Saturday, May 02, 2009
Human Rights Watch Letter to the Prime Minister of Malaysia
April 27, 2009
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Bin Haji Tun Abdul Razak
Pejabat Perdana Menteri
Blok Utama, Bangunan Perdana Putra
Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan
62502 Putrajaya
Malaysia
Re: Human Rights in Malaysia
Dear Prime Minister,
Congratulations on your April 3, 2009, appointment as Malaysia's sixth prime minister. As you know, Human Rights Watch, a nongovernmental human rights organization that monitors human rights in more than 70 countries around the world, has long raised human rights concerns in Malaysia with your predecessors.
We especially welcome your expressed "intention to uphold civil liberties" and your "regard for the fundamental rights of the people of Malaysia." To that end, we urge your government to take specific measures to bring Malaysian law, policy, and practice into line with international human rights standards.
We urge that your government promptly ratifies core international human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and begin the process of bringing domestic law into conformity with these international instruments.
We further urge that you and your government give priority to the issues of arbitrary and preventive detention, freedom of expression, protection of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, and ending impunity for security forces. In the pages that follow, we discuss these issues in detail and offer specific recommendations.
Arbitrary Detention
The state of emergency in effect in Malaysia since the 1960s has been used by previous governments to violate fundamental human rights. Under the emergency, the Malaysian government enacted emergency ordinances permitting the government to pass broad and ambiguous laws that bypass judicial processes and review and effectively permit indefinite preventive detention. The Internal Security Act (ISA) is the most notorious of such laws and violates a number of international human rights standards, including the right to be free from arbitrary detention, the right to due process and to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, as well as rights to freedom of expression and association.
Previous governments have justified use of the ISA by referring to multi-ethnic tensions. While Human Rights Watch recognizes that multi-ethnic tensions are a legitimate concern of any government, 51 years after independence, the government should not lose sight of the fact that Malaysia has a well-developed criminal justice system fully capable of dealing with multi-ethnic tensions, threats to its security, and other ill-defined activities without recourse to the extra-judicial ISA.
The official position that detention under the ISA is preventive, acknowledges that the government cannot, or has chosen not to, prosecute detainees for alleged crimes but rather extends executive power at the expense of the judiciary.
Throughout its long history, the ISA has been used to punish and silence peaceful political opponents and government critics. It has become an unfortunate and deeply embedded feature of a Malaysian political climate that stifles free expression, association, and peaceful assembly. Recent ISA political detainees include Raja Petra Kamaruddin, founder and editor of Malaysia's most popular website; Teresa Kok, an opposition Democratic Action Party parliamentarian; and the Hindraf 5. Three of the five Hindu activists remain in detention. Others once held under the ISA include prominent political leaders such as Anwar Ibrahim, former deputy prime minister and current head of the political opposition coalition; and Lim Kit Siang, Karpal Singh, and Lim Guan Eng.
While Human Rights Watch welcomes the release of 13 ISA detainees, we are concerned that the promised government review will rebuff efforts at repeal. We are further concerned that in March and April 2009 there were three new ISA arrests and that such arrests were not formally announced, but only confirmed after reported by a civil society group. We urge that you heed the 2003 recommendation of Suhakam (Human Rights Commission of Malaysia), and promptly rescind the ISA and all other criminal preventive detention measures.
Human Rights Watch urges the Malaysian government to:
- Immediately and unconditionally revoke all emergency proclamations and ordinances that violate internationally protected human rights, including the Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention) Ordinance 1969.
- Abolish the Internal Security Act. Malaysia's penal code and criminal justice system are fully capable of addressing situations of internal security.
- Immediately charge or release all individuals currently held under the Internal Security Act. - Assure that those charged have prompt access to legal counsel and family members and are tried in conformity with international fair trial standards.
Freedom of Expression and Assembly
Human Rights Watch welcomes your lifting of the March 23, 2009, ban against two opposition party newspapers, Suara Keadilan, published by Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), and Harakah, published by Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS), and your follow-up statement that Malaysia's media outlets should not fear the consequences of responsible reporting.
However, less than a week later, your government refused to admit a reporter and photographer from Merdeka Review, an internet news website, to the press conference announcing your new cabinet. On April 14, Information, Communication, and Culture Minister Rais Yatim warned bloggers that the law would be invoked against bloggers who make unfounded allegations, and on April 19 he indicated displeasure and a review of "the role of [private] television and radio stations in nation-building."
Until legislation such as the draconian Printing Presses and Publications Act, which requires annual licensing, is dismantled and the scope of the Sedition Act is narrowed, arbitrary threats to free speech and political activity in the name of national unity will remain. In September 2008, for example, Sin Chew Jit Poh, a Chinese language newspaper, and The Sun were warned about their reporting on "sensitive" inter-ethnic issues.
Provisions of the Police Act further compromise the ability of Malaysian citizens to peacefully assemble and advocate on critical issues. License requirements for any gathering of more than three persons have been used to block rallies, large and small, whose message the government disapproves of. Peaceful "unlawful" demonstrations have been swiftly repressed through use of water cannons, tear gas, arbitrary arrests, and politically motivated trials. In 2008-09, a series of small candlelight vigils calling for an end to ISA detention were summarily dispersed. In one, on November 9, 2008, a Malaysikini videographer on assignment was roughed up and had his camera confiscated. While eight people, among them five lawyers, have recently been acquitted of charges relating to their participation in a peaceful march on December 10, 2007, International Human Rights Day, the eight should never have been charged, nor is an appeal of their acquittal by the government warranted.
Human Rights Watch urges the Malaysian government to:
- Rescind the Printing Presses and Publications Act.
- Amend the Police Act to ensure it respects the right to peaceful assembly by revoking the unlimited power of a police district's officer in charge to refuse to license or determine the conditions under which assemblies, meetings, and processions are licensed. Substitute regulations that set out reasonable and negotiated conditions for assembly and an appeal process that eliminates political grounds on which decisions to withhold permission are too often made.
- Narrow the overbroad definitions of "sedition" and "seditious tendency" employed in the Sedition Act and refrain from using the act to censor expression or to jail political opponents or critics.
Security Force Malfeasance
A culture of impunity pervades routine law enforcement by police and immigration officers in Malaysia. Recent unresolved incidents in police lockups highlight the problems of injuries and deaths in custody. Police report that there were 85 deaths in police custody during 2003-07, many of them still unresolved.
The United Nations Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions call upon governments to conduct "thorough, prompt and impartial investigation of all suspected cases of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions, including cases where complaints by relatives or other reliable reports suggest unnatural death." Ensuring that the police and other security officers are held fully accountable for any crimes that they commit is necessary for respect of human rights as well as for the maintenance of professionalism in the security forces.
In Malaysia, inquests move slowly-some are postponed for years-and family members are often not aware they are occurring. Common police explanations for these custodial deaths include hanging (i.e. suicide), falling while trying to escape, and natural causes. In one case, a detainee was reported to have died of "sudden fatty liver" within days of his detention. In addition to injuries that resulted in deaths, numerous other cases of physical abuse occur in conjunction with investigations of alleged crimes.
The death of 22-year-old Kugan Ananthan in January 2009 is one of a number of recent cases that point to the need for an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) as recommended in April 2005 in the Report of the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysian Police. Although the attorney general originally classified the case as murder, no one has been arrested and the case appears stalled. The subsequent public outcry has no doubt pointed to the lack of confidence in the ability of the police, the hospitals, and the Attorney General's Chambers to investigate swiftly and impartially deaths in custody.
Substitution of the pending Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission bill (EAIC) for the IPCMC is unacceptable. The EAIC, which covers 21 government agencies, is a much-watered down version of the commission's recommendations. Among other defects, the revised bill eliminates the commission's power to initiate its own investigations even if no complaint had been received, and should it find a complaint has merit, choose the appropriate course of action. It also fails to eliminate as commissioners those with vested interest in outcomes.
