabinet in 2001 to coordinate and consider all applications for filming and performance by foreign artistes. It has so much clout that no concert promoter would dare to make a comment, even a little squeak, about Puspal, for fear of being blacklisted. Puspal reports to the Communications and Multimedia Minister.

Then there are the authorities at other levels. And the hottest issue now is that even the district police headquarters can stop an event. Last week, the highly awaited “Thirst 2015: We Are All Stardust” event, which was scheduled to take place at Mines International Exhibition & Contention Centre (MIECC), was cancelled at the last minute.

Never mind if it was supposed to be a closed-door dance music event with only non-Muslims allowed, since beer would be served. For the organisers, one year of planning went down the drain, thanks to the fickleness of the police and the Subang Jaya Municipal Council.

According to reports, on the afternoon of April 24, the day before the event, the police sent a letter to MPSJ stating that they would not support the concert. This led to the MPSJ withdrawing the entertainment permit that had been issued to the organisers. It has also been claimed that the Serdang police had initially issued a letter on March 25 stating that they had no objections to the staging of this event.

MPSJ then issued a temporary permit to the organisers, Future Sound Asia Sdn Bhd, on April 21, to stage the concert, subject to certain conditions. They included ­ensuring that there would be no one under the age of 18 attending the concert, and that Muslims are also forbidden to attend.

The police have cited security reasons for their decision and have denied that they acted following a complaint by Seri Serdang state assemblyman Noor Hanim Ismail, who wrote an official letter objecting to the concert.

The PAS representative reportedly said it was her responsibility as a Muslim legislator to stop the concert, which is sponsored by beer company Heineken, as it would have an adverse social impact on society.

Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma)’s Youth wing has also reportedly backed the authorities’ decision to withdraw support for Thirst 2015, claiming the event encourages the consumption of alcohol.

Pardon the expression but these objections have left a bitter taste in my mouth. As a non-Muslim who drinks, I believe I have the right to enjoy a party with alcohol served. It is not for PAS or Isma to pass moral judgement on non-Muslims as the conditions clearly stated that Muslims would not be allowed to participate.

Thank you very much to non-Muslims who cast their votes for PAS candidates in the 2013 general election. Thank you for believing that PAS policies, including the implementation of hudud laws, would not affect non-Muslims.

Before this issue broke out, there was also a lot of debate generated when it was revealed that the Malaysian Islamic Development Department (Jakim) had proposed that males and females be segregated during concerts. Its guidelines included a section on dealing with the organisation of entertain­ment events whereby Jakim said such programmes should not allow “mixing (percampuran) of males and females in the audience”.

The guidelines were endorsed during the 107th National Fatwa Committee Meeting held on Feb 10 and 11 this year.

According to reports, the guidelines also specified that concert organisers should not allow pergaulan bebas (mingling) between men and women during rehearsals.

Needless to say, it created a furore among Malaysians of all races for its impracticality and the controversy was also widely reported in neighbouring countries.

Jakim subsequently backpedalled and clarified it was merely a guideline. Well, if Malaysians had not spoken up, it could well be regarded as a regulation.

It would appear no one gave any thought as to how the gender segregation proposal could be implemented. Would it mean married couples have to be seated separately? And does the rule apply to non-Muslims as well? If it is a yes, the rights of non-­Muslims would surely be infringed. And we all know that some members of our royalty, including certain Sultans and their families, like attending concerts. Would the regulation be applicable to them as well?

It has also been reported that Jakim has ruled that jokes made during performances must be appropriate and cannot lead to “excessive laughter”.

Now, who is to decide what kind of jokes would be deemed appropriate and is there such a thing as “moderate laughter”? This sounds really absurd, even to an advocate of moderation like me.

But by now, Malaysians have got used to such absurdities. Three years ago, a Singaporean dance troupe was denied a permit to perform here owing to their “indecent” costumes. Puspal was reportedly against the female dancers wearing tutus as well as the tights worn by men.

If ballet dancers do not wear tutus and tights, then what are they supposed to wear? In the end, it had to take the minister to knock some sense into them.

The point here is this – do we always need to run to the Prime Minister or Minister for something as ordinary as holding a concert?

Back in 2008, the promoter of the Avril Lavigne concert, someone I know, was in tears because there was pressure from PAS leader Nasruddin Hassan for the show to be cancelled. Imagine the financial losses he had to bear. Even though the argument was frivolous, there were few Umno leaders who had the courage to speak up against this politician.

Lavigne may just be a skinny artiste to most of her fans but Nasruddin, now the MP for Temerloh, found her too sultry and sexy to be allowed to perform in Kuala Lumpur. The promoter was desperate but thankfully was able to seek the help of then Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to intervene and allow the show to proceed.

Interestingly enough, in the 2013 elections, there were enough Chinese voters who supported Nasruddin to help him defeat the incumbent MP, Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, now a fellow moderation advocate.

Malaysia is in danger of becoming a basket case with extreme theologians and communal champions appearing to combine their strengths to push their agendas.

If moderate Malaysians do not speak up, or prefer to let others do the job, we will be heading towards a Malaysia which our founding fathers never envisioned.

