I refer to the letter by Dr Shahul Hameed on 'DAP-PAS tussle on Islamic state' (July 12). It is interesting to see how the writer has tried to equate PAS' intention to create an Islamic state in Malaysia with the "creation of a just state in accordance with the values of the majority of people in Malaysia, i.e. Islam".

One immediate question that comes to mind would be, what about the values of the minority in Malaysia, i.e. non-Islam who comprises more than 40 percent of the population?

This is neither a debate between or about religions nor a comparison as to which religion is more 'just' than others. This is a debate about citizenship rights.

In this plural society, where no one religion or race constitutes the absolute majority among the citizens, to base a country's legal system and constitution on any one particular holy book and teaching is a recipe for disunity and disaster.

To be able to survive in harmony side by side, all races and religions must make adjustments and accommodations in Malaysia - which need not contradict one's basic beliefs and values.

Thus those who question PAS' idea of an Islamic state should not be seen as being anti-Islam. Whether the ideal is for an Islamic state, Christian state or Buddhist state, it is not for a non-believer to interfere.

But a citizen of any country who would be affected by such a theocratic system is entitled to take a stand on whether it is acceptable, including opposing it, regardless of his religion or beliefs. This is why the opposition to the PAS' concept of an Islamic state in Malaysia should be given due respect.

The claim that the Islamic state is 'justice to all' is a general statement which holds no water unless the advocate is able to draw up a concrete plan spelling out the details of laws to be implemented under such an 'Islamic state'.

The claim of 'justice under an Islamic State' will be just a rhetoric if one is unable to answer the many questions that are actually based on historic facts and different interpretations even among the Muslims on the minority's status in such a theocratic state from the history of Islam and Islamic countries since the eighth century

The writer said "if DAP supports democracy, then it should support majority rule with minority rights and protections". It would appear that the word 'protections' seems to have more weight in an Islamic state idea than the word 'rights'.

Will a non-Muslim be appointed as commander of the armed forces in an Islamic state? Will a non-Muslim ever attain the position of prime minister in an Islamic state? Will a non-Muslim be allowed to propagate forms of government which are different from an Islamic state and not be prosecuted as anti-Islam?

What about the imposition of Islamic civic laws on non-Muslims? What about the respective rights of Muslim and non-Muslim parents to their children? Whether the Malaysian minority in the eyes of an Islamic state would be those of Zimmis (those in custody), People of the Hudna (truce), Musta'min (protected one), or will they be treated like people of the Household of War, if these minorities defy the Islamic rulings?

Many legitimate questions which are not anti-Islam but concern basic citizenship rights and the system of governance need to be addressed. Unless PAS or any party which insists on the establishment of an Islamic state can answer all these queries and worries, we should not, as a matter of principle, treat them as opposing "the creation of a just state in accordance with the values of Islam", but a fair and legitimate effort to evaluate the matter in accordance with the universal values of justice to all.

The claim that an open debate on the issue of Islamic state is just 'a tussle' between two political parties is belittling the gravity of the issue and a disservice to those who want to focus public attention on the political, legal and constitutional implications of an Islamic state to all Malaysian citizens, whether Muslim or non-Muslim.

Whether or not PAS would have enough seats to enable it to change the constitution and set up an Islamic state in Malaysia, whether under the current political realities a non-Muslim can attain the position of prime minister, are matters that warrant a separate discussion.

But an open discussion and debate on the idea of an Islamic state by Muslims and non-Muslims is a pertinent exercise for the survival of BA in keeping with the principles of political accountability and transparency. In response to the writer, no one is asking PAS 'to murtad', but no one can ask the non-PAS to keep quiet either.