In addition, the Malaysian government should:
- Implement the original Independent Police Complaint and Misconduct Commission proposal recommended by the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysian Police.
- Discipline or prosecute as appropriate all security force officers involved in incidents of abuse, including those with command responsibility.
Migrants, Refugees, and Asylum Seekers
Malaysia's immigration policy makes no legal distinction between undocumented migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. Only those with proper documentation, including work permits, may legally enter or reside in Malaysia. All others are without protection and vulnerable to arrest, detention and deportation. The government does no screening to ascertain whether deportation poses a threat to a person's life or freedom "on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion."
Malaysia's current policy demands that asylum seekers register with the Malaysian offices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). However, impediments to effective access deny asylum seekers "the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution" as guaranteed in article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Of particular note, the government refuses to allow UNHCR unrestricted access to migrants awaiting deportation in immigration detention centers, some of whom may be refugees in need of protection who have not had the opportunity to seek asylum.
In the context of the global economic downturn, Malaysia has halted new foreign hires and instituted a "foreign workers first out" policy that requires employers making staff cuts to terminate migrants first. Migrant workers carry large recruitment debts that they pay back over extended periods of time. Their employers should not be encouraged to prematurely terminate employment on the basis of national origin.
RELA
RELA (Ikatan Relawan Rakyat or People's Voluntary Corps) is a government-backed untrained paramilitary force whose members, in conjunction with immigration and police officers, routinely round up suspected undocumented migrants. In May and June 2008, asylum seekers, refugees, and migrants told Human Rights Watch researchers of abuses perpetrated by RELA members and immigration officers during the arrest process and in the immigration detention centers. Such abuses included physical assault, intimidation, threats, humiliating treatment, forced entry into living quarters, extortion, theft, restricted communications with friends or family, and disregard and destruction of identity or residency papers. Several Malaysian officials have excused the abuses suggesting that the number of abusers is insignificant and that reasonable force is sometimes justified. However, credible accounts from migrants indicate that force is ubiquitous and gratuitous.
Domestic Workers
Migrant workers in Malaysia include over 300,000 domestic workers, primarily from Indonesia. Excluded from key provisions in Malaysia's labor laws and subject to onerous placement fees by recruitment agents, many of these workers confront a wide range of human rights abuses, including labor rights violations such as excessively long working hours, lack of rest days, and unpaid wages; violations of freedom of movement and freedom of association; and physical and sexual abuse. In some cases these situations amount to forced labor, trafficking, or servitude.
Human Rights Watch welcomes recent prosecutions and convictions of abusive employers, but few domestic workers receive any redress. In recent years, nongovernmental organizations in Indonesia and Malaysia and the Indonesian embassy in Malaysia have received thousands of complaints from or on behalf of domestic workers. Many more cases are likely unreported given domestic workers' isolation in private homes, employers' ability to have workers summarily deported, and migrants' lack of information about their rights.
Human Rights Watch urges the Malaysian government to:
- Ratify without reservations the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, its 1967 protocol, and the 2003 Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and bring domestic law and practice into conformity with the documents.
- Ensure asylum seekers, refugees, trafficked persons, and abused workers are not subject to penalties imposed under the Immigration Act 1959/63.
- Allow asylum seekers the right to residence, documentation, work, and education while their claims are pending and give recognized refugees the opportunity to regularize their status.
- Facilitate UNHCR's ability to determine refugee status by allowing the agency unhindered access to detention facilities. Ensure that all detained asylum seekers and refugees are able to contact UNHCR regularly.
- Abolish RELA, and repeal all regulations under which RELA was established and its powers expanded. Until such time, RELA should be restructured as a volunteer agency with no enforcement powers and with no role in either apprehension of irregular migrants or maintenance of security in the immigration detention centers.
- Undertake independent investigations into allegations of abuse by RELA members, immigration officers, and police officers. Hold accountable the perpetrators of such abuses, including those with command responsibility.
- Extend equal protection of the 1955 Employment Act and the 1952 Workman's Compensation Act to domestic workers and create mechanisms for enforcement.
- Strengthen regulations governing recruitment agencies and include clear mechanisms to monitor and enforce standards concerning migrant workers. Oversight bodies to protect domestic workers from abuse should enjoy the power to conduct unannounced inspections of recruitment agencies and to impose substantial penalties on agencies that abuse workers or otherwise violate standards.
- Ensure employers fulfill their contractual obligations to migrant workers or pay adequate compensation.
Thank you for your consideration. We would appreciate the opportunity to discuss these and other human rights issues with you and with members of your administration.
Sincerely,
Brad Adams
Executive Director
Asia Division
Cc:
Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Dato' Haji bin Muhyiddin Yassin
Minister of Foreign Affairs Datuk Anifah bin Haji Aman
Minister of Home Affairs Dato' Seri Hishammuddin bin Tun Hussein
Minister of Information, Communication, and Culture Dato' Seri Utama Dr. Rais Yatim
Deputy Chief of Mission to the US Ilango Karuppannan
Ambassador to the UN Datuk Hamidon bin Ali
Malaysia: Truly Asia?
On November 25, 2007, an estimated 20,000 ethnically Indian Hindus gathered in the streets of Malaysia’s capital, Kuala Lumpur, to protest against government discrimination. The backdrop of the state-owned Petronas Twin Towers, Malaysia’s foremost symbol of modernity and progress, served as a damning indictment of the faults that now divide Malaysian society.When Malaysia (then Malaya), along with many other Southeast Asian countries, became independent in the 1950s, many political experts thought its tremendous racial and religious diversity made it a tinderbox, a potential “Balkans of the East.” Seeming to prove them wrong, Malaysia’s steady economic growth helped bring about prosperity that ensured at least a peaceful coexistence among the different ethnic groups. Malaysia’s story of prosperity and harmony, a model of similar trends across Asia, prompted an international tourism ad campaign with the tagline: “Malaysia: Truly Asia.”
Yet beneath that veneer, frustrations among the country’s Indian minority had been bubbling under the surface for decades before they were finally aired at the protest in November 2007. The unexpected intensity and broad support for the protests within the Hindu minority came as a rude shock to the Malay community and the ethnic Malay establishment that dominates the state and its institutions.
A group known as Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF) emerged as a major player behind the protests. Frustrated by the Malaysian government’s positive discrimination towards indigenous Malays, Waytha Moorthy, a lawyer by profession, founded HINDRAF soon after seeking counsel on the issue from Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin, the Malaysian king, in January 2006—but to no avail. The Malaysian government reacted to the protests, which were the culmination of HINDRAF’s efforts, by jailing Moorthy’s brother along with four other HINDRAF leaders, under a dated pre-independence law, the Internal Security Act.
Speaking to the Globalist, Waytha Moorthy, in exile in London, asserted that the jailings were illegal. “This act was illegally invoked under the guise of national security to silence the legitimate voice of democracy in Malaysia,” he said. Initially in self-imposed exile, Moorthy has now had his Malaysian passport revoked, making him, in his words, “de facto stateless.” He added that the five protest leaders are still being detained “without having been charged in open court, with no opportunity to defend themselves.” This is, according to Moorthy, an indictment of the independence and fairness of the Malaysian judiciary. But the Indian Hindus’ woes go back much further.
An Old “New” Policy
Since independence, Malaysia has had a partisan, race-based political system. The ruling coalition consists of the main Malay-Muslim party, United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), and parties representing the ethnic Chinese and Indian communities. The Malays, or Bumiputeras (sons of the soil), who were historically disadvantaged under colonialism, were accorded special entitlements under the benignly titled New Economic Policy, which gave them privileges in employment, education, and business. The policy was started in 1971 as a response to race riots on May 13, 1969, between the Malay and Chinese communities, a result of the Malays’ grievances regarding their poor economic conditions. The Chinese community has long held significant economic and financial power, mitigating the domination of political power by the Malays. But that arrangement left the Indian community feeling powerless and deeply frustrated.
