After what seems to be unending woes suffered by Umno after her last general assembly, I knew all too well that they will not take it lying down. I anticipated a serious backlash on their traditional detractors (read PAS) whom they thought had gained immensely from their bad outing. They needed to deflect it soonest as the temperature was no longer bearable. But I didn't expect it to come so soon as this. As sure as sunset, it came before I could even sit up. They got it from the Kota Baru Municipal Council, MPKB (read PAS).

My heart sank when I saw the front page headline in The Star on Dec 5 'No sexy dressing'. Not again. What immediately ensued was another round of blistering attacks on PAS for over a fortnight now. I wanted to pen down my reflections earlier when it was fiercely debated. Fully aware of how futile this effort could be, I kept my cool.

At the heart of the issue is the debate on 'morality and law' or in simple terms, 'moral policing' a political non-starter of sorts. It has been a very long drawn out debate, on the 'philosophy of law', since time immemorial. Writings on this, both academic or semi-popular, abound.

Much as I would like to engage further, this short piece neither pretends to be nor is anywhere capable of handling this gargantuan task. Let us defer that discourse to a better time.

That said, I'm going to say my piece nonetheless, equally no holds barred, much as others have ranted or ventilated. I will begin by quickly revisiting some writings on both sides of the 'divide'. My intention is not really to advocate or 'proselytise' on any particular proposition per se. More importantly, it is to drive home my side of argument. I promise to do it, inflicting the least pain as possible.

PAS took centre stage again in the mainstream media from Dec 5 following its intention to impose a RM500 fine on workers who are 'indecently or sexily dressed' in retail outlets and restaurants. The last time it took the limelight, and was under siege for this very reason, was in March 2005. One wonders at the dogged passion PAS has for this cause.

Incidentally, the MPKB's dress code has been in place and enforced since 1990. Hence, it has taken more than 15 years for PAS to get it really enforced. Prior to this, the state local government committee chairman emphasised that they were only involved in generating awareness and 'education' about proper attire. Hasty or overzealous?

Empower civil society

Now, what is proper attire? The chairman's answer was: 'We define proper attire as wearing respectful clothing'. Indeed, eye-popping outfits (without having to go to details) invite undesirable attention from men. That is almost saying the obvious and no man, mere mortals like anyone of us, could deny this. No association of dressing with sex-related crimes was narrated as the reason for the enforcement this time round. Otherwise, we would go into the same stereotyping of Islam and PAS-bashing for the umpteenth time.

The Kelantan menteri besar, who is also PAS' spiritual leader, had made it clear that the underpinning basis was to respect and elevate women's dignity while the imposition of fines was only applicable to Muslims. To make it gender-neutral, the dress code was also applicable to men, perhaps for the same reason as not to entice undesirable attention (form the opposite sex?).

Quite interestingly and consistently, PAS' move is, in fact, taking cognisance of and responding to mounting complaints from Kota Baru residents and the public at large. This was openly testified by both the local government committee chairman and the MPKB's public relations officer.

From these backdrops alone, PAS could have saved their skin and avoid all trouble by placing the move to impose fines squarely on the residents of Kota Bharu. PAS could judiciously manage a public debate or consultation and finally empower civil society to decide over what is pertinent for the benefit and interest of the public, in what is otherwise a very precarious issue to handle. One could imagine that even if they could not come to a consensus, the debate would be sufficient to get the message across to everyone that society at large deserves a mutually rewarding and mutually respecting ambience in business outlets.

Not unlike the last time, there were all kinds disparaging critiques at PAS this time round from all quarters. Incidentally, no such hue and cry or vicious smear campaign was noted - locally or elsewhere - when BBC featured a news report headlined China bans 'sexy' female attire, two years ago. The report mentioned that: 'Female civil servants in eastern China (Zhejiang province) have been banned from wearing sexy clothes and not to use 'dirty' language in the office. The clothes must not be avant-garde and ostentatious, too-thin and tight or showing the undergarment'.

Why I'm quoting this is perhaps to drive home the message that it is not just about imposing moral or religious values on others. It is also about enriching ethics and morals in conducting businesses (besides good governance, of course). Lest we have forgotten, I have quoted above a communist experience where God has long been relegated to oblivion.

A 'friend' like ....

I will come to my last observation. While I don't take much offence to familiar writings, I was completely struck by DAP' Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng's almost instantaneous scathing attack on PAS on Dec 6. That he is in total opposition to the MPKB's move is perfectly understandable and he is entitled to his standpoint.

However, his invoking that 'our self-inflicted wounds are politically and economically foolish as these will drive away moderates voters as well as foreign investment' is most unfortunate and unsolicited. As if that wasn't sufficient to denigrate PAS in the usual BN's media stereotyping way, he assumed a higher judging role by pronouncing the verdict that the 're-branding exercise carried out by PAS is merely cosmetic and reinforces the sentiment among non-Muslims that PAS poses a threat to their daily lives and livelihood'. That was awfully presumptuous and sinister. What could be worse than to be a threat to lives and livelihood? I was immensely disturbed.

Little wonder he got quite a violent reaction from readers who wrote in both here and in other media. They could very well be the tip of the iceberg. Lim Guan Eng and perhaps a woman minister should be pleased to note that PAS has focused on a lot of other aspects of 'development' especially in regards to the care and upgrading of the social mobility of the poorer sections of the rakyat namely single-mothers (Armalah) and orphans.

Some 12,000 families of this category are under a Group Takaful Policy under a new scheme launched by the state government while a fund of RM4 million was created to further aid them, besides the other usual welfare measures conducted by the state.

The state government is also all too willing to advocate for local council elections legal conditions permitting and the Election Commission being amenable to seeing it through. However, the state government is as committed to all these reforms in democracy as it is passionate about enhancing the betterment of the society under its rule.

After all, may we be reminded that PAS is mandated under the slogan 'Membangun Bersama Islam' by the majority of the Kelantanese voters. PAS may have its shortcomings but many can't doubt their relentless and earnest efforts in placing the interest of the people, the nation and Islam the top of their priorities. If that is a 'sin', so be it!

Be that as it may, and very reluctantly I say this. If we have a friend like Guan Eng (in this regard), we do not need a political adversary like the BN (read Umno)'. I rest my case.

DR DZULKIFLI AHMAD is the director of the PAS research centre.