There will be no turning back if we do not speak up for a moderate Malaysia. We must insist on the middle ground.

Building caretaker showing the empty space where the Cross was brought down following a protest by residents at Taman Medan, Petaling Jaya.

LIKE most Christians in this country, I am sad rather than angry over the protest staged by about 50 people demanding the removal of a cross at a church in Taman Medan in Selangor.

In fact, if some of the protesters have their way, they would want the church to leave the area because of its predominantly Muslim population.

This flawed argument feeds on the fears of these people, and we are not even sure if they actually represent the views of the majority as they claimed. The demonstration may well be the work of some local politicians.

But it is clear enough that some of the remarks made at that demonstration last Sunday seem to stem from ignorance, prejudice and even plain bigotry.

They include the claim that the sight of a cross in a Muslim area challenged Islam and could influence the young.

Just a few months ago, hundreds of protesters gathered at a development site in Taman Keramat, claiming that their Malay-majority neighbourhood would be overrun by the Chinese because of the ongoing project.

The rowdy protesters stormed into the construction site of the condominium project, Datum Jelatek, after tearing down its zinc hoardings.

It was revealed later that their fears were unfounded, or rather false, as the developer, the Selangor State Development Corporation, confirmed that the majority of bookings were by the Malays.

Although it is wrong to play the racial card, we must acknowledge that the fears of the urbanites being pushed aside by development in their own areas are real.

Many of them, especially the urban poor, struggle to own homes in the areas which had been their home for generations because the new developments are beyond their reach.

Still, incidents like these, which smack of racism, have left many Malaysians, especially non-Malays, wondering about the state of affairs in this country.

We love this country, like the rest of our brothers and sisters, regardless of their race and religion. Malaysia remains our country and our only home.

There is nowhere else to go. Just because we are of ethnic Chinese and Indian origin does not mean we can just pack our bags and head to China and India, as some ignorant ones think.

Our hearts bleed when such incidents happen. Worse, despite the inflammatory racial remarks made at Taman Keramat, no one has been arrested or charged over that incident so far.

Can cynical Malaysians be blamed if they assume that no one would be arrested or charged over the Taman Medan protest as well?

We salute the Prime Minister, the Home Minister and the Cabinet for their strong stand against what had taken place.

Our politicians, as well as some individuals and groups, should stop harping on the wrong belief that Malays and Islam are under siege in our country.

The statistics themselves already prove that this is not possible. The Malays are the substantive majority, and their fertility rate is such that their numbers are growing. In contrast, both the Chinese and the Indian communities are shrinking.

As for religion, Islam is firmly entrenched as the religion of the country, even as the freedom of religion is guaranteed under the Constitution.

The official statistics reveal that Muslims constitute 60.4% of the population, Buddhist (19.2%), Christian (9.1%), Hindu (6.3%), Confucianism, Taoism, other traditional Chinese religions (2.6%), other or unknown (1.5%), and none (0.8%).

It is unfortunate that so many issues today are still seen through racial and religious perspectives.

Which is why many are under pressure to only speak out for their own community and faith, right or wrong. Those who are prepared to point out the flaws in some of the extreme arguments of their own communities are often condemned. And many just remain silent.

But talk of moderation would remain hollow if we are not able to take the internal pressures.

Our conscience requires us to speak up against those who cannot draw the line between right and wrong. How can we remain silent when something that is so fundamentally wrong happens in front of our eyes?

Coming back to Taman Medan, the argument that a place of worship belonging to a minority cannot be set up in a Muslim-majority area is deeply flawed.

Everyone is entitled to profess and practise his faith freely. That is clearly defined in our Federal Constitution.

Although our nation is predominantly Muslim, there are also many areas in states like Penang, Sabah and Sarawak where they are actually in the minority. But like everyone else, they too have the right to set up mosques and worship freely even if their numbers are not large.

No one should tell Muslims to pray elsewhere in areas with more Muslims, for example. That would surely be unacceptable. The protesters in Taman Medan obviously never thought of this angle.

Likewise, in Europe and the United States, Muslims should be given the right to build mosques and should not face any form of restrictions in the practice of their faith.

What has happened in Taman Medan should open the eyes, the ears and most importantly, the hearts of all Malaysians on the predicament faced by Christians in this country. The fact that Christians have to set up places of worship in commercial and industrial lots should lead us to question why this has become the norm.

These are certainly far from perfect refuges to worship God. It is not unusual to have churches being set up above coffee shops, and the worshippers just have to bear with the din downstairs.

The traditional churches, with all their architectural grandeur, are relics of the past. These were churches built during the British colonial days and they cannot accommodate many of the new Christians who have their own denominations.

Today, Christians have to fight bureaucracy, mostly at council level, and other obstacles, just to set up a church where they can pray and worship the God they believe in.

It is even more difficult for independent churches like the Community of Praise in Taman Medan, with only about 20 people in its congregation. It is not part of the mainstream church with its proper structure and support facilities.

But the incident has certainly put this relatively unknown Tamil language church located in a shoplot in the national spotlight.

