Hi all,
Pls view the motivating and never give up speech by Makkal Sakthi hero Mr P. Uthayakumar given on Monday 20th Oct 2008 at Jalan Duta courtroom.
This is an historical moments to hear his speech and view though he is been held under draconian law ISA.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16aChl3cQxs&feature=user
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkZ46Hytf-c
Pls do post more links and photos of the event if you have captured them in your cameras or hp to admin.hindraf@gmail.com or waytha@hotmail.com.
Upload them to youtube with the name prefix starts with "Hindraf" for easy search.
Nandri.
Vaalge Makkal Sakthi
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Letter from Supporter :The Hundraf of Umno's making
Monday, October 20, 2008
By Helen Ang
Syed Albar take only the doctor and lawyer statastics which all are not sponsored by government, its the parents who sold their property to finance them to do medicine , by the time they become doctor these parents are almost bankrupt, UMNO cheat lump up malay income into bumiputera sabah & sarawak and orang asli to hide Malay income to show it as indian are earning 1.2 times higher than the Malays , he is the biggest cheat and racist minister in nature.The UMNO government who represent 60% of Malays they determine so much to suppress and oppress and marginalise the 8 % Indian for what reason, what is their agenda, are they hate the Indian, we are just tiny minority who are deprieved of their citizen right for 5o years, why they are not generous in admiting to the truth, and treat the minority fairly as a reponsible government.
There is no typing error above; I did spell 'Hundraf' for Human Rights Action Force. Hundraf is the twin spirit of Makkal Sakthi, an expression translated as People Power, not Indian Power.
Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar is reported by Bernama as saying the Indians are not neglected in Malaysia. What he implied is that Indians have little cause for complaint and thus the complaining Hindraf have no basis for their struggle.
Syed Hamid in announcing the ban on Hindraf said the Indian community was quite well represented with 14 Members of Parliament, 21.4% in the legal fraternity, 18.4% in medicine and their income was 1.2 times higher than the Malays.Out of his count of 14 Indian MPs, only three are from MIC compared to six from DAP. There are three from PKR and one from PSM — Samy-slayer of Sg Siput, the redoubtable Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj. If Indians are 'well represented' , it is no thanks to BN. (I could only recognise 13 Indian names, maybe I missed someone or perhaps there is a Malay Dilemma-ed MP in the House.)
Regarding the statistics Syed Hamid cited, may I ask how many Indian lawyers and doctors got their degrees from Malaysian public universities? And secondly, how many had their education paid for by the state?This is what blog commentator Parameswara tells me about one of the Hindraf-5 lawyers:
To my knowledge. R. Kengadharan the eldest son of a postal worker and housewife, completed his law studies on the meagre proceeds of a single storey house that was hocked to a financial institution to procure a study loan. Having returned from his studies, he not only paid off the loan but educated his siblings through the same house and earning from his law practice."
And DAP's Tony Pua says of another Hindraf-5 lawyer V. Ganabathirau:
"Gana never manage to have the privilege of completing his education at one go. After finishing Form 5, he had to take up various odd jobs to help support himself and his family. That however, did not prevent him from investing his earnings and taking up part-time courses to pursue his ambition of becoming an officer of the court. His dream came true in his late twenties when he graduated with a law degree from the University of London external programme."
Those who hold external or foreign degrees are required to additionally have the Certificate of Legal Practice, a hard-to-pass Malaysian exam designed to block entry into the profession.
SPIN ON STATISTICS
Syed Hamid conveniently forgot other professional fields where Indians are under-represented. From the same table of statistics that he drew his figures, here's what the Minister omitted: Of architects, 45.3% are bumiputera, 1.4% are Indian. Of engineers, 46.0% are bumiputera, 5.4% are Indian.I have statistics as well: While Indians accounted for 9.8% of civil servants in the 1980s, they were 5.2% in 2003. Malays are fast increasing in numbers in the skilled professions and dominating government and GLC posts, while the Indians are regressing in proportionate numbers.And more statistics:
In the present Abdullah cabinet, there is one Indian out of 27 Ministers — 3.7%. The Indian share in 2004 of corporate wealth (ownership of capital at par value) is 1.2%.Now with regard to those living under the poverty line, Syed Hamid said Indians comprised 2.9%, Chinese 0.6% and Malays 8.3%.
Again, he has deliberately obscured the truth. He said 'Malays'. Wrong, it's bumiputera 8.3%. These figures come from the Ninth Malaysia Plan. The poorest, least helped among bumiputera are the Orang Asli of the peninsula and the indigenes of Sabah and Sarawak who are not Muslim.How did the statistics measure 'poor'?
Over 300,000 Indians have been displaced in the last two decades after they lost their jobs in the plantations. In 2005, it was reported that more than 30% of Indians did not own a house. Indians are squatters in urban centres or the periphery; Indian vagrants sleep in the street — you have seen them.The poverty line income used for 2004 in Peninsular Malaysia was RM663 per month for urban areas, and RM657 for rural areas.
The Department of Statistics, ior year 2000, reported that out of approximately 1.68 million Indians, some 80% were urban and the remaining 20% rural.If one lived in his own house in the kampung, he does not have to pay rent. If one planted vegetables on his land and reared chicken, he spends less on food.
The use of household income as a single yardstick (RM663-urban and RM657-rural; the RM6 differential fails to reflect the cost of living gap between the two regions) does not signal the true level of deprivation.While on paper mean household income may look more for Indians, it is an average jacked up by the earnings of Indian professionals, and Ananda Krishnan.
But the figures also indicate class differences within any one community. Just as the Tan Sri Chinese tycoons have absolutely no bearing on my daily life, how much does the monthly income of RM3,456 attributed to Indians reflect their salary overall?Yayasan Strategic Sosial in 2005 put 30% of Indians in the bottom strata of society, and 20% in the top strata. My analogy would be that for the one doctor and one lawyer Syed Hamid mentioned, you have three low-wage earners in the labourer, cleaner and production worker.
Drawing from the same statistical pool dipped by the Minister, while Indians made up 7.5% of Malaysia's population, they constituted 14.7% in the elementary occupations.
Next, Syed Hamid said the overall income of the Indian was 1.2 times higher than Malay. Heck, if I'm Indian and took home RM3,456 a month, why would I want to go out and demonstrate? So where does the Tamil underclass that is the backbone of Hindraf come from then?
TEMPLES IN A ROW
Are the Indians a community in distress? How about looking at this set of social indicators? There were 2,555 suicides nationwide [Health Ministry report cited by NST in Sept, 2005], and 21.1 suicides per 100,000 Indians, 2.6 per 100,000 Malays.
They are killing themselves in despair, it would seem.Syed Hamid further claimed that there is a ratio of one temple to 149 Hindus and one mosque to 2,300 Muslims in this country. Aaah, the good Minister must have gone around the country tallying the little Hindu shrines under trees and altars lodged in rock crevices.
I hope these 'temples' — one for every 149 Hindus — are marked on maps because tourists may like to visit them.He also equated action against Hindraf to action taken against Al-Arqam, Al-Ma'unah and Kumpulan Militan Malaysia in the past, saying "The government's priority is to protect the security of Malaysians".
As a Malaysian, I do not feel threatened by the Muslims of Al-Arqam as I know the Malays to be a race full of kindness and budi bahasa. And as for the KMM, Syed Hamid as Home Minister should sign the order for their immediate release from ISA; prove their militancy in open court. Otherwise, I could think that Syed Hamid has committed fitnah, a grave sin in Islam, to allege his fellow ummah are militants.Lastly, Syed Hamid said the government "cannot tolerate groups that propagate extremism and stir up racial and religious tension" and accused them of having "created fear among the people".
Yet it appears to me as if he is describing Umno factions. Is Umno going to be declared illegal soon too?
- Centre for Policy Initiatives
The Other Press
By Helen Ang
Syed Albar take only the doctor and lawyer statastics which all are not sponsored by government, its the parents who sold their property to finance them to do medicine , by the time they become doctor these parents are almost bankrupt, UMNO cheat lump up malay income into bumiputera sabah & sarawak and orang asli to hide Malay income to show it as indian are earning 1.2 times higher than the Malays , he is the biggest cheat and racist minister in nature.The UMNO government who represent 60% of Malays they determine so much to suppress and oppress and marginalise the 8 % Indian for what reason, what is their agenda, are they hate the Indian, we are just tiny minority who are deprieved of their citizen right for 5o years, why they are not generous in admiting to the truth, and treat the minority fairly as a reponsible government.
There is no typing error above; I did spell 'Hundraf' for Human Rights Action Force. Hundraf is the twin spirit of Makkal Sakthi, an expression translated as People Power, not Indian Power.
Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar is reported by Bernama as saying the Indians are not neglected in Malaysia. What he implied is that Indians have little cause for complaint and thus the complaining Hindraf have no basis for their struggle.
Syed Hamid in announcing the ban on Hindraf said the Indian community was quite well represented with 14 Members of Parliament, 21.4% in the legal fraternity, 18.4% in medicine and their income was 1.2 times higher than the Malays.Out of his count of 14 Indian MPs, only three are from MIC compared to six from DAP. There are three from PKR and one from PSM — Samy-slayer of Sg Siput, the redoubtable Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj. If Indians are 'well represented' , it is no thanks to BN. (I could only recognise 13 Indian names, maybe I missed someone or perhaps there is a Malay Dilemma-ed MP in the House.)
Regarding the statistics Syed Hamid cited, may I ask how many Indian lawyers and doctors got their degrees from Malaysian public universities? And secondly, how many had their education paid for by the state?This is what blog commentator Parameswara tells me about one of the Hindraf-5 lawyers:
To my knowledge. R. Kengadharan the eldest son of a postal worker and housewife, completed his law studies on the meagre proceeds of a single storey house that was hocked to a financial institution to procure a study loan. Having returned from his studies, he not only paid off the loan but educated his siblings through the same house and earning from his law practice."
And DAP's Tony Pua says of another Hindraf-5 lawyer V. Ganabathirau:
"Gana never manage to have the privilege of completing his education at one go. After finishing Form 5, he had to take up various odd jobs to help support himself and his family. That however, did not prevent him from investing his earnings and taking up part-time courses to pursue his ambition of becoming an officer of the court. His dream came true in his late twenties when he graduated with a law degree from the University of London external programme."
Those who hold external or foreign degrees are required to additionally have the Certificate of Legal Practice, a hard-to-pass Malaysian exam designed to block entry into the profession.
SPIN ON STATISTICS
Syed Hamid conveniently forgot other professional fields where Indians are under-represented. From the same table of statistics that he drew his figures, here's what the Minister omitted: Of architects, 45.3% are bumiputera, 1.4% are Indian. Of engineers, 46.0% are bumiputera, 5.4% are Indian.I have statistics as well: While Indians accounted for 9.8% of civil servants in the 1980s, they were 5.2% in 2003. Malays are fast increasing in numbers in the skilled professions and dominating government and GLC posts, while the Indians are regressing in proportionate numbers.And more statistics:
In the present Abdullah cabinet, there is one Indian out of 27 Ministers — 3.7%. The Indian share in 2004 of corporate wealth (ownership of capital at par value) is 1.2%.Now with regard to those living under the poverty line, Syed Hamid said Indians comprised 2.9%, Chinese 0.6% and Malays 8.3%.
