Hudud Law

tiba2 pagi ni teringat lak what my friend say over dinner a few days ago pasal hudud. Selalunya nampak hudud ni kat mana2 tapi malas aku nak kisah sebab ppl make it like political agenda. Dia cakap, kita x sepatutnya implement this hudud law but we should do, is take the approriate law and implement in secular law to improving the secular law. Reason because ppl tend to make use religion either for their own agenda, lacks of knowledge or simply extremist. he give example taliban. He trust Nik Aziz now but what happen after Nik Aziz die. N aku rasa aku setuju le ngn dia cakap until the last part. Aku rasa kat Malaysia ni kita kurang scholar yg benar2 paham tentang situation and we not ready for Hudud law even Nik Aziz. Tapi ni opinion aku je la. For example, fatwa yoga. I've been to 2 Yoga class. The first yoga class that I went was a meditation Yoga kat UK. They asked me to stare a photo of a makcik yg dicakap ada banyak ion positive le ... and ask me to clear my mind. Apa kehalkan .. and I know it not a class I should go. Mcm ada unsur2 pemujaan sebab diorang cakap gambar auntie tu boleh tolong menclearkan mind. Anyway ... i just went for the first class and last year I went to another yoga class. It's just an exercise class ok... no picture whatsoeva and even when we have a step where you put your palm together in front your chest ( mcm statue buddha), my teacher cakap its up to me nak buat ke tak kalau aku rasa benda tu x sesuai. But I do it sebab aku x nampak apa2 pemujaan etc kat situ, we not chanting or idolize anything.. So bila kuar fatwa pasal yoga ni aku mcm pelik. Do those people yg buat fatwa pernah gi kelas yoga or understand mcm mana kelas yoga kat sini. maybe diorng akn cakap utk prevention etc but why dont they do fatwa kat tempat yg lebih manfaat seperti fatwa hisap rokok etc.
emm lagi satu example why aku rasa M'sia x ready is masa sodomy case. How many scholar kat Malaysia can give a good opinion based on Quran & hadith. Most of them amik ayat Quran yg sebut kena ada 4 saksi untuk tuduh org berzina n kalau x kena rotan. Tapi kalau difikir, ayat tu utk org lain menuduh org lain berzina.. dan diturunkan utk mengelak fitnah terhadap org yg x berdosa. kalau dipikir, this sodomy case sama ngn case rogol and didnt mention directly in Quran. So in rape case, if you have 4 saksi yg nampak mangsa kena rogol dont you think most likely saksi tu adalah kuncu2 org merogol or the rogol wont happen because sure 4 people can have enough strength utk prevent dari perogolan tu kan. So in rape case, we should not take that Ayat but there is another ayat yg patut dilihat. Ayat ni kasik hukum suami menuduh isteri dia berzina. So bagi suami tuduh isteri berzina, dia x yah kasik 4 saksi tapi apa yg perlu dia kena bersumpah 4 kali dgn nama Allah yg isteri dia berzina and last sumpah kena cakap di akan dilaknat kalau bohong. And kalau isteri dia x nak ngaku, isteri dia plak kena bersumpah 4 kali yg dia x buat n akan dilaknat kalau bohong. So lepas tu terserah kepada Allah sebab diorang dah bersumpah dengan nama Allah. Takkan le kita rasa kita ni lebih adil dari Allah kan. its not easy for husband utk tuduh isteri dia berzina.. humilation kan.. So amat susah nak berlaku fitnah. Tapi Allah maha hebat .. dia tau manusia ni cunning, so by implement 2 way sumpah ( yg tuduh dan dituduh) kita boleh avoid dari hukum yg tak bersalah. Benda yg kita tak tau, we leave it to Him. So dalam case rape or Saiful's sodomy is the same thing. It wasnt easy for normal people ( normal == not so evil) to claims diri dia dirape or disodomi. Humilation. Bape banyak mangsa rogol yg x report just because of humilation or ancaman dari perogol. So when they have courage to say that dia telah dirogol, we should not make thing harder by asking 4 saksi which for me didnt make sense in rogol case and only applicable when you accuse some else berzina not yourself. but we should implement hukum suami tuduh isteri berzina and terserah pada Allah lepas tu sebab dia lebih tahu apa yg sebenarnya. N lagi, aku baca somewhere that, to accuse someone of a crime, kita x boleh meng invade privacy org. so utk tangkap basah, kita x leh gi mengintip rumah org utk cari org buat maksiat. Those who make maksiat openly barulah kena dihukum. And the main thing of amar makruf nahi mungkar concept not only on law implementation but how to prevent. Sebagai contoh org buat maksiat, JAIS etc instead of selalu buat tangkapan, they should also sit and think why people do it and how to prevent.
aku suke ngn idea2 Dr Asri.. but we need more so they can argue intelligently wth guidance of Quran/Hadith. Aku rasa if we reach a point where we are saturated wth scholar cam Dr Asri, hudud law is feasible but with our current scholar yg lebih Yes Sir, susah nak really berlaku adil. With correct implementation, this law can prevent the crime but it can also cause injustice/human rights issue bila org salah tafsir the Quran law.