Breaking up wealth concentration in Malaysia

The past year has seen the government and the opposition unveil their respective economic reform policies. Even if these reform policies and their attendant programmes are implemented, they will not be able to resolve the country’s economic problems. This is because the policies advocated by both sides of the political divide are merely palliative. They do not address the root or fundamental cause of the problem of structural deformation of the country’s economy.

How has this deformation come about? What are its characteristics? And what can be done to bring about a reversal or correction of the deformation so that we have a really transformed economic system that can live up to its full potential?

First we need to recognize that wealth in any country – and Malaysia is no exception – is created by economic activity engaged in by individuals or enterprises that bring profits or gains to the entrepreneur. Much of this wealth creation and subsequent accumulation is legitimate. It is based on material reward arising from work (or gift) and is socially and ethically acceptable. It comes from risk-taking and from the social utility and superiority of the products and services generated by the individual or enterprise.

Wealth generated and accumulated by individuals through legitimate means and conforming to the norms of justice and fairness is not only desirable but beneficial to society and the economy.

But what about wealth that is created or amassed by less than legitimate or by illegitimate or illegal means? Is it a minor or non-issue and do we just ignore it as is the case with the Barisan Nasional government?

Outflow of massive illegal wealth accumulation
One important clue to the massive wealth capture by illicit means in Malaysia was exposed recently by the Global Financial Integrity, a US-based watchdog.

In its study on ‘Illicit Financial Flows from Developing Countries’, it estimated that Malaysia was fifth in the world on cumulative total illicit financial flows (IFF) since 2000.

For 2009 alone, IFF (non-normalised) amounted to approximately U$47 billion (approximately RM145 billion at the exchange rate of RM3.1 = US$1) and over the cumulative nine years, total IFF amounted to US$350 (approximately RM1.09 trillion.)

Two methods of estimation were used in the study, one being the World Bank residual model (using the change in external debt or CED), and secondly, trade mispricing (using the Gross Excluding Reversals method or GER).

Through the balance of payments (a component of CED), it captures unrecorded capital leakages i.e. illicit transfers of the proceeds of bribery, theft, kickbacks, and tax evasion. Outflow of unrecorded transfers due to trade mispricing was captured under the GER method.

Based on the study, Malaysia’s nine-year average normalised i.e. conservative IFF, amounted to US$14.2 billion (42%; RM43.9 billion) due to CED while GER accounted for $19.6 billion (58%; RM60.8 billion). Meanwhile, average non-normalised IFF was US$15.4 billion (44%; RM47.5 billion) due to CED and US$19.6 billion (56%; RM60.8 billion) due to GER.

MNCs and Illicit Financial Flows
According to the study, “illicit flows involve capital that is illegally earned, transferred, or utilised and covers all unrecorded private financial outflows that drive the accumulation of foreign assets by residents in contravention of applicable capital controls and regulatory frameworks. Hence, illicit flows may involve capital earned through legitimate means such as the profits of a legitimate business”.

If taxes were levied on the illegal outflows, the country’s finances would have benefitted to the tune of close to US$100 billion. When the GFI’s findings were made public recently, the finger of blame for the massive outflows was placed by the MP for Kota Belud, Abdul Rahman Dahlan, on multinational corporations (MNCs). Indeed, MNCs have been a convenient scapegoat for transfer pricing woes in developing countries where they have major operations.

One local observer – a specialist in transfer pricing – has demolished this accusation in the context of Malaysia. According to his letter of 27 December 2011 to Free Malaysia Today, “transfer pricing has been the one of the most scrutinised subjects by the Malaysian Inland Revenue Board since the Transfer Pricing Guidelines was introduced [in 2003].”

He has argued that “more likely than not, where there are cases of transfer mispricing, MNCs would always step forward and rectify the situation. This is so because “getting caught by authorities in doing illegal activities will most likely cause serious damage to business integrity and reputation.”

He concluded that “compliance by MNCs is one of the most stringent as far as I understand from a corporate culture perspective, or at least for cases I have seen.”

So if MNCs are not the culprit for the illicit financial outflows, who are the real culprits?
The Global Financial Integrity study has noted that besides transfer pricing outflows – MNCs alone are not to blame for this; local conglomerates and GLCs also play the same game with greater insider knowledge – IFF was caused by illicit transfers arising from the proceeds of bribery, theft, kickbacks, and tax evasion.

Malaysia is in fact the only country where IFF is caused by a comparable proportion of transfer and non-transfer pricing transgressions.

Real culprits in illegal wealth accumulation and concentration
While the study has been helpful in providing some hard data on the quantum of the illicit financial outflows, it does not provide much assistance on other key details such as who are responsible for the outflow; the countries of fund relocation; etc.

At this stage, we can only hazard a guess as to the likely individuals or parties involved in the non-transfer pricing illicit outflow. The most likely culprits are those who have been able to accumulate enormous wealth and who for various reasons find it expedient or necessary to conceal their wealth accumulation as well as to diversity their wealth havens and assets away from Malaysia.

The GFI study does not cover the illicit wealth accumulated locally and not yet remitted to foreign shores. The size of this locally retained illicit wealth is likely to be several if not many times more than that sent abroad.

A crude estimate of the extent of legal wealth concentration in the country can be obtained from the 40 individuals identified by Forbes as the richest billionaires for Malaysia. Collectively this group was worth $62.5 billion in 2011. In addition there must be many other extremely wealthy individuals who have avoided making the list through their ability to conceal their wealth and others who though not making the top 40 list still possess enormous wealth.

The most widely rumoured name not making the Forbes list has to be Taib Mahmud, the chief minister of Sarawak, who together with his family is reputed to have shares in more than 330 companies in Malaysia alone and more than 400 companies around the globe worth several billion US dollars.

Various quarters have questioned the legitimacy of the wealth accumulation engaged in by the chief minister. A recent article in the blogsite Sarawak Headhunter provides in-depth details on what is alleged to be the income stream of the Chief Minister’s financial vacuum machine.

These include:

• Income from timber licences
• Surcharge on timber exports
• Kickbacks from timber shipping companies
• Agency and other fees levied on shipping companies
• Privatization of government companies
• Illegal logging receipts
• Federal government contracts
• Alienation of state land to plantations
• State contracts

The Sarawak chief minister has refuted these claims and has argued that that his daughter's considerable property empire was amassed through the daughter and son-in-law’s business acumen in investing wisely the gratuity which Taib earned from his earlier service in the federal government.

This may well be true but if so, it needs to be substantiated by an opening of the financial records and bank accounts of the family and the companies owned or controlled by the family in Malaysia and abroad. Only then can the authorities and public determine the truth of the allegations of financial and political impropriety.

That the chief minister and his family own an extraordinary amount of wealth – held locally and abroad – at least is not denied. Some idea of the enormous size of the Taib family wealth emerged when Taib’s daughter-in-law filed a RM400 million claim on her estranged husband Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib in court recently, including what she claims is her share of property worth RM300 million.

