In this concluding part of the interview, PAS deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa responds to the perceived silence among the party's young turks on Islam, the Islamic state document and debates over issues on conversion and apostasy.

Malaysiakini: There is this perception that you and the other 'young turks' are not vocal enough on religious issues. There were several controversies over the past year concerning Article 11 and apostasy but instead of PAS, NGOs like Badai and Teras were at the forefront indeed.

Nasharudin: No, we put our stand very clear on Islam. There was even a motion that was passed on the issue of apostasy, the issue of infringement into affairs of Islamic faith and belief. As far as matters related to the Islamic faith, belief and teaching of Islam are concerned, we have a very clear stand. It shouldn't be treated in such a way (as) freedom of religion, expression, rights to profess religion and so on. Matters related to Islam and syariah (Islamic law) shouldn't be disturbed in a way that tension is going to develop in the country.

(On making apostasy a criminal offence), that is the teaching of Islam, it doesn't come from PAS. I keep on repeating when you talk about the implementation of the law, you've got to differentiate between the substantive law and procedural law. Yes, the substantive law says very clear this is the crime but in order to implement (the punishment), it has to be proven and undergo a very strict procedural process to prove beyond any shadow of doubt to ensure justice is done.

People see that PAS is shying away from your pet issue, religion, partly due to your attempt to reach out to the non-Muslims (under the engaging and repackaging approach).

I am still very much an Islamist. The only thing is the concentration that we are moving into the substance rather than the form. A personal example, there has been talks within the party on the way I dress. I said the Quranic teaching is that in Islam you should cover your aurat (body parts not allowed to be exposed under Islam), there is no single verse in the Quran that says how you should dress. If you feel comfortable in the jubah (long robe), dress in jubah; if you are comfortable with the t-shirt, wear the t-shirt, as long as you cover your aurat. This is how I understand Islam.

I stayed in Jordan for eight years, even my lecturer who teach tafsir (exegesis) in Quran in the university, he came in with suit and tie but the level of knowledge they have is - I am sorry to say - some even more than those who wear turban and jubah.

It is quite interesting how people tend to label you as a professional rather than a ulama despite your qualification in Islamic studies. Why do you think this is so ?

Exposure is quite important. Thank God I have got this exposure being in the Arab word, the Faculty of Syariah, in that tradition, speaking Arabic... I was in India for one year, in a real traditional Islamic school for Islamic studies (first) and after that I went to Jordan for eight years. I went to Jordan without knowing the Arabic (language), I spent three years in the language centre so I can speak Arabic like any other Arab.

From there I was sent to the UK for a couple of years. Again, I was exposed to the western world and life. I also mixed with Muslims there. They are there but they keep a hold onto their faith, beliefs and culture but they also progress with how the European community progresses. I think this is the kind of progressiveness that we should apply.

How do you define an ulama in the party?

My understanding on the term 'ulama' is people with knowledge. So when you are people with knowledge, even if you are a biologist, then you are ulama of biology. Of course there is also very strict and focused definition of ulama, people who are educated in fiqh, usuluddin, hadith (Islamic jurisprudence, principles of Islam, prophetic traditions). Even if only that definition makes you an ulama, do you apply that knowledge? Islam is about answering the myths of the day so even if you have all this knowledge, you can't apply it to the people. That is quite worrying. What is the purpose of that knowledge? Just for your individual development?

From your exposure elsewhere, should the process of conversion in Malaysia be made stricter to prevent religious controversies that we have seen lately?

A basic Islamic teaching is that there is no compulsion in religion. Muslims are not allowed to force someone to accept the faith and beliefs of Islam. Our duty is to dakwah (Islamic propagation), or to call people (to do good). To explain to them what is the Hereafter, the Prophet - to explain, but not to force. Those who have not accepted the faith and beliefs, you are free from the rules and regulations of Islam. If one chooses to accept the religion - automatically once he or she professes the religion and say the shahada (declaration of faith) - he is now a subject of Islam - of syariah, the law and the system.

There are many teachings, rules, regulations in Islam which are still not understood by many (of our) non-Muslim friends. One of the teachings is that you are not allowed to force people to accept Islam but once he or she is converted then they are subject to the rules and regulations in Islam including the law of conversion. Compulsion, no, but once you are there, being a Muslim you have to obey. Being a Muslim means submission to the will of Allah, you have to obey Him.

