Reading deeper into the reading of the hudud bill
No doubt some voters in the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections will be excited by this sudden tabling of the Bill, and throw support behind it. If the gimmick works, there may be no debate on the Bill in October as its tabling would have served its purpose.
By Ravinder Singh
It’s amusing that the Hudud Bill was allowed to jump the queue, and yet debate on it was postponed at the request of the person who tabled it. Rather unusual, isn’t it? Sort of a “first”.
To me, it appears there is an “udang di sebalik batu” (a subtle motive) to this sudden tabling which “surprised” the other component parties of the ruling coalition, and of course all those who disagree with a dual penal system, one religious and the other secular.
But why at this time, why the hurry, why the postponement of the debate on it?
I think the answer lies in the battle for the two vacant parliamentary seats that will be decided in by-elections soon.
Panic is reigning in the political arena, with some Malay voters now supporting the Opposition candidates.
The two seats up for grabs are not in the interior of Sabah or Sarawak, but in the west coast of Peninsular Malaysia and not rural.
The fear is that the Opposition may make inroads into these seats if some Malays vote for them.
So, to avert such a possibility, every means must be employed to win the hearts of the Malays to remain united behind the Malay race-based parties, Umno and PAS, both of which plan to put up candidates.
So, to try and galvanise the voters to throw their full weight behind these parties, there is nothing better than to throw in the trump card, i.e. the race and religion card as symbolised by the Hudud Bill.
No doubt some voters will be excited by this sudden tabling of the Bill, and throw support behind it. This has been admitted by PAS Youth Chief Nik Abduh Nik Abdul Aziz.
If the gimmick works, there may be no debate on the Hudud Bill in October as its tabling would have served its purpose.
So, the “sudden, surprising” tabling of the bill is sort of an “incentive” to get all the component parties to campaign for candidates from both or either of these parties, who are put up to contest in the two constituencies as the choice of gerrymandering is not available in this instance, and if they do not want to see the Hudud Bill go through.
Then, of course, the public will be told that the government is sensitive to the views of the others and on second thought has decided not to proceed with the Hudud Bill. What a sparkling script.
May I remind the readers that this is just a fiction of my imagination.
*Ravinder Singh is an FMT reader.
Stay current - Follow FMT on WhatsApp, Google news and Telegram
With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.