The future of the church is not clear. Obviously, the congregation does not want any controversy or conflict with the local community. That is not the Christian way.

The fact that they were quick to take down the cross, as demanded by the protesters, shows that they are peacemakers in line with the teachings of their faith. But the action itself must have broken their hearts.

We all need to understand the religions of fellow Malaysians. We must not be suspicious of each other because there is beauty in all religions.

No religion teaches bad things. We need to emphasise on the common values such as compassion, tolerance, patience, forgiveness, mutual respect and acceptance.

It is dangerously selfish of anyone, especially small time politicians, to use race and religion to win votes.

And when such personalities spew racist and religious rhetoric freely, without the fear of facing the wrath of the law, it only emboldens the extremists to continue what they are doing. And others will join in believing they have the superior right to do so.

Those on the receiving end will assume, rightly or wrongly, that there are different sets of laws for different people, or worse, different communities.

Our leaders must understand they represent all Malaysians. A government of one faith or one race has no legitimacy in multi-racial Malaysia.

Any political party that assumes it does not need the support of other races is simply arrogant. Such a belief is surely a recipe for disaster at the polls.

The Rukunegara is clear – Kepercayaan Kepada Tuhan – or the Belief in God. We pray for Malaysia and its leaders to do the right thing and to right the wrongs.

The reality is that politicians, as public figures, can no longer ask for privacy. After all, no one asked them to be politicians and they cannot cherry-pick their choice of publicity.

WELL, it was only a matter of time before this came out. Images of Malaysian politicians wearing luxury watches, as well as cheap ones as a comparison, have gone viral on social media.

Those named have chosen to remain quiet except for Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who was clearly peeved.

He defended his purchase of three luxury watches allegedly worth more than RM1mil in total, saying he was a corporate figure before becoming a politician.

The Umno vice-president questioned the need for the Malaysian Crime Watch Task Force (MyWatch) to monitor watches worn by politicians.

Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Ahmad Maslan also quickly defended himself on Twitter although he wasn’t highlighted prominently in the expose, saying he has never owned a RM40,000 Rolex Submariner.

Even Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin were implicated in the watch issue.

Social media has become both a boon and bane to politicians everywhere. From their choice of restaurants to how they shop and what they want to buy, politicians and their spouses have never been so openly scrutinised.

It is no longer about the paparazzi or press. Anyone who has a smartphone is able to capture anyone else in a public place and post that image online.

The reality is that politicians, as public figures, can no longer ask for privacy. Public figures only have public lives. After all, no one asked them to be politicians and they cannot cherry-pick their choice of publicity.

Politicians with expensive watches are now the talking point of the Malaysian public, but they are not the first to come under such scrutiny.

Four years ago, Chinese officials wearing such high-end watches found themselves being watched. An official of ministerial rank earned only RM50,000 a year, so questions were raised on how certain officials could afford luxury brands like Rolex, Piaget, Omega and Cartier, which probably cost more than half of their annual income.

Those caught in the exposé by the Chinese Internet activist included China’s railways minister Sheng Guangzu.

Among the reported glittering timepieces identified by an activist when he zoomed in for a closer look at Sheng’s wrist were a Rolex Oyster Perpetual DateJust, a Piaget Altiplano and an Omega Constellation.

Together, these three timepieces were worth a total of 400,000 yuan (RM237,000).

Ironically, Sheng took over the job after the previous railways minister Liu Zhijun was arrested and investigated for corruption, with reports in China’s official media alleging that he had taken up to RM500mil in bribes.

Sheng lost his job after the ministry was dismantled.

Nearer to home, Indonesia’s military commander was photographed wearing a watch from Richard Mille brand’s Filipe Massa collection, reportedly worth more than RM360,000.

Gen Moeldoko quickly refuted the accusation, saying the timepiece was actually a cheap Chinese fake worth only five million rupiah (RM1,400).

To prove his point, he removed his watch and showed it to reporters who were covering his press conference, saying “this is a Chinese-made fake watch… how could such a watch be original?” while slamming the watch onto the floor.

A Singapore website had also shown photos of Moeldoko wearing other luxury watches.

Moeldoko appeared unnecessarily defensive as he actually comes from a very wealthy family with numerous land assets.

In fact, he had reported to the anti-graft commission last year that he had assets worth about 36 billion rupiah (RM10mil).

Back to Malaysia. There must be something about watches, especially for male politicians. There could be a correlation between an expensive watch and the male ego but for sure, a watch can land many male politicians into trouble.

Well, it happened to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in that infamous sex video involving a man resembling the opposition politician.

To refresh our memories, a mysterious video purportedly featuring Anwar surfaced in Kuala Lumpur in 2011, allegedly showing him having sex with a Chinese woman believed to be a prostitute.

The trio of Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Tamby Chik, Datuk Shazryl Eskay and Datuk Shuib Lazim, who referred to themselves as “Datuk T”, showed the video to some members of the press, including this writer, at Carcosa Seri Negara.

The single luxurious fashion accessory that was mentioned was an Omega watch said to be worn by the man resembling Anwar on that day.

