The purpose of this letter is to remind the supporters of hudud (Islamic penal code) law to rethink about their effort.

If I am not mistaken, their main objective in supporting the implementation of hudud is to ensure fairness in the legal system. If this is not their objective, then I can only say they have been misled by un-Islamic element.

One of the tenets of Islamic teaching is fairness to everyone, regardless of sex, religion, race or political stance. Fair play is the key to this religion's greatness.

So, in their zeal to implement the hudud, have the proponents ever paused for a moment to think how it compares to the current legal system? A few questions that beg to be asked are:-

  • Is the current legal system unjust? If it is, then point out to the public how it is unfair and how is hudud more just. Please don't give the shallow reasoning that it is better because it is Islamic law. That carries no weight at all as it is not perfect either. Isn't it easier to amend whatever weaknesses there are in the legal system?

    If the legal system is fair, but has been abused, then go after the abusers. Introducing another legal system does not guarantee that it will not be abused.

  • Hudud law is modern technology-challenged as compared to the current system. An example is the dependence on four male witnesses of good credential to prove the rape. The medical and scientific experience and technology available today do a better job in proving the crime. The current system offers greater avenue of objective investigation whereas hudud was designed for an age where DNA testing and other scientific discoveries were not known.

    Resorting to hudud law would throw our country back in development, just as replacing Bahasa Melayu as the language of instruction in lieu of English did to our education system. And how legally qualified are the people in implementing hudud?

  • Can the scope of hudud law effectively cover all the aspects of modern living and crimes? For example, there are financial instruments that did not exist a century ago, so they can't possibly be covered by hudud. So what are they proposing to do? Take the current law and just call it hudud?

    We live in an age where brains matter more than brawn. Women are shown more respect, and rightly so in this modern world. Those who want to implement hudud are still living in a different world where brawn, not brains, are given greater emphasis.

    Well, sometimes good intention is just not good enough. Thoughts and care have to go hand in hand with good intention for any good effort to result. I am afraid I am not convinced at all that hudud is a more just and fair legal system in this modern age.