Letters - When silence of non-Muslim BN parties means consent

THE test of the pudding is in the eating. The pudding here is RUU 355 – Hadi Awang's Private Member's Bill to amend Act 355.

When it was served by Hadi, the non-Muslim BN component parties beat their chests opposing it, saying they would even leave the coalition.

Now comes the bombshell. Umno supreme council member Datuk Ahmad Maslan has cut the ground from under their feet. He has point-blank told them that they cannot, repeat cannot, oppose the same bill when it is taken over by the government and served by the government.

Now what? Are the non-Muslim BN component parties going to be man enough to tell us their stand on this directive?

They have got to answer Ahmad Maslan, for silence means consent.

Did they "oppose" it feeling safe that they will not be going against the BN's consensus system as they will be opposing Hadi and not the BN led by Umno?

Now that the game plan has changed, will they in the spirit of "consensus" do as directed by Ahmad Maslan, or have the courage to tell him that they are not opposing any individual or party, but are opposing RUU 355 regardless who tables it, even upon pain of having to leave the coalition, not just leaving the cabinet posts.

The non-Muslim parties in the government must make their stand here and now and not play any games, as they seem to have done when opposing the private members' bill, knowing full well they will not be breaching the "consensus" to support all government bills.

The game is up. So the threats to leave cabinet posts were all a drama.

Will the non-Muslim parties also have to answer for it in the afterlife?

They need to answer here and now whether they approve of a dual criminal law system; whether they want the non-Muslims to become subjected to Islamic law.

Even the mufti of Perlis had at a seminar advocated that non-Muslims must also be subjected to Islamic laws as it would be unfair to the Muslims if they were not.

Where is the hard evidence that hudud or religious laws have actually reduced crime?

Ahmad Maslan has himself inadvertently "explained" the need for hudud – that is to cement Umno's "unity" with PAS. Thus it is all political with nothing religious about it.

What Ahmad Maslan has done is to throw a dare to the non-Muslim parties – dare you oppose and be kicked out of BN?

Any takers, please?

Ravinder Singh