One of the major reasons for a lot of conversions is due to marriage - they come into Islam not because of their knowledge of the religion or their love for Islam but because of the love for an individual. Problems arise later when there is divorce or worse still, the convert passed away and the family wants to claim the body. In that context, wouldn't it be better and prudent to make it a must for the convert's family to be witnesses to that conversion and have full knowledge of what it is like to become a Muslim?

This is a matter more on administration than belief and faith. The administrative process for conversion in this country is quite complicated one way or another. One of the things lacking is knowledge about Islam even among the Muslims. This is one very serious situation we are facing now. Especially in cases like this, one who, because of marriage - let's say he is a man - and converted (his wife-to-be) to get married, then (what)? Why doesn't he take that opportunity to teach his wife what Islam is about? If only that process of education is generated, then we will have lesser problems.

We understand that it involves administrative questions and that's our question: whether you will advocate the idea to tighten the administrative process?

I have to look at it. It's quite technical (for me) to answer it straightaway just like that. We also have to look at it from the legal and Islamic aspects. I think if only the process is stricter, I think all these cases could be (avoided).

Some of the converts do not really know the religion in that sense and it is bad for Islam because people use that as a weapon against the religion.

Sorry to say, but because of misunderstandings, there is also (the) threat (made) against the converts that they will lose their lives if they convert. Fear (because) of this threat is also there. All these (things) developed because of the lack of understanding. This is a big society, we don't expect everyone to know. I know very little about Christianity and Buddhism, many out there know very little about Islam, they lack understanding.

Most of these cases, where (those) who converted did not make public their conversion, is because of the threat they received, sometime even from (within) the family. They just keep (it) to themselves and when nature takes its course, then problems are created. It is a sad thing.

Take for example, Lina Joy's case. Now she has to go the Syariah Court to renounce Islam, but once she goes there, she may be arrested and sent for rehabilitation. What if after rehabilitation one still refuses to renounce the new religion and accept Islam?

This is where the procedures take place. If you have already given the opportunity for him or her to repent, still he or she can't accept (Islam), don't want to change, the discussion among the scholars is - if he really doesn't want to come back to the religion, to me, you cannot force, you shouldn't force - whether the law should be applied to him or her. As far as Malaysians are concerned, we don't really have any law on that.

How will the Islamic state issue be dealt with by PAS in the next general election?

As far as the Islamic state issue is concerned, everybody realises that the 'what' part of that Islamic state document is no longer being discussed. We are now concentrating on the 'how', the content, the substance of it.

Kelantan is always our example on how that concept, for instance, a charity state (will be implemented). We introduced many programmes in Kelantan for those in need, such as the special takaful (Islamic insurance) programme for the elderly, and many other programmes that benefit the people are being introduced. (This is) to give an example that, things we can do in Kelantan, we can also do it in other states and at the federal level.

In other words, the next election manifesto is going to focus on policies under an Islamic state rather than its form?

It's no longer going to be talking, discussing and debating on the form, (there is) going to be more concentration on substance, what we have done and intend to do to fit the needs of the people.

Is there a consensus in the party on this?

Yes. You will realise that even in the speeches of the leaders, we don't talk about the 'how', because that has already been explained. This is a document about Islamic state. What is Islamic state? Then we go into the substance. The universal values of Islam - anti-corruption, good governance, transparency, sustainable development - are issues that are going to be highlighted in the election manifesto.

To clarify, the term Islamic state will totally be dropped in the next election manifesto?

The concentration will be on the substance more than the term.

Would you adopt the approach of having one election manifesto at the federal level and a different one for the state level, such as during the last general election?

Of course, there will be separate manifestos. In the state where we govern, we have a special agenda and that is within our limit (to offer). At the federal level, we are talking about the intention of offering it, something that we don't have yet, but we intend to offer if we are given the mandate. One good example is, in the last muktamar, we suggested that student loans be given without any interest imposed on them. Education is a very important asset of the country, and the opportunity should be given to all those qualified and in need.

Part One

Young turks gets 'aggressive' on reforms

Q&A: PAS not only about 'hell and heaven'