The good news is that Malaysian-Indians are no longer waiting for the cows to come home. The bad news is that after sacred cows are corralled, they’re still not easy to slaughter.
Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) chairman P Waytha Moorthy was busy working on the class action suit brought against Britain on behalf of Malaysia’s two million Indians when I spoke to him.
This suit, among other things, will obliquely challenge Article 153 of the Federal Constitution on Malay special rights. “Malaysia is probably the only country in the world with racial discrimination explicitly written into its constitution,” The Economist had once observed.
For the first time ever, this never-ending privilege will be legally contested. But as the lawsuit is filed in London, the challenge is academic. Nonetheless it serves to break a mental barrier on a hitherto taboo subject, says Waytha, the lead lawyer on the suit.
He explains the Reid Commission which oversaw Independence was negligent in not putting a written cap on the duration of special rights, which Malaya founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman had not asked to be instituted forever.
Waytha adds the lawsuit is a chance to break new ground to “undo the wrongs” of the departing British, at least on paper. But it is a start.
While institutionalised racism has done its work to uplift the Malays, the discriminative policies facilitated by Article 153 have shut out Indians from their desired upward mobility. Waytha counts the absence of affirmative action for poor Indians as part of the government neglect which has led to the creation of an Indian underclass.
The suit catalogues a host of longstanding grievances of the Indian community and it is a legitimate list that needs to be looked into in all good faith.
Lagging behind in everything
In melting Malaysia’s curry pot, the Indians are among the worst off. Doubtless they are over-represented in law and medicine. But Indians also predominate as “labourers, industrial manual workers, office boys, road sweepers, beggars and squatters,” lawyer P Uthayakumar told IPS last month when speaking on the suit.
When I was a kid, all the peons in my school were Indian. Today and still, the evidence of our eyes bears out the truth of Uthayakumar’s statement. The Malaysian-Indian’s paucity of economic advancement and prospects – comparatively, they are doing well as professional minorities in Singapore and Western countries – has led to dire social consequences.
According to Police Watch, Indians make up 60 percent of those arrested by police and news reports have quoted government statistics saying 40 percent of convicted criminals are Indians. This is a gross imbalance considering that Indians comprise a mere eight percent of the Malaysian population.
Thus, the setting up of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) has strong backing from Indians who are the main victims of police brutality and custodial deaths. Ranked among the top three issues of concern to the community are crime and gangsterism, a survey by the Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research found in the fourth quarter of 2006.
Indians complain they are continually targeted by police, this bias further exacerbating the community’s fraught relations with a uniformed force that is predominantly Malay. Police role in relentless temple demolitions and the Kg Medan clashes have not helped ease the tensions.
Negotiation is futile
As Islamisation is being ratcheted up, Waytha believes the “aggressive conduct” of the Islamic authorities is a mutilation of individual rights, commenting on the Hindu cases including cause celebre M Revathi and P Marimuthu.
“These are nothing but provocative acts designed to humiliate, frustrate and belittle the faith and belief of the non-Muslims,” he says.
The destruction of Hindu temples is not something only happening this year or started last year. It has been ongoing for years and is a sustained campaign.
The emergence of rights groups like Hindraf is symptomatic of Indians deciding they’re not waiting for Godot, and “the BN way” of backroom dealing, to preserve their houses of worship and defend their rights.
Indians are also beginning to splinter into newer political parties and no longer remain in thrall to MIC as sole ‘guardian’ of the community. This emancipation from the previously entrenched acquiescence to BN has uncorked the bottled-up rumblings we’re hearing now.
Adding salt to the Indian’s sense of injury is Putrajaya in denial. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is fast immortalising himself for inanity. A week before Merdeka, he piously reminded Malaysians: “Don’t mock any religion.”
After performing the groundbreaking ceremony for a new UiTM (university especially for Malays) campus built to the munificent tune of RM150 million, Abdullah delivered his groundbreaking homily: “Do not do things which may offend the believers of other religions ... this is not good” – and in the process rather lowering the bar for prime ministerial gravitas.
Hindraf rejoined: “What about demolishing Hindu temples at the rate of one in every three weeks, Mr Prime Minister?”
Fairest one of all
If you care to find out what Islam Hadhari is about, read the FAQ on the Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) website or Abdullah’s dozens of speeches, text on the Prime Minister’s Office website.
A fair representation of Hadhari is distilled in Abdullah’s declaration: “I have been fair, I want to be fair and I will always be fair. This is my promise to you.”
Under Hadhari-in-a-hurry, we’ve seen Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim suggest that the use of English common law be scrapped, Attorney General Abdul Gani Patail suggest that it be replaced with Syariah and Minister for religious affairs in the PM’s Department Dr Mohd Abdullah Zin saying what a jolly good idea.
Ahmad Fairuz had also written in his judgment on Lina Joy: “… seseorang tidak boleh sesuka hatinya keluar dan masuk agama”. If we pay heed to the learned CJ’s injunction, then ‘fairly’, an Indian cannot simply leave Hinduism at his whim and fancy to become Muslim at his whim and fancy.