One of the Datuk Ts was allegedly asked by the person in the video to pick up the watch, which the latter had accidentally left in the room.

That Datuk T, who is actually Shazryl Eskay, claimed to have the watch in his possession before handing it to the police for further investigation.

Of course, Anwar was challenged to reproduce the infamous Omega watch but he denied that he was the man in the video.

Anwar’s wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail has insisted she has in her possession the expensive watch, which some said was a gift from a Saudi Arabian royal family burnished with a royal crest, but until now, no one has seen it.

While Malaysians do not expect our politicians to live like paupers or lead a pretentious life of poverty, what most of us find hard to swallow is the flaunting of wealth. Such a blatant show of extravagance will certainly not go down well with most Malaysians struggling with their daily lives.

Malaysians already find it hard to understand why many of our politicians must go everywhere with an entourage – don’t these government officials or party leaders have work to do?

If only they could emulate the likes of Minister of International Trade and Industry Datuk Mustapa Mohamed and Ministers in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Wahid Omar and Datuk Seri Idris Jala, who are all so simply down to earth.

Travellers taking the ERL from KL Sentral to KLIA have often seen Mustapa travelling alone with no hangers-on.

The reality is that political leaders are being watched closely – not just them, but also their spouses and children. And it is not just about what they indulge in, but also their behaviour.

Our leaders need to stay connected to ordinary Malaysians. They need to be sensitive so that they can understand fully how most of us cope on a daily basis.

A notice pasted on wall stating 10% service charge and 6% GST at a restaurant in Kuala Lumpur. AZHAR MAHFOF/The Star

We want politicians who understand what real Malaysians have to put up with every day, and to help up deal with them.

GET real – real Malaysians talk about the further increase in the cost of living since the Goods and Services Tax was implemented two weeks ago.

We are at the adjustment stage as we try to come to terms with the changes that are affecting our daily lives.

We are definitely looking at the bill more closely. Even if we are prepared for the 6% GST to show up, we grumble why we have to pay 10% for service charge as well.

We know the GST is supposed to go to the government coffers, but we are not sure if the service charge is going straight into the pockets of the restaurant owners or to the workers who should get the money. Some of us may also have a sneaky suspicion if the GST will actually go where it is supposed to go.

Okay, we admit we do not have a tipping culture, and we have to be “forced” to give service tax. But at the same time, let’s admit that in most cases, there is no quality service from most restaurant helpers.

We now check our receipts more carefully because we do not want any extra charges to show up. Let’s get real. We are all affected by the rising cost of living.

At roadside stalls, where no GST is charged, we also notice that the food portion has shrunk or the price has gone up slightly. Yes, even these stallholders need to earn more to make ends meet.

This is what most Malaysians talk about in their daily conversations. If our politicians and bureaucrats think these are all made up, then they are either in self-denial or living on another planet, which means they really deserve to be sacked from their jobs.

Stop waiting for just good news which you only want to hear. If you want real feedback, talk to real people, not apple polishers or opportunists.

The typical Malaysian wage-earner cannot escape the taxman as everything is deducted at source. So there is always a gap between the actual salary and the take-home pay after all the statutory deductions.

Not only does he have to juggle his expenses, he also cannot be sure about the annual increment exercise. After all, employers also can cite reasons like weak market sentiments to reduce the increments and bonuses.

Middle class Malaysians are the worst off. They are truly squeezed in the middle. They can’t qualify for BR1M and they are too poor to live the life of the rich and famous of Bangsar.

Our leaders can rattle off statistics to convince us how well the Malaysian econo­my is doing but we are sorry to tell them that the trickle-down effects are not being felt at all. Most of us are not reporting roaring businesses. Try talking to those in the retail business especially.

So the last thing we are interested in are squabbling politicians. They include retired politicians who just can’t accept the fact that they are retired. And then there are those still in service who really need to get special lessons on how to provide convincing and truthful answers during interviews.

Either way, Malaysians are not amused with the daily overdose of news about murder conspiracies, alleged missing money and plots to overthrow the leader­ship – not when many of us have to put food on the table and figure out where the money should go this month.

But of course, if we Malaysians think that the cost of living is our biggest issue, PAS Members of Parliament think otherwise.

Nothing matters to them more than to push through the Private Member’s Bill to impose hudud law. It was at the top of the party’s biggest agenda but it didn’t happen, so most of them must have travelled back to the East Coast grumbling away. They have to wait until the next Parliament meeting. Good luck, try again.

Their next more important item, of course, is to prepare themselves for their coming party elections. Economic issues? That’s too difficult to understand and explain to the village folks. It doesn’t have emotional appeal and it will be difficult to grab the attention of the ceramah crowds.

And of course, it doesn’t help that the ringgit has shrunk. The cost of doing business has gone up and it has also become more expensive for those of us with children studying overseas.

If there’s any consolation, the price of petrol has just gone down a bit, but the hawkers have not reduced their prices since the last time the prices of crude oil went up. For many businesses, what goes up need not come down, never mind the law of gravity.

