Dzulkefly: Islamic state a distant goal
“So it is academic to keep talking about it. I don’t know why other PAS leaders keep on talking about it to find themselves getting bashed by others,” he said.
Giving the bare facts of the political standing of the Islamic party in the Malaysian context, he reminded that PAS still has a long way to go before being able to achieving its Islamic state goals.
“We have 222 constituencies in the country. Out of that, 165 of them are in West Malaysia. From that, only 96 seats are considered Malay-dominant seats.
“In the last general election, we contested in 64 constituencies and won 23 seats. If you look at the numbers, can you imagine PAS governing a country on its own?” he said at panel titled ‘National Unity through Religion, Law and Shared Values’ at the 5th National Congress On Unity in UCSI University this afternoon.
During the a question-and-answer session, the former lecturer was asked to state his stand on the concept of an Islamic state, to which he said that it may only serve to remind PAS members of their identity as an Islamic party.
“Yes, it may be our life long aspiration. But by looking at our demographics, it is only academic to us… We cannot simply push it aside, so it remains as a utopian dream.
“But in realpolitik, it makes no sense for us to keep on harping on it… an Islamic state will never come to fruition within what is foreseeable,” said Dzulkefly who is also the Kuala Selangor MP.
Focus of closer goals
In a move that is bound to open him to criticism from the more conservative party elders, he also said that the party should also focus on other more realistic goals.
“It is more realistic to address issues that are pressing right now, like the fight against corruption, abuse of power and cronynism and to work for a level playing field, to institute check and balance, and enhance equality,” he said.
He also explained that although the concept of an Islamic state is practically an uphill battle, it is only their religious duty to achieve it, but within the confines of the party.
“The Islamic state is a PAS thing, so we keep it in the party. That is the beautiful thing of coalition politics,” he said.
But if the people want it, why not?
However, he also said that while PAS will never impose Islam on non-Muslims, there will be room for Islamic policies if it is the wishes of the people.
“If it is achieved through a proper democratic and legislative process, then we will implement it. But there is no such thing as a backdoor implementation of Islamic laws with PAS,” he said.
While arguing that PAS has been accepting of the other races and religions, he appealed for the same kindness and respect towards them and their ideals.
“I know the worry about Islamisation. I support others in their rights, but allow us the same space to advocate.
“Whenever we talk about Islam now, we see resistance that is based on contempt and hatred, borderline Islamophobia, like we are criminals.
“Allow us the space to try and implement it. At least then, we can stand up to say that we have tried our best,” he said.
The issue of Islamic state has been a bone of contention for the fledgling Pakatan Rakyat coalition as coalition partner DAP is staunchly secularist.
In 2001, DAP had withdrew from the opposition Barisan Alternatif coalition over PAS Islamic state agenda. Ties warmed up again after PAS toned down its Islamic state rhetoric before the 2008 elections
For the information of readers, I was speaking on the topic of “Integration with Integrity – Religion, Laws and Shared-Values’ in the NCOI at the UCSI, Cheras with Dato’ Deenison Jayasuria as the other panelist and AP Dr Azmi Shaharom as the moderator.
I said that the greatest asset of diversity has unfortunately become our greatest liability. Rather than leveraging it as our strength, our multi-ethnic background and its multi-religious-cultural demography have turned to be the greatest stumbling bloc in the effort to forge genuine fraternity and national integration. Why?
My take was essentially pinning it down to the adverse effect of the ‘divide and rule’ regime of the colonialist British. Consequently each ethno-religious grouping perceived themselves as ‘victim’ of the system, where their rights are usurped and denied.
The Malays believed that the other ethnic groups namely Chinese and Indians are ‘lodgers-pendatang’ who have now taken control of the wealth of the country. With such a mind-set it surely provides easy fodders for the ‘victims’ to justify all their actions under the rubric of ‘self-defence’ and fighting for their ‘inalienable rights’ as the indigenous people who are also under ‘siege’.
The Chinese and Indians on the hand both are convinced that they have been marginalized and discriminated because the government has given undue rights to the Malays and the bumiputera at their expense and also felt ‘victimised’.
Invariably all ethnic groupings assumed the moral authority and moral high ground to defend and in fact fight for their ethnic interest. This has been the scenario from time immemorial since the post-colonial era.
Admittedly, we are now gutted in racial-hatred never seen before. The religious bigotry has reached a level that was previously unimaginable. The looming danger is ominous but not insurmountable.
It is the conviction of the writer, however, that the changing landscape of an evolving New Politics (debunking raced-based Old Politics) and a nascent 2-party system after the last 12th General Election (GE) provides ample opportunity for the precarious racial and religious divides to be revisited and addressed as a national dialogue in the public sphere. Contestation in the New Politics shall be based on policy advocacy and programmes. The assault on reason shall end much as intolerance based on race and religion.
The 47th Malaysia Day shall serve as a landmark to embark on this national dialogue and discourse for a nation-rebuilding. This shall be the genesis, amongst other critical factors, of a truly developed state that aspires to be in the league of the high performing nations. Dr Dzul).