Indian apostates outnumber Malay apostates by far. Among the famous names are Muhammad Fitri Abdullah (M Revathi’s counsellor), Muhammad Shafi Abdullah (formerly T Saravan, husband to R Subashini) and Muhammad Ridzwan Mogarajah (formerly M Jeyaganesh, husband to S Shamala).
Nobody’s yet suggested that the men should have obtained permission from their state or national Hindu organisation in order to leave the religion they were born into. Or recommend that they be subjected to detention and rehabilitation before they are sanctioned to abandon Hinduism.
These hindrances would, of course, be against the spirit of Article 11. And illegal, don’t you think?
Go forth and multiply
In any case, it is not that the Islamisation juggernaut can today be in any way hamstrung; we have passed the point of no return.
Allied Co-ordinating Committee of Islamic NGOs (Accin) and Pertubuhan-pertubuhan Pembela Islam attacked the similarly NGO-backed Merdeka Statement and its provisions on promoting freedom of religion – in Malaysian context, the freedom of religions other than Islam – and marking their ever widening Muslim-only territory.
Meanwhile, the dakwah (proselytising Islam) movement is active on the ground with NGOs like Perkim, Yadim and JIM well-networked, and the state pumping the wind behind their sails.
Last weekend, Abdullah said religious and racial divisions are an increasingly serious problem in Malaysia. However, on Aug 27 when he launched the Merdeka Award, the prime minister cited findings that said 81 percent of Malaysians believe ethnic relations to be “favourable”.
Abdullah seems to have experienced quite a big perception shift within the span of a short month, wouldn’t you say? Now which is it, increasingly serious problem or favourable relations?
As with its racial discrimination, Malaysia is probably the only country in the world with definition of race also explicitly written into its constitution. Article 160 (2) defines Malay as a person professing Islam, habitually speaking Malay and conforming to Malay custom.
An Irish is Irish, Inuit is Inuit but when is an Indian constitutionally Malay in Malaysia?
The international convention is that a child takes on the ethnicity of his father. Over here, this universal norm poses somewhat of a ‘dilemma’ to mixed(-up) leaders. Perhaps the ‘who is Indian’ conundrum can be best explicated by ex-premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Confused Indian identity
Abdullah vaguely mentioned our country’s “most precious identity” in the run-up to Merdeka. But as far as the tub-thumpers of his administration go, Malay-Muslim is the only mould this precious identity is going to take. And knowing full well the Malaysian predilection for conformity, there will be enough takers.
With Hindu temples and shrines bowled over like dominoes, Tamil schools dilapidated, hardly any state funds for religious activities and centres, or training and stipend for the priesthood, it is understandably much more onerous for an Indian to learn the religion of his forebears. Thus Revathi was accused to have had “zero knowledge of Hinduism” and not receiving adequate instruction in faith from her Hindu husband.
Exposure to the Religion of the Federation is comparatively more persuasive as proven by the healthy rate of conversion to Islam.
It’s technically possible to transmogrify into Malay as per Article 160 (2) and you can witness some Malaysians in the throes of such a metamorphosis shedding their old skin to crawl into a new one.
Perhaps to avert segments of the minority communities plunging into an identity crisis, the government should seriously resolve to uplift the Indians and others by ensuring that everyone who deserves NEP help gets it.
There are those who may be under the misassumption that only Malays and pseudo-Malays are eligible for social benefits. Then there is the other popular notion that a Muslim name is a vehicle to acquiring preferential shares in stock-market floatation, contracts and other economic perks.
What has the consistent actions of government shown about its approach to the “most precious identity” of Malaysian-Indians as Indians? Has national life displayed a genuine respect for Indian culture? Supported the teaching, dissemination and practice of Hinduism?
The Indians have pleaded themselves hoarse; now the PM finally promises he’ll listen “even if the truth hurts”. Abdullah promises, promises, sweet talks and honey-coats his words. Ants are practically swarming over all that sugar and termites over the temples that have come a-tumbling down.
The Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research last year found that Malays identify themselves first and foremost as Muslim (correct!), Chinese by race (yes, naturally) and Indians by nationality (oh, I see …)
Proud-to-be Malaysians are living in a country shaped by confused leaders and a regime 22 years under a ‘Malay Dilemma-ed’ ex-premier, who perhaps unbeknownst to his own self suffered an identity crisis. Or maybe it was just a prolonged skin rash that refused to heal.
This confused premier left us a confused successor and an inheritance of confused ministers; some like the Law Minister more confused than others. And top civil servants who are confused about the country’s secular laws and battery-dead ‘independent panels’ confused about what laws they are empowered with.
It’s no wonder then that in this country not a few Malaysians too are confused about the race to which they belong. Bangsa Melayu should not be taken as synonymous with Bangsa Malaysia!
No comments:
Post a Comment