These tantalizing details of the extraordinary wealth accumulation by Taib and a small group of Malaysians show a common pattern. Firstly, they have all been beneficiaries of the Barisan Nasional government and its policy aimed at working with an elite few individuals in driving the economy forward.

Many if not all of the names that appear on the Forbes list are regarded as cronies of past prime ministers Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and the present prime minister Najib Razak, and are widely perceived as owing their considerable wealth to their political loyalty to the Barisan Nasional.

All the business empires of the former ‘Sugar King’ Robert Kuok, Genting Highlands’ late Lim Goh Tong, Public Bank’s Teh Hong Piau, YTL’s Yeoh Tiong Lay, Astro’s Ananda Krisnan, Air Asia’s Tony Fernandez and the rising Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary – deservedly or undeservedly – are seen as built on government preference and patronage. This connection is what has provided them with head starts and privileged monopolies without which their enterprises could never have come about, let alone flourish.

Getting to the bottom of how the business empires of our richest Malaysians have taken shape may be a useful way of dealing with the thorny question of how wealth concentration – whether legitimately derived or under a cloud of illegitimacy – has occurred.

We should have no illusions about the obstacles that lie ahead of such investigative efforts. We should also be mindful that in countries where illegal wealth accumulation by the leaders of impoverished countries has drawn national and international ire, attempts at recovery of the wealth, much of which has been spirited abroad and stashed in overseas banks and assets, has been a long-drawn and difficult process.

Admittedly the hope for any confiscation of illicit or illegitimate wealth is distant and dim. The time may not even be ripe to insist on a full-blown opening up of the records and having the truth come out on how the crème de la crème of our business and political leaders have accumulated their fortunes.

But there may be need for public scrutiny in a few special cases in Malaysia despite the concern that such efforts may be construed as an anti-capitalist or anti-Barisan witch hunt.

National discussion on wealth accumulation and concentration
The time is right at the least though for a national discussion on what are the pros and cons of the current economic system which encourages the concentration of wealth and its illegal outflows on such a systemic basis, and whether this is the right economic model for the country.

The time is also right to focus on sectors and processes which have been the main playgrounds of unfair or illicit wealth accumulation; and to implement actions aimed at decisively containing or neutralizing them.

Best practice examples are readily available for example, in the natural resource sector of countries with the same natural wealth as us. These countries, such as Norway for example, have been able to avoid the errors that we have made in the exploitation of our mineral and forest resources. Our mistakes have been in permitting opaque policies and procedures, and condoning corrupt or shady businesses that have reaped a windfall of illicit gains.

For the national discussion on wealth concentration and outflows to take place, we need to break the conspiracy of silence by our political elites that have befitted from the system and that have collaborated in the accumulation of illicit wealth and wealth generated from dubious means.

We need the professionals to play their role. We need more studies by academics and civil society to uncover where illicit and less than legitimate accumulations are taking place and what can be done to plug leakages and bring to justice the offenders and culprits. We need more whistleblowers to step forward.

Discussion needs to be followed by action, whether by the Barisan or a Pakatan government.

This action needs to be more than just the tweaking of economic policy as envisaged by the Pakatan parties. It needs to be a fundamentally new paradigm of development based on the de-concentration of wealth and its more equitable distribution.

New paradigm of development
The radically new paradigm of development that puts the spotlight on the wealth of the country (within and outside) as well as on the wealthy, and with a major focus on the eventual breaking down of wealth concentration illicit financial flows – beginning with illicit wealth – is needed for three reasons.

Firstly, it is a superior approach to the narrowly race-based New Economic Policy model that has dominated the country’s economic life and which is based on a simplistic caricature of affirmative action policy.

Secondly, our oil wealth is rapidly depleting and our treasury is depleted. Going after wealth that has been illegally accumulated or rightfully belongs to the state will provide the country some breathing space until we get our act together on the other pieces of the bigger economic transformation jigsaw.

The final reason is that the primary cause of poverty and stunted development in Malaysia is an economic system that promotes excessive concentration of wealth. So long as the excessive concentration of wealth exists, our poverty and deformed development problem will remain unresolved.

It has been said that economics is not only about production and wealth creation. It is also about morality, and the first moral principle is that the strong owe a duty towards the weak. It is the role of government to ensure that the strong and wealthy fulfil their duty and not to encourage them in wrongdoing in their obsessive wealth accumulation.






Written by Dr. Lim Teck Ghee

450,000 stateless Indians in Malaysia, fact or fiction?

Today it is generally taken for granted that there are good things that people are entitled to have and bad things that they can expect or hope to avoid. A wide, and ever-widening, range of such entitlements and immunities are supposed to belong to everyone, everywhere and at all times, purely as a consequence of our humanity (i.e. of the dignity and respect that are due to us as human beings).Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Article 15 of the United Nations ‘Universal Declaration on Human Rights’ gives everybody the right to a nationality: no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her nationality nor denied the right to change nationality. So any act by a nation of depriving a nationality to her inhabitants, that too up to 4th or 5th generation born must be regarded as a perpetual humanitarian crime.

Hindraf has on many occasions stated that there is an estimated 450,000 Malaysian- born Indians that have been rendered stateless as they have been denied citizenship status by the Malaysian government.
According to the Population and Housing Census of Malaysia 2010, there are 2,320,779 non-Malaysian citizens residing in Malaysia. However the general perception that is given is that this huge number consists of nothing but foreign workers like from Indonesia, Bangladesh, etc. In reality it is suspected that this figure of 2.3 million also includes a large number of Malaysian-born but stateless Indians.

During a series of focused group discussions held Aug 24-26, 2009 at Putrajaya with the deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department to review the Ninth Malaysia Plan period and provide recommendations for the Tenth Malaysia Plan, certain participants expressed tremendous distrust towards the official figures presented, particularly those on Malaysian Indians.

An outline paper was presented to the Economic Planning Unit in a special meeting chaired by EPU deputy director-general Mat Noor Nawi on Dec 24, 2009 highlighting citizenship documentation of the Malaysian Indians.

It was stated in the paper that there were no proper records of the cases and assistance seems extended to these Indians to be on an ad hoc basis. It was suggested that the government should undertake a comprehensive survey and document all the Malaysian Indian cases and analyse the root causes for this situation.

It was also suggested to enlist the cooperation of the National Registration Department whereby a focal point is established at the national and state levels, and to also undertake a quarterly review of the situation in order to ensure that between 2010 and 2011, at least 75 percent of the cases could be resolved.

It is already 2012 now and I’m afraid the stateless Indian numbers are still estimated to exceed 450,000.

To prove if this number is indeed fact or to discount it as fiction, one has to trace back to old records and reports of the population census of Malaysia.

Following the data trail
The United Nations had declared 1974 as World Population Year and as such the organization initiated within this framework the preparation of a series of monographs on the past, present and future population trends in various countries.

The Committee for International Co-ordination on National Research (Cicred) was given the responsibility of coordinating the preparation of the monographs. Malaysia submitted its report in December, 1975 which was edited by R. Chander, the chief statistician in the country’s Census and Demographic Division.

In the preface of this report Chander states “the presentation of past, present and future trends in Malaysia in this volume, form a useful synthesis of much of the knowledge accumulated by official censuses. Its value is enhanced by the effort made to demonstrate the relevance of population data for social planning”.

According to Cicred, each collaborating national institutional was commissioned a national monograph on the main dimensions of population growth and composition which serve today as a benchmark for studying demographic change in these countries over the last decades.
In short this report was done in a very comprehensive manner and would have been conducted very diligently. Its figures could represent an unbiased clearer picture of the Malaysian population today.

PROJECTED POPULATION BY COMMUNITY
The future population projection of Malaysia was calculated for each community for the years between 1970 and 1990. It was done based on several established standard assumptions and giving four different projections for each community based on:

Projection A: Fertility constant, 1970-1990.

Projection B: Fertility decline 10%, 1970-1990.

Projection C: Fertility decline 20%, 1970-1990.

Projection D: Fertility decline 30%, 1970-1990.

Based on these four different types of projections, the future population projection of the three main ethnic communities in Malaysia was estimated.

For 1990, the Malay community was estimated to number anywhere between 8,006,849 and 8,985,925.

According to Malaysian’s actual population census carried out in 1991, the Malays numbered 8,521,906. This is well within the estimated range projected by the 1975 reported prepared by Chandler and submitted to Cicred.

The Chinese community was estimated to number anywhere between 4,512,199 and 5,487,349. The Malaysian population census of 1991 gave the figure of 4,623,882. Again well within the estimated range.

The Indian community was estimated to number anywhere between 1,491,949 and 1,660,575. The official census of 1991 counted 1,316,086 Indians. This is very much lower than the estimated range.
Meaning the Indian community was around 250,000-300,000 persons less than the estimated number projected by the chief statistician of Malaysia in 1975. How is that so when he was well on the mark on the estimates of the Malay and Chinese communities?

Chandler was way off mark on the 1990 estimate of the Indian community reported to the United Nations committee. Furthermore the estimate given was for the year 1990 but the official population census carried out a good year after that, in 1991. (Malaysia’s population census is conducted once very 10 years – 1970, 1980 1991, 2000 and 2010.)

Despite the external migration of the Chinese community which was far greater compared with the Indian community, Chandler had still been on target with his projection of the ethnic Chinese population numbers in Malaysia. His projection on the ethnic Indian population figure should by right have been accurate yet the 1991 census numbers fell short notwithstanding the fact that the Indian fertility level was far higher than the Chinese’s.

The answer to this anomaly is very simple.

As of 1991, there were at least 250,000 to 300,000 ethnic Indians who had been denied citizenship status in Malaysia for whatever reasons. That was in 1991. Today after 21 years, that number must surely be more than 450,000 at the very least.

Just try asking any Malaysian Indian that you meet whether they know of anyone among their friends
or relatives who do not possess valid citizenship documents? Chances are, more often than not, their answer will be ‘Yes’. The numbers are that staggering!

At least once a week you will come across articles in the Tamil newspapers about an Indian family or individuals here and there who do not have MyKad and about Indian children who are unable to attend primary school because they have no birth certificate, etc.

Which political party or NGO is truly fighting for these stateless Malaysian Indians?

Which elected representative has brought this matter to parliament or requested for a Royal Commission on this humanitarian crime on innocent, poor people? What have you as an individual done about this?

Written by Dr Paraman Subramaniam

STATELESS- UNDOCUMENTED INDIANS

"Being said ‘No’ to by the country where I live; being said ‘No’ to by the country where I was born; being said ‘No’ to by the country where my parents are from; hearing ‘you do not belong to us’ continuously! ….. Being stateless, you are always surrounded by a sense of worthlessness.” - Lara, formerly stateless

Nationality is a legal bond between a state and an individual, also known as citizenship. A stateless person is a person who is not considered as a National by any states under the operation of its law. A stateless person then, is someone who does not enjoy the legal bond of nationality with any state. In effect, a stateless person is a non-national in every country in the world. The above definition of statelessness has been codified in the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Person (article 1).

According to the Federal Constitution, a child born in the country becomes a citizen by operation of law only if one parents is a citizen or permanently resides in Malaysia at the time of his or her birth or if he or she “is not born a citizen of any country.”

Article 14 of the Federal Constitution, Second Schedule, Part 2, reads:
Citizenship by operation of law of persons born on or after Malaysia Day,(1)(a) “every person born within the Federation of whose parents one at least is at the time of the birth either a citizen or permanently resident in the Federation,“ (e) “every person born within the Federation who is not born a citizen o any country.”

Malaysia has yet to sign the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness and the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugee.

However, Malaysia has signed the Convention for the Rights of Child (CRC) and Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), albeit with some reservations.

Statistics indicate that Indians in Malaysia comprise 7.8% or 1.8 million of the 23 million total populations. For several generations, the Indian community resided in rural areas, especially in the rubber and palm oil estates managed by large plantation companies. These plantation companies not only provided them with jobs but also took care of their social and cultural needs i.e. housing, school, temples and health care. In 1970, 47% of the Indians were engaged in agriculture of which 74% were in the plantation sector.

However, due to the rapid industrialisation program undertaken by the government, many of these estates were developed into industrial, commercial and residential areas. Employment in rubber plantations declined from 163,577 in 1979 to 11,788 in January 2006. From 1980 to 2000, it is estimated that more than 300,000 Indians were displaced due to the development. The magnitude of Indian displacement from rural plantation areas to urban areas can be seen from the official reports. In 1970, 323,435 Indian (34%) were in the urban areas and 609,194 (65.3%) in rural areas however by 2000, 1.33 million Indians (79.7) were in urban areas while 341,622 (20.3%) continued to live in the rural areas.

Despite the very large number of people involved in this involuntary stream of migration and with full knowledge of the traumatic impacts of this displacement will have on these people, sadly little or nothing had been done to prepare them for this new environment or to have a holistic transition program in order to equip them with the necessary skills to resettle this community in more sustainable and improved livelihoods. They are now forced to look at alternative ways and means to survive. However, with no proper education or skills, they ended up taking the lower-rung jobs in the cities and having to compete with the migrant workers.

These people are by birth Malaysians, but due to their lack of knowledge and awareness of the importance of such documents they are now in a state of limbo as to their citizenship status is uncertain and are at the mercy of the authorities who could due to bureaucratic reasons deny them their citizenship right. It is sad that in this day and age, there are many people who are not aware of important basic facts, such as how to register a marriage, birth or death. It is estimated that there are around 40,000 Indian children in the state of Selangor alone who do not have their birth certificates . Similarly, based on the number of cases we received at our 10 community centres from 2003 – 2006, we estimated that at least 20,000 Indian women do not have identity documents . These figures could be much higher if their children are taken into account. Therefore, they become ‘stateless’ in their own country and as a result they been denied of protection and care as a citizen of the nation state, and thus vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.

One of the other reasons for this issue based on our finding is due to the refusal of some men to own up to their responsibility when the child is born out of wedlock. In other cases the non-registration happened because some parents do not register their child’s birth within the prescribed14-days mandatory period or after that because they fear of being fined or reprimanded by the National Registration officials. As a result their children grew up without proper identification documents. Hence, the consequences are far reaching as children were unable to attend school or get proper medical attention.

An adult without proper documents can't secure a proper job or get married legally. If he or she does get married without their marriage certificate and have children, chances are that their children's birth will not be registered. As a result the children are neglected within an environment that is not suitable for living or is less favourable than their peers. As a result they often lack the opportunities for development in accordance with their age; such as the opportunity to receive formal education, the opportunity to be safeguarded by the national health care system, the opportunity to work in safe and just positions (leading to labour exploitation), and the opportunity to legally travel out of their residential area. These children often become targets and fall victim to criminal gangs or enforcement officers such as the police and RELA; they become trapped in a vicious cycle.

Similarly, because they are illiterate or lack education, they are unable to converse fluently in Bahasa Malaysia. As a result, they are unable to communicate effectively with government officials and face difficulty in understanding their bureaucratic procedures and requirements. Therefore, they are often subject to rude treatment by these officials which causes them to be demoralised and give up their efforts to complete their application. This has led to serious problems for these poor Indians and the cycle of “quasi statelessness” repeats itself after their children grow up and start families.

DHRRA Malaysia has taken effort to identify the stateless or undocumented Indians in Malaysia. Among the efforts taken are, DHRRA Malaysia has conducted many workshops in order to train the community leader, as they are much closer to the community and they will be able to identify the stateless people. DHRRA Malaysia has been very vocal in highlighting this issue in every available avenue. DHRRA Malaysia was also invited to contribute towards 10th Malaysia Plan by the Economic Planning Unit, Prime Ministers Department. During these sessions DHRRA Malaysia highlighted on the issues of the stateless people, how these stateless people will benefit or will be taken into account in 10th Malaysia Plan. DHRRA Malaysia has been involved in this task since 2003. DHRRA Malaysia and other NGOs are trying to minimise the problem by raising awareness among the community of the importance of applying for birth certificates early and assisting these undocumented Indians to apply for their legal documents. DHRRA Malaysia has also established good rapport with the National Registration Department (NRD) wherein NRD has been very cooperative in resolving the undocumented issues. The 2011 data at DHRRA Malaysia, shows 2099 number of cases have been collected since Jan to 15 Jul 2011.

According to DHRRA Malaysia’s experience, among the reason for not having legal documents are:
1.Lack knowledge on the importance of legal documents
2.Ignorance
3.Administrative or procedural problems
4.Financial problem
5.Inter – religion marriage
6.Marriage to foreign spouse (no legal marriage)
7.No proof of birth
8.Illegal Adoption
9.Child abandoned without proper documents
10.Child born out of wedlock


Case Study:

Vasudevan Subramaniam
Vasudevan Subramaniam was legally adopted by a couple at the age of 1 year from the government welfare home in Johor Bharu. He did not have any legal documents. His adopted parents managed to get his birth certificate but at the age of 12 when the parents took him to get his identity card, Vasudevan was given a red identity card which is known as “Permanent Residence”. Now Vasudevan Subramaniam is 19 years. Till date he is still unable to get his citizenship. His adopted parents have made several applications but all were rejected. Due to this he is also unable to apply for an International Passport to travel to overseas with his adopted parents.
Being born in Malaysia, having lived in a government welfare home, adopted by Malaysian parents and studied in a national school but being denied of nationality. Vasudevan Subramaniam has been classified as Stateless.

Muniammah & Family
Madam Muniammah is 60 years old. She was born in an estate in Kuala Kubu Bharu. She does not know where her siblings are, as she was married off at the age of 11. Her husband was an alcoholic and did not care for the family. Muniammah has 4 daughters. The husband left when the children were still young. Muniammah tried to register the birth of her children but could not do as she herself did not have any legal documents. Now her daughters are of the age between 30 – 36 years. The worst part, Muniammah daughter’s has children of their own. In this family alone we have 3 generations of stateless people.

Norhashima bt Abdullah
Norhashima was sent to government welfare home with a court order when she was a few months old. She grew up in the government welfare home, which till today has her records. She went to a national school. The welfare home did apply for her birth certificate and her parents details are not in the birth certificate due to that, Norhashima is also classified as stateless. Norhashima is 27 years now, the only identity card that she has now is a green identity card, which recognises her as temporary resident in the country where she was born and grew. This identity card has an expiry date as well.

Tan Ming Siang & Tan Ming Haw
Tan Ming Siang and Tan Ming Haw are bothers. They both were born in Malaysia. They were born to a Thai mother and Malaysian father. Tan Ming Haw has a birth certificate but in his birth certificate it is stated as ‘Bukan Warganegara’. Tan Ming Siang’s application is still in process. Both their parents were not legally married. Since they are not legally married, both the children are not recognised as citizens of this country. To make situation worse, both of them were stopped from attending school as they are stateless.

These are some of the sample cases which are in limbo; it is doubtful if these people will be recognized as citizens of this country. According to the current policy these people will not be recognized as the citizen of the country.

Governments Effort In Eradicating Statelessness among the Indian Community

•The government has taken some effort by setting up the Special Implementation Taskforce on Indian Community (SITF) under the Prime Ministers Department. SITF initiated MyDaftar campaign from 19 Feb – 4 Mac 2011. SITF manage to collect 14, 882 cases.
•The National Registration Department has also been very cooperative in handling the stateless issues.
•The Prime Ministers Department has also provided allocation to various NGO’s to identify and assist in eradicating this issue.
•The government has also launched many media campaign.


All the above effort is appreciated but there is nothing much done on policy matters. Only with policy amendment can the issue of stateless Malaysians can resolved.


SUHAKAM’s Stance on the Stateless People

SUHAKAM has issued many statements on various stateless groups. However there has not been much effort taken in eradicating the issue of statelessness.

SUHAKAM in its capacity should conduct a study with the help of NGO’s working on these stateless people and provide policy recommendations to the government.

Accede to and implement the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

Lobby to the government on the basis of Child Rights Convention, that every child should have access to education.

Racism and Corruption in Malaysia: The Ongoing Saga

Many of us may have asked: when and why did the racial divisions in Malaysia start and who is to blame? Obviously, the racial divide did not exist in old Malaya, where the different races could live together in harmony in the kampongs (villages) and small towns.

Now, it seems that we are forever at the brink of racial tension or even racial war. In fact, jihad (holy war) has been declared several times by the UMNO-linked PERKASA against the Christians as well as the Chinese.


The starting point
When UMNO was formed, Onn Jaafar who was one of the main founders and who was the then president, had to leave the party because a group of new faces disagreed and fought with him over the political direction to be taken. They insisted their ideas were better than his and this inevitably led to the changes in policies, rules and objectives.


Whereas Onn was more for uniting the Malays from all walks of life, with the Chinese, Indians and other migrants under one organsation, and then jointly struggle for independence, the group of UMNO leaders led by the late Tunku Abdul Rahman was more interested in meeting the qualifying terms set by the British for achieving independence – no matter how onerous.


The idea of a non-communal political party
Onn Jaafar (right) – the grandfather of the current Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein – had indeed been farsighted and visionary; he felt the need for racial harmony and a non-communal political party was the best way to secure a prosperous future for Malaya. No doubt the British did create the Malayan Union comprising all races with equal rights, and even diluted the powers of the Malay rulers, but the British were not really sincere at all.

The British did not really want Malayans to be united as one, like in Onn’s vision. Neither did the British really want the Malayan Union to succeed. So the Malays were led into rejecting the Malayan Union, paving the way for its dissolution.

Had the British been sincere, they would have backed Onn’s idea. Instead the British supported Tunku when he was elected the new UMNO president after Onn resigned. Onn had to quit after failing to garner the majority support from the delegates on his multiracial vision after his speech in the UMNO General Assembly in Kuala Lumpur in August 1951 backfired. The Malays have never been united since then.

The idea of non-communal political party still lives on
But did Onn Jaafar really have so little support? The answer is no, he had the support of the Malays all over the country and at the grassroots level. In fact when Tunku tried to manage UMNO, he found out that most of the people were not aware that Onn had left the party. The staff manning the UMNO offices were also reluctant to work with Tunku as they still supported Onn. In the end, Tunku had to abandon the old UMNO office bearers and create a new set-up, appointing his own people to manage the party and its activities.

Further proof of the British ill-intent was when they told the Malayan entourage negotiating for independence consisting of UMNO, MCA and MIC that Malaya could not be given independence since the three major races were not united! Onn’s multiracial proposal was the best and it still is and the British also knew that. Yet, they managed to convince the Malayan delegates to agree on an Alliance with UMNO, MCA and MIC the pioneer members.

To their discredit, all three of them fell for it. Presumably this had been outlined by the British for Tunku to implement.

UMNO failed us from the start
Here UMNO has thus failed twice. Firstly, to unite the Malays and consolidate their political power and losing the opportunity to unite the various races under one non-communal party. Secondly, to really lead a more meaningful struggle. Unlike the other true independent struggles seen all over the world, UMNO just “negotiated” for a ‘walkover’ from the British.

UMNO may argue that it was the ingenuity of their leaders that helped Malayans gain independence without bloodshed. This is not true! There was indeed a lot of bloodshed but not amongst the UMNO people. What about the struggle led by other groups and individuals?

Let us also not forget that during this period there were many other groups and individuals struggling and fighting for independence and with the inevitable bloodshed. We were not informed about their struggle as if the Alliance was the only one who struggled. PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu had exposed this one-sided history for us. Besides the Communists, there were many others from all the races.

Nations that experienced, endured and managed to overcome all obstacles leading to the true sense of independence are usually of a different breed. The struggle instills real patriotism and their citizens really value what they have achieved unlike Malaysians too, who need to be lured to fly the Jalur Gemilang almost every time we try to celebrate the National Day.

In the end, the UMNO-BN celebration of the 31st August National Day has become something of a mediocre, wasteful, and meaningless effort, without zeal and substance, without the real feeling of patriotism at all. The annual procession is just for show as the number of people flying the Jalur Gemilang keeps dwindling year after year till the number of road vehicles flying the national flag can even be counted on our fingers. The national day celebrations are only being looked forward to by the Mat Rempits and the like.

UMNO and Malaysia under Tunku Abdul Rahman: Going Nowhere

Malaysia under Tunku was not really independent, it had to depend on the British and they were more than willing to maintain their support, mainly due to economic reasons. The British had invested so much in Malaya in plantations, mining, banking, media and education. Furthermore, Malaya was one of the growing markets for everything English.

After gaining independence, the Tunku was not able to really achieve anything more substantial. He was not even able to defeat the ragtag Communists, and Malaysia was still backward in every sense of the word. The young democracy and new nation was just at its infancy and without any coherent policy, objectives, vision and actions although there were some sort of localized economic activities in the towns, and racial harmony in the kampongs.

With the Communists still active not only in the jungles but also in the urban areas and their ideology spreading in the University of Malaya, real peace and unity as a nation were not attained during his administration. Even Singapore was separated from Malaysia. The economy was not doing well since Malaysia was more on a commodity-based economy, and at the mercy of the British who controlled prices and the trade itself.

At this stage of the nation building, Malaysians had nothing to celebrate or cheer about. There was nothing to hold on to, nor was there a sense of belonging. Not only were the business, finance and money still under the British, the Supreme Court was also in Britain. Nothing substantial belonged to Malaysia. The Malays in particular had nothing except for the small plots of land in the kampongs and the Malay rulers to be proud of. Tunku did not have any real plans for the Malays despite UMNO being so-called the United Malays National Organization.

Racism during Tunku’s period
The Tunku fell into the trap set by the British when the racial based coalition, Alliance was formed. He had not done enough to set any solid foundation for the country and he realized too late how fragile racial harmony was after the 1969 general election. The Gerakan and DAP had celebrated their wins with a victory parade in KL on May 12, 1969. Then UMNO led a counter march the next day, and this is when the racial riot known as the infamous May 13 racial riots erupted. May 13 also led to Abdul Razak Hussein taking over the nation’s leadership.

But was it really a racial riot? Were both the Gerakan and DAP really so insensitive to the political situation that they organized the march and failed to control their members? The Alliance managed to win 77 out of 140 seats in Parliament; UMNO still held power. Furthermore it was very interesting to note that Malay opposition parties saw a sharp increase in votes in the peninsula, rising drastically from about 15% in 1964 to 25% in 1969. UMNO did not have the full support of the Malays and apparently the Malays did not agree fully with UMNO even then!

UMNO under Razak: His inaction led to the next stage of failure

Razak, the father of current Prime Minister Najib Razak, was quite thoughtful and managed to bring about some changes. He started the process of nation building by introducing the word “pembangunan” which is development. For this, he was eventually bestowed the title of “Bapa Pembangunan”. After the infamous May 13 racial riot, he introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP) which had good and noble intentions although it was miserably abused to the core in later years.

The NEP was meant to restructure society, encompassing education, business opportunities, employment and preferences to eliminate identification of race with economic function anf eradicate poverty amongst Malaysians, irrespective of race.But UMNO leaders took advantage of this policy to fatten their coffers leaving both the Malays and other poor Malaysians behind. We can clearly see and understand the situation now.

Razak also empowered FELDA (which was formed by the British in 1956 for their own reasons) to aggressively embark on opening new land schemes and making Malays do something to upgrade and improve themselves. The FELDA story is still unfolding now.

As the Malays were earning some extra income, Tabung Haji ( the brainchild of Professor Ungku Aziz) was formed to inculcate the habit of savings for the rainy days and to help save enough money to perform the haj. Sad to say, as has been reported, Tabung Haji was not safe from the dirty hands either.

The siphoning of money that we see now, the unscrupulous civil servants and their abuse of power and unchecked corruption also started during Razak’s premiership. He was not able to closely monitor all the things that he had implemented.

One glaring example is the construction of the wooden houses for the FELDA settlers. But instead of houses, the settlers got what were basically just pieces of sawn wood nailed together with some sort of roofing to protect the inhabitants from the elements of nature. Yes, the ‘house’ was just a shed. These houses can still be seen in the FELDA settlements as a testimony to the plundering of the allocations by unscrupulous groups of people.

This was the beginning of the money-making schemes, and those in UMNO saw the doors opening to all the golden opportunities that had never existed for them before. The government officials too found the opportunity and took what they could and as much as they could.

When RISDA was formed to help the rubber smallholders, they were provided with free fertilizers, weed poison and other incentives like the money to keep the rubber plantation clear of all other plants, shrubs and small trees. This was to ensure improved rubber production, easy maintenance, safety and prevent the rubber plantation to be any form of hideouts for vermin, wild animals and the communists.

While they were supposed to be given the items free of charge, the officials still demanded money from the small holders and a substantial amount of the fertilizers and poisons went into the wrong hands and were eventually sold to the hardware shops to be re-sold to others. The money-making schemes were carried out openly to the extent the RISDA emblem on the sacks could be clearly seen. Yet, the authorities did nothing to stop the corruption.

Almost all the projects awarded to the UMNO-putras during this period was executed as Ali Baba schemes leaving the UMNOputras with just 5 percent of the profit which was too little. Since they were not real businessmen, they spent extravagantly within a few months finished all their gains. Thus more projects had to be given out to fulfill their lust. The Ali Baba business trend began here.

It was the same with other government projects and procurements. The instant noodles supplied as army ration were paid by the Ministry of Defense at RM0.65 per packet while the market price was just RM0.25 each.

The Police and the Army were also in a world of their own with free cigarettes, cheap alcohol, partying in their messes. They were oblivious to their surroundings. The police were so callous in their duties that the IGP was shot dead point blank by two assailants on a motorbike when his car halted at a congested road on his way to the office.

The inefficient civil servants were preoccupied with so many tasks in their offices. Hospitals and medical staff were few in numbers, and the school teachers were the most respectable group of people in society then. But unfortunately not anymore now.

The Biro Siasatan Negara (National Bureau of Investigation) was operational but they did nothing. At this stage, the UMNO government ignored all the warning signs of blatant corruption, misuse of funds and pilferage. As such, the next stage of failure was inevitable and more so under Hussein Onn.

First huge scandal under Tun Hussein Onn

Hussein Onn was like Abdullah Badawi and unlike Badawi, he was a reluctant politician. He was not able to fit into Razak’s shoes. Hussein Onn left the country on auto-pilot. Thus, more corruption and wrongdoing spread all over the country including to Sabah and Sarawak which had huge amounts of natural resources especially timber.

Sandakan in Sabah once held the world record of the highest numbers of millionaires (from the greedy rampage and corruption of the timber industry) per square mile. Sabah is now without a virgin forest except at the national reserve. This too will not be spared for long and Sabahans still remain poor today.

The first huge scandal for UMNO which was the RM2.5 billion losses by Bank Bumiputera Malaysia Bhd, which began in 1976 with its wholly owned Bumiputera Malaysia Finance (BMF) lending money to property developer Carrian Group in Hong Kong. The mess unfolded in 1983 kicked off the UMNO plundering tradition on a huge scale.

You see, no one was punished for the crime. UMNO leaders condoned such debacle creating a precedent that when one is a strong UMNO man and with proper connection, one can get away scot-free. The bailout tradition too began from this point on. Since Malaysia was on auto-pilot, the ordinary citizens had to survive on their own.

Mahathir: All forms of failure and a sad lack of vision

This was a very interesting period for UMNO. There were failures galore – all and every form of failure that could happen did happen. There was systematic failure at all levels of government to understand the magnitude of the situation, from stripping the Malay rulers of their powers, using the full force of the ISA on the opposition, breaking up UMNO, looting the nation’s funds, antagonizing the West, full-scale bailouts of cronies, destroying the integrity of the Police and Judiciary to being a dictator. Obviously, this resulted in resentment throughout the entire society leading to the formation of Pakatan Rakyat.

Mahathir was the one who broke the national piggy bank, blazing the trail to unmitigated government borrowings. He failed to provide enough funds for rainy days. Many of his supporters boasted that he was famous for his vision, but time has proven that Mahathir in fact lacked it. He lacked vision simply because he was not able to see beyond himself.

Mahathir failed to understand the inherent economic cycle and be prepared for eventual downturns. He knew Lee Kuan Yew had special funds to be used under the power of the President. But Mahathir siphoned out the only real funds we had in PETRONAS, thus even the once rich PETRONAS has to borrow money now.

The Police under Mahathir was for most of the time working for him and not much for the rakyat. The police was used to defeat the opposition, harass individuals, put people in jail using the ISA and determining the most suitable time for a general election. Crime was high since the PDRM was preoccupied with UMNO and Mahathir. Lawyers were know to be unscrupulous but it was during his time that the judiciary system was turned into shambles and judges could be openly bought, thus ending the integrity of the entire law and order of the country.

Mahathir also failed to defend the monarchy by stripping the Malay rulers of their powers. The Malays have lost their last bastion of pride and for the rest of the Malaysians the last bastion of justice, as can be seen in the awkward position of the Sultan of Perak being manipulated by UMNO in the Perak power grab of 2009. The Perak Sultan sanctioned UMNO’s coup d’etat, while the Agong only had enough guts to acknowledge BERSIH as legitimate, while the Sultan of Selangor had to play safe in the JAIS -DUMC case with UMNO breathing down his neck.

Mahathir in his endeavour to make Malaysia a developed nation by 2020 failed to safeguard the nation from being plundered by refusing to prevent and take action against corrupt people. This could be because he was himself a cohort in some, if not most of the fiascos. The Tajuddin Ramli-MAS scandal is an example and a living testimony to the failures of the Mahathir-era, while the RM12.5bil PKFZ scandal is still unfolding.

Mahathir also failed to see the inept capability of Badawi and the hopeless Najib who both have no real ability of their own. Nonetheless, one cannot turn back time or erase the systematic failures Mahathir caused. In any case, he was ready to pass the baton to Abdullah Badawi by 2003.

Badawi sleeping away

Badawi was not able to fit in the shoes of Dr. Mahathir. He tried to undo several of questionable projects started by Mahathir. But even this, he fumbled and bungled.

Badawi tried to create some economic corridors, have some fancy slogans like working together with him and Islam Hadhari, which he himself found difficult to explain. Till now, the questions ring: what are the corridors, the slogans and Islam Hadhari really all about?

The economy became stagnant and to spur development Malaysia had to borrow more money. He was able to create some sense of economic activities but just for the elections. Fortunately for him but unfortunately for the rakyat, he had the fourth floor goons headed by his beloved son-in-law, Khairy Jamaludin who made things worse.


Our nation was in jeopardy because it was being managed by a twenty-something de-facto prime minister. Although Khairy was an Oxford graduate, he was not savvy enough to run a country much to the disgust of Mahathir. Both the nation and UMNO are now in disarray. A classic example of a Khairy deal gone awry is the failure of the Shahrizat-linked Gemas NFC debacle.

Badawi did form the MACC but for what? They are just the same people from the Anti Corruption Agency (ACA) in different uniform.

Free for all, grab what you can now under Najib

Najib is long on ideas but short on action, thus has no results to show. Basically, this is due to his ideas being copycats of other systems, such as the Pakatan’s Buku Jingga or economic blueprint.

But first of all since he was not elected to his post and his image was tarnished by the useless and unsinkable Scorpene submarines that also led to the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaaribuu.

Najib engaged APCO and FBC Media for a full scale image makeover, spending at least RM55 million of tax-payers’ money for expensive propaganda to glorify himself, his government and his policies and having it screened on international channels like CNN, CNBC and BBC.

To repair the damage to his image, Najib should have rectified the mistakes and not try to whitewash them and incurring more blunders in the process. There is really no point in putting on thick make up during the day when everyone can see the thick layer of ‘paint and powder’.

Transformation programs that go nowhere
Then Najib went on to try to transform several major things but he failed to see what the causes were that led to past failures. All the sounds and bombast of his Economic Transformation Program may have seem rather impressive to the layman, but what are the results so far? Unfortunately we have not been able to feel good about anything that Najib and his ETP people have announced.

His main showpieces are the six National Key Results Areas (NKRA), twelve National Key Economic areas(NKEA) – all part of his Economic Transformation Program. On November 23, Bernama reported that Najib underlined six high impact programs to boost the growth of the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) to 8.7 by 2020 but, what about now or next year?

The economic policies that the UMNO-BN government under Najib have been undertaken but show no improvement in the economy. Thus, until now, it has been ‘nothing for nothing Najibnomics’.

As for Najib’s Political Transformation Program, it has proven to be a farce – heavy on proclamations and full of doublespeak as in the recent Peaceful Assembly Bill, which actually restricts our freedom and not grant greater democratic space as he had promised.

Old habits die hard
Even at this very critical juncture, in the last lap to the “Mother of all Elections”, UMNO still continues to award contracts without following the proper procedures. At present there are several projects under the various ministries that have been allocated to their cronies and when the time comes, by hook or by crook, these projects will come to light whether UMNO-BN wins the GE-13 or not. So too will all the money-making schemes planned with guarded secrecy, the PKFZ scandal, the Scorpene scandal and the Gemas NFC debacle.

The Najib government has also told the rakyat that it will not be involved in financing the mega-projects he has announced; they are mostly under the Private Financing Initiatives (PFI), he assures. But we were not told that the UMNO cronies will have to borrow from the banks and none of the clear minded private banks would ever lend them any money.

The private banks know that these projects are just money-making schemes without any guarantee of success and will eventually need bailouts. Thus all the burden of financing has been given to Bank Pembangunan, the government bank, with money from the government. Still the money will be taken from our already depleting EPF and Tabung Haji or borrowed somewhere and bringing Malaysia closer to becoming another Greece.

Chaos at the ministries
The Ministry of Defense has set the plan moving for the purchase of new fighter planes from Russia as reported in a defense magazine but Ahmad Zahid Hamidi denied this recently. The ministry will also continue with the building of the exorbitantly expensive naval ships and boats.

The Ministry of Education has embarked on building several campuses in Perlis and Pahang and even the HUKM pediatric hospital in KL and being awarded to their cronies.

The Ministry of Transport has already approved the KVMRT project, the Integrated Transport Terminal in Subang Jaya with another going to be in Gombak and in Melaka and as we all know Malaysia Airports Holding Bhd has a free hand to impose any charges on passengers and complete the KLIA2 tour at whatever cost.

The Ministry of Agriculture will eventually bail out the failed Gemas NFC project and the wasteful rice bowl “National Rice Bowl” project in Sarawak will get more money – some to be reinvested and the rest pocketed.

The Ministry of Finance will continue paying the PKFZ thieves and continue dumping more money into MAS despite the purported win-win share swap with AirAsia as MAS has already announced RM400 in losses recently. PETRONAS has been set to bail out TNB by absorbing the gas cost.

The Ministry of Tourism too have their money-making schemes through various advertisement projects, while the Ministry of Information uses FINAS through the loans and grants issued for movie productions and the misuse of FINAS assets for some influential individuals. The other ministries too have their problems and these could be revealed later.

Enough is enough

Najib has turned Malaysia backwards by not trying to reject the wrong doings of UMNO-BN. Where his father was too busy, Najib’s problem may be because he has his own scandals; thus a change of government is the only true means of saving this country. The recent UMNO AGM showed the country the party’s true colors; its racists/fascist bent and the fact that it had no real agenda for the country.

So after tracking through the 6 Prime Ministers, all of whom came from UMNO, it is clear the party is the cause, the main ingredient, the catalyst and the main element of all the failures that have befallen the nation.







by Nawawi Mohamad, Malaysia Chronicle

Malaysia after regime change - With or Without Barisan Nasional: Regime Change and Identity Politics in Post Authoritarian Malaysia

Why are you interested in Malaysia? If asked such a question, the majority of foreign observers, scholars and students of Malaysian politics would most likely mention ethnicity, religion (Islam) or what is broadly categorised as “identity politics.” Even if identity is not their primary interest, not one of them is likely to deny that collective identities are a crucial aspect of contemporary Malaysian politics dominated by the multi-ethnic ruling coalition, National Front (Barisan Nasional, BN).

What will Malaysian politics look like if BN ever lost power? Would identity, either ethnic or religious, recede from politics if the opposition, People’s Alliance (Pakatan Rakyat, PR), came to power? Or would it fuel politicisation of identity even further to threaten otherwise relatively oppressive but peaceful inter-communal relations?

