Article 153, which points out that the Bumiputra are in a "special position" (contrary to popular belief, the only time it mentions "rights" are when it protects the rights of non-Bumiputra), is actually a means to accomplishing equality. It is meant to give the Bumiputra a leg up so they can compete with other Malaysians fairly — it is not meant to be a permanent crutch for them to lean on.
This interpretation is of course far from radical — it is exactly what the report of the Reid Commission stated.
Unequal treatment of Malaysians, not only when it comes to race, but geographic locality. The blatant unfairness of a Constitution which allows the East Malaysian states to demand that West Malaysians present identification documents when they enter — something noted before as part of the East Malaysian question.
Whether the NEP was still relevant in modern Malaysia.
whether the Constitution and the "social contract" we have are still relevant, because our country cannot continue premised on inequality and with a temporary affirmative action provision enshrined as permanent law.
"I believe we have to change it all." We have to make it clear that the purpose of Article 153 and affirmative action policies like the NEP is to achieve equality of opportunity for all Malaysians, and not allow ourselves to be fooled into thinking this is a country for and ruled by the Malays or Bumiputra alone.
NEP had been implemented wrongly, but UMNO did not apologise for misleading Malaysians with the constitutional law and the social contract.
Federal Constitution still draws a line between Bumiputra and non-Bumiputra, or as some Malay supremacists would have it, "true Malaysian" and "kaum pendatang"? We cannot truly tackle this thorny issue unless we get our first principles in the supreme law of the land right.
19/08/10
This interpretation is of course far from radical — it is exactly what the report of the Reid Commission stated.
Unequal treatment of Malaysians, not only when it comes to race, but geographic locality. The blatant unfairness of a Constitution which allows the East Malaysian states to demand that West Malaysians present identification documents when they enter — something noted before as part of the East Malaysian question.
Whether the NEP was still relevant in modern Malaysia.
whether the Constitution and the "social contract" we have are still relevant, because our country cannot continue premised on inequality and with a temporary affirmative action provision enshrined as permanent law.
"I believe we have to change it all." We have to make it clear that the purpose of Article 153 and affirmative action policies like the NEP is to achieve equality of opportunity for all Malaysians, and not allow ourselves to be fooled into thinking this is a country for and ruled by the Malays or Bumiputra alone.
NEP had been implemented wrongly, but UMNO did not apologise for misleading Malaysians with the constitutional law and the social contract.
Federal Constitution still draws a line between Bumiputra and non-Bumiputra, or as some Malay supremacists would have it, "true Malaysian" and "kaum pendatang"? We cannot truly tackle this thorny issue unless we get our first principles in the supreme law of the land right.
19/08/10
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment