Give Ahmad Ismail A Break, Will You?

I think we should leave Ahmad Ismail and his merry men to do what it is they do best; reinforce the choices voters made on March 8th when they decided to hand over Penang to the Pakatan Rakyat.

Look at it this way. Mustafa K Anuar’s incisive blog-post on the subject (“The Sorry state of apologies in Malaysia”) points to the possibility of more fuss than necessary being made over the issue to justify more aggressive action. This is a view that others share (see, for instance Malaysia Waves, "Ahmad Ismail Reciting Racial "Historical Fact", but for What?").

As we all know, there are those who fervently believe that there is great political opportunity and advantage in race and religion. The threat of racial unrest is a tried and tested method for the deployment of the Internal Security Act. It would appear, judging by Minister Syed Hamid’s comments in the media about the police reports lodged against Raja Petra by several Islamic agencies and departments, the authorities are already exploring the possibility of silencing the seemingly unstoppable Raja Petra on this basis (see “Syed Hamid: ISA can be used against Raja Petra"; Malaysiakini; 6 Sept 2008).

It would not be unreasonable to think that in as much as the Barisan Nasional, and in particular UMNO, may be publicly ridiculing the idea of the Pakatan Rakyat being in a position to form a government by September 16th, or at all for that matter, its less public view of the matter is one fraught with anxiety at the possibility, if not probability. The mind boggles at the possible impact of a new government, in particular on the personal interests of individuals whose actions may have been less than above board. The potential take over is as such no longer merely a matter of political survival for some. To them, it is a matter of survival, pure and simple.

All this points to the real possibility of a desire to take more extreme measures. Desperate times, after all, require desperate measures.

For this reason, it would be prudent to employ restraint in the way we react to the entire issue. That Ahmad Ismail was inelegant in the way he made his point and that he caused offence is beyond dispute. He did and if the media reported him correctly (and this seems to have been the case, why else would the Deputy Prime Minister offered an apology), what he said smacks of racism. But then, a lot of other people make these kinds of statements all the time. That Ahmad Ismail is someone senior in UMNO does not make his statement any more exceptional as the sentiment he expressed is of the kind that we have sadly come to expect from UMNO officials.

The fact that his statement has afforded a political opportunity to those in whose interests UMNO bashing lie should not make it exceptional as well. The bigger picture demands that we view it so and not distract ourselves from what needs to be done.

The objective is to democratize Malaysia. There is a stronger possibility of this happening if a new government is formed. Reactionary behaviour will allow the powers that be to set in place obstacles to that process by validating aggressive reprisal.

We do not want that. We do not need it.

And, after all, if Ahmad Ismail feels the need to throw his weight behind the transformation of Malaysia by making the Barisan Nasional that much more unattractive, should he not be getting our praise and gratitude? Give the guy a break.

MIS

A Broken Record

How do we begin to measure the pain so many of us have felt at being told that we had a lesser right to be Malaysian than others.

***

I do not like any form of discrimination, I think it's very wrong.

As a secondary school student in the mid-80s, no matter how I tried, I could not get my mind around the fact that it was unjust, unfair and ruthless to hand out scholarships hand over fist to under-achieving Malay students purely on the basis that they were Malay when many well-deserving, very needful non-Malay students were being by-passed.

I could understand giving help to those who were less privileged and for whom, without a helping hand, the future was an inescapable cycle of despair. And I recognised that history had left some of us more vulnerable than others. But to inflict the pain of hopelessness on those as deserving, or even more so, purely on the basis of race was cruel and wrong.

I was lucky enough to be awarded an ASEAN Scholarship by the Singapore Public Services Commission in 1986. It got me a place in an extremely good school in Singapore where I did my ‘A’ levels. This was an experience that showed me not only how little I really knew about anything but also the fact that for so many of us opportunities for advancement and the kind of life that we deserved were not to be found in Malaysia. Many of my fellow scholars were leaving on what seemed to be for most a one way trip, a perception that time soon made a reality. Most of them are now all over the world, some carrying Singaporean passports, others having no vision of returning to this country.

In many ways this has not changed. I recently addressed a group of about 150 bright Malaysian students studying in top universities in the United States and I could see that uppermost in many of their minds was whether it was in their best interests to return home.

For, after all, what is it that they would be coming back to? A landscape shaped by ‘ketuanan Melayu’ in which it has become a rule of society that we must believe, and enthusiastically at that, the propaganda that would have some believe (I am not sure who) that the Government does really appreciate that all of us have our rightful, and equal, place under the sun?

I read law at the International Islamic University, commencing my term in 1989. I was called a ‘keling’ for the first time during my time there. I was also told that I shouldn’t be so sensitive to being called a ‘keling for the first time during the same period. Somehow, being told not to be sensitive just didn’t do it for me, didn’t make me feel any better.

Along the way, I have confronted my share of racism, both personally and in the course of my work as an activist and a lawyer. Exposure to it has not made it easier to bear; the increasingly bizarre justifications are just as hollow. And through it all, I have been haunted by UMNO’s obsessions with ‘ketuanan Melayu’.

***

The Prime Minister’s advisors don’t see to understand that ‘ketuanan’ by any definition means just that: supremacy. When put next to the word ‘Melayu’, it means the supremacy of the Malays.

Any notion of ethnic supremacy in a multi-racial country in which all are guaranteed equality as a fundamental liberty is misplaced. When articulated to defend preferential treatment, it is discrimination. When pushed to a point where other ethnicities are suppressed in favour of those who consider themselves supremacists by virtue of their own ethnicity, it is racism. A championing of ‘ketuanan Melayu’ and all that it connotes in this society is a championing of a racist cause.

The defence of ‘ketuanan melayu’ by the Prime Minister as being reflective of the need for Malays to excel is incomprehensible. ‘The Star’ (‘Pak Lah explains meaning of ‘ketuanan Melayu’’, 29.04.2008) paraphrased the Prime Minister’s explanation this way:

“He said Malay supremacy meant that the Malays, as the indigenous people in Malaysia, needed to strengthen themselves to ensure they were successful and developed.”

It went on to quote the Prime Minister as follows:

“If they are not successful and developed, then they are not tuan (masters), therefore they will be coolies. I am sure we do not want to become coolies who do not play any role in development because we are weak and not able.

“So when we talk about that (Malay supremacy), we mean we must be successful in many fields. It is never about ruling over others, or forcing our power upon them,” he told reporters after chairing the Umno supreme council meeting last night.”

The logic, or lack thereof, underlying this explanation is of the same ilk as that which was advanced to justify the now notorious unsheathing of the keris. The explanations turn on an assumption that Malaysians will believe that all that was said and done should be accepted as it was merely intended to serve the Malay agenda in one way or the other.

I do not think so.

The almost infantile structuring of the explanations is an insult to all Malaysians. There is no place nor is there a need for a separate and distinct Malay agenda. The Malays are the majority and not the minority. By their numbers, they cannot be victimized. A large amount of the total wealth of the population is in Malay hands. They do not need to be told that they are supreme in order for them to excel. The Nazir Razaks and other extremely capable Malays of this nation are testaments to this fact. They would not agree that they need ketuanan melayu not to be coolies.

It does not appear to have struck UMNO that saying that UMNO is playing to the Malay agenda is not a good thing, not even after the treatment the Barisan Nasional (and therefore UMNO) received on March 8th. ‘The Sun’ (‘Shahri defends UMNO’s ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, 30.04.2008) paraphrases Shahrir Samad in this way:

“He said Ketuanan Melayu is something that exists under the constitution. What Umno is doing – in shouting for Ketuanan Melayu – is just defending the concept of Malay special rights as enshrined in the constitution that is.”

I have great difficulty in swallowing this - hook, line or sinker.

The Constitution does not provide for the supremacy of any ethnic community. Conversely, it guarantees equality even as it provides for a means of protecting the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. To assert that the Constitution provides for ‘ketuanan Melayu’ would necessarily mean that the Constitution similarly provides for ‘ketuanan Orang Asli’. Is UMNO saying this? I don’t think so.

I resent revisionist thinking aimed at substantiating a political position. I resent it even more when it involves perverting and misrepresenting the Constitution. But then, I shouldn’t be surprised. It would seem that very little is sacred in this country any more.

The word ‘ketuanan’ or ‘supremacist’ should not be in the lexicon of Malaysia in this day and age. If at all, it should only be used to describe our Constitution or the significance of the rakyat.

And nothing that UMNO can say about it will change that. Birthrights can never be denied.

MIS

Say No To Racial Discrimination And Racism

The Government of Malaysia has no excuse for not having ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Any government that does not ratify CERD is a government that supports racism and racial discrimination.

Only 19 UN members (out of 191) have not ratified CERD. Malaysia is in the company of countries like Vanuatu, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Samoa and Palau to name a few. Of so called Islamic countries (my understanding of Islam being that it does not support racial discrimination), Malaysia only has Brunei for company (see here, click on "status of ratifications").

Malaysia is a member of the United Nations, sits on the UN Human Rights Council and has ratified 2 human rights treaties - the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). It has also adopted various UN human rights declarations, from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to more recently, the Vienna Declaration And Programme of Action (on human rights).

There is no doubt that Malaysia has accepted the international human rights framework. In addition to the matters described above, the National Human Rights Commission was established in response to a UN led initiative to establish national human rights institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights. The National Human Rights Commission Act refers to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And it goes without saying that the Federal Constitution guarantees equality (see No Discrimination Please, We Are Malaysians)

Demand that the Government of Malaysia ratify immediately. Demand action, reject excuses. We are all equal. Reasonable and fair measures for protection and affirmative action (such as in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution) do not allow the establishment of a system of racial discrimination (see Article 1 (4) and Article 2, CERD - excerpt appears below).