Again, he has deliberately obscured the truth. He said 'Malays'. Wrong, it's bumiputera 8.3%. These figures come from the Ninth Malaysia Plan. The poorest, least helped among bumiputera are the Orang Asli of the peninsula and the indigenes of Sabah and Sarawak who are not Muslim.How did the statistics measure 'poor'?
Over 300,000 Indians have been displaced in the last two decades after they lost their jobs in the plantations. In 2005, it was reported that more than 30% of Indians did not own a house. Indians are squatters in urban centres or the periphery; Indian vagrants sleep in the street — you have seen them.The poverty line income used for 2004 in Peninsular Malaysia was RM663 per month for urban areas, and RM657 for rural areas.
The Department of Statistics, ior year 2000, reported that out of approximately 1.68 million Indians, some 80% were urban and the remaining 20% rural.If one lived in his own house in the kampung, he does not have to pay rent. If one planted vegetables on his land and reared chicken, he spends less on food.
The use of household income as a single yardstick (RM663-urban and RM657-rural; the RM6 differential fails to reflect the cost of living gap between the two regions) does not signal the true level of deprivation.While on paper mean household income may look more for Indians, it is an average jacked up by the earnings of Indian professionals, and Ananda Krishnan.
But the figures also indicate class differences within any one community. Just as the Tan Sri Chinese tycoons have absolutely no bearing on my daily life, how much does the monthly income of RM3,456 attributed to Indians reflect their salary overall?Yayasan Strategic Sosial in 2005 put 30% of Indians in the bottom strata of society, and 20% in the top strata. My analogy would be that for the one doctor and one lawyer Syed Hamid mentioned, you have three low-wage earners in the labourer, cleaner and production worker.
Drawing from the same statistical pool dipped by the Minister, while Indians made up 7.5% of Malaysia's population, they constituted 14.7% in the elementary occupations.
Next, Syed Hamid said the overall income of the Indian was 1.2 times higher than Malay. Heck, if I'm Indian and took home RM3,456 a month, why would I want to go out and demonstrate? So where does the Tamil underclass that is the backbone of Hindraf come from then?
TEMPLES IN A ROW
Are the Indians a community in distress? How about looking at this set of social indicators? There were 2,555 suicides nationwide [Health Ministry report cited by NST in Sept, 2005], and 21.1 suicides per 100,000 Indians, 2.6 per 100,000 Malays.
They are killing themselves in despair, it would seem.Syed Hamid further claimed that there is a ratio of one temple to 149 Hindus and one mosque to 2,300 Muslims in this country. Aaah, the good Minister must have gone around the country tallying the little Hindu shrines under trees and altars lodged in rock crevices.
I hope these 'temples' — one for every 149 Hindus — are marked on maps because tourists may like to visit them.He also equated action against Hindraf to action taken against Al-Arqam, Al-Ma'unah and Kumpulan Militan Malaysia in the past, saying "The government's priority is to protect the security of Malaysians".
As a Malaysian, I do not feel threatened by the Muslims of Al-Arqam as I know the Malays to be a race full of kindness and budi bahasa. And as for the KMM, Syed Hamid as Home Minister should sign the order for their immediate release from ISA; prove their militancy in open court. Otherwise, I could think that Syed Hamid has committed fitnah, a grave sin in Islam, to allege his fellow ummah are militants.Lastly, Syed Hamid said the government "cannot tolerate groups that propagate extremism and stir up racial and religious tension" and accused them of having "created fear among the people".
Yet it appears to me as if he is describing Umno factions. Is Umno going to be declared illegal soon too?
- Centre for Policy Initiatives
The Other Press
Monday, October 20, 2008
Photos at Duta Court during Uthaya trail on 20 Oct 2008
This is amazing !!
We had an historical moment with our great Makkal Sakthi ( People's Power) leader, Mr Uthayakumar today while he came to the trail in Jalan Duta Court at 9am.
The court diverted the case to another court room without any notification even to the defence counsel. The supporter whom came as earlier morning as 6am started to que in front of court room and later found that the trail is about to start in another room.
When the supporters and well wishers came to the actual court room they were again blocked by police claiming thr room is packed when there is only 6 people in court room.
Again another first time took place, where the police says that only those with number tag will be allowed and asked the supporter to get back to ground floor to register the names and collect the tags. The peace loving supporters walked all the way down to que up to register thru their IC and collected the "special" token number which limited to 58 only.
Surprisingly there were many other cases running in the same building but they were allowed to move in to their respective court room without "special tags nor registration". Another double standard !!
The court later adjourn to afternoon and the interval were used to see and greet Uthaya by all the suppporter whom came. Uthaya was very happy and motivated. He stressed that the struggle for the Malaysian Indians will not stops until the UMNO led govt fulfill the rightful rights of Malaysian indians.
More news to be written later.
Thx
Vaalge Makkal Sakthi
Speaker rejects emergency motion on Hindraf
Rahmah Ghazali Oct 20, 08 12:06pm
Dewan Rakyat Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia today rejected an emergency motion by M Kulasegaran (DAP-Ipoh Barat) last week to discuss the government's recent ban on Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf).
The speaker rejected the motion on the grounds that the matter was not urgent enough because members of parliament will still have an opportunity to discuss the ban on the ongoing budget debate session."They still can discuss the (Hindraf) issue during the budget debate session, there is an opportunity to do so. Why would we need an emergency motion for this?" asked Pandikar. Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar banned the movement last Wednesday after the ministry said it was satisfied with facts and evidence showing that "Hindraf had (been) and was being used for unlawful purposes and posed a threat to public order and morality".The decision was criticised, especially by Pakatan Rakyat leaders who described it as going against the principles of democracy and rights.
Barisan Nasional component party Gerakan and the Human Rights Commission have expressed rare disapproval as well.
At a press conference in the Parliament lobby, Kulasegaran said he had been “surprised” to receive a letter this morning informing him that the motion had been rejected.The motion, moved under Standing Orders 18 to the Home Ministry, is required to meet three criteria - the matter has to be specific, urgent and of public interest.“I regret that the speaker has made the decision like this. It would have been better for him to allow this motion because it is very urgent, otherwise we would not have move it,” he said.Kulasegaran pointed out that, had the motion been allowed, the home minister would have had to issuing a reply to the House immediatelyNow there will be a delay, as the minister is only due to wind up on matters relating to his ministry in two weeks time, during the ongoing debate on Budget 2009.The Ipoh Barat MP said he had been shocked to hear of the ban.“It is best for the minister to justify (the reason for the ban) in Parliament. I was surprised when the government decided to ban Hindraf, as (an announcement) was not made in the House.“When parliament is sitting, the minister should respect the House. This is not good for the parliamentary system.”
Uthaya in court to face sedition trial
Mkini news
Oct 20, 08 11:42am
ISA-detained Hindraf leader P Uthayakumar is in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court this morning for his sedition trial over a letter which he posted on a website.
The letter, addressed to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, highlighted the alleged marginalisation of Indians in Malaysia.In the letter, Uthayakumar also sought the help of the British government to move emergency UN resolution condemning ethnic cleansing in Malaysia.The letter was dated Nov 15, 2007 and sent from Hindraf main office in Seremban.Uthayakumar, in ISA detention since Dec 13 for undertaking Hindraf activities, was charged on Dec 11. He pleaded not guilty and is out on a RM50,000 bail before he was detained under the detention-without-trial Act two days later.He was charged under Section 4 (1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948 which carries a fine of not exceeding RM5,000 or a jail term not exceeding three years or both for a first offence.
Prosecution is led by deputy public prosecutor Raja Rozeela Raja Toran while N Surindran and M Manoharan represent Uthayakumar.
Commotion in court
Hearing is before Sessions judge Sabariah Othman but the trial today was preceded by a small commotion in the courtroom when the case was moved to another court, but also before the same judge.Hindraf supporters were unhappy when they were not allowed into the new courtroom. A shouting match ensued between the supporters and the police, with Uthayakumar - wearing a white shirt and a blue pants - joining in as well.He was brought from Kamunting detention centre for the trial yesterday.
A woman fainted in the ensuing disorder and was taken to a hospital in an ambulance.More than 150 Hindraf supporters had gathered at the court complex since early morning for the case.The government had banned the organisation last week for playing up sensitive issues.BN parties must speak out
On a related matter, Hindraf chairperson P Waythamoorthy urged all BN component parties to make their stand on the banning of Hindraf and the real problems facing the ethnic Indian community."Hindraf urges component parties within BN to come out of their cocoon and speak up the truth on the real situation facing the Indians and the impact of the Umno repression on Hindraf which is causing great uneasiness amongst the people," he said in a statement today.He said that the Umno-led government "cannot go on forever silencing all legitimate voice of democracy in the unfounded and malicious allegation of national security".He said the BN component parties have a moral duty to speak up the truth in the larger national interest and to protect and uphold the rule of law.
[Full report to follow]
Oct 20, 08 11:42am
ISA-detained Hindraf leader P Uthayakumar is in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court this morning for his sedition trial over a letter which he posted on a website.
The letter, addressed to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, highlighted the alleged marginalisation of Indians in Malaysia.In the letter, Uthayakumar also sought the help of the British government to move emergency UN resolution condemning ethnic cleansing in Malaysia.The letter was dated Nov 15, 2007 and sent from Hindraf main office in Seremban.Uthayakumar, in ISA detention since Dec 13 for undertaking Hindraf activities, was charged on Dec 11. He pleaded not guilty and is out on a RM50,000 bail before he was detained under the detention-without-trial Act two days later.He was charged under Section 4 (1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948 which carries a fine of not exceeding RM5,000 or a jail term not exceeding three years or both for a first offence.
Prosecution is led by deputy public prosecutor Raja Rozeela Raja Toran while N Surindran and M Manoharan represent Uthayakumar.
Commotion in court
Hearing is before Sessions judge Sabariah Othman but the trial today was preceded by a small commotion in the courtroom when the case was moved to another court, but also before the same judge.Hindraf supporters were unhappy when they were not allowed into the new courtroom. A shouting match ensued between the supporters and the police, with Uthayakumar - wearing a white shirt and a blue pants - joining in as well.He was brought from Kamunting detention centre for the trial yesterday.
A woman fainted in the ensuing disorder and was taken to a hospital in an ambulance.More than 150 Hindraf supporters had gathered at the court complex since early morning for the case.The government had banned the organisation last week for playing up sensitive issues.BN parties must speak out
On a related matter, Hindraf chairperson P Waythamoorthy urged all BN component parties to make their stand on the banning of Hindraf and the real problems facing the ethnic Indian community."Hindraf urges component parties within BN to come out of their cocoon and speak up the truth on the real situation facing the Indians and the impact of the Umno repression on Hindraf which is causing great uneasiness amongst the people," he said in a statement today.He said that the Umno-led government "cannot go on forever silencing all legitimate voice of democracy in the unfounded and malicious allegation of national security".He said the BN component parties have a moral duty to speak up the truth in the larger national interest and to protect and uphold the rule of law.