Since independence, Malaysia has had a partisan, race-based political system. The ruling coalition consists of the main Malay-Muslim party, United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), and parties representing the ethnic Chinese and Indian communities. The Malays, or Bumiputeras (sons of the soil), who were historically disadvantaged under colonialism, were accorded special entitlements under the benignly titled New Economic Policy, which gave them privileges in employment, education, and business. The policy was started in 1971 as a response to race riots on May 13, 1969, between the Malay and Chinese communities, a result of the Malays’ grievances regarding their poor economic conditions. The Chinese community has long held significant economic and financial power, mitigating the domination of political power by the Malays. But that arrangement left the Indian community feeling powerless and deeply frustrated.
In recent years, many Indians, who are mostly Hindu, have been aggrieved by a new perceived abuse: the destruction of Hindu temples. The Associated Press reported that eight temples were destroyed over three months from February to May 2006, ostensibly for occupying land illegally. HINDRAF claimed in a November 2007 letter to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown that a Hindu temple is destroyed every three weeks in Malaysia. The lack of accurate and unbiased news coverage in Malaysia makes the exact number of destroyed temples difficult to verify, but none deny that the pattern is real.
Moorthy joined forces with human rights organizations such as the Minority Rights Group International and Amnesty International to protest this situation. Aside from the ignominy and agony of seeing local temples destroyed, the Hindu community witnessed a Malaysian Hindu soldier, Maniam Moorthy (no relation to Waytha Moorthy), a national hero as a member of Malaysia’s first-ever expedition to Mount Everest, buried by the government as a Muslim. According to Waytha Moorthy, this highly controversial incident served as a catalyst to spark the formation of HINDRAF.
Though it has united Indians around its cause, HINDRAF may have further polarized Malaysian society by emboldening its opposition at the same time. Some Malays have taken umbrage at HINDRAF’s emergence, seeing it as an affront to the proper status quo as currently enshrined in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution: “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong [the King of Malaysia] to safeguard the special position of the Malays.”
In response to the rise of HINDRAF, Johan Saravanamuttu, a visiting fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore and an expert on Malaysian politics, said, “These incidents have put a greater emphasis on ethnicity in politics.” Also, he argued, greater racial emphasis accentuates the partisan climate in Malaysian politics: “These extravagant demands probably damaged the cause in the minds of many Malaysians by making HINDRAF look more extreme.”
But he stressed that most Malays empathized with the Indians’ demands, seeing them not so much as challenges to Malay hegemony but as expressions of frustration with Indian marginalization. Adriana Nordin Manan, a Malay researcher in politics and social sciences, said, “People across the ethnic spectrum are beginning to see the New Economic Policy as a policy that was good in the beginning but needs to be reviewed in order to benefit the poor from all the ethnic groups, the majority of whom are Malay to begin with.” She added, “I hope that Malaysia becomes a nation of people who regard themselves as citizens, where not everything is seen as a zero sum game between the ethnic groups.”
A Shift in Mindset
Indeed, HINDRAF may have sparked a national soul-searching exercise that has led many to rethink the structure of Malaysian society. Moorthy said of the socioeconomic policies in the country, “There has been a shift in mindset among all Malaysians.”
Indeed, HINDRAF may have sparked a national soul-searching exercise that has led many to rethink the structure of Malaysian society. Moorthy said of the socioeconomic policies in the country, “There has been a shift in mindset among all Malaysians.”
While Malaysia’s Indians remain a politically weak constituency unlikely to bring about broad political change in Malaysia’s partisan race-based political system, the election last March, which saw the incumbent political party lose votes in all communities, supported Moorthy’s idea. Saravanamuttu said, “The issues HINDRAF raised have resonated deeply across the board and made a palpable, real impact on the election results.” He cited analysts’ estimates that the greatest swing of votes from the incumbent Barisan National coalition to opposition parties was seen among Indian voters, with a change of about 35-40 percent.
This shift was further given credence by a poll in June and July 2008 by the independent Merdeka Center that showed that a majority across all races felt that Barisan Nasional’s “race-based affirmative action policy is obsolete and must be replaced with a merit-based policy” for a truly fair redistribution of wealth.
In response to calls for change, the Federal Government has introduced the “Race Relations Act,” which aims to build stronger interracial ties. Saravanamuttu is skeptical of the move. “This act [will] prove to be of limited effectiveness, for it proscribes rather than liberates race relations in the country,” he said. Other more positive harbingers for Malaysia were a declaration last March by the newly elected Penang state minister that his state will not follow the New Economic Policy and a statement by deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak in October urging his party to end the New Economic Policy, something that, if realized, would go a long way toward alleviating Indian anger. Yet the same month also saw the home minister declaring HINDRAF to be an illegal organization.
Meanwhile, Moorthy ruefully told the Globalist, a generation has grown up knowing tension, not tolerance. “When I was growing up, my father’s friends, of various races, used to come visit and celebrate together diwali with open house festivities, inviting friends and neighbors,” he said. “In recent years, my nephews and nieces do not get their friends visiting them anymore.” In November 2008, HINDRAF urged Malaysian Indians not to hold diwali open houses at all to protest deeply entrenched government discrimination. That the lights went out on diwali, the festival of lights and the holiest day in the year for Hindus, was at once a bitter irony and a symptom of the ills plaguing all of Malaysian society.
Monish Shah is a freshman in Morse College.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Mahathir's Returns...........
The former prime minister is expected to complicate life for newly minted Premier Najib
With Malaysia expected to shed as much as 2.5 percent off its gross domestic product in 2009 and the country's politics riven with factionalism, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak looks unlikely to get a 100-day honeymoon, or even less of one. For one thing, he has former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad looking over his shoulder at every move.
The late-March conclave of the United Malays National Organisation that ratified Najib in power in particular demonstrates Mahathir's resurgence, and with him probably UMNO's old guard. With a US$16.26 billion stimulus package announced in March to increase employment, improve infrastructure and help the private sector, the test of whether there is a new UMNO or an old UMNO will be where the stimulus will be directed. Watch for the firms most closely connected to party stalwarts.
The problem is that while Najib may placate the Mahathir faction inside UMNO, the greater public at large continues to be disenchanted with the party's leadership of the country. After the March 2008 election which cost the ruling national coalition its two-thirds lock on parliament, Najib has lost four of five other by-elections to the opposition Pakatan Rakyat, winning only one in an isolated village in Sarawak in East Malaysia. He faces a revolt in the northeastern, conservative state of Terengganu, where 10 local assembly members refused to be seated last week in objection to the chief minister appointed to head the party there. In two by-elections on April 8, one in Perak and the other in Mahathir's own home state of Kedah, his personal return to the campaign trail appeared to have done little good, with both elections going to the opposition in greater numbers than in the 2008 general election.
Although Mahathir's hegemony over his old party is not 100 percent, and he says he is retired and intends to remain only an adviser, his return to UMNO leaves little doubt about his sway. After he left the party in a huff a year ago when it was announced that he faced a probe over judicial corruption, he devoted considerable space on his blog, Chedet, to blasting Najib when he wasn't ripping into Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, whom he anointed as his successor only to turn on him with a vengeance. Party insiders say Najib, having got Mahathir back on his side, lives in fear that the former prime minister will go after him again if he doesn't get what he wants. Mahathir, party insiders say, regards Najib as weak and won't hesitate to blast the prime minister if he doesn't get his way.
In particular, party insiders say, one condition for getting Mahathir back into the party was the isolation of Khairy Jamalludin, former Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's son-in-law, even though Khairy was elected head of the important Youth wing of the party. Despite the position's importance, Khairy was denied a cabinet seat and his close associates within his faction of the party are being investigated for vote-buying although vote-buying was widespread on all sides during the UMNO conclave.
Mahathir's son Mukhriz, who lost out to Khairy in the contest for the youth wing job, was named minister of international trade and industry. That ministry in particular is the senior Mahathir's brainchild, the agency from which many of the grandiose projects of Mahathir's 22-year reign as prime minister sprang.