But just when we think our politicians on the opposite sides of the divide must disagree on everything, it is interesting to note that when it comes to increasing the allowances of our elected representatives, there is almost brotherly love and reconci­liation in the august hall from everyone. No need to call for block voting, all in favour, just say “aye”. It is amazing what money can do.

You know what else Malaysians want? We want our cops to get back to catching criminals, especially snatch thieves, instead of locking up journalists whose only crime was to file inaccurate articles.

We want our MPs to stop sleeping on the job and to actually take part in ­voting in Parliament instead of sneaking off somewhere with pathetic excuses.

We want politicians who understand what real Malaysians have to put up with every day, and to help us deal with them. These are issues that affect all of us, whatever our race or religion, and there is no need to see everything through political eyes. It should not be about helping only those who will vote for them.

Live your lives as we simple folks do. Be sensitive, listen to us. Don’t talk down to us. That is all we ask for – remember we elected you and not the other way around.

It’s time for the Education Ministry to send out a directive that religious conversion is strictly out of bounds in schools.

TEACHERS are hired to teach – that’s why they are called teachers. But in the case of two teachers in SMK Lutong in Miri, Sarawak, they went further and created a storm in the process.

The two, who are from the peninsula, have been taken out of the school and reassigned to desk jobs with immediate effect for allegedly converting a 13-year-old student to Islam. The Education Ministry has acted rightly and swiftly to put an end to the ugly episode.

We all know that attempting to convert any child below 18 years old to whatever religion without the parents’ consent is illegal.

It is time for the Education Ministry to send out a directive that religious conversion is strictly out of bounds in schools, where all the students are below the age of 18.

When cases like this happen, we should not simply transfer the teachers to another school, whether within the state, or even to another state. If these teachers are not clear as to their actual role within the confines of the school, then it would not be proper to place them anywhere near our schoolchildren.

That the girl involved came from a Chris­tian family only heightened the contro­versy, which has not only angered the predominantly Christian community in Sarawak, but also gone viral on social media.

Some already feel that the two teachers should be sacked immediately but as civil servants, they are also entitled to due process. According to media reports, they have been assigned to desk jobs at the Miri district education office, and the likelihood of them being transferred out of Sarawak is probably a foregone conclusion.

We must, however, be clear that they should not remain as teachers unless we can be sure that they are truly remorseful. Transferring them to another school is merely moving a problem elsewhere.

In February, a similar controversy arose in SMK Kinarut in Sabah when a 16-year-old schoolgirl was reportedly converted to Islam.

Media reports quoted Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Jalaluddin Abdul Rahman who said their inquiry showed the girl was still a Christian and had not converted although she practised the Islamic way.

Her father, Jilius Yapoo, correctly insisted that his daughter remains a Christian, and can only decide on her own religion after she turns 18. For now, the parents have decided to transfer her and her three siblings to SMK Tun Fuad Stephens, a mission school in Kiulu, some 40km from Kota Kinabalu.

Meanwhile, the errant ustazah and her husband, also a teacher, have been transferred to religious schools in Tuaran and Inanam.

These two cases appear to reinforce the fears among parents of the rural Christian communities in both Sabah and Sarawak over what might happen if they send their children to schools with hostel facilities in the urban areas.

Away from home, the parents need to be reassured that their children are going for an education, and not a new religion.

It may be natural for teachers, especially those who are religious, to share their beliefs. But to the parents, this is a form of indoctrination.

The teachers’ responsibility is to teach, and in the case of the hostel students, to also care for their well-being as these young students are away from home.

The children are still considered minors and the law is very clear that their religion is determined by their parents until they turn 18. Obviously, any teacher who seeks to influence a conversion has entered into forbidden territory. It is also a violation of the Child Protection Act, in case these teachers are not aware of it.

Worse still, if such cases involved teachers from the peninsula, as in the Sarawak case, there will also be major political ramifications.

The Federal Government has to listen carefully to the unhappiness that is now openly expressed by the substantial Christian community in these two states.

They have proven themselves to be consistent loyal supporters of the Barisan Nasional but their support must not be taken for granted.

It is a fact that the Malay-Muslim vote in itself will not be enough to keep the Barisan in power. The coalition needs the backing of the Sabahans and Sarawakians. The Barisan politicians, in particular those from Umno who are still ignorant and arrogant, should wake up to the reality.

Christian leaders in Sabah and Sarawak, if you listen to them, will tell you of their concerns over the Islamic resurgence, led by certain federal agencies, supposedly funded by the Federal Government, in the two states.

Rightly or wrongly, perception is everything. If it is not true, then efforts must be made to reassure the people there. They are the ones who can teach us about racial and religious harmony and how diversity is truly embraced by all. They certainly do not want to see the kind of fissures in the peninsula exported across the South China Sea.

We have also come to a point where Christians who bring up such issues are attacked on the Internet by groups and individuals whose words clearly breached the Sedition Act.

Liberals and moderates have also been called all sorts of names and threatened at times. It takes a tremendous amount of courage for them to speak up, especially when they may end up in jail as a result.

