The Constitution itself is divisive by nature, by apportioning rights along religious and racial lines. Its a bit like Lebanon quilt-like division of power among the factions.
Political parties in Malaysia today, either seek to maintain the results of historical political bargain as enshrined in the Constitution, or to seek to become progressive and render the religious and ethnocentric Constitution irrelevant.
In the case of Sarawakian and the Sabahan, Article 153 sounds good on paper but in reality the placid monarchy had failed to breathe a word to protect the Indigenous rights of Borneo people, like the Penan. Instead, it is quite telling, that it is the NGOs like Tahabas, Bruno Manser Fund, and Brimas who champion their human rights - and not the Yang Di Pertuan Agong, as the Constitution, had promised.
So, in the final analysis - the Constitution and the divisive race and religious politics arising from it, may not be able to act as the guarantor of rights. For Borneo natives in particular, it may well be foolhardy to cling to the notion of Bumiputera brotherhood (per the Constitution), as the basis for their supposedly share political struggle with the Malays.
But it should be clear to all readers, that - even Pakatan Rakyat, does not make any effort to revise the Constitution, to be less divisive. Majority of Malays, remains insecure if without the Constitutional safeguards to their claim to ketuanan in this land, while the Bumiputera at large, can't part ways with the perks that the NEP bestow on them.
If Sabah and Sarawak can be evolved into a regional autonomy rule, that will be a chance to create a republic, linked to Malaya only in defense ties, but would have a progressive Constitution without the baggage of race and religious bigotry - that we seem to have chiseled into the present Constitution.
Political parties in Malaysia today, either seek to maintain the results of historical political bargain as enshrined in the Constitution, or to seek to become progressive and render the religious and ethnocentric Constitution irrelevant.
In the case of Sarawakian and the Sabahan, Article 153 sounds good on paper but in reality the placid monarchy had failed to breathe a word to protect the Indigenous rights of Borneo people, like the Penan. Instead, it is quite telling, that it is the NGOs like Tahabas, Bruno Manser Fund, and Brimas who champion their human rights - and not the Yang Di Pertuan Agong, as the Constitution, had promised.
So, in the final analysis - the Constitution and the divisive race and religious politics arising from it, may not be able to act as the guarantor of rights. For Borneo natives in particular, it may well be foolhardy to cling to the notion of Bumiputera brotherhood (per the Constitution), as the basis for their supposedly share political struggle with the Malays.
But it should be clear to all readers, that - even Pakatan Rakyat, does not make any effort to revise the Constitution, to be less divisive. Majority of Malays, remains insecure if without the Constitutional safeguards to their claim to ketuanan in this land, while the Bumiputera at large, can't part ways with the perks that the NEP bestow on them.
If Sabah and Sarawak can be evolved into a regional autonomy rule, that will be a chance to create a republic, linked to Malaya only in defense ties, but would have a progressive Constitution without the baggage of race and religious bigotry - that we seem to have chiseled into the present Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment