KUALA LUMPUR, March 26 — The hudud enactment planned for implementation in PAS-led Kelantan is not totally infallible unlike what its proposers have claimed, scholars said, as most of its provisions are the result of man’s interpretation of Allah’s laws over the years.

Although admitting that the basis for hudud is rooted in the holy scriptures, the experts said what PAS wants introduced in Kelantan cannot be accepted as wholly divine and should be opened to criticism.

“Hudud was barely mentioned in the Quran,” Perlis Mufti Datuk Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin told Malay Mail Online over phone.

“Whipping as the punishment for consuming alcohol was never mentioned.

“Similar with whipping for illicit sex. It was mentioned in very general terms, but not in detail.”

The details, he explained, had come from Islamic scholars and sometimes, the hadith, which is the collection of sayings and deeds of Prophet Muhammad.

“Sometimes, the details were also mentioned in the hadith, sometimes they were not,” he said.

The outspoken scholar said this process of interpretation is called ijtihad, and the conclusive views espoused by the scholars were the result of deliberation after compiling various arguments on a matter.

“A lot of the details were not mentioned in the Quran and sunnah,” Asri said.

“Sunnah” refers to the practices and teachings followed by Prophet Muhammad.

“Most of them are ijtihad. Ijtihad is not divine, so you can have different views of criticising the ijtihad, although you cannot criticise the original texts,” the popular preacher added.

Over the past week, arguments over PAS’s plan to introduce hudud in Kelantan saw an already divided Malaysia ripped right down the middle.

On one side of the divide, Muslim fundamentalists and other supporters of the criminal justice system say hudud is Allah’s law and because Islam is enshrined in the Constitution as the religion of the federation, the Malaysian government is obliged to put the country entirely under Shariah rule.

On the other side, hudud’s critics, which include progressive Muslims and the country’s non-Muslim minorities, say introducing a law that prescribes punishments like stoning and amputation for crimes is backward and repressive, and unsuitable for multi-racial, multi-religious Malaysia.

They also argue that hudud violates the secular structure of the Constitution.

The country’s supreme law, critics like the Malaysian Bar have said, does not envisage the formation of a theocratic Islamic state or the implementation of parallel criminal justice systems for the country’s Muslims and non-Muslims.

As such, lawmakers have been splitting hairs over the constitutionality of hudud, taking turns to argue with each other over why the Islamic punishment system cannot be infused with existing laws against crime.

According to independent preacher Wan Ji Wan Hussin, Kelantan’s hudud proposal is “not even 20 per cent” of Allah’s original law according to Quranic texts.

Like Asri, he pointed out that the punishments prescribed in Kelantan’s enactment, such as whippings and stoning for zina, or illicit sex, were not found in the Quran, but was based on the hadith.

“So when they are present in the hadith but not Quran, it involved interpretations from the scholars. There are elements of human hands here,” said Wan Ji, who is also the founder of the As-Syatibi School of Thought movement here.

“When it involved the view of the scholars, it is not wrong to criticise the enactment. When there are people saying that Kelantan’s hudud is not based on the Quran, there is truth in their claims.”

Last week, PKR central committee member Latheefa Koya claimed that PAS’s version of hudud is not in line with the Quran, listing down four differences between Quranic teaching on hudud and Kelantan’s Shariah Criminal Code (II) 1993 Enactment.

Latheefa pointed out that there is no punishment for apostasy in the Muslim holy scriptures, stoning is not mentioned in the Quran as a punishment, while the Muslim holy book has different requirements for the cutting of limbs and crucifixion, as well as different requirements for the offences of rape and adultery.

Saying that Muslims are obliged to accept the Quran’s hudud instead of “man-made” versions, Latheefa said all Muslims, including Muslim federal and state lawmakers, are obliged to reject PAS’s hudud.

Earlier this week, Asri also suggested that a panel of local and international experts be formed to study PAS’s proposed Islamic penal law for Kelantan, to ensure that it is in line with maqasid syariah, or the higher purpose of Shariah.

According to him, the review is necessary to prevent the failures to implement the controversial criminal justice system in Libya, Sudan, Nigeria and Pakistan from repeating itself in Malaysia.

The Islamic scholar also believes that justifying the implementation of hudud in modern times using ancient ijtihad arguments can be problematic, as such arguments were pronounced in a different age that carried different circumstances.

“You cannot rely on old text, you have to relook the text in current situation.

“If you just follow ijtihad in the old book, they had different circumstances back then,” the mufti said, referring to the interpretations of ancient scholars.

When tabling PAS’s bill to amend the Kelantan’s Shariah Criminal Code II 1993 enactment last week, Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Ahmad Yaakob had labelled critics who vilified hudud as immoral liars.

Business radio station BFM later launched a satirical video on hudud, which subsequently resulted in death and rape threats against its presenter Aisyah Tajuddin and other staff members.

Despite the relentless criticism against hudud from its political foes, PAS still intends to push for its implementation in Kelantan and hopes to table a private members’ Bill in Parliament soon for this purpose.