[Full report to follow]
HINDRAF’S DHARMIC WAR WILL NEVER BE LOST.
Dear HINDRAF supporters
Thank you for the concern shown on the recent ban on HINDRAF. Many of you are anxious as to what would happen next. Numerous questions have been posed. What would we do? Have we lost the struggle?
The answer is a simple NO. Yes the Government has declared HINDRAF unlawful. They have taken away our “body” (HINDRAF) but they can never take away our souls for the humanity that will prevail . We belong to a great tradition which believes in the Law of Karma and Reincarnation- the spirit of HINDRAF would soon emerge in a new body, a much energized and energetic force which would lead us to greater democratic heights.
The artificial authority along with the spinmasters of UMNO led by the ruling government continues to chastise us. Let it be.
The history and each person's experience is the hard truth and reality that cannot be killed and what HINDRAF is fighting for is the hard truth and the reality and not what sounds good. The sanctity and dignity is on the truth and the reality is the base of HINDRAF and the Almighty in any form will protect us, as HINDRAF is a humanity struggle in the Almighty's blessing for his children.
Be patient – it would be sooner than later. Oppression intimidation and threats by the Malaysian Government will never derail our struggle. Let us all await the new “Rising Power” of Makkal Sakthi.
THE NEO DEMOCRATISATION REVOLUTION BEGINS.
P.Waytha Moorthy
CHAIRMAN
HINDRAF
Thank you for the concern shown on the recent ban on HINDRAF. Many of you are anxious as to what would happen next. Numerous questions have been posed. What would we do? Have we lost the struggle?
The answer is a simple NO. Yes the Government has declared HINDRAF unlawful. They have taken away our “body” (HINDRAF) but they can never take away our souls for the humanity that will prevail . We belong to a great tradition which believes in the Law of Karma and Reincarnation- the spirit of HINDRAF would soon emerge in a new body, a much energized and energetic force which would lead us to greater democratic heights.
The artificial authority along with the spinmasters of UMNO led by the ruling government continues to chastise us. Let it be.
The history and each person's experience is the hard truth and reality that cannot be killed and what HINDRAF is fighting for is the hard truth and the reality and not what sounds good. The sanctity and dignity is on the truth and the reality is the base of HINDRAF and the Almighty in any form will protect us, as HINDRAF is a humanity struggle in the Almighty's blessing for his children.
Be patient – it would be sooner than later. Oppression intimidation and threats by the Malaysian Government will never derail our struggle. Let us all await the new “Rising Power” of Makkal Sakthi.
THE NEO DEMOCRATISATION REVOLUTION BEGINS.
P.Waytha Moorthy
CHAIRMAN
HINDRAF
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Hear Hindraf's cry for freedom
Hear Hindraf's cry for freedom
Sim Kwang Yang | Oct 18, 08 3:17pm
The Hindu Rights action Force (Hindraf) has been banned under the Societies Act 1966 as of Oct 15.
When making this announcement, Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar declared that, if left unchecked, Hindraf could pose a threat to public order, peace, security, and morality in Malaysia. When I read this in the Star, I could already hear the uproar of outrage exploding all over the Malaysian blogsphere.
That itself is interesting. With the expansive influence of the internet in Malaysia, the BN government can no longer monopolise the right to interpret public events, or manufacture synthetic truths to pass moral judgement on citizen-based social movements in the country.
In the hearts and minds of many Malaysians, the emergence of Hindraf prior to the March 8 general election this year has been one of those critical phenomena that turned an important page for Malaysian history.
The peaceful but massive street protests that responded to Hindraf’s call for action then signaled a spontaneous groundswell of anguish, resentment, and quiet anger among the Indians against decades of arrogant neglect by the government over many political social and economic woes plaguing the community.
The Hindraf leadership and their protesters were probably from the middle class within the Indian community. But they must have plucked a sensitive nerve of all Malaysian Indians, including all the far flung, widely scattered, and hitherto long-suffering silent Indian underclass.
Far bigger political clout
Finally, the Indians broke their silence and spoke out where it counted the most - at the ballot box. During the March 8 general election, they voted as a bloc overwhelmingly against the BN, helped drive the ruling coalition from five state governments, reduced MCA to a mosquito party, practically retired MIC supremo Samy Vellu, and ended the myth of power sharing among ethnic communities within the closed doors of the BN supreme council conference room.
In doing so, the Indians have proven that they have far bigger political clout out of proportion with their numerical percentages. They can become king-makers. Hindraf has proven itself as the most empowering social movement in the half-century history of multiracial and polyglot Malaysian society.
A smart government in an enlightened democracy would recognize the message of the Indian voters. Political leaders would try to win back their hearts and minds by engaging the Hindraf people in serious, inclusive, and meaningful dialogues. The Indian problem would indeed have to receive urgent and comprehensive attention.
Unfortunately for the Indian community, the BN government is not all that smart, and our democracy is not all that enlightened.
After the general election, the BN government has rewarded the Hindraf people with more oppressive responses. Five Hindraf leaders were detained under the much hated ISA. Now, it has been banned, with official insinuation as if Hindraf is no better than organised criminals, fakers of passports, or even the communists of old.
With this punch of the iron first, is Hindraf therefore destined to fizzle out like a burst balloon?
Hindraf national coordinator RS Thanenthiran did respond the day after the ban by saying, “The government can ban Hindraf but it can’t silence the majority of the Indian community who feel marginalized”. As he pointed out, the ban can only aggravate the situation.
I am sure that Hindraf leaders are now taking stock of the situation and counting their many options. Perhaps they are waiting for feedback from people like you and me.
Words of Martin Luther King
The Hindraf predicament suddenly reminds me a lot of Martin Luther King’s Civil Rights Movement. In his letter from Birmingham city Jail (printed in 1972), King wrote:
“We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed ... Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come”.
King, like Hindraf leaders in recent months, had just been arrested and jailed for leading an “illegal” protest march against racism in America. But he knew he needed more than noble dreams and haughty rhetoric. He needed a strategy for action.
He explained how his non-violent campaign consisted of four steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive, agitation, self-purification, and direct action. He wrote, “So we had no alternative except that of preparing for direct action whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and national communities. We started workshops on non-violence an repeatedly asked ourselves this question, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating? Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail”?
When queried why he advocated breaking some laws and obeying others, King had this to say; “The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws. There are just laws and there are unjust laws. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St Augustine that ‘An unjust law is no law at all’.”
I suspect most Malaysian lawyers are influenced by legal positivism, which states that a law-legislated legally is a law, and must be obeyed. But I do agree with King and St Augustine - a law is not just a law; a law is either a good law or a bad law. Any piece of legislation may be legal, but it can also be highly immoral, and so must be changed peacefully at the earliest possible opportunity.
By now, we should know that, whatever the superstructure of the State may say about Hindraf, it is not a secret society out to ruin social stability and public security. It is a spontaneous movement of citizens trying to right socio-political wrongs through non-violent peaceful means. There is no denying that Hindraf does threaten the survival of the BN government. What’s wrong or illegal about that?
We should also know that the banning of Hindraf under the Societies Act of 1966 is an injustice that has made the Act into a bad law. It has become a law that denies the fundamental human rights to free association and free expressions, inalienable rights which are enshrined in our constitutions.
The Hindraf leaders may go to court and challenge their banning on constitutional ground. I don’t know. There may be a small later amendment to say that whatever decision a minister makes under this law cannot be challenged in a court of law.
It is good to see that the Hindraf leaders are now coolly calculating their odds and weighing their options. Their hot actions require cool heads.
They may end up adopting the philosophy of Martin Luther King, or they may not. They can also draw inspiration and courage from their ancient and rich Hindu traditions. There was Gandhi who could also provide them with some bright ideas.
Whatever they do from this point on, the worst choice is to get into an acrimonious factional fight over their next course of action. This would cripple their movement, as it did to the Socialist Front a few decades ago. They must guard against the infiltration of agent provocateurs into their rank and file to divide and rule them. This is a time that would indeed test their wisdom and courage to the limit.
A national problem
I see the Hindraf movement not merely as one involving Malaysian Indians only. The Indian problem is a national problem; it is your problem and my problem.
Once again, I would like to quote Martin Luther King. He wrote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects us indirectly.”
In short, we Malaysians of all ethnic origin must do whatever we can to defend the Hindraf movement in whatever way we can. The least we can do is to pray for them.
We must take note that the central concept that drove King’s Civil Rights Movement is “freedom”. Although the word “freedom” has been made to sound like a dirty word in Malaysian mainstream discourse, it is an idea behind the Hindraf movement.
As I see it, Hindraf is a struggle of the Indian community to be free from poverty, neglect, marginalisation, and from many social ills that are the direct results of socio-economic backwardness. Above all, theirs is a struggle for freedom from political oppression and persecution by the multi-racial ruling class. It is this same cry for freedom that an increasing number of Malaysian can share these days.
We all badly need a reformation in our country.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/91519
Sim Kwang Yang | Oct 18, 08 3:17pm
The Hindu Rights action Force (Hindraf) has been banned under the Societies Act 1966 as of Oct 15.
When making this announcement, Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar declared that, if left unchecked, Hindraf could pose a threat to public order, peace, security, and morality in Malaysia. When I read this in the Star, I could already hear the uproar of outrage exploding all over the Malaysian blogsphere.
That itself is interesting. With the expansive influence of the internet in Malaysia, the BN government can no longer monopolise the right to interpret public events, or manufacture synthetic truths to pass moral judgement on citizen-based social movements in the country.
In the hearts and minds of many Malaysians, the emergence of Hindraf prior to the March 8 general election this year has been one of those critical phenomena that turned an important page for Malaysian history.
The peaceful but massive street protests that responded to Hindraf’s call for action then signaled a spontaneous groundswell of anguish, resentment, and quiet anger among the Indians against decades of arrogant neglect by the government over many political social and economic woes plaguing the community.
The Hindraf leadership and their protesters were probably from the middle class within the Indian community. But they must have plucked a sensitive nerve of all Malaysian Indians, including all the far flung, widely scattered, and hitherto long-suffering silent Indian underclass.
Far bigger political clout
Finally, the Indians broke their silence and spoke out where it counted the most - at the ballot box. During the March 8 general election, they voted as a bloc overwhelmingly against the BN, helped drive the ruling coalition from five state governments, reduced MCA to a mosquito party, practically retired MIC supremo Samy Vellu, and ended the myth of power sharing among ethnic communities within the closed doors of the BN supreme council conference room.
In doing so, the Indians have proven that they have far bigger political clout out of proportion with their numerical percentages. They can become king-makers. Hindraf has proven itself as the most empowering social movement in the half-century history of multiracial and polyglot Malaysian society.
A smart government in an enlightened democracy would recognize the message of the Indian voters. Political leaders would try to win back their hearts and minds by engaging the Hindraf people in serious, inclusive, and meaningful dialogues. The Indian problem would indeed have to receive urgent and comprehensive attention.
Unfortunately for the Indian community, the BN government is not all that smart, and our democracy is not all that enlightened.
After the general election, the BN government has rewarded the Hindraf people with more oppressive responses. Five Hindraf leaders were detained under the much hated ISA. Now, it has been banned, with official insinuation as if Hindraf is no better than organised criminals, fakers of passports, or even the communists of old.
With this punch of the iron first, is Hindraf therefore destined to fizzle out like a burst balloon?
Hindraf national coordinator RS Thanenthiran did respond the day after the ban by saying, “The government can ban Hindraf but it can’t silence the majority of the Indian community who feel marginalized”. As he pointed out, the ban can only aggravate the situation.
I am sure that Hindraf leaders are now taking stock of the situation and counting their many options. Perhaps they are waiting for feedback from people like you and me.
Words of Martin Luther King
The Hindraf predicament suddenly reminds me a lot of Martin Luther King’s Civil Rights Movement. In his letter from Birmingham city Jail (printed in 1972), King wrote:
“We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed ... Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come”.
King, like Hindraf leaders in recent months, had just been arrested and jailed for leading an “illegal” protest march against racism in America. But he knew he needed more than noble dreams and haughty rhetoric. He needed a strategy for action.
He explained how his non-violent campaign consisted of four steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive, agitation, self-purification, and direct action. He wrote, “So we had no alternative except that of preparing for direct action whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and national communities. We started workshops on non-violence an repeatedly asked ourselves this question, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating? Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail”?
When queried why he advocated breaking some laws and obeying others, King had this to say; “The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws. There are just laws and there are unjust laws. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St Augustine that ‘An unjust law is no law at all’.”
I suspect most Malaysian lawyers are influenced by legal positivism, which states that a law-legislated legally is a law, and must be obeyed. But I do agree with King and St Augustine - a law is not just a law; a law is either a good law or a bad law. Any piece of legislation may be legal, but it can also be highly immoral, and so must be changed peacefully at the earliest possible opportunity.
By now, we should know that, whatever the superstructure of the State may say about Hindraf, it is not a secret society out to ruin social stability and public security. It is a spontaneous movement of citizens trying to right socio-political wrongs through non-violent peaceful means. There is no denying that Hindraf does threaten the survival of the BN government. What’s wrong or illegal about that?
We should also know that the banning of Hindraf under the Societies Act of 1966 is an injustice that has made the Act into a bad law. It has become a law that denies the fundamental human rights to free association and free expressions, inalienable rights which are enshrined in our constitutions.
The Hindraf leaders may go to court and challenge their banning on constitutional ground. I don’t know. There may be a small later amendment to say that whatever decision a minister makes under this law cannot be challenged in a court of law.
It is good to see that the Hindraf leaders are now coolly calculating their odds and weighing their options. Their hot actions require cool heads.
They may end up adopting the philosophy of Martin Luther King, or they may not. They can also draw inspiration and courage from their ancient and rich Hindu traditions. There was Gandhi who could also provide them with some bright ideas.
Whatever they do from this point on, the worst choice is to get into an acrimonious factional fight over their next course of action. This would cripple their movement, as it did to the Socialist Front a few decades ago. They must guard against the infiltration of agent provocateurs into their rank and file to divide and rule them. This is a time that would indeed test their wisdom and courage to the limit.
A national problem
I see the Hindraf movement not merely as one involving Malaysian Indians only. The Indian problem is a national problem; it is your problem and my problem.
Once again, I would like to quote Martin Luther King. He wrote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects us indirectly.”
In short, we Malaysians of all ethnic origin must do whatever we can to defend the Hindraf movement in whatever way we can. The least we can do is to pray for them.
We must take note that the central concept that drove King’s Civil Rights Movement is “freedom”. Although the word “freedom” has been made to sound like a dirty word in Malaysian mainstream discourse, it is an idea behind the Hindraf movement.
As I see it, Hindraf is a struggle of the Indian community to be free from poverty, neglect, marginalisation, and from many social ills that are the direct results of socio-economic backwardness. Above all, theirs is a struggle for freedom from political oppression and persecution by the multi-racial ruling class. It is this same cry for freedom that an increasing number of Malaysian can share these days.
We all badly need a reformation in our country.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/91519
Friday, October 17, 2008
CPPS' Statement on Banning of HINDRAF
CPPS' Statement on Banning of HINDRAF
The Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) is disappointed with the decision taken by the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to declare the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF) an illegal organisation. This move by the Ministry of Home Affairs is an infringement on the basic human right to expression and contradicts the Prime Minister's previous commitment to opening up the democratic space and allowing more open discussion in the country.
This decision is telling of the dismal state of civil liberties in Malaysia, and sends these signals to the domestic and international community. The CPPS finds ludicrous that HINDRAF, in trying to voice out very legitimate grievances of the consistent socio-economic marginalisation of the Indian community, has been labelled as a threat to "public order, peace, security and morality" (The Star, Thursday 16 October 2008).
According to the Minister, HINDRAF would also pose a threat to the prevailing racial harmony enjoyed in Malaysia presently. This spells caution that any interest group speaking on behalf of the economic marginalisation of their particular community would be considered as a threat. Instead of banning HINDRAF, the Government should have called for an open, rational discussion in order to ascertain the problems and issues raised, and in seeking constructive solutions to overcome them.
This move may instead fuel further resentment by minority ethnic groups who are legitimately raising concerns of their particular interests. Discussion and dialogue on grievances or perceived injustices should be encouraged, not stifled.
Suppressing dissent under the guise of national peace and security is in fact counterproductive to fostering true national unity amongst the citizens of the country. Genuine national unity begins by identifying real problems and struggles being faced by all interest groups in the country. The CPPS is also concerned that the government is planning on identifying specific members of HINDRAF or anyone associated with the group.
The CPPS urges the government to reconsider its ban on HINDRAF and respond to grievances of various ethnic groups by engaging in further discussion and working towards reaching mutually beneficial solutions. This draconian method of suppression is not sustainable in the long run. It is hoped that this move by the Ministry is not the beginning of a more extensive clampdown on civil society in Malaysia.
If Malaysia truly desires to become a democratic country of developed nation status, it must not suppress opinions of any interest groups, much less those who are already downtrodden upon and at wit's end.
Tan Sri Ramon V. Navaratnam,
Chairman
Tricia Yeoh,
Director Centre for Public Policy Studies
Kuala Lumpur 16th October 2008
For more enquiries, please contact: The Centre for Public Policy Studies; website: www.cpps.org.my;email: cpps@cpps.org.my
Tel: +603-20932820/20934209/20932630;Fax: +603-20933078
The Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) is disappointed with the decision taken by the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to declare the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF) an illegal organisation. This move by the Ministry of Home Affairs is an infringement on the basic human right to expression and contradicts the Prime Minister's previous commitment to opening up the democratic space and allowing more open discussion in the country.
This decision is telling of the dismal state of civil liberties in Malaysia, and sends these signals to the domestic and international community. The CPPS finds ludicrous that HINDRAF, in trying to voice out very legitimate grievances of the consistent socio-economic marginalisation of the Indian community, has been labelled as a threat to "public order, peace, security and morality" (The Star, Thursday 16 October 2008).
According to the Minister, HINDRAF would also pose a threat to the prevailing racial harmony enjoyed in Malaysia presently. This spells caution that any interest group speaking on behalf of the economic marginalisation of their particular community would be considered as a threat. Instead of banning HINDRAF, the Government should have called for an open, rational discussion in order to ascertain the problems and issues raised, and in seeking constructive solutions to overcome them.
This move may instead fuel further resentment by minority ethnic groups who are legitimately raising concerns of their particular interests. Discussion and dialogue on grievances or perceived injustices should be encouraged, not stifled.
Suppressing dissent under the guise of national peace and security is in fact counterproductive to fostering true national unity amongst the citizens of the country. Genuine national unity begins by identifying real problems and struggles being faced by all interest groups in the country. The CPPS is also concerned that the government is planning on identifying specific members of HINDRAF or anyone associated with the group.
The CPPS urges the government to reconsider its ban on HINDRAF and respond to grievances of various ethnic groups by engaging in further discussion and working towards reaching mutually beneficial solutions. This draconian method of suppression is not sustainable in the long run. It is hoped that this move by the Ministry is not the beginning of a more extensive clampdown on civil society in Malaysia.
If Malaysia truly desires to become a democratic country of developed nation status, it must not suppress opinions of any interest groups, much less those who are already downtrodden upon and at wit's end.
Tan Sri Ramon V. Navaratnam,
Chairman
Tricia Yeoh,
Director Centre for Public Policy Studies
Kuala Lumpur 16th October 2008
For more enquiries, please contact: The Centre for Public Policy Studies; website: www.cpps.org.my;email: cpps@cpps.org.my
Tel: +603-20932820/20934209/20932630;Fax: +603-20933078
இண்ட்ராஃப் நிகழ்வுகளுக்கு தற்காலிக நிறுத்தம்!
இந்து உரிமைப் பணிப்படையின் தலைவர் திரு.வேதமூர்த்தி, தற்சமயத்திற்கு இண்ட்ராஃப் இயக்கத்தின் நிகழ்வுகளை நிறுத்தி வைக்குமாறு கேட்டுக் கொண்டுள்ளார். சட்ட வல்லுநரான திரு.வேதமூர்த்தி மலேசியச் சங்கங்கள் சட்டம் 1966-ஐ ஆய்வு செய்து வருகிறார். அதன் அடிப்படையில் இன்னும் சில தினங்களில் இண்ட்ராஃப் எடுத்துக் கொள்ள வேண்டிய நடவடிக்கைகள் குறித்து அவர் விளக்கம் அளிப்பார் என எதிர்ப்பார்க்கப்படுகிறது.
இதற்கிடையில் அம்னோ அரசாங்கம் இண்ட்ராஃபிற்கு எதிராக விதித்தத் தடையை ஆட்சேபிக்கும் வகையில் அனைத்து இண்ட்ராஃப் ஆதரவாளர்களையும் ஒவ்வொரு சனி மற்றும் ஞாயிற்றுக் கிழமைகளில் ஆரஞ்சு நிற உடையினை அணியுமாறு திரு.வேதமூர்த்தி கேட்டுக் கொண்டுள்ளார். இத்தினங்களில் ஆரஞ்சு நிற உடையினை அணிந்து அம்னோ அரசாங்கத்தின் மீது இந்திய மக்களின் அவநம்பிக்கையையும் கண்டனத்தையும் அடையாளமாகக் காட்ட வேண்டும் என்று அவர் கேட்டுக் கொண்டுள்ளார்.
இதற்கிடையில் மலேசிய மனித உரிமை ஆணையமான 'சுஹாக்காம்', இண்ட்ராஃபிற்கு விதிக்கப்பட்டத் தடைக்கு வித்திட்ட ஆதாரங்களை அரசாங்கம் வெளிக்கொணர வேண்டும் எனக் கேட்டுக் கொண்டுள்ளது. கண்மூடித்தனமாக ஓர் இயக்கத்தை தடை செய்வதனால் மக்களின் போராட்டம் மேலும் வலுப்பெறுமே தவிர முடங்கிவிடாது என அது கருத்துரைத்தது.
ஈப்போ பாராட் நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர் எம்.குலசேகரன் கருத்துரைக்கையில், அம்னோ அரசாங்கத்தின் இத்தகு நடவடிக்கையானது கோழைத்தனம் என்றும் அராசகமானது என்றும் கூறினார்.
அம்னோ அரசாங்கம், இண்ட்ராஃபிற்கு எதிராக விதித்த தடைக்கான சட்டப்பூர்வமான காரணங்களை உடனடியாக வெளிபடுத்த வேண்டும் என்று இந்து நடவடிக்கை ஒருங்கிணைப்புக் குழுவின் தலைமை ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர் திரு.முகுந்தன் அரசாங்கத்தைக் கேட்டுக் கொண்டுள்ளார். மேலும், இவ்வியக்கம் ஆயுதமின்றி உரிமைக்காக அமைதிவழி போராட்டத்தைக் கடைப்பிடிப்பவர்கள் என்றும், ஒடுக்கப்பட்ட மலேசிய இந்திய சமுதாயத்திற்காகக் குரல் கொடுக்கும் ஓர் உன்னத இயக்கம் என வர்ணித்தார்.
இண்ட்ராஃப் இயக்கத்தை தடை செய்ததன் வழி, அம்னோ அரசாங்கம் நெருப்புக் கோழியைப் போல தன் தலையையே மண்ணுக்குள் இட்டுக் கொண்டது என புக்கிட் பெண்டேரா நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர் லியூ சின் தோங் வர்ணித்துள்ளார்.
சிவில் மனித உரிமை போராட்டவாதியான டாக்டர் தோ கின் வூன் கருத்துரைக்கையில், உண்மையில் மத்திய அரசாங்கம் நேர்மையாகவும் மக்களின் மீது பரிவும் கொண்டிருந்தால் இதுபோன்ற இழிச்செயல்களில் ஈடுபடாது, மலேசிய இந்தியர்களின் அடிப்படைப் பிரச்சனைகளை கண்டறிந்துக் களைந்திருப்பர் என்று கூறினார்.
இவ்வியக்கத்தைத் தடைச் செய்வதன்வழி அம்னோ தன் நிலைமையை மேலும் மோசமாக்கிக் கொள்கிறது என அவர் மேலும் கூறினார்.
இதற்கிடையில் பல மனித உரிமை இயக்கங்கள், அரசியல் கட்சிகள், தொண்டூழிய இயக்கங்கள் அம்னோ அரசாங்கத்தின் இனவாத அடிப்படையிலான அராசகத்தைக் கண்டித்து கண்டனக் குரல்கள் எழுப்பி வருகின்றன.
போராட்டம் தொடரும்...
இண்ட்ராஃப் இயக்கத்தை தடை செய்ததன் வழி, அம்னோ அரசாங்கம் நெருப்புக் கோழியைப் போல தன் தலையையே மண்ணுக்குள் இட்டுக் கொண்டது என புக்கிட் பெண்டேரா நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர் லியூ சின் தோங் வர்ணித்துள்ளார்.
சிவில் மனித உரிமை போராட்டவாதியான டாக்டர் தோ கின் வூன் கருத்துரைக்கையில், உண்மையில் மத்திய அரசாங்கம் நேர்மையாகவும் மக்களின் மீது பரிவும் கொண்டிருந்தால் இதுபோன்ற இழிச்செயல்களில் ஈடுபடாது, மலேசிய இந்தியர்களின் அடிப்படைப் பிரச்சனைகளை கண்டறிந்துக் களைந்திருப்பர் என்று கூறினார்.
இவ்வியக்கத்தைத் தடைச் செய்வதன்வழி அம்னோ தன் நிலைமையை மேலும் மோசமாக்கிக் கொள்கிறது என அவர் மேலும் கூறினார்.
இதற்கிடையில் பல மனித உரிமை இயக்கங்கள், அரசியல் கட்சிகள், தொண்டூழிய இயக்கங்கள் அம்னோ அரசாங்கத்தின் இனவாத அடிப்படையிலான அராசகத்தைக் கண்டித்து கண்டனக் குரல்கள் எழுப்பி வருகின்றன.
போராட்டம் தொடரும்...
TIME FOR ALL COMPONENT PARTIES WITHIN BARISAN TO SPEAK UP.
PRESS STATEMENT 17/10/08
RE : TIME FOR ALL COMPONENT PARTIES WITHIN BARISAN TO SPEAK UP.
HINDRAF calls upon all component parties within Barisan to speak up and make their stand clear on the issue of HINDRAF ban and the real problems facing the ethnic Indian community. 51 years has passed since independence and the ruling UMNO led Government has neglected and denied the ethnic Indians their basic rights and has oppressed suppressed and marginalized them so much so they remain a permanently colonized community. HINDRAF took the bold step to highlight these issues and is paying a heavy price and the ban is a desperate attempt to silence legitimate voice of democracy.
HINDRAF urges component parties within BN to come out of their cocoon and speak up the truth on the real situation facing the Indians and the impact of the UMNO repression on HINDRAF which is causing great uneasiness amongst the people. UMNO can’t go on forever silencing all legitimate voice of democracy in the unfounded and malicious allegation of National Security and against public order.
Barisan component parties have a moral duty to speak up the truth in the larger 
National interest and to protect and uphold the Rule of Law. The people who voted in the multi racial BN Government are losing their patience and confidence on the component parties which would eventually lead them into oblivion.
National interest and to protect and uphold the Rule of Law. The people who voted in the multi racial BN Government are losing their patience and confidence on the component parties which would eventually lead them into oblivion. It is time for the component parties to come together and voice out the ground reality and rebuke UMNO for its arrogance and bully attitude against HINDRAF.
P.Waytha Moorthy
CHAIRMAN
HINDRAF
Suhakam: Prove Hindraf a threat
Athi Veeranggan Oct 16, 08 8:56pm
The government was at the receiving end of much criticism for its decision to ban Hindraf, starting with the country’s officially sanctioned human rights organisation.
“Suhakam is of the opinion that a ban on Hindraft will not resolve the issues being championed by this group of individuals and therefore encourages the relevant agencies to address the genuine grievances which are socio-economic in nature,” said commissioners Simon Sipaun, Michael Yeoh and Denison Jayasooria in a joint statement.They were concerned that the ban would further alienate the group from mainstream Malaysian society and asked for the ban to be rescinded.The trio want the government to produce evidence of the movement being a threat to public order and morality - a feeling shared by others.“It was cowardice and arrogance - a clampdown of genuine voices of dissent,” said DAP Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran.“Its (18-point) demands should indeed be incorporated into the national socio-economic policy,” he said - critical of Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar for not informing Parliament beforehand.
Ostrich behaviour
Bukit Bendera MP Liew Chin Tong characterised it as the government “burying itself in the sand like an ostrich” and losing further Indian support."The government should understand that with or without Hindraf, the community was unhappy with the way their cultural, religious and basic needs were trampled on," he said.Liew lambasted socio-economic policies which marginalised the lower income groups in Malaysia, making many Indians, Malays and Chinese living in abject poverty.“The government had kow-towed to demands made by a small group of Umno right-wing advocates to ban Hindraf,” he said.
Civil rights activist and former Gerakan leader Dr Toh Kin Woon called it distasteful and ridiculous since they are banning a NGO struggling for disenfranchised Indians.“If the federal government is sincere, it’ll find the root causes of Indian dissatisfaction, rather than to resort to such harsh actions,” he said. Toh argued that poor Indians - not unlike other ethnicities - lack upward social mobility opportunities, and are mired in generational poverty. Therefore the government should work with Hindraf to address the issues.“Declaring Hindraf illegal will not only resolve the problem, but exacerbate the situation,” he summed up.
Hindu Action Network (HAN) chief coordinator G Mugunthan asked Syed Hamid to clarify his decision.“Hindraf was never an armed struggle. It was a harmless movement championing the cause of marginalised minorities and protesting against repressive security laws,” he said, repeating similar calls to revoke the ban.
Save Ourselves secretary BK Ong questioned the legal basis of the decision. “Without such evidence, the charges are rather unfounded and libellous,” he said adding that the reasons behind the decision were questionable.He postulated that if Syed Hamid was doing this because of Hindraf’s illegal assemblies, then Umno and PAS too should be banned for their NEP demonstrations in Penang and Bar Council’s forum intrusion in Kuala Lumpur respectively.“Ban on Hindraf was blatant prejudice and injustice.“Is this the sign of things to come after the Umno leadership change?” he asked.
Ahimsa movement
“If the movement was a threat to national security, then former Indian independence hero Mahatma Gandhi’s Ahimsa movement should also be deemed as a terrorist organisation,” said United Hindu Religious Council (UHRC) deputy president AK SuppayahHe believes the ban was a bad omen for the BN federal government, just like how police brutality at the Nov 25 Hindraf rally last year led to their electoral losses in March.Bayan Baru MCA division vice-chairperson Ooi Chuan Aik felt that the government should have adopted a softer approach.Anti-ISA Movement (GMI) chairperson Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh said the ban would not change the situation since the issue was about managing and engaging’ Hindraf and its demands.
Penang Makkal Sakti Welfare Association (Pemaswa) deputy chairperson MC Pitchay views the ban as part of government strategy to quell the community’s insurgence against injustice and discrimination.“The government may have a hidden agenda to establish a camouflaged pro-BN NGO in Hindraf’s mould to hoodwink the Indian community,” he said.
PAS national unity chairperson Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa said the government should have dealt with the movement professionally and not politically, calling on the accusations against the movement to be heard in court.He also invited Hindraf to move into mainstream civil rights struggles in the country and to appear less as an extreme Hindu movement
The government was at the receiving end of much criticism for its decision to ban Hindraf, starting with the country’s officially sanctioned human rights organisation.
“Suhakam is of the opinion that a ban on Hindraft will not resolve the issues being championed by this group of individuals and therefore encourages the relevant agencies to address the genuine grievances which are socio-economic in nature,” said commissioners Simon Sipaun, Michael Yeoh and Denison Jayasooria in a joint statement.They were concerned that the ban would further alienate the group from mainstream Malaysian society and asked for the ban to be rescinded.The trio want the government to produce evidence of the movement being a threat to public order and morality - a feeling shared by others.“It was cowardice and arrogance - a clampdown of genuine voices of dissent,” said DAP Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran.“Its (18-point) demands should indeed be incorporated into the national socio-economic policy,” he said - critical of Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar for not informing Parliament beforehand.
Ostrich behaviour
Bukit Bendera MP Liew Chin Tong characterised it as the government “burying itself in the sand like an ostrich” and losing further Indian support."The government should understand that with or without Hindraf, the community was unhappy with the way their cultural, religious and basic needs were trampled on," he said.Liew lambasted socio-economic policies which marginalised the lower income groups in Malaysia, making many Indians, Malays and Chinese living in abject poverty.“The government had kow-towed to demands made by a small group of Umno right-wing advocates to ban Hindraf,” he said.
Civil rights activist and former Gerakan leader Dr Toh Kin Woon called it distasteful and ridiculous since they are banning a NGO struggling for disenfranchised Indians.“If the federal government is sincere, it’ll find the root causes of Indian dissatisfaction, rather than to resort to such harsh actions,” he said. Toh argued that poor Indians - not unlike other ethnicities - lack upward social mobility opportunities, and are mired in generational poverty. Therefore the government should work with Hindraf to address the issues.“Declaring Hindraf illegal will not only resolve the problem, but exacerbate the situation,” he summed up.
Hindu Action Network (HAN) chief coordinator G Mugunthan asked Syed Hamid to clarify his decision.“Hindraf was never an armed struggle. It was a harmless movement championing the cause of marginalised minorities and protesting against repressive security laws,” he said, repeating similar calls to revoke the ban.
Save Ourselves secretary BK Ong questioned the legal basis of the decision. “Without such evidence, the charges are rather unfounded and libellous,” he said adding that the reasons behind the decision were questionable.He postulated that if Syed Hamid was doing this because of Hindraf’s illegal assemblies, then Umno and PAS too should be banned for their NEP demonstrations in Penang and Bar Council’s forum intrusion in Kuala Lumpur respectively.“Ban on Hindraf was blatant prejudice and injustice.“Is this the sign of things to come after the Umno leadership change?” he asked.
Ahimsa movement
“If the movement was a threat to national security, then former Indian independence hero Mahatma Gandhi’s Ahimsa movement should also be deemed as a terrorist organisation,” said United Hindu Religious Council (UHRC) deputy president AK SuppayahHe believes the ban was a bad omen for the BN federal government, just like how police brutality at the Nov 25 Hindraf rally last year led to their electoral losses in March.Bayan Baru MCA division vice-chairperson Ooi Chuan Aik felt that the government should have adopted a softer approach.Anti-ISA Movement (GMI) chairperson Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh said the ban would not change the situation since the issue was about managing and engaging’ Hindraf and its demands.
Penang Makkal Sakti Welfare Association (Pemaswa) deputy chairperson MC Pitchay views the ban as part of government strategy to quell the community’s insurgence against injustice and discrimination.“The government may have a hidden agenda to establish a camouflaged pro-BN NGO in Hindraf’s mould to hoodwink the Indian community,” he said.
PAS national unity chairperson Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa said the government should have dealt with the movement professionally and not politically, calling on the accusations against the movement to be heard in court.He also invited Hindraf to move into mainstream civil rights struggles in the country and to appear less as an extreme Hindu movement
Mkini-Your Say: Hindraf ban BN's Deepavalli 'gift'
Oct 17, 08 10:34am
‘Syed Hamid can declare Hindraf illegal if he wishes but an organisation does not live or die at the whim of the government. They live and die by the will of the people.
'On Gov't declares Hindraf an illegal organisation
Vetrivel: This is a Deepavalli gift for the Indians from BN after giving them a heartbreak last year.BN is lucky as Hindraf follows Gandhi's peaceful ahimsa (non-violence) way but even then Hindraf is demonised and made to look as pure evil terrorists though everyone knows better.If they were a terrorist group do you think their struggle will be peaceful and full of love while abiding by the laws of the land?The Hindraf leaders are the only ones keeping the community in check after Indian families were beaten, mothers and children were tear-gassed and after baton sticks were used on grandfathers on that fateful day in history as the community stood in the streets like beggars only to be kicked and pushed further away.From the first tear gas fired, the Hindraf leaders have taken responsibility for the community and for that some are in ISA and another is in self exile.Indeed, BN is lucky, the intellectuals guiding the community are using all peaceful methods to move but how patient can this community be? Only time will tell.
Spirit Fox: Syed Hamid can declare Hindraf illegal if he wishes but an organisation does not live or die at the whim of the government. Like governments are supposed to - but in Malaysia, do not - organisations live and die by the will of the people.
An organization that loses credibility, no matter how much official backing it receives, can no more sustain itself than a man can live without food. It can just squeak along for a few months. But in the end, it dies a natural and ignominious death.The alternative is an organisation that, while officially illegal, retains its credibility as a vehicle for the aspirations of the people. Such an organisation can survive indefinitely in a multitude of forms despite the harshest repression.Witness the PLO and its struggle against the Zionist regime or the wartime Edelweiss Pirates against the odious apparatus of the Third Reich.
These organisations can be declared illegal, their members hunted and hounded.But they survive so long as they continue to embody the spirit and goals of the populace.Syed Hamid can continue to blather but if the majority do not wish him to succeed, he cannot succeed.
This would entail the endurance of the resistance - for all their empty strength, the government still has brute force at its beck and call - but I have no doubt that if the people are strong and willing, the government will fail.Then Syed Hamid will have plenty of time to contemplate the words of a wise man, written over two centuries ago - that governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed.
As for me, I have a little Hindraf flag which I got from our September 27 outing. I will wave that banner proudly until which time Syed Hamid sees fit to revoke this illegal and fatuous ruling or when the sinister agents of this fascist government pry it from my fingers.
Millionth Citizen: Do not think we are born yesterday, Syed Hamid. We can see and are used to seeing you and your cronies trying to divert our attention from the helicopter scandal -good try.We can smell it coming a mile away. If you think what Hindraf did was wrong, by comparison, more of BN cronies should be in jail now. Correct Syed?
Marginalised: Mr Syed Hamid Albar, I'm very convinced that you never think. Let me tell you this. Your action is as good as banning the Indians.And the conclusion is BN has now lost almost all of the Indian Malaysians' votes. Let's see what is the MIC's role in this. Pakatan, I would like to see your response too.
Crazy Nutty: If Hindraf is only now an illegal organisation, why put the Hindraf leaders under ISA last year?Syed Hamid Albar's talk doesn't make sense. All Malaysians should judge for themselves what type of leaders we are having.Simply putting people under the ISA. Shall we put him under the ISA instead?Just World: Hindraf folks, continue with your struggle (for Malaysias democracy). Ban or no ban, do what is right for all Malaysians. Just change your name to ‘Hindraf Baru' (like what Mahathir did to Umno did in 1988 - from Umno to Umno Baru).
John Johnson: Just wonderful, the home minister has done it again. He has decided that Hindraf is an illegal society.
When are we going to wake up?Here is a society that is only fighting for the rights of the marginalised Indians and this minister wants to ban it. His reasons? It is an ‘illegal' society and it is a ‘threat' to the nation. ...What rubbish. These people are only fighting for equality, justice and equal opportunities. If the home minister is going to continue in this way, it is time to replace him.He has stuck his foot in his own mouth at every opportunity he gets and he is actually an embarrassment to us all.
Sang Kancil: Syed Hamid Albar has made another stupid mistake by banning Hindraf. The government has labelled Hindraf as ‘racist', ‘terrorist' and regarded this group of innocent Malaysians as a ‘national threat'.I put it to Syed Hamid, that you are the primary threat to national security. Umno is the most racist party in the world. Umno practices discriminatory laws. Umno leaders are confused between Umno, Malays, Utusan Malaysia and Islam.That is the reason why Umno's Cheras Division has launched a fund called Tabung Azan. They claim that a case against Utusan Malaysia is humiliating Islam. How can this be?challenge you Syed Hamid to sacked the Umno Cheras division chief.
On Hindraf's exiled leader lashes out at ban
Aiyaphaa: Yes, I too agree - the government's decision to ban the movement as a cowardly act. My only message is this:To my belief, what was the first reason why BN fared very badly in the recent elections? Answer?: HindrafAnd why? Their huge demonstration opened not only many eyes of the Indians eye but also th eyes of many others.And with this ban, does the government think they have solved the problem? The frustration will only increase.
‘Syed Hamid can declare Hindraf illegal if he wishes but an organisation does not live or die at the whim of the government. They live and die by the will of the people.
'On Gov't declares Hindraf an illegal organisation
Vetrivel: This is a Deepavalli gift for the Indians from BN after giving them a heartbreak last year.BN is lucky as Hindraf follows Gandhi's peaceful ahimsa (non-violence) way but even then Hindraf is demonised and made to look as pure evil terrorists though everyone knows better.If they were a terrorist group do you think their struggle will be peaceful and full of love while abiding by the laws of the land?The Hindraf leaders are the only ones keeping the community in check after Indian families were beaten, mothers and children were tear-gassed and after baton sticks were used on grandfathers on that fateful day in history as the community stood in the streets like beggars only to be kicked and pushed further away.From the first tear gas fired, the Hindraf leaders have taken responsibility for the community and for that some are in ISA and another is in self exile.Indeed, BN is lucky, the intellectuals guiding the community are using all peaceful methods to move but how patient can this community be? Only time will tell.
Spirit Fox: Syed Hamid can declare Hindraf illegal if he wishes but an organisation does not live or die at the whim of the government. Like governments are supposed to - but in Malaysia, do not - organisations live and die by the will of the people.
An organization that loses credibility, no matter how much official backing it receives, can no more sustain itself than a man can live without food. It can just squeak along for a few months. But in the end, it dies a natural and ignominious death.The alternative is an organisation that, while officially illegal, retains its credibility as a vehicle for the aspirations of the people. Such an organisation can survive indefinitely in a multitude of forms despite the harshest repression.Witness the PLO and its struggle against the Zionist regime or the wartime Edelweiss Pirates against the odious apparatus of the Third Reich.
These organisations can be declared illegal, their members hunted and hounded.But they survive so long as they continue to embody the spirit and goals of the populace.Syed Hamid can continue to blather but if the majority do not wish him to succeed, he cannot succeed.
This would entail the endurance of the resistance - for all their empty strength, the government still has brute force at its beck and call - but I have no doubt that if the people are strong and willing, the government will fail.Then Syed Hamid will have plenty of time to contemplate the words of a wise man, written over two centuries ago - that governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed.
As for me, I have a little Hindraf flag which I got from our September 27 outing. I will wave that banner proudly until which time Syed Hamid sees fit to revoke this illegal and fatuous ruling or when the sinister agents of this fascist government pry it from my fingers.
Millionth Citizen: Do not think we are born yesterday, Syed Hamid. We can see and are used to seeing you and your cronies trying to divert our attention from the helicopter scandal -good try.We can smell it coming a mile away. If you think what Hindraf did was wrong, by comparison, more of BN cronies should be in jail now. Correct Syed?
Marginalised: Mr Syed Hamid Albar, I'm very convinced that you never think. Let me tell you this. Your action is as good as banning the Indians.And the conclusion is BN has now lost almost all of the Indian Malaysians' votes. Let's see what is the MIC's role in this. Pakatan, I would like to see your response too.
Crazy Nutty: If Hindraf is only now an illegal organisation, why put the Hindraf leaders under ISA last year?Syed Hamid Albar's talk doesn't make sense. All Malaysians should judge for themselves what type of leaders we are having.Simply putting people under the ISA. Shall we put him under the ISA instead?Just World: Hindraf folks, continue with your struggle (for Malaysias democracy). Ban or no ban, do what is right for all Malaysians. Just change your name to ‘Hindraf Baru' (like what Mahathir did to Umno did in 1988 - from Umno to Umno Baru).
John Johnson: Just wonderful, the home minister has done it again. He has decided that Hindraf is an illegal society.
When are we going to wake up?Here is a society that is only fighting for the rights of the marginalised Indians and this minister wants to ban it. His reasons? It is an ‘illegal' society and it is a ‘threat' to the nation. ...What rubbish. These people are only fighting for equality, justice and equal opportunities. If the home minister is going to continue in this way, it is time to replace him.He has stuck his foot in his own mouth at every opportunity he gets and he is actually an embarrassment to us all.
Sang Kancil: Syed Hamid Albar has made another stupid mistake by banning Hindraf. The government has labelled Hindraf as ‘racist', ‘terrorist' and regarded this group of innocent Malaysians as a ‘national threat'.I put it to Syed Hamid, that you are the primary threat to national security. Umno is the most racist party in the world. Umno practices discriminatory laws. Umno leaders are confused between Umno, Malays, Utusan Malaysia and Islam.That is the reason why Umno's Cheras Division has launched a fund called Tabung Azan. They claim that a case against Utusan Malaysia is humiliating Islam. How can this be?challenge you Syed Hamid to sacked the Umno Cheras division chief.
On Hindraf's exiled leader lashes out at ban
Aiyaphaa: Yes, I too agree - the government's decision to ban the movement as a cowardly act. My only message is this:To my belief, what was the first reason why BN fared very badly in the recent elections? Answer?: HindrafAnd why? Their huge demonstration opened not only many eyes of the Indians eye but also th eyes of many others.And with this ban, does the government think they have solved the problem? The frustration will only increase.
Silent protest by Malaysian Indians against the ban
All planned HINDRAF activities be suspended,
pending further instructions.
As a mark of silent protest to the ban
we urge all supporters to wear orange
T-shirt during the weekends
(Sat & Sunday)
- Waytha Moorthy –Hindraf-
Let us be united and send this sms / email accross to all Malaysian show our solidarity in this silent protest against the act of suppression by the UMNO led govt.
Malaysia ban on Hindu rights group sparks outcry
Malaysia ban on Hindu rights group sparks outcry
Wed Oct 15, 2008 6:11pm IST
KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) - Malaysia's government on Wednesday outlawed Hindu rights group Hindraf which held a massive anti-government protest last year against alleged discrimination of minority ethnic Indians.
Malaysia is holding five leaders of Hindraf or the Hindu Rights Action Force under the harsh Internal Security Act, which allows indefinite detention without trial, after they led the protest last November.
Ethnic Indians make up 7 percent of Malaysia's 27 million population and, like ethnic Chinese, have expressed growing resentment against decades-old government policies giving majority Muslim-Malays preferential treatment.
News agency Bernama said the Home (Interior) Ministry clamped down on Hindraf after it found evidence that the group posed "a threat to public order and morality".
"The decision to declare Hindraf an illegal organisation is not based on one or two of its activities that are in contravention of the law but covers all the actions it has taken since it was formed," Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar said.
"Hindraf has also tried to secure support from foreign countries for the purpose of pressuring the government to bow to its demands," he said.
The opposition Democratic Action Party (DAP) condemned the ban. "The banning of Hindraf by the Home Minister must be deplored in the strongest possible terms," DAP leader Lim Kit Siang said. "It will only aggravate the disaffection among the Indian community."
Malaysia has long been wary of anything that might upset racial harmony in the multicultural and relatively prosperous Southeast Asian nation.
Wed Oct 15, 2008 6:11pm IST
KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) - Malaysia's government on Wednesday outlawed Hindu rights group Hindraf which held a massive anti-government protest last year against alleged discrimination of minority ethnic Indians.
Malaysia is holding five leaders of Hindraf or the Hindu Rights Action Force under the harsh Internal Security Act, which allows indefinite detention without trial, after they led the protest last November.
Ethnic Indians make up 7 percent of Malaysia's 27 million population and, like ethnic Chinese, have expressed growing resentment against decades-old government policies giving majority Muslim-Malays preferential treatment.
News agency Bernama said the Home (Interior) Ministry clamped down on Hindraf after it found evidence that the group posed "a threat to public order and morality".
"The decision to declare Hindraf an illegal organisation is not based on one or two of its activities that are in contravention of the law but covers all the actions it has taken since it was formed," Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar said.
"Hindraf has also tried to secure support from foreign countries for the purpose of pressuring the government to bow to its demands," he said.
The opposition Democratic Action Party (DAP) condemned the ban. "The banning of Hindraf by the Home Minister must be deplored in the strongest possible terms," DAP leader Lim Kit Siang said. "It will only aggravate the disaffection among the Indian community."
Malaysia has long been wary of anything that might upset racial harmony in the multicultural and relatively prosperous Southeast Asian nation.
Hindraf's exiled leader suspends all activities
Oct 16, 08 3:24pm
Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leader P Waythamoorthy today said that he was suspending all activities of the movement as a result of the ban by the government.
MCPX
"I have instructed our coordinators to suspend all activities. I am also urging all our sympathisers and supporters not to take part in activities that is claimed to be organised by Hindraf from today onwards," he told Malaysiakini.
He urged them to await further instructions from him on the movement's next course of action.
"We are presently taking legal advice on this matter as well," he said.
Waythamoorthy also urged supporters to wear orange-coloured t-shirts over the weekends to show their support for Hindraf
Earlier in a statement, Waythamoorthy described the government's decision to ban the movement as a cowardly act.
“It is meant to suppress and oppress the minority Indian (Malaysian) community and the prime minister should step in and revoke the decision,” he said in a statement from his London base.
“Hindraf represents a very deep feeling experienced in the hearts and souls of millions of Indians both locally and internationally,” he added.
Waythamoorthy said the action proves that the government is running out of ideas in dealing with Hindraf and it underscores the notion that Malaysia is a police state.
The self-exiled leader said Hindraf’s struggle is to highlight the plight of Indian Malaysians who have been systematically marginalised, adding that the government does not understand this.
“Hindraf represents the Indian commoner, the hardworking oily-faced man who is made fun of in the streets, the man whom people step on, the man who walks past you, yet you notice him not.
“They all do not wither away with this illegal declaration. The government obviously has a primitive understanding of the situation. They cannot see a genuine problem within a significant section of Malaysian society."
ROS investigated Hindraf
The lawyer compared the movement with the French and American civil revolutions and, more pertinently, with the abolition of apartheid in South Africa.
He claimed that Hindraf’s struggle had raised the self-worth of all Malaysians.
“We demand dignity and equality for each and every Malaysian, which cannot be abandoned and diluted for the glory of the Umno-led government intent on stirring racial tension and maintaining the status quo,” Waythamoorthy added.
The government, however, has rejected claims that the ban is about the ethnicity or the faith of Hindraf followers.
“The government denies racial or religious bias in banning Hindraf. It is up to the police to decide what action to take against those associated with the movement,” English-language daily Star today quoted Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar as saying.
Announcing the ban yesterday, the minister explained that the decision was made after the Registrar of Societies investigated the movement, and his ministry found that “Hindraf had (been) and was being used for unlawful purposes and posed a threat to public order and morality".
Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, president of the national human rights society Hakam, said the ban was unnecessary and showed a lack of sensitivity to the minority community which shunned the government in March elections.
"Hindraf is more a wave of consciousness than an organisation and in declaring it illegal the government has possibly alienated the Indian community even more," he told AFP.
Koh: Listen to their woes
In a related development, Gerakan president Koh Tsu Koon expressed hope that despite the ban on Hindraf, the cause of the movement will be given due attention by the authorities.
"The issues affecting the Indian community brought up by Hindraf and other NGOs should be quickly and properly addressed," he told a press conference at Parliament House today.
He said a cabinet committee on the Indian Malaysian community chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has already implemented a few policies, although the outcome will take time to be seen.
"We hope this (ban) will not stifle the freedom of expression by individuals, groups and legally registered organisations. It is an important hallmark for the society to allow for freedom of expression and association" stressed Koh.
He was met by reporters after attending a BN management committee meeting chaired by Najib. The deputy premier and other BN leaders left without speaking to reporters.
The meeting had discussed the rebranding of BN among other aspects, but Koh declined to reveal details
Oct 16, 08 3:24pm
Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leader P Waythamoorthy today said that he was suspending all activities of the movement as a result of the ban by the government.
MCPX
"I have instructed our coordinators to suspend all activities. I am also urging all our sympathisers and supporters not to take part in activities that is claimed to be organised by Hindraf from today onwards," he told Malaysiakini.
He urged them to await further instructions from him on the movement's next course of action.
"We are presently taking legal advice on this matter as well," he said.
Waythamoorthy also urged supporters to wear orange-coloured t-shirts over the weekends to show their support for Hindraf
Earlier in a statement, Waythamoorthy described the government's decision to ban the movement as a cowardly act.
“It is meant to suppress and oppress the minority Indian (Malaysian) community and the prime minister should step in and revoke the decision,” he said in a statement from his London base.
“Hindraf represents a very deep feeling experienced in the hearts and souls of millions of Indians both locally and internationally,” he added.
Waythamoorthy said the action proves that the government is running out of ideas in dealing with Hindraf and it underscores the notion that Malaysia is a police state.
The self-exiled leader said Hindraf’s struggle is to highlight the plight of Indian Malaysians who have been systematically marginalised, adding that the government does not understand this.
“Hindraf represents the Indian commoner, the hardworking oily-faced man who is made fun of in the streets, the man whom people step on, the man who walks past you, yet you notice him not.
“They all do not wither away with this illegal declaration. The government obviously has a primitive understanding of the situation. They cannot see a genuine problem within a significant section of Malaysian society."
ROS investigated Hindraf
The lawyer compared the movement with the French and American civil revolutions and, more pertinently, with the abolition of apartheid in South Africa.
He claimed that Hindraf’s struggle had raised the self-worth of all Malaysians.
“We demand dignity and equality for each and every Malaysian, which cannot be abandoned and diluted for the glory of the Umno-led government intent on stirring racial tension and maintaining the status quo,” Waythamoorthy added.
The government, however, has rejected claims that the ban is about the ethnicity or the faith of Hindraf followers.
“The government denies racial or religious bias in banning Hindraf. It is up to the police to decide what action to take against those associated with the movement,” English-language daily Star today quoted Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar as saying.
Announcing the ban yesterday, the minister explained that the decision was made after the Registrar of Societies investigated the movement, and his ministry found that “Hindraf had (been) and was being used for unlawful purposes and posed a threat to public order and morality".
Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, president of the national human rights society Hakam, said the ban was unnecessary and showed a lack of sensitivity to the minority community which shunned the government in March elections.
"Hindraf is more a wave of consciousness than an organisation and in declaring it illegal the government has possibly alienated the Indian community even more," he told AFP.
Koh: Listen to their woes
In a related development, Gerakan president Koh Tsu Koon expressed hope that despite the ban on Hindraf, the cause of the movement will be given due attention by the authorities.
"The issues affecting the Indian community brought up by Hindraf and other NGOs should be quickly and properly addressed," he told a press conference at Parliament House today.
He said a cabinet committee on the Indian Malaysian community chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has already implemented a few policies, although the outcome will take time to be seen.
"We hope this (ban) will not stifle the freedom of expression by individuals, groups and legally registered organisations. It is an important hallmark for the society to allow for freedom of expression and association" stressed Koh.
He was met by reporters after attending a BN management committee meeting chaired by Najib. The deputy premier and other BN leaders left without speaking to reporters.
The meeting had discussed the rebranding of BN among other aspects, but Koh declined to reveal details
PS from WMP - Cowardly Act by UMNO lead govt to suppress Malaysianb Indian
PRESS STATEMENT
RE: COWARDLY ACT BY THE UMNO LED GOVERNMENT TO SUPPRESS AND OPPRESS MALAYSIAN INDIAN MINORITY
Declaring Hindraf as an illegal organization will in any case not banish the spirit that created Hindraf . Hindraf represents a very deep feeling experienced in the hearts and souls of millions of Indians both locally and Internationally.
This dastardly and ludicrous attempt by the Home minister to declare HINDRAF as an illegal organisation clearly indicates that the UMNO led government is at the end of their wit and shows that Malaysia is indeed a police state under the pretext of democracy.
The UMNO led government continued use of the sanctity of illegitimate laws such as ISA, Sedition Act, and now the Societies Act with their predatory acts against HINDRAF is a desperate attempt to silence legitimate voice of democracy.
The UMNO led government enjoys demonizing and bullying us on the pretext of law, public order, National security when all we are fighting for is to address the true and real condition of the downtrodden Malaysian Indians who have been systematically marginalized, suppressed and oppressed.
The UMNO government is not able to understand the phenomenon of Hindraf. Hindraf represents the Indian commoner, the hard working oily faced man who is made fun of in the streets, the man who people step on, the man who walks past you yet you notice him not. These are the people whom Hindraf represents – the marginalized and downtrodden Indians. They all do not wither away with this illegal declaration. The Government obviously has a primitive understanding of the situation, they cannot see a genuine problem within a significant section of the Malaysian society.
Look at the annals of history – when the people begin to demand what is truly theirs no governing elite have been able to stop them – take the French revolution, the American revolution, the anti-colonial and liberation movements through the first half of the 20th century and then the liberation of Africa in the late 20th century culminating in the abolition of apartheid in South Africa.
HNDRAF is peoples’ mass movement that seeks the moral and spiritual truth for the oppressed Malaysian Indians against the tyranny of the UMNO led government.
HINDRAF's movement has raised the self worth of every individual in Malaysia and demand that the dignity and equality for each and every Malaysian cannot be abandoned and diluted for the glory of the UMNO led government whose only intention is to stir racial tension and maintain their status quo.
HINDRAF will not flinch with these threats and will continue its struggle against the UMNO regime in Malaysia as we can no longer be cowed nor are we any longer afraid. It is the people's mass movement for moral and spiritual truth on the basis of humanity against the tyranny of the current ruling government.
It is only fair for the Prime Minister to advise his Home Minister to revoke the order.
Waytha Moorthy
HINDRAF – CHAIRMAN
RE: COWARDLY ACT BY THE UMNO LED GOVERNMENT TO SUPPRESS AND OPPRESS MALAYSIAN INDIAN MINORITY
Declaring Hindraf as an illegal organization will in any case not banish the spirit that created Hindraf . Hindraf represents a very deep feeling experienced in the hearts and souls of millions of Indians both locally and Internationally.
This dastardly and ludicrous attempt by the Home minister to declare HINDRAF as an illegal organisation clearly indicates that the UMNO led government is at the end of their wit and shows that Malaysia is indeed a police state under the pretext of democracy.
The UMNO led government continued use of the sanctity of illegitimate laws such as ISA, Sedition Act, and now the Societies Act with their predatory acts against HINDRAF is a desperate attempt to silence legitimate voice of democracy.
The UMNO led government enjoys demonizing and bullying us on the pretext of law, public order, National security when all we are fighting for is to address the true and real condition of the downtrodden Malaysian Indians who have been systematically marginalized, suppressed and oppressed.
The UMNO government is not able to understand the phenomenon of Hindraf. Hindraf represents the Indian commoner, the hard working oily faced man who is made fun of in the streets, the man who people step on, the man who walks past you yet you notice him not. These are the people whom Hindraf represents – the marginalized and downtrodden Indians. They all do not wither away with this illegal declaration. The Government obviously has a primitive understanding of the situation, they cannot see a genuine problem within a significant section of the Malaysian society.
Look at the annals of history – when the people begin to demand what is truly theirs no governing elite have been able to stop them – take the French revolution, the American revolution, the anti-colonial and liberation movements through the first half of the 20th century and then the liberation of Africa in the late 20th century culminating in the abolition of apartheid in South Africa.
HNDRAF is peoples’ mass movement that seeks the moral and spiritual truth for the oppressed Malaysian Indians against the tyranny of the UMNO led government.
HINDRAF's movement has raised the self worth of every individual in Malaysia and demand that the dignity and equality for each and every Malaysian cannot be abandoned and diluted for the glory of the UMNO led government whose only intention is to stir racial tension and maintain their status quo.
HINDRAF will not flinch with these threats and will continue its struggle against the UMNO regime in Malaysia as we can no longer be cowed nor are we any longer afraid. It is the people's mass movement for moral and spiritual truth on the basis of humanity against the tyranny of the current ruling government.
It is only fair for the Prime Minister to advise his Home Minister to revoke the order.
Waytha Moorthy
HINDRAF – CHAIRMAN
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Malaysian Indian Society in Ferment - A research material
by Dr. V. Suryanarayan
The unprecedented demonstration by Malaysian Indians before the British High Commission in Kula Lumpur at the end of November 2007, under the sponsorship of the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF), has brought into sharp focus the pathetic situation in which the Indian community finds itself today. The HINDRAF is a coalition of 30 non-governmental organizations, committed to the preservation and promotion of the Hindu identity. The coalition had been agitating against what it calls the unofficial policy of temple demolition and the steady introduction of Sharia-based law.
The Memorandum, submitted to the British High Commission, demanded that the United Kingdom should move an emergency resolution in the United Nations condemning the “ethnic cleansing” taking place in Malaysia. It also appealed that the issue should be referred to the World Court and International Criminal Court of Justice for crimes against its own ethnic minority Indians. In August 2007 the Malaysian Indians had approached the Royal Court of Justice demanding compensation of US Dollars 4 Trillion, which works out to US Dollars one million to every Malaysian Indian, for bringing their forefathers as indentured labourers and failing to protect their rights and interests on the eve of Malayan independence.
The Malaysian Government, true to its authoritarian traditions, refused permission to hold the rally, arrested the leaders and used tear gas and water cannon to disperse the nearly 35,000 demonstrators. The leaders of the HINDRAF should know that historical wrongs perpetrated during the colonial era, like the indenture system, cannot be undone. Presumably their objective was to highlight the increasing marginalization of the Indian community in the social, economic, political and cultural life of Malaysia. A Malaysian Indian student, Ananthi, a Rhodes Scholar, reading for her PhD in Oxford University, echoed the feelings of the overwhelming majority of her community, in a letter widely circulated in Malaysia.
To quote Ananthi, “It was about being neglected, about not having a seat at the table to bargain, about having a national and communal leadership that we do not trust and is utterly discreditable. It is about saying no to being the forgotten Indians, and not enough of us in our comfortable houses, those of us who worked to manage to work the system to our benefit – stood with the other Indians, who are not so different from us”. For the first time, the marginalized Malaysian Indians displayed the power of Makkal Shakti (people’s power).
This paper is divided into two sections. The first deals with the changing political dynamics in Malaysia and the second analyses the factors that have led to the marginalization of the overwhelming sections of the Malaysian Indian community. It has been rightly said that every issue in Malaysia, whether political, cultural or economic, had always been and would continue to be dominated by ethnic considerations. The entire political system is based on communal politics. The ordinary Malaysian grows up and lives under a pervasive communal atmosphere. While ethnicity would continue to dominate, the nature of political discourse is changing from time to time, depending upon the changing political dynamics. In order to put the issues in proper perspective, it is necessary to highlight certain political realities.
The Malays feel that they are the indigenous people (Bhumiputra) and, therefore, they have a special claim for dominance in the political and cultural life of the country. The British colonialists upheld this claim and ruled the country in the name of Malay Sultans, on whom sovereignty vested. At the same time, as part of imperialist objectives, the British also encouraged large-scale immigration of Chinese and Indians for the economic exploitation of the country’s natural resources.
The existence of a plural society prevented the growth of anti-British feelings and a sense of common nationalism in Malaya before the Second World War. As the English novelist Somerset Maugham wrote, “Malaya was a first rate country for third rate English men”.
The political awakening of the Malays, in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, following the introduction of the Malayan Union Proposals (a unitary state to which the Sultans were to cede their sovereignty) and the unity that they forged under the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) had far reaching consequences. Not only did it compel the British to withdraw the Malayan Union proposals, it also clearly revealed that the Malays would never give up their pre-eminent position in the political life of Malaya.
While in later years, the Malay leaders did co-operate with the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC), in the larger interests of Malaya as a whole, the dynamic leadership of Malayan nationalism has always remained in Malay hands. The Alliance, which was voted to power in 1955, was not an alliance of equal partners; it was an alliance in which the supremacy of the Malays was clearly established.
The transformation of the Alliance into Barisan Nasional in the 1970’s, with the incorporation of various Malay and non-Malay political parties, further reduced the political clout of the MCA and the MIC. On the eve of independence in August 1957, the Malays and the non-Malays were roughly equal in numbers (Malays 49.8 per cent, Chinese 37.1 per cent, Indians 11.1 per cent and the others 2.0 per cent). Over the years the demographic structure has radically altered to the advantage of the Malays. Higher rate of natural increase and large scale immigration of Indonesian Malays have contributed to the burgeoning of Malay population.
The Bhumiputras (Malays plus the indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak, which were incorporated into Malaysia in 1963) constitute nearly two thirds of the population; the Chinese