INTRODUCTION

All political parties in Malaysia—whether Muslim majority ones or otherwise— cannot escape discussing Islam's role in public policy. No Malaysian politician can ignore Islam's significance in defining the country's political landscape. But when it comes to “political Islam”, the political party that is most frequently studied and cited is the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS). Established in 1951, PAS has a long-standing history in the country. Over the years, PAS faced its fair share of factionalism and splintering, with the latest split occurred in 2015, when a sizeable number of its national leaders and activists left the party to form Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah). This chapter explores the evolution of political Islamism in Malaysia by looking at PAS as a case study. It examines the party's past internal conflicts with a special focus on the 2015 incident which eventually led to the formation of Amanah.

There are different ideological camps in PAS. It started off as a conservative party in the early 1950s. In the late 1950s and 1960s, prominent leftists and radical nationalist figures joined the party in large numbers. In the 1970s and 1980s, the party welcomed pan-Islamists into its fold, and later, during the reformasi era of the late 1990s and 2000s, party membership opened to individuals who did not have any clear ideological leanings.

During the 2000s, PAS was distinguished by two schools of thought: the conservative Islamists and the progressive Islamists (Wan Saiful 2017, pp. 3–5). The conservative faction has been commonly referred to as the “ulama” camp, though nonreligious scholars are also part of this group. This camp includes those who are not trained in the Islamic sciences. Still, when it comes to politics, this faction generally adheres to a conservative interpretation of Islam, arguing that Islam should be incorporated into public policy. Often, they focus on the legal aspects of Islam, calling for immediate implementation of the Islamic Shariah law or hudud (punitive Islamic laws that include stoning, amputation, and whipping as modes of punishment). They also hold an exclusivist view when it comes to dealing with non-Muslims, believing that major policy decisions affecting Islam—be it at party or government levels—must be mainly, if not solely, in the hands of Muslims.