Allow me to respond to Muslim Student's, 'What kind of an Islamic state is the question', (Oct 2). The writer asks a pertinent question, "How do you replace a corrupt system?" This should be a question for all to ponder seriously upon. The writer did not dwell on the question but rather gave a definition of an Islamic state, stressing its inevitability. I still disagree that it must be.

As for replacing a corrupt system, I believe it is more accurate to say that a system lends itself to abuse rather than it being corrupt in itself. Systems aren't corrupt, people are. To restore - note, not replace - a system that has gone bad, reinstate the checks and balances that have been removed. That is the most important factor in restoring people's confidence in the system.

Easier said than done? Perhaps, but that is about the only way to go for those who do not subscribe to the Islamic state. I agree with the writer that an Islamic state is a theocracy in that it is ruled by the divine law. Therein lies the problem. A non-Muslim does not recognise Islamic law as divine.

So how can we, as non-believers according to Islam, live under laws which we do not recognise? Where is the justness in imposing a set of faith-inspired laws on dissenting people? I hope those who are for the Islamic state can address this question satisfactorily.

That the state is not divine, as said by the writer, is obvious.

And since an Islamic state is susceptible to failings like any other state because it is non-divine, why should it be imposed? If the word 'imposed' is viewed disfavourably by the writer, should I use 'bestowed' instead?

As for the noble intention of traditional scholars to recommend incorporating checks and balances into an Islamic state, I'm not sure the current set of scholars are thinking in the same vein. In fact, it is difficult to see what they are thinking of other than the fact that an Islamic state must be 'bestowed'.

So far, those who advocate the setting up of an Islamic state and with perhaps enough political clout has been silent on its exact form. It's a disconcerting silence. And by the way, where is the place of the non-Muslim in an Islamic state?

"Ranting" over the possibility of an Islamic state as I'm perceived to be by Muslim Student is definitely better than to accept it without question. To ask a non-Muslim to accept an Islamic state 'bestowed' upon him/her is like asking the person to betray his/her allegiance to his/her own faith.