The thing about Hudud is...

Before you pass judgments let me tell you this, I am one of those people who are on the fence. I am neither for nor against; and I generally don’t really mind either one. In fact, I may be speaking for many who are simply in the grey spot.

Let us draw the context of Hudud specifically to Malaysia. There are not many countries in the world with such a diverse community; so many ethnicities, backgrounds, and especially religious beliefs. Not to mention, with roughly 30 million people and each with their own individual opinions. How do you decide if Hudud is the best law for these 30 million citizens in the long run?

Put aside the religion factor – because not all Malaysian Muslims necessarily favour the idea of having Hudud as the law, and not all non-Muslims oppose Hudud.

The reality is, there is not a single country in the world that Malaysia can use as a model Hudud nation.

Brunei is also on its way to implement Hudud in its country, albeit postponed at point of writing, and is also still trying to figure things out. But Malaysia and Brunei (and what more some Middle Eastern countries that have practised Hudud) have totally different socio-economic make-up, hence we cannot really compare.

Which drives me to my point: have we covered enough about Hudud to make a sound decision for it to be implemented? And at the end of the day, will it be beneficial to everybody?

Hudud as most of us know is a very strict law. As any other laws a society has, it provides a boundary for what is acceptable and what is considered a crime. However, the impression that we get from our general shallow schemata about Hudud is that the punishments are brutal. You steal, your hands will be chopped – as a lesson for you to not steal again, and also because you literally can’t steal anymore (not with your hands at least).

But there is also the scenario in which, let’s just say, an innocent is wrongly judged where he is accused of stealing, and gets punished where his hands get cut off. There is no turning back in this, is there? What's worse is if someone is wrongly punished and sentenced to death.

In addition to that, what exactly is Hudud based on? If there is a manuscript of the specific punishments for every specific crime, which era was it formed in and is it still relevant in today’s society?

As a melting pot of beliefs and principles, Malaysia often struggles to find a middle ground where everyone can agree on and be happy with. Not an exceptionally easy task. There will never be a 100 percent satisfaction guarantee.

Hence, to those whose job is to lead the nation – they cannot just make a decision based on one or a few groups’ desire. Decisions have to be made based on what the country and the people need.

In our particular society – a developing nation that is on its course to finding itself – this particular decision will last an impact not just now, but for many years to come. Not only will it be there to help curb the crime rate, but it will also be a foundation in which the people of Malaysia will be shaped upon. It will be a form of a psychological conditioning.

Therefore my two cents is that we can implement the Hudud, and I have nothing against it, because at the end of the day, if it is updated to suit today’s society, it will be as good as any law in the world.