There is no possible justification for the continued failure of the Malaysian Government to ratify CERD. Consider the following excerpt from CERD:

The States Parties to this Convention,


Considering that the Charter of the United Nations is based on the principles of the dignity and equality inherent in all human beings, and that all Member States have pledged themselves to take joint and separate action, in co-operation with the Organization, for the achievement of one of the purposes of the United Nations which is to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,


Considering that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and that everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set out therein, without distinction of any kind, in particular as to race, colour or national origin,



Considering that all human beings are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection of the law against any discrimination and against any incitement to discrimination,



...



Considering that the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 20 November 1963 (General Assembly resolution 1904 (XVIII)) solemnly affirms the necessity of speedily eliminating racial discrimination throughout the world in all its forms and manifestations and of securing understanding of and respect for the dignity of the human person,



Convinced that any doctrine of superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and that there is no justification for racial discrimination, in theory or in practice, anywhere,



Reaffirming that discrimination between human beings on the grounds of race, colour or ethnic origin is an obstacle to friendly and peaceful relations among nations and is capable of disturbing peace and security among peoples and the harmony of persons living side by side even within one and the same State,



Convinced that the existence of racial barriers is repugnant to the ideals of any human society,



Alarmed by manifestations of racial discrimination still in evidence in some areas of the world and by governmental policies based on racial superiority or hatred, such as policies of apartheid, segregation or separation,



Resolved to adopt all necessary measures for speedily eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms and manifestations, and to prevent and combat racist doctrines and practices in order to promote understanding between races and to build an international community free from all forms of racial segregation and racial discrimination,



...



Desiring to implement the principles embodied in the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and to secure the earliest adoption of practical measures to that end,



Have agreed as follows:

PART I

Article 1


1. In this Convention, the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.


....


4. Special measures taken for the sole purpose of securing adequate advancement of certain racial or ethnic groups or individuals requiring such protection as may be necessary in order to ensure such groups or individuals equal enjoyment or exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms shall not be deemed racial discrimination, provided, however, that such measures do not, as a consequence, lead to the maintenance of separate rights for different racial groups and that they shall not be continued after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved.



Article 2


1. States Parties condemn racial discrimination and undertake to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms and promoting understanding among all races, and, to this end:

(a) Each State Party undertakes to engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination against persons, groups of persons or institutions and to en sure that all public authorities and public institutions, national and local, shall act in conformity with this obligation;


(b) Each State Party undertakes not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by any persons or organizations;


(c) Each State Party shall take effective measures to review governmental, national and local policies, and to amend, rescind or nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists;


(d) Each State Party shall prohibit and bring to an end, by all appropriate means, including legislation as required by circumstances, racial discrimination by any persons, group or organization;


(e) Each State Party undertakes to encourage, where appropriate, integrationist multiracial organizations and movements and other means of eliminating barriers between races, and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division.



2. States Parties shall, when the circumstances so warrant, take, in the social, economic, cultural and other fields, special and concrete measures to ensure the adequate development and protection of certain racial groups or individuals belonging to them, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the full and equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. These measures shall in no case en tail as a con sequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved.



Article 3


States Parties particularly condemn racial segregation and apartheid and undertake to prevent, prohibit and eradicate all practices of this nature in territories under their jurisdiction.



Article 4


States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia:



(a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;


(b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law;


(c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination.



Article 5


In compliance with the fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of this Convention, States Parties undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights:



(a) The right to equal treatment before the tribunals and all other organs administering justice;


(b) The right to security of person and protection by the State against violence or bodily harm, whether inflicted by government officials or by any individual group or institution;


(c) Political rights, in particular the right to participate in elections-to vote and to stand for election-on the basis of universal and equal suffrage, to take part in the Government as well as in the conduct of public affairs at any level and to have equal access to public service;


(d) Other civil rights, in particular:



(i) The right to freedom of movement and residence within the border of the State;


(ii) The right to leave any country, including one's own, and to return to one's country;


(iii) The right to nationality;


(iv) The right to marriage and choice of spouse;


(v) The right to own property alone as well as in association with others;


(vi) The right to inherit;


(vii) The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;


(viii) The right to freedom of opinion and expression;


(ix) The right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;



(e) Economic, social and cultural rights, in particular:



(i) The rights to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work, to protection against unemployment, to equal pay for equal work, to just and favourable remuneration;


(ii) The right to form and join trade unions;


(iii) The right to housing;


(iv) The right to public health, medical care, social security and social services;


(v) The right to education and training;


(vi) The right to equal participation in cultural activities;


(f) The right of access to any place or service intended for use by the general public, such as transport hotels, restaurants, cafes, theatres and parks.



Article 6


States Parties shall assure to everyone within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies, through the competent national tribunals and other State institutions, against any acts of racial discrimination which violate his human rights and fundamental freedoms contrary to this Convention, as well as the right to seek from such tribunals just and adequate reparation or satisfaction for any damage suffered as a result of such discrimination.



Article 7


States Parties undertake to adopt immediate and effective measures, particularly in the fields of teaching, education, culture and information, with a view to combating prejudices which lead to racial discrimination and to promoting understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and racial or ethnical groups, as well as to propagating the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and this Convention."


MIS