Daim Zainuddin, who was appointed finance minister by Mahathir in 1984, holds no official position. Daim became enormously rich -- and controversial -- under Mahathir. Although he apparently will have no official position, he is expected to play a major role in advising the government on Malaysia's economic outlook, perhaps joining the new council of economic advisers that Najib is establishing. It was Daim as much as Mahathir who advocated the creation of a class of Malay entrepreneurs through the award of vast contracts for government-linked projects to counterbalance the Chinese. That policy as much as anything is responsible for the quandary Malaysia finds itself in today, with a class of rent-seeking cronies who have become enormously rich while draining government coffers, particularly in the construction industry.
Although it is by no means certain, it also appears that some of Mahathir's cherished grandiose projects, which were cancelled by Badawi to Mahathir's eternal enmity, may be back. In particular, the so-called “crooked bridge” across the causeway whether Singapore wanted it or not, has made a reappearance, with a trial balloon floated last week in The Star, one of Malaysia's two English-language newspapers, which is owned by the Malaysian Chinese Association, the second-biggest component party in the Barisan Nasional, or ruling national coalition which is led by UMNO.
If the bridge does make an appearance, one UMNO stalwart told Asia Sentinel, it will demonstrate beyond doubt the sway Mahathir holds over Najib. It is certain to cause serious complications in Malaysia's relations with Singapore, which buys water from Malaysia, and sand, which Singapore needs in ever-increasing amounts in its bid to fill the Strait of Sumatra to make itself a bigger country. Singapore also wants airspace – liebensraum for its air force, which is bigger than Malaysia's and Indonesia's combined, and which can't get its wheels up before it leaves Singapore's borders.
Another project which will probably reappear soon, according to party insiders, is the dual-track railway that will run 329 km up Malaysia's spine from Ipoh to the Thai border. In 2007, the government approved a no-bid contract with Gamuda-MMC for RM12.5 billion (US$3.73 billion) but then shelved it again. The MMC part of the consortium is a construction company backed by Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, a longtime backer and fundraiser for UMNO. The contract, critics say, was far in excess of the amount necessary to actually build the project. It remains to be seen what company will get the contract this time.
On the other hand, time may be running out for the troubled Iskandar Malaysia project, a massive 2,200 square kilometer development in Johor, across from Singapore, which Badawi commissioned in 2006 and which has been flagging, particularly as the global economy has turned down. The development is to include port facilities and a huge panoply of petrochemicals projects and orther projects as well as condominiums. Besides being commissioned by Badawi, Mahathir has called it an extension of Singapore itself.
Local media quoted Mahatir as saying “after the land is sold, the Malays will be driven to live at the edge of the forest and even in the forest itself. In the end, the area in Iskandar Malaysia will be filled with Singaporeans and populated with only 15 per cent Malays.”
Whether the opposition can capitalize on the disarray within the coalition is another matter. The Penang deputy chief has quit the Parti Keadilan Rakyat opposition party amid corruption allegations over illegal quarrying activities, is threatening to expose further scandals in the Penang government. The opposition coalition has been under pressure across the country from Najib's attempts to pry away party members , with critics charging he had been offering large sums of money to get them to jump ship.
The stimulus package, the largest in Malaysia's history, represents 9 percent of GDP, but still is expected only to bring the export-oriented economy back to about neutral. With malaise growing, and critics at his back, Najib faces an unappetizing future.
by Asia Sentinel
P.Uthayakumar Speaks ....................
Today April 26, 2009, marks my 500th day under Umno’s captivity without being charged, tried or found guilty in a court of law. I suppose this is ‘justice’ for me, an Indian ethnic minority and human rights lawyer of 18 years. Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s continued unilateral decree is that I be made to serve a jail sentence of two years and indefinitely thereafter under his regime. There are prisoners here at Kemta Kamunting, Taiping, serving their eighth year of their ISA sentences.
But I have no regrets. I know in my heart that every day of my imprisonment will liberate and open up a thousand new minds against Umno’s atrocities and injustices in their marginalisation, discrimination, suppression, oppression and the exclusion of Indians from the mainstream of national development in Malaysia. 
Today, I have grown 500 days older. Today, I have lost 500 days of my precious freedom. Today, it is 500 days since I shaved my beard or combed my hair to protest my ISA detention. Today, it is 500 days since I have been made to wear the very same two pairs of dark blue baggy pants and white restaurant waiter-like prison uniform.
My left foot
On Jan 31, 2009, I had accidently injured the last toe of my left foot, which had gotten worse because of my long standing diabetic condition. From day one of my injury, I had repeatedly asked to be treated at the Gleneagles private hospital as I no longer have confidence in the independence of government-service doctors, which I believe had been compromised by the Home Ministry and its Special Branch police officers.
On Jan 31, 2009, I had accidently injured the last toe of my left foot, which had gotten worse because of my long standing diabetic condition. From day one of my injury, I had repeatedly asked to be treated at the Gleneagles private hospital as I no longer have confidence in the independence of government-service doctors, which I believe had been compromised by the Home Ministry and its Special Branch police officers.
Under protest, I agreed to be treated at a government hospital on Feb 3, 2009. As I had anticipated, the doctor refused to admit me despite my swollen leg and blackening left foot condition. The doctor told me there were no hospital beds and neither did she want to refer me to an orthopedic surgeon or a consultant physician, as well as a cardiologist to treat my silent heart attack during my ISA detention.
No cast was put on my leg. No medication was prescribed. This doctor told me that my leg would heal on its own. My suspicion was confirmed when the doctor, who had written my medical notes in a police file, gave it back to the police officers accompanying me.
The worst case scenario ran across my mind. I may lose my left foot. For the first time, I realised that as a lawyer, I could not even save myself. There was nothing I could do, I was a prisoner.
But even then, I had thought to myself that should the worst happen, I would put on a prosthesis (artificial leg) and keep walking. I feel that at the end of the day, it was the prayers held at scores of Hindu temples nationwide by supporters of Makkal Sakthi that had actually saved my leg and ensure my well-being in prison.
Surviving on bread and biscuits
On March 22, 2009, I found pieces of beef in the chicken sambal served to me. Mohamad, a Pakistani national, and Abdul Sarjon, a Sri Lankan national, and fellow detainees who worked at the prison kitchen confirmed that chicken and beef were cooked in the same pot after which the chicken was scooped out and served.
On March 22, 2009, I found pieces of beef in the chicken sambal served to me. Mohamad, a Pakistani national, and Abdul Sarjon, a Sri Lankan national, and fellow detainees who worked at the prison kitchen confirmed that chicken and beef were cooked in the same pot after which the chicken was scooped out and served.
But I suppose this is all part and parcel of PM Najib’s One Malaysia policy. One Malaysia, two systems. Since that day, I have refused to consume cooked food from the prison kitchen in protest against the violation of my religious rights in contravention of Article 11 of the Federal Constitution. As a Hindu, I do not consume beef. I am now surviving basically on bread and biscuits.
Throughout these 500 days, there was never a single day that I ever regretted starting and spearheading this struggle. I believed in justice, including for the minority ethnic Indians, in Malaysia.
In these 500 days, I have refused to meet any of the Special Branch officers who came to meet detainees once in every two to three months to “plead for my release”. I have done no wrong and I am not prepared to beg for my freedom. I had earlier also refused to meet Umno’s home minister, knowing fully well that my release from prison is in his hands, for the very same reason.
My biggest satisfaction and what keeps me going in prison is the true and sincere spirit of the struggle through Hindraf’s Makkal Sakthi.
It moved me to see thousands of Hindraf supporters who had braved FRU’s tear gas and water cannons, who were roughed up and beaten by the police, arrested, handcuffed, thrown into jail, prosecuted in court and bravely standing up in the dock to face possible jail sentences, losing their jobs, and with their wife and children suffering. All these sacrifices, just for a public cause to put to an end to Umno’s racism, religious extremism and exclusion of the Indians from the mainstream of national development. To all of you, I salute you and I am proud of you. Makkal Sakthi Valga.