But that is how the racist and religious bullies work – they want the moderates to be cowed into silence. Let us be clear that Malaysia does not belong to them.

Islam is the official religion of this country. Malaysia is a predominantly Muslim country, and their numbers are expected to grow even faster due to their high fertility rate.

According to the latest study by Washington-based pollster Pew Research Center, Muslims will make up 72.4% (32.7 million) of Malaysia’s projected population of 45.2 million in 2050, compared to just 63.7% (18 million) of the 28.4 million population in 2010.

The report titled The Future of World Religions also revealed that Malaysian Christians will stay at just 9.4% of the population in the next 40 years, while all other religions will see their share of the populace shrinking. The biggest decline will be the Buddhists, who will make up an estimated 10.8% of the country’s population in 2050, compared to 17.7% in 2010.

With the dominant Muslim population, politics will also be played out differently. Already we can see how the push by PAS for the implementation of hudud has put Umno in a spot, since both depend on the same racial and religious voters.

The irony is that as much as some non-Malays dislike Umno, the party is probably the best hope to stop PAS from turning Malaysia into another Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iran.

If Malaysians, especially the urban Chinese, are not tactically careful or strategically clever, Malaysia will turn green – and it won’t be the Environment Party that wins, but PAS.

Likewise, Umno has to remember that it too needs the support of non-Malays. Trying to compete and outdo PAS all the time isn’t going to help.

Which brings us back to the point of why Sabah and Sarawak are so important. These two entities are not just two states within the federation. They were the ones who helped form Malaysia by merging with then Malaya and Singapore in 1963.

All of us, including the children in our schools, need to be reminded that without Sabah and Sarawak, there will be no Malaysia.

Trying to change the religious and political landscape of these two states, and in that process, stepping on the sensitivities of the people there, is plain stupidity.

But as we celebrate Easter Sunday today, forgive them we must – for they do not know what they are doing.

PAS President Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang

PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang is experienced enough to know that the implementation of hudud laws, even in Kelantan, would be ultra vires the Federal Constitution – but the signals have already been sent.

IT’S almost certain that the attempt by PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang to push for the implementation of hudud laws in Kelantan, via a private member’s bill, will not see the light of day in the current session of Parliament.

The word in Putrajaya is that Hadi will be told that the Dewan Rakyat is busy with other more urgent matters including several other bills in the current one-month session which ends on April 9.

In short, Hadi’s proposed bill to amend the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act to synchronise it with the recently passed Syariah Criminal Code II 1993 (Amendment 2015) in Kelantan will not happen.

The statement by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak on the hudud issue is also long ready. It is understood that he wants to choose the right timing to state his stand.

It is obvious that Barisan Nasional is enjoying the daily mud-slinging between PAS and DAP, with PKR already indicating that it won’t support the PAS attempt.

But one thing is clear in Putrajaya – the implementation of hudud laws, even in Kelantan, would be ultra vires the Federal Constitution. Or, in simple language, it will go against the supreme law of the country.

PAS and the party’s array of lawyers can argue and try to interpret the laws to suit their stand but, in the end, any implementation of hudud would still need an amendment to the Federal Constitution, which requires a two-thirds majority.

Criminal laws are under the sole jurisdiction of the federal authorities. Even the criminal laws under the Kelantan enactment will need some form of enforcement authority and, as it stands, the only authority is the Royal Malaysian Police.

While the state religious authorities are empowered to enforce specific religious matters, they do not have any power with regard to criminal matters.

It is not the job of PAS leaders to play policemen. It is the job of the Royal Malaysian Police headed by Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar.

The policemen report to him and not PAS leaders and their state religious authorities, or any self-appointed moral police force.

Kelantan, or any state government for that matter, simply does not have the power or the right to introduce criminal laws. Only Parliament can legislate on such matters, and provide the punishment to go with the offences. That’s what the Penal Code is all about, which is a federal piece of legislation.

What PAS is trying to do, and they know that they cannot do it, is to usurp the power of Parliament.

The Syariah Criminal Code II 1993, which was amended recently, is being revived after 22 years. It has always been there, but the party did not push it at the federal level because it was realistic about its chances of getting enough MPs to support it.

So why the current push? Is it because PAS believes that it now has sufficient clout – together with other Muslim MPs from Umno, and possibly some from PKR – to get the stamp of approval?

Or is it simply because the PAS ulamaks, headed by Hadi, want to make sure that the party president gets re-elected in the coming PAS elections, and in the process strengthen their grip on the Islamist party?

Hadi is experienced enough to know that PAS will never be able to push it through – but the signals have already been sent.

PAS has always been consistent about its hudud and Islamic state ambitions, even if its Pakatan partners, DAP and PKR, seem to want to gloss over this clear fundamental divide. It is also clear that PAS wants to push harder now because of the changing demographics in the country.

The Chinese and Indian population is shrinking and so will its electorate base in the years to come. This is primarily the case in the peninsula. The only bastion against any Islamic agenda seems to be the non-Muslim bumiputra voters in Sabah and Sarawak, with their large number of Christians.

And these two states also control 56 of the 222 seats in the Dewan Rakyat, so they cannot be ignored.

But over in the peninsula, especially in the Malay heartland, Umno is handling the hudud issue cautiously as PAS campaigns along the line that “Hudud=Islam and Islam=Hudud” in the rural areas.

There is no doubt that the religious and conservative side of Islam is on the move and increasing its influence. And the reality is that only Umno, whether we like it or not, can hold back the push by PAS.

Unfortunately, the Chinese and Indian voters were convinced in the 2013 general elections by DAP that the Barisan Nasional government could be toppled at the federal level. In the process, they happily voted in PAS candidates without thinking of the consequences.

The saddest case was in Temerloh where incumbent MP Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah was voted out and replaced by PAS hardliner Nasrudin Hassan Tantawi. Saifuddin, known for his progressive views, is now an active advocate of moderation.

Now, DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng has said that the party wants to sever ties with Hadi, but will keep its relations with PAS within the Pakatan Rakyat. In Sarawak, however, the state DAP has declared that it will not work with PAS any more.

For all that bravado, the reality is that PAS is actually inconsequential in Sarawak. But DAP appears to want to play safe at the national level by going after Hadi personally. But whether DAP wants to work with PAS or not is quite irrelevant, even if Hadi is not party president, because the Islamist party has clearly stated its goals.

Is DAP, again, in the next general election going to tell the Chinese voters to vote for PAS and pretend that all is well and fine? DAP has to make up its mind.

Likewise, the Prime Minister also needs to come out strongly on the issue.

Barisan cannot continue the tactical move of deferring any Private Member’s Bill on hudud at every parliament session. The charade has to stop and the best way is to say clearly that Malaysians will not and cannot accept hudud because it is unconstitutional.

This is a multi-racial and multi-religious country. It is a total fallacy and gross misrepresentation for Hadi and anyone, including some misguided Umno leaders, to believe that hudud laws do not affect non-Muslims. Of course, they will, make no mistake about it.

The implications to non-Muslims are clear enough. If anyone missed out on their possible impact in the original 1993 enactment, the amendments that were recently passed should convince them that there is no way hudud can be exclusively a Muslim issue.

Until now, we have not heard any convincing rebuttals from PAS or their supporters other than to be told to stay out of the debate.

It won’t be just Malaysia watching how we deal with Hadi but also the world. Keep our beloved Malaysia multi-racial, multi­cultural and multi-religious. We will not and must not let PAS dictate how we live our lives.

In a multi-racial and multi-religious country like Malaysia, hudud will impact the non-Muslims as well, whatever the assurances given so far.

IF we were to listen to Umno leader Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri and various PAS leaders, they would want us to believe that the hudud laws in Kelantan, if implemented, would not affect non-Muslims in Malaysia. So we should not be worried.

Correction – judging from Ismail’s tone, it was more of a warning to non-Muslims not to “interfere” in the issue. And this is the same person, who also happens to be a Minister, who has achieved notoriety for his controversial rantings recently.

We should be aware that there are some non-Muslim hardcore supporters of Pakatan Rakyat, because of their fanatical anger against the Barisan Nasional, who would also agree with the claim that it does not affect non-Muslims.

Despite such persistent claims that hudud does not affect the non-Muslims, we have to acknowledge the reality that in a multi-racial and multi-religious country like ours, there is absolutely no way that we can separate the Muslims and non-Muslims. Our daily interactions will be mainly for the good, but when crime covered by hudud is committed, there will invariably be cases when both parties are involved.

Which is why the questions will persist over what happens in such situations. In a rape case, for example, it remains unclear how it would be resolved if the victim is a non-Muslim and the perpetrator(s) are Muslims.

How does one get the four reputable Muslim witnesses to prove that the offence has been committed? What if only non-Muslims were witnesses to this horrible crime? How can they testify in a religious court, and how much weight will their evidence be given? And what if there are absolutely no witnesses involved, when it is just the word of the victim against the perpetrator?

These are questions that need to be answered properly, even by people like Ismail. Or should we just shut up and not interfere?

Just take a look at Section 41 of Kelantan’s Syariah Criminal Code (II) Enactment 1993 which states that it only permits direct evidence by just adult male Muslims. A “just” male Muslim is defined as a person who does whatever is required of him by Islam, avoids committing great sins, does not continuously commit lesser sins and also has a sense of honour.

Section 40(1) clearly states that there must be two or more witnesses for every hudud offence listed in the Code, except for adultery and sodomy, where the number of witnesses shall not be less than two.

Again, not only do you need two witnesses, but they must be “just, adult male Muslims.” These particular sections have already been widely discussed by many legal commentators, and even law students.

It should also be noted that while the current issue is with regard amendments being made to the original Enactment, and PAS’ plan to ensure its implementation by moving the Private Member’s Bill in Parliament, the issues have remained unresolved since 1993.

Back in 1993, we all probably saw it as a state issue which will probably not get a federal mandate to allow for its implementation. But now with a stronger PAS at the national level, and the realisation that the Islamist party could also get the support of other Muslim MPs, it is a different scenario altogether.

