Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak knows he needs more time for the voting public to buy this story about Anwar, says a former Umno assemblyman.
We are in full agreement that everyone has that right to do a “sumpah laknat”. But it must be done in accordance with the rules laid down by Islamic law.
It’s not done and never done in a circus-like atmosphere such as the one by Shazryl Eskay Abdullah.
I understand he was flanked by the two clowns – Umno supreme council member (Rahim Tamby Chik) and the other a Perkasa reject (Shuib Lazim).
Doing a sumpah laknat is not a trivial matter. The requirements are absolutely strict including the presence of four witnesses.
Rahim and Shuib are not witnesses. They are more like accomplices. Did Eskay bring with him four righteous witnesses?
Were Rahim and Shuib Lazim present during the filming of the video?
If Eskay swears that it was him who made the film, the police should not wait any moment longer.
If making a smut film is a punishable offence, arrest him.
Anwar scares Putrajaya
But that we all know is not the real aim. The real objective of the whole thing is politics. Politics is judged in a general election. But that again it is a tricky situation.
Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak knows he needs more time for the voting public to buy this story about Anwar.
My thinking is that the general election will not be held this year.
Let’s look at the facts. The opposition DAP “sapu-ed” almost all the urban seats in Sarawak, making the call by Najib for the Chinese to choose BN a futile academic exercise.
But the more dangerous thing is this – Anwar, with all the problems he has, has won three seats. Now that fact is sending shivers down Najib’s spine, which incidentally is becoming increasingly difficult to locate.
Coming back to Eskay’s sumpah laknat
Some modern Islamic jurists say videos or films are good substitutes for four upright witnesses.
But in my mind videos or films lack the important ingredient of being alive and imbued with righteous qualities demanded.
A film or video is a technical thing subject to manipulation and is unreliable. If it’s Eskay or Rahim doing the film, the accusation lacks integrity.
Validity of sumpah laknat
A sumpah laknat is only valid after all legal arguments have been exhausted and an impasse reached.
Only at this point is the choice open to invoke God. Umno wants to finish off Anwar, so in its minds this is the right method.
History notes that our Islamic judges were deafeningly silent when (allegedly sodomised) Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan took the oath.
Saiful did it before any court case and did not produce four witnesses. He did it before all legal debates were exhausted.
If Saiful takes the oath after the conclusion of the present court, then his conduct would be more credible.
Islamic experts have, however, said nothing of that.
Hypothetical argument
Was there a court case involving the allegations against Anwar in the sex video as represented by the Datuk T trio?
No. But this is a requirement in the dispensation of Islamic law. One only does a sumpah laknat after the full legal debates are exhausted.
So yes, everyone can do a sumpah laknat, especially if doing so involves Anwar and slowing down the declining fortunes of Umno.
But what if, hypothetically speaking, Raja Petra Kamaruddin decides to do a sumpah laknat somewhere in Regents Park Mosque in London or some mosque in Patani?
The act will be equally right and is capable of producing the same conclusions – that the sumpah laknat has actually done what is prayed for.
Again, hypothetically speaking, what if private investigator P Bala converts to Islam and carries out a sumpah laknat?
He invokes god and says Rosmah Mansor (Najib’s wife) was present at the grisly scene (involving Altantuya Shaaribuu).
What then?
The whole mess we are in at the moment is because we crusade on a moral issue. In the end, we find ourselves caught up in our own moral morass.
No comments:
Post a Comment