I miss my freedom
I am suffering from this imprisonment daily. I miss my freedom. I miss my family, my wife and children.
I am suffering from this imprisonment daily. I miss my freedom. I miss my family, my wife and children.
But I am prepared for the worst, even if it means another 500 days or more of imprisonment. I will do this just for the cause of Hindraf. Umno can imprison me but they cannot imprison the forces of Hindraf’s Makkal Sakthi.
Makkal Sakthi was the tipping point in the March 8, 2008 general elections. It was the triggering factor which resulted in Umno/BN losing two-thirds majority in Parliament as well as political power in four west-coast states.
Makkal Sakthi once again showed its prowess at the Bukit Selambau and Bukit Gantang by-elections. I never, even in my wildest dream, thought I would see Makkal Sakthi forces to this extent in my lifetime.
Please be patient. Umno will not change, but we will change Umno in the 2012/2013 general elections. We will put an end to Umno’s bully tactics and its rule by fear. We have waited 52 long years.
Please be patient. In another three or four years, there would hopefully be a new beginning, a new political structure and a Malaysia with equality and equal opportunities, including for the Indians. A Malaysia where the Indians would be a part of the mainstream in national development.
Every day and every moment of my imprisonment, my thoughts and prayers are with Makkal Sakthi. I have plans for our further struggle. Please pray for my freedom, and for Umno’s end of its rule so that justice will finally prevail.
Umno may have punished me with this 500 days of imprisonment but you, the Makkal Sakthi, will in turn punished Umno/BN where it hurts them most - the ballot box.
God bless.
P Uthayakumar, Kamunting Detention Camp, Perak
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Forced and unlawful Conversion of children
GOVERNMENT SHOULD IMMEDIATELY STOP THE NONSENSE OF FORCED AND UNLAWFUL CONVERSION.
LATEST RELIGIOUS FIASCO – 3 CHILDREN AGED 12 , 11 AND 1 FORCEFULLY CONVERTED TO ISLAM
MAARAN MATTERS expresses its shock and utter disgust at the conduct of JAIS in allowing a forceful and unlawful conversion of three children who were born and brought up as Hindus.
The father of those children has every right to convert to whatever religion he chooses but he does not have any right to forcibly convert his children who are minors to the Islamic faith unilaterally without the consent of his estranged wife.
The Federal constitution was drafted for everyone in a civil society that consist of a multi racial society but today Syariah laws practiced by fanatical JAIS with assistance from the government and sanction from the Federal Court (which has abdicated its powers) is infringing the basic right of a Malaysian citizen as it seems to supersede the desire of the multi racial society and the true spirit of the constitution.
We are totally sickened with the conduct and manner in which JAIS officers seem to have been colluding with K.Pathmanathan (now Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah) in serving “a syariah court order” on the Hindu wife. Every time a religious controversy arises it is the relevant Islamic religious bodies which colludes and protects the converting party without any regards to the civil society.
JAIS continues to strain the social fabric of a multi racial nation with their “CULTURE OF ARROGANCE IN CONVERSION”.
The provisions of the Federal Constitution with regards to religious freedom are crystal clear. It is time the converting party and the Islamic authorities follow the correct logical procedure ie obtaining the necessary court order in a civil court first before attempting to convert the children. What they are doing is definitely a “backdoor method through Syariah law” to conversion and an attempt to bully the mother of those children and non muslims into submission to a syariah court order.
Malaysia is a multi racial country with a Federal constitution and religious zealots cannot usurp its function. There should be respect for universal principles of human rights and religious freedom.
MAARAN MATTERS urges all democratic minded citizens, NGO’s and lawmakers to condemn this appalling act by the father, Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah and the Islamic authorities in converting the children.
Hindu Sangam which claims to represent the Malaysian Hindu community should act proactively to mount the pressure rather than putting their “faith” and “pray” on promises of setting up committees and “we will look into it” answers given by UMNO government.
Many committees have come and gone but there has never been a solution to this pertinent controversial issue relating to conversion as the government continues to defy the very concept of the Federal constitution.
The 2007, Federal court judgment, that the consent of one parent is sufficient to convert a child in the case of R.Subashini is gravely flawed as it always favours the party converting to the Islamic faith rather than upholding the spirit of the constitution.
What if the other non Muslim parent then initiates a civil action and provides consent to reconvert the child to its original faith-would that be sufficient consent then and will the Federal court then sanction it or the Syariah court would then declare that the minor could face criminal prosecution for apostasy.
This is a deadlock that the government and the Federal Court need to address for the well being of the multi racial society rather than being intimidated by religious zealots.
Maaran Matters maintains the Federal Court judgment in Subhashini’s case is gravely flawed and the Federal Court should not abdicate its duties and independence to protect every litigant equally and in fairness without fear or favour.
LATEST RELIGIOUS FIASCO – 3 CHILDREN AGED 12 , 11 AND 1 FORCEFULLY CONVERTED TO ISLAM
MAARAN MATTERS expresses its shock and utter disgust at the conduct of JAIS in allowing a forceful and unlawful conversion of three children who were born and brought up as Hindus.
The father of those children has every right to convert to whatever religion he chooses but he does not have any right to forcibly convert his children who are minors to the Islamic faith unilaterally without the consent of his estranged wife.
The Federal constitution was drafted for everyone in a civil society that consist of a multi racial society but today Syariah laws practiced by fanatical JAIS with assistance from the government and sanction from the Federal Court (which has abdicated its powers) is infringing the basic right of a Malaysian citizen as it seems to supersede the desire of the multi racial society and the true spirit of the constitution.
We are totally sickened with the conduct and manner in which JAIS officers seem to have been colluding with K.Pathmanathan (now Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah) in serving “a syariah court order” on the Hindu wife. Every time a religious controversy arises it is the relevant Islamic religious bodies which colludes and protects the converting party without any regards to the civil society.
JAIS continues to strain the social fabric of a multi racial nation with their “CULTURE OF ARROGANCE IN CONVERSION”.
The provisions of the Federal Constitution with regards to religious freedom are crystal clear. It is time the converting party and the Islamic authorities follow the correct logical procedure ie obtaining the necessary court order in a civil court first before attempting to convert the children. What they are doing is definitely a “backdoor method through Syariah law” to conversion and an attempt to bully the mother of those children and non muslims into submission to a syariah court order.
Malaysia is a multi racial country with a Federal constitution and religious zealots cannot usurp its function. There should be respect for universal principles of human rights and religious freedom.
MAARAN MATTERS urges all democratic minded citizens, NGO’s and lawmakers to condemn this appalling act by the father, Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah and the Islamic authorities in converting the children.
Hindu Sangam which claims to represent the Malaysian Hindu community should act proactively to mount the pressure rather than putting their “faith” and “pray” on promises of setting up committees and “we will look into it” answers given by UMNO government.
Many committees have come and gone but there has never been a solution to this pertinent controversial issue relating to conversion as the government continues to defy the very concept of the Federal constitution.
The 2007, Federal court judgment, that the consent of one parent is sufficient to convert a child in the case of R.Subashini is gravely flawed as it always favours the party converting to the Islamic faith rather than upholding the spirit of the constitution.
What if the other non Muslim parent then initiates a civil action and provides consent to reconvert the child to its original faith-would that be sufficient consent then and will the Federal court then sanction it or the Syariah court would then declare that the minor could face criminal prosecution for apostasy.
This is a deadlock that the government and the Federal Court need to address for the well being of the multi racial society rather than being intimidated by religious zealots.
Maaran Matters maintains the Federal Court judgment in Subhashini’s case is gravely flawed and the Federal Court should not abdicate its duties and independence to protect every litigant equally and in fairness without fear or favour.