Possible answers to these questions in part depend on the type of regime that the opposition coalition—comprised of the People’s Justice Party (PKR), Democratic Action Party (DAP), and the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS)—wishes to establish. The opposition pact was first and foremost formed and sustained to challenge and bring down the authoritarian rule of BN where the Malay-Muslim based United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) is dominant. The establishment of some form of democratic rule is their next goal. Indeed, their platform, “Ubah Sekarang, Selamatkan Malaysia! (Change Now, Save Malaysia!)”, published in the run-up to the 2008 elections emphasizes the following initiatives: expansion of democratic rights and institutions such as independent judiciary; creation of a just and fair society that provides all people with equal opportunities regardless of ethnicity, religion and culture; elimination of corruption and other unfair and discriminatory practices that hinder equal and fair distribution of public resources; growth with equity; and elimination of undemocratic apparatuses and practices, most notably the Internal Security Act (ISA). The absence of aforementioned initiatives under the current regime provided a common ground for opposition parties to come and fight together, leading to their impressive electoral ascendancy in 2008. The question remains however: Is the PR platform sufficient to convince their multi-ethnic constituencies to oust BN from power to build a new democratic Malaysia?

Complication about Malaysia’s regime change and democratic transition is derived from the very nature of the current regime. It is not only authoritarian in a conventional sense of the term, but also highly ethnocentric and illiberal, thereby denying equal rights and freedom to minority citizens based on their ethnic/religious identities. Under this regime, the majority Malay (and therefore Muslim) population have gained an unparalleled amount of power, wealth, status and opportunities as their birth rights since independence. UMNO and its major coalition partners in BN, the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), were formed and allowed to survive primarily to represent and protect political and material interests of Chinese and Indian minority communities. In the post-NEP period, the regime has become even more protective of the communal interests of the Muslim-Malays while gaining authoritarian characters.

Under this ethnocentric pro-Malay regime, state institutions and a bureaucratic infrastructure were constructed in a manner to buttress supremacy of the state, UMNO and the Muslim-Malay community, while undermining civil society, civil rights and the well being of minority communities. Furthermore, the same regime has granted an unprecedented amount of power, resources and authority to the Islamic state bureaucracies in order to cater to the religious interests and spiritual well being of a growingly pious Muslim-Malay community. The results of such maneuvering are now obvious in a wide range of policy areas including law, education, welfare and economy. Consequently, post-NEP generations of minority populations feel increasingly alienated and discriminated against despite the fact that some communal grievances were mitigated by the inclusive multi-ethnic national vision and continuous growth under Mahathir (together with currently opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim) till the multiple crises following 1998.

Against this backdrop, it is of little surprise that the Hindu-Indian community has formed a powerful opposition against the regime. In 2007, the opposition was organised to form an ethno-nationalistic movement, Hindraf (Hindu Rights Action Force), to express the socio-economic grievances and political demands of the community. The state’s violent suppression of a street protest organised by the movement further deteriorated the already uneasy relations between the BN regime and minority communities, arousing anti-regime sentiments even further with particular damage done in urban areas.

Opposition parties, while certainly sharing such unusually strong anti-regime sentiments emanating from civil society, were not able to translate these divisive ethnocentric sentiments and demands directly into political action. Instead, they have chosen to stay mute on fundamental issues that they do not wish to discuss or negotiate, that is, issues related to communal identities and religion. Moreover, they strategically framed their anti-regime cause in universal democratic terms so as to forge a critical coalition with civil society forces across communal boundaries. They did so precisely because they need one another to maintain a multi-ethnic coalition front in order to beat BN. They and electorates are aware that the opposition parties and their interests, just like their opponents in the ruling coalition, are defined and restrained by competing identities: PKR is Malay-Muslim dominant and led by the most charismatic and powerful Malaysian Muslim leader to date, Anwar Ibrahim; DAP is non-Muslim based and dominated by ethnic Chinese; and PAS is a puritanical Islamist party. These constituencies have made significant efforts to compromise on issues regarding their core identities and interests in order to achieve their political goals and survival. Such compromise was handsomely rewarded with a significant 2008 increase in votes for the PR.

The tragedy of Malaysian authoritarianism is that authoritarian rule has grown stronger alongside the growing dominance of UMNO in BN and the Malaysian polity as well as its avidly pro-Malay and pro-Islam characters throughout 1980s and 1990s. The highly politicised identities—and state, political, economic and socio-cultural institutions created to serve the identity-based interests over several decades—will not easily go away even if regime change rids Malaysia of authoritarian rule and the BN falls from power. Popular interests and demands will continue to be defined and organised through collective identities based on ethnicity, religion, culture, or some combination of these characteristics.

This situation will lead to another tragedy: a tragedy of Malaysian democracy and regime change. As a result of the institutionalisation of politicised identities, demands for democracy, freedom and equal rights for all Malaysians are readily interpreted in zero-sum terms to connote a reduction of the special rights and privileges preserved for the Malay-Muslim majority. Regardless of whoever takes over the BN, the new regime will have to negotiate and balance contending communal demands and interests.

The key question here is whether Malaysians, especially the Malay-Muslim community, are ready to accept a new set of deals, terms and conditions set by the new democratic regime along the line suggested by PR. All possible signs thus far seem to suggest that they are not. According to public surveys conducted by the Merdeka Center between 2008 and 2010, a large majority of Malays, especially those in the lower income categories, strongly favour the reservation of special rights and privileges. They are also extremely anxious about policies and concessions that appear favourable to non-Malay communities. It is important to remember that Malay votes for UMNO/BN were constant between 2004 and 2008 and many still think that UMNO supremacy is necessary to protect their special rights.

More alarmingly, such anxiety among a community perceived to be under threat or siege at a time when the regime is undergoing unpredictable transition is a ready recipe for communal tension and potential violence. Indeed, it was when the BN adopted policies and allocated resources in ways seen disproportionately favorable to the non-Malay communities, especially Chinese, that ultra-nationalistic Malay movements such as Perkasa gained popular approval and appeal. Some UMNO elites were willing to allow these movements to exploit racist rhetoric and symbols in an effort to provoke anti-minority sentiment and violence.

Regime transition means that UMNO will be in the opposition. It is not unlikely that UMNO elites will use such racist rhetoric and movements more freely and aggressively to regain power they have lost, deteriorating already uneasy ethnic relations even further. We are also unsure if PAS will remain moderate once it gains power in order to have access to the conservative religious bureaucracies and patronage that have expanded dramatically under UMNO. According to Ashutosh Varshney, a renowned scholar of ethnic violence, ethnic peace is more likely when rivaling communities have developed associational interactions and ties—and social capital—across ethnic boundaries so as to withstand attempts to instigate racial hatred or antagonism. If this proposition and legacies of institutionalized political identities mentioned above offer some guide to predict Malaysia’s democratic future, we are left uncertain whether the much-waited transition to democracy will in fact bring a peaceful and happy future for all Malaysians as many had wished.

Kikue Hamayotsu is Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA. Her research focuses on comparative politics, identity politics, religion and politics and regime transition and quality of democracy in the Muslim world with special reference to Indonesia and Malaysia. Her current interest include: religious parties and electoral politics, religious intolerance and violence, and finding a way to move Australia closer to North America.