The problem is that our politicians are so eager to rush through these laws for their own political agenda that they are not interested in explaining to us how hudud would be carried out.

While they claim to pursue this cause in the name of God and Islam, we can’t help but suspect that politics is at play here with powerful religious arguments used to shut down critics and of course, non-Muslims. This is what non-Muslims fear most – that we cannot comment nor criticise anything that affects us because we are not Muslims.

Non-Muslims, if we were to listen to PAS and the likes of Ismail, should just stop debating or even talk about hudud laws.

But from a political perspective, non-Muslims are also responsible for the situation we are in today. The reality is that the DAP campaigned strongly for PAS in the 2013 general election. A huge number of non-Muslims, especially among the Chinese, voted for PAS even if the Islamist party never wavered from its stand that it wanted to set up an Islamic state.

There was only one DAP leader who consistently objected to it – the late Karpal Singh. The other DAP leaders simply glossed over this fundamental issue and pretended that it would never come to pass. And they were successful in convincing the Chinese voters to throw their support behind the PAS candidates and put more of them into Parliament and the various state assemblies.

It also has to be mentioned that the voting trend of the last two general elections was also due to the fact that most Malaysians want a good government. With so many allegations of corruption and abuse of power, it was felt that voting for the opposition would facilitate the creation of a two-party system which would help to keep all the politicians in check.

The so-called liberal stand by some PAS leaders during the election season also helped, but what we see in PAS today is that the conservative ulama leaders, who are also politicians, are wrestling to gain control of the party. Hudud is used to show that they are the real leaders – and this has to be carried out before the party elections.

In Umno, there are some party leaders who have given up on non-Muslim (principally also non-Malay) voters after the last elections. They feel let down and angry that these voters would rather vote for PAS than Umno, despite knowing what PAS stood for.

Against this political backdrop, some Umno grassroots members are saying they would rather gain the support of the Muslims, particularly Malays, even if that means, rightly or wrongly, playing the racial and religious cards. Their argument is that if some Chinese voters can work with and support PAS, why can’t Umno members do the same on an issue that affects them as Muslims and Malays.

Unfortunately, this has given rise to the impression that Umno and PAS are thinking alike but let us not forget that the Barisan Nasional, of which Umno is the dominant partner, is still a multi-racial coalition. Malaysia isn’t just about the Malay heartland in the peninsula but also Sabah and Sarawak, with its huge base of non-Muslim voters. These are the voters who have been loyal to Barisan and are crucial for the ruling coalition to remain in power.

One can understand their concerns when religion, as perceived in the peninsula, becomes the focus. They are watching closely how Umno would handle this issue, bearing in mind how the centre handled the few contentious cases relating to religion in these two states.

And we have to salute the Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem for his open-mindedness, especially his stand that he will never compromise on issues that could disrupt the racial and religious harmony of the people.

On the hudud, it has been reported that he has conveyed the party’s stand direct to the Barisan chairman.

If we need more convincing relating to how hudud affects non-Muslims, just look at some clauses in the recently passed Bill, now officially known as the Syariah Criminal Code II 1993 (Amendment 2015).

The PAS Kelantan government has reportedly retained three clauses that could subject non-Muslims to the Islamic penal law despite its assurance otherwise.

The media has reported that the Bill retained Clause 56, 57 and 58 under the “General” supplementary that provides for hudud and ta’zir (discretionary) punishments for anyone who conspires, plots, abets or assists in the act of a crime.

Clause 58 also provides that those found to have assisted in a sariqah (theft) offence would also be subject to the hudud punishment of amputation, it said.

Clause 56 states that “if the act of crime is perpetrated by a result of or caused by abetment, assistance, plotting or malicious planning, everyone involved in the planning, plotting, assisting or partaking in the malicious plan to perpetuate an act of crime shall be punished by imprisonment under ta’zir of not more than 10 years.”

It was further reported that Clause 57 states that “shall an act of crime be perpetrated by a group of individuals in order to realise a malicious plan, then every one of those individuals involved shall be deemed as guilty as the main perpetrator and shall be punished with imprisonment under ta’zir of not more than 10 years.”

According to some reports, section 46(1) states that circumstantial evidence will not be accepted in hudud offences, except for zina (adultery) and syurb (intoxication), leaving only oral evidence to be admissible.

No doubt the lawyers mounting the challenge to this law will be perusing every detail of the Enactment but for the ordinary people, they have very simple questions that need to be answered.

Certainly we want to know who will actually be enforcing such a law – the religious police or our police. And we have already seen how, even without hudud, the religious authorities conduct themselves in situations when both Muslims and non-Muslims are involved, like in the Borders case.

How will the syariah courts carry out the hearings and what is the view of the Attorney-General? Being the principal legal adviser in this country, he has to be concerned for the rights of all Malaysians. We would certainly like to hear his views and what kind of advice he will give to the federal government should this process go one step further and land in Parliament.

Let’s get the picture right – the hudud laws do affect the non-Muslims, so let’s not kid ourselves into believing otherwise.

I believe and trust in God but I will surely not trust politicians masquerading as theologians and using God’s name.