Digging up Malaysia’s Racial Past
A new book presents the view that 1969 race riots were instigated by ambitious Malay politicians. Now it seems the book will be banned by the government.
Thirty-eight years on, the traumatic ethnic riots of May 13, 1969 in Malaysia remain as much a subject of official censorship as the events of June 4, 1989 in China. Now a new book by a Malaysian Chinese academic is on the point of being officially banned for suggesting that May 13 was the occasion for what amounted to a coup against the independence leader and Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman by his United Malays National Organisation colleagues who were pushing pro-Malay policies. Officials of Malaysia’s Internal Security Ministry Tuesday confiscated 10 copies of the book from a Kuala Lumpur bookstore, advising the store not to sell it as it may be banned. According to a letter issued by ministry officials, the book is suspected of being an “undesirable publication.”
What happened on May 13 remains highly relevant to UMNO’s position as the leader of the Barisan National, the alliance of race-based parties that has ruled the country since independence 50 years ago.
“Declassified Documents on the Malaysian riots of 1969” by Dr. Kua Kia Soong, the principal of New Era College, is based not directly on Malaysian sources but on now-open British documents held at the Public Records Office in Kew Gardens, near London. These consist of contemporary British diplomatic and intelligence reports which suggest that the riots were not spontaneous acts of communal violence, as is constantly alleged by UMNO, but were fanned by Malay elements, with support from the army and police, wanting to discredit the accommodating prime minister and impose a much more rigorous Malay agenda. One British document concluded that the goal was to “formalize Malay dominance, sideline the Chinese and shelve Tunku.”
The official Malaysian government version of events was that the riots were sparked by opposition parties “infiltrated by communist insurgents” following huge opposition gains in the election. Although the UMNO-led Alliance, the predecessor of the Barisan National, retained an overall majority, it lost its two thirds majority and its control of Selangor state was threatened. Certainly there was much celebrating among the mainly Chinese opposition parties at the election result, which angered Malay politicians who sensed their political dominance was under threat.
By the time the riots were over, official figures said 196 people had been killed, 6,000 made homeless and more than 700 buildings destroyed or damaged.
Non-Malays in particular have long believed that though there was violence on both sides, it was a mostly one-sided affair with some Malay politicians, notably Selangor Chief Minister Harun Idris, encouraging mobs to attack Chinese areas and that the security forces initially did little to prevent violence. This is largely confirmed by contemporary reports such as those of Far Eastern Economic Review correspondent Bob Reece.
Kua’s thesis suggests that there was a grander political design behind the episode, which from the beginning was intended to create a new political agenda and new leadership. He attributes this to a younger Malay group dissatisfied with the aristocratic, pro-British the Tunku.
In any event, the Tunku effectively stepped aside as emergency powers to rule by decree were (temporarily) placed in the hands of a National Operations Council headed by his deputy Tun Abdul Razak – father of current prime minister Najib Abdul Razak. The Tunku remained prime minister until September 1970 but had little authority any more. In 1971 he also stepped down as president of UMNO after virulent criticism by the Malay “Young Turks,” headed by Mahathir Mohamad, the future Prime Minister(former prime minister). The same year the government enunciated the New Economic Policy and began aggressive affirmative action programs to advance the economic and educational level of Malays.
However, while the consequences of May 13 may be clear, there are disagreements about Kua’s thesis even among those who attribute the riots to Malay politicians. For example, Dr Syed Husin Ali also a respected academic and deputy head of the opposition Keadilan Party, has suggested that while some UMNO figures used the events as an opportunity to sideline the Tunku and set out a pro-Malay agenda, it was not planned as such.
In other words, Razak and others took advantage of the situation which arose after the election and the appearance of Malay mobs to grab the reins of power from the Tunku, with whom they were dissatisfied, but that it was not premeditated. Syed also takes issue with Kua’s view that they represented an aspirant Malay capitalist class when most had traditional and feudal links.
Bookstores have been advised not to sell Kua’s book and a formal ban looks likely on the grounds that it will stir up racial animosities, which it could well do in the short run. However, from a broader perspective it is hard to see how a multi-racial, multi-religious Malaysia can flourish if events such as May 13 can only be discussed in private, while the public is fed a distorted official version in order to sustain the legitimacy of UMNO politicians.
Written by Philip Bowring
Thirty-eight years on, the traumatic ethnic riots of May 13, 1969 in Malaysia remain as much a subject of official censorship as the events of June 4, 1989 in China. Now a new book by a Malaysian Chinese academic is on the point of being officially banned for suggesting that May 13 was the occasion for what amounted to a coup against the independence leader and Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman by his United Malays National Organisation colleagues who were pushing pro-Malay policies. Officials of Malaysia’s Internal Security Ministry Tuesday confiscated 10 copies of the book from a Kuala Lumpur bookstore, advising the store not to sell it as it may be banned. According to a letter issued by ministry officials, the book is suspected of being an “undesirable publication.”
What happened on May 13 remains highly relevant to UMNO’s position as the leader of the Barisan National, the alliance of race-based parties that has ruled the country since independence 50 years ago.
“Declassified Documents on the Malaysian riots of 1969” by Dr. Kua Kia Soong, the principal of New Era College, is based not directly on Malaysian sources but on now-open British documents held at the Public Records Office in Kew Gardens, near London. These consist of contemporary British diplomatic and intelligence reports which suggest that the riots were not spontaneous acts of communal violence, as is constantly alleged by UMNO, but were fanned by Malay elements, with support from the army and police, wanting to discredit the accommodating prime minister and impose a much more rigorous Malay agenda. One British document concluded that the goal was to “formalize Malay dominance, sideline the Chinese and shelve Tunku.”
The official Malaysian government version of events was that the riots were sparked by opposition parties “infiltrated by communist insurgents” following huge opposition gains in the election. Although the UMNO-led Alliance, the predecessor of the Barisan National, retained an overall majority, it lost its two thirds majority and its control of Selangor state was threatened. Certainly there was much celebrating among the mainly Chinese opposition parties at the election result, which angered Malay politicians who sensed their political dominance was under threat.
By the time the riots were over, official figures said 196 people had been killed, 6,000 made homeless and more than 700 buildings destroyed or damaged.
Non-Malays in particular have long believed that though there was violence on both sides, it was a mostly one-sided affair with some Malay politicians, notably Selangor Chief Minister Harun Idris, encouraging mobs to attack Chinese areas and that the security forces initially did little to prevent violence. This is largely confirmed by contemporary reports such as those of Far Eastern Economic Review correspondent Bob Reece.
Kua’s thesis suggests that there was a grander political design behind the episode, which from the beginning was intended to create a new political agenda and new leadership. He attributes this to a younger Malay group dissatisfied with the aristocratic, pro-British the Tunku.
In any event, the Tunku effectively stepped aside as emergency powers to rule by decree were (temporarily) placed in the hands of a National Operations Council headed by his deputy Tun Abdul Razak – father of current prime minister Najib Abdul Razak. The Tunku remained prime minister until September 1970 but had little authority any more. In 1971 he also stepped down as president of UMNO after virulent criticism by the Malay “Young Turks,” headed by Mahathir Mohamad, the future Prime Minister(former prime minister). The same year the government enunciated the New Economic Policy and began aggressive affirmative action programs to advance the economic and educational level of Malays.
However, while the consequences of May 13 may be clear, there are disagreements about Kua’s thesis even among those who attribute the riots to Malay politicians. For example, Dr Syed Husin Ali also a respected academic and deputy head of the opposition Keadilan Party, has suggested that while some UMNO figures used the events as an opportunity to sideline the Tunku and set out a pro-Malay agenda, it was not planned as such.
In other words, Razak and others took advantage of the situation which arose after the election and the appearance of Malay mobs to grab the reins of power from the Tunku, with whom they were dissatisfied, but that it was not premeditated. Syed also takes issue with Kua’s view that they represented an aspirant Malay capitalist class when most had traditional and feudal links.
Bookstores have been advised not to sell Kua’s book and a formal ban looks likely on the grounds that it will stir up racial animosities, which it could well do in the short run. However, from a broader perspective it is hard to see how a multi-racial, multi-religious Malaysia can flourish if events such as May 13 can only be discussed in private, while the public is fed a distorted official version in order to sustain the legitimacy of UMNO politicians.
Written by Philip Bowring
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Indian Discontent in Malaysia - Remembering 2007's Darkest Day
The harsh reaction by Kuala Lumpur’s police Sunday to a protest organized by the Hindu Action Force, a pressure group established to further the cause of Malaysia’s 2 million Indians, turns the spotlight on the country’s third largest ethnic group and the problems it has faced for decades.
Tensions have been inflamed recently with the accelerated destruction of Hindu temples by the government. Although many have been built without permits on government land, they have been in place for decades. Three have been bulldozed this year to make way for road construction and a housing development and another three are due for demolition over the next few months.
The Kuala Lumpur police set up road blocks for three days in advance of the demonstration and charged the group’s leaders with sedition. As they had on Nov. 10 against the pressure group Bersih calling for election reform, the police confronted an estimated 100,000 Indian demonstrators with water cannon and tear gas. Some police were armed with submachine guns, weapons they rarely carry openly, as helicopters hovered overhead.
This demonstration was notably more aggressive than the Nov. 10 one, which was multiracial and led not only by Bersih, a good-government organization, but three opposition parties. Defying an order that the protest was illegal, the protesters Sunday, many of them swinging motorcycle helmets as weapons, threw cans and bottles. Disobeying an order to disperse, they gathered outside the city’s gleaming Petronas Towers, with police chasing them down side streets. Scores also gathered at the huge, Batu Caves north of Kuala Lumpur, which is filled with Hindu statues and other objects of worship.
The Hindu Action Force, three of whose leaders were arrested Friday and charged with sedition in advance of the protests, sought to present a petition to the British High Commission asking Queen Elizabeth to appoint a Queen’s Counsel to represent the Indian community. Hundreds of police from Malaysia’s Federal Reserve Unit and the General Operations Force were stationed in the vicinity of the British High Commission in an effort to thwart their progress. In August, the group filed a US$4 trillion class-action suit against the British government in London, asking compensation for being brought to the rubber plantations. At issue in the protest is the odd niche that Indians, some 7 to 8 percent of the population, occupy in Malaysian society. Brought to what was then British Malaya to work in rubber plantations, they occupy the bottom rung of modern society at the same time their numbers are over-represented in medicine, the law, civil service, the police and information technology. Ananda Krishnan (worth $4.6 billion in Forbes' list of Malaysian billionaires), of Sri Lankan descent, is the second richest tycoon in Malaysia. He owns pay TV operator Astro All Asia Networks and telecom major Maxis, among other businesses. Tony Fernandes, CEO of Air Asia, is one of Malaysia's most successful entrepreneurs. Born in Kuala Lumpur of Indian descent, Fernandes revolutionized budget air travel in Asia and has been called the "Asian Branson."
The Indians’ presence in Malaysia, however, is much more complicated than that. Migration started in the second half of the 19th century when the British brought Tamils and Telugus from the south of India as indentured laborers, primarily to work on rubber plantations, rail lines and the ports. A second wave, mostly from Northern India, came to man the police force and become civil servants. That included Tamils from Sri Lanka and Indians from Kerala – including the father of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has always been somewhat coy about his Indian roots. Yet a third stream came as traders, Anjum writes.
Yet another wave of Indian migration arrived starting in the 1970s, according to Anjum. In particular, as Mahathir pushed the dream of Malaysia as an IT hub, they were sought after to develop the country’s information technology base, with Malaysia formally signing a Memorandum of Understanding with India for manpower recruitment on a contract basis in 2007. Today, Malaysia’s overseas Indian population is the largest outside the United States.
But outside the legions of professionals, the rubber and palm oil plantations of Malaysia’s interior are still home to some of the poorest residents of the country, their health stunted by malnutrition and their lives marked by lack of upward mobility. In 2000, Time Magazine reported that Indians had the lowest share of the nation's corporate wealth: 1.5%, compared to 19.4% for Malays and 38.5% for Chinese. The highest rate of suicide of any community is among Indians. Gangsterism and violent crime is largely associated with Indians. Some 15% of the Indians in the capital are squatters.”
While some blame Malaysia’s racial policies as the barrier to Indian social wellbeing, with Malays betting on the country’s affirmative action policy and the Chinese being formidable in commerce and business, others blame the Indians themselves. The Malaysian Indian Congress, the ethnic-based party that represents the Indian minority in the ruling coalition, is widely looked upon as ineffective if not corrupt.
Race is the big divide in Malaysia. During his 20 years as prime minister, Mahathir sought to uplift Malays, guaranteeing them a large share of business opportunities. The Chinese, the biggest minority, were supposed to lose their disproportionate share of the country's economy. But the real losers were Indians. Due to their colonial legacy, they are generally seen as providers of cheap labor in plantations and construction sites, their political and social mobility has been thwarted.
Amarjit Kaur, professor of Economic History, at the University of New England in Australia, attributes this partly to caste distinctions. She writes in The Encyclopedia of Indian Diaspora: "The underperformance of the Indian working class may be attributed to the fact that Indian workers were drawn from the less favored caste groups. Thus they continue to be weighed down by the low self-esteem that usually characterizes members of groups belonging to the lower castes and is worsened by lack of the interaction between the well-off and the less well-off Indians.... The marginalization of working-class Indians is reflected in their poor performance in business, equity ownership and employment in professional sectors and the civil service. The disadvantaged position of the majority in the Indian community has contributed to a sense of dispossession and disadvantage among many Indians in Malaysia."
Sarala Sukumaran, 40, a Malaysian Indian entrepreneur who runs an IT firm, says: ""I know many Indian families who want to get out of Malaysia. There are two main reasons behind the backwardness of Indians. One is that we are a minority here, and two, the politicians who represent us do not promote our cause."
Sukumaran is a third generation Malaysian Indian. Her grandparents came to Malaysia in the 1930s to work in the plantations in Penang.
“I feel that we are not aggressive enough as a community in terms of unleashing our entrepreneurial potential. That's why our evolution has been very slow. Comparatively, look at the Tamils from Sri Lanka,” she said. “They have a more close-knit community feeling, they help uplift each other and they are certainly doing much better than the Indians."
After the racial riots of May 1969, Malaysian leaders emphasized the establishment of a united nation and a national culture transcending ethnic identities. The dominant culture in this set-up is Malay with some elements from other cultures supporting it.
Even some new Indians, want to get out. "Being non-bumiputras in Malaysia, we can never settle down here," says Nishant Upadhyay, 30, an instructional designer. "We know that getting a permanent residency is next to impossible so we are looking at opportunities in countries like Singapore and Australia where we can easily settle down and start a family."
Many Indian IT professionals have still not gotten over the mistreatment of 300 Indian citizens in March 2003 in Kuala Lumpur, which was widely reported in the Indian press. Security agencies reportedly interrogated them rudely in a search for illegal immigrants, but all the Indians possessed valid residency documents. Subsequently Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, then the deputy prime minister, apologized for the incident.
But there are frequent reports of abuse of Indian workers and Bumiputra politics disadvantage Indians in education and work opportunities. Local university seats and scholarships are awarded under a racial quota system, and even after getting a degree, many say that discrimination is commonplace. Indian doctors, for instance, complain that they are often excluded from lists of approved doctors whom civil servants or company employees can patronize.
The conversion of rubber plantations to housing estates and golf courses also has displaced plantation workers who have drifted to urban centers. As a result, urban Indian ghettos have emerged and crime has escalated.
Many Indians blame government policies for their backwardness, a charge rejected by mainstream politicians. Says Malaysian politician Shahrir Abdul Samad: "The Indian community problems are more than just equity. Most of their problems are social problems, such as gangsterism. I admit Indians are among the poorest in this country, but their participation and achievements in many other fields are amazing."
Indian Malaysians discover themselves in a bind. Most have resigned themselves to their plight while discontent simmers within the community. But how long can Malaysia afford to allow 8 percent of its population to feel alienated?
Written by Zafar Anjum
Tensions have been inflamed recently with the accelerated destruction of Hindu temples by the government. Although many have been built without permits on government land, they have been in place for decades. Three have been bulldozed this year to make way for road construction and a housing development and another three are due for demolition over the next few months.
The Kuala Lumpur police set up road blocks for three days in advance of the demonstration and charged the group’s leaders with sedition. As they had on Nov. 10 against the pressure group Bersih calling for election reform, the police confronted an estimated 100,000 Indian demonstrators with water cannon and tear gas. Some police were armed with submachine guns, weapons they rarely carry openly, as helicopters hovered overhead.
This demonstration was notably more aggressive than the Nov. 10 one, which was multiracial and led not only by Bersih, a good-government organization, but three opposition parties. Defying an order that the protest was illegal, the protesters Sunday, many of them swinging motorcycle helmets as weapons, threw cans and bottles. Disobeying an order to disperse, they gathered outside the city’s gleaming Petronas Towers, with police chasing them down side streets. Scores also gathered at the huge, Batu Caves north of Kuala Lumpur, which is filled with Hindu statues and other objects of worship.
The Hindu Action Force, three of whose leaders were arrested Friday and charged with sedition in advance of the protests, sought to present a petition to the British High Commission asking Queen Elizabeth to appoint a Queen’s Counsel to represent the Indian community. Hundreds of police from Malaysia’s Federal Reserve Unit and the General Operations Force were stationed in the vicinity of the British High Commission in an effort to thwart their progress. In August, the group filed a US$4 trillion class-action suit against the British government in London, asking compensation for being brought to the rubber plantations. At issue in the protest is the odd niche that Indians, some 7 to 8 percent of the population, occupy in Malaysian society. Brought to what was then British Malaya to work in rubber plantations, they occupy the bottom rung of modern society at the same time their numbers are over-represented in medicine, the law, civil service, the police and information technology. Ananda Krishnan (worth $4.6 billion in Forbes' list of Malaysian billionaires), of Sri Lankan descent, is the second richest tycoon in Malaysia. He owns pay TV operator Astro All Asia Networks and telecom major Maxis, among other businesses. Tony Fernandes, CEO of Air Asia, is one of Malaysia's most successful entrepreneurs. Born in Kuala Lumpur of Indian descent, Fernandes revolutionized budget air travel in Asia and has been called the "Asian Branson."
The Indians’ presence in Malaysia, however, is much more complicated than that. Migration started in the second half of the 19th century when the British brought Tamils and Telugus from the south of India as indentured laborers, primarily to work on rubber plantations, rail lines and the ports. A second wave, mostly from Northern India, came to man the police force and become civil servants. That included Tamils from Sri Lanka and Indians from Kerala – including the father of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has always been somewhat coy about his Indian roots. Yet a third stream came as traders, Anjum writes.
Yet another wave of Indian migration arrived starting in the 1970s, according to Anjum. In particular, as Mahathir pushed the dream of Malaysia as an IT hub, they were sought after to develop the country’s information technology base, with Malaysia formally signing a Memorandum of Understanding with India for manpower recruitment on a contract basis in 2007. Today, Malaysia’s overseas Indian population is the largest outside the United States.
But outside the legions of professionals, the rubber and palm oil plantations of Malaysia’s interior are still home to some of the poorest residents of the country, their health stunted by malnutrition and their lives marked by lack of upward mobility. In 2000, Time Magazine reported that Indians had the lowest share of the nation's corporate wealth: 1.5%, compared to 19.4% for Malays and 38.5% for Chinese. The highest rate of suicide of any community is among Indians. Gangsterism and violent crime is largely associated with Indians. Some 15% of the Indians in the capital are squatters.”
While some blame Malaysia’s racial policies as the barrier to Indian social wellbeing, with Malays betting on the country’s affirmative action policy and the Chinese being formidable in commerce and business, others blame the Indians themselves. The Malaysian Indian Congress, the ethnic-based party that represents the Indian minority in the ruling coalition, is widely looked upon as ineffective if not corrupt.
Race is the big divide in Malaysia. During his 20 years as prime minister, Mahathir sought to uplift Malays, guaranteeing them a large share of business opportunities. The Chinese, the biggest minority, were supposed to lose their disproportionate share of the country's economy. But the real losers were Indians. Due to their colonial legacy, they are generally seen as providers of cheap labor in plantations and construction sites, their political and social mobility has been thwarted.
Amarjit Kaur, professor of Economic History, at the University of New England in Australia, attributes this partly to caste distinctions. She writes in The Encyclopedia of Indian Diaspora: "The underperformance of the Indian working class may be attributed to the fact that Indian workers were drawn from the less favored caste groups. Thus they continue to be weighed down by the low self-esteem that usually characterizes members of groups belonging to the lower castes and is worsened by lack of the interaction between the well-off and the less well-off Indians.... The marginalization of working-class Indians is reflected in their poor performance in business, equity ownership and employment in professional sectors and the civil service. The disadvantaged position of the majority in the Indian community has contributed to a sense of dispossession and disadvantage among many Indians in Malaysia."
Sarala Sukumaran, 40, a Malaysian Indian entrepreneur who runs an IT firm, says: ""I know many Indian families who want to get out of Malaysia. There are two main reasons behind the backwardness of Indians. One is that we are a minority here, and two, the politicians who represent us do not promote our cause."
Sukumaran is a third generation Malaysian Indian. Her grandparents came to Malaysia in the 1930s to work in the plantations in Penang.
“I feel that we are not aggressive enough as a community in terms of unleashing our entrepreneurial potential. That's why our evolution has been very slow. Comparatively, look at the Tamils from Sri Lanka,” she said. “They have a more close-knit community feeling, they help uplift each other and they are certainly doing much better than the Indians."
After the racial riots of May 1969, Malaysian leaders emphasized the establishment of a united nation and a national culture transcending ethnic identities. The dominant culture in this set-up is Malay with some elements from other cultures supporting it.
Even some new Indians, want to get out. "Being non-bumiputras in Malaysia, we can never settle down here," says Nishant Upadhyay, 30, an instructional designer. "We know that getting a permanent residency is next to impossible so we are looking at opportunities in countries like Singapore and Australia where we can easily settle down and start a family."
Many Indian IT professionals have still not gotten over the mistreatment of 300 Indian citizens in March 2003 in Kuala Lumpur, which was widely reported in the Indian press. Security agencies reportedly interrogated them rudely in a search for illegal immigrants, but all the Indians possessed valid residency documents. Subsequently Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, then the deputy prime minister, apologized for the incident.
But there are frequent reports of abuse of Indian workers and Bumiputra politics disadvantage Indians in education and work opportunities. Local university seats and scholarships are awarded under a racial quota system, and even after getting a degree, many say that discrimination is commonplace. Indian doctors, for instance, complain that they are often excluded from lists of approved doctors whom civil servants or company employees can patronize.
The conversion of rubber plantations to housing estates and golf courses also has displaced plantation workers who have drifted to urban centers. As a result, urban Indian ghettos have emerged and crime has escalated.
Many Indians blame government policies for their backwardness, a charge rejected by mainstream politicians. Says Malaysian politician Shahrir Abdul Samad: "The Indian community problems are more than just equity. Most of their problems are social problems, such as gangsterism. I admit Indians are among the poorest in this country, but their participation and achievements in many other fields are amazing."
Indian Malaysians discover themselves in a bind. Most have resigned themselves to their plight while discontent simmers within the community. But how long can Malaysia afford to allow 8 percent of its population to feel alienated?
Written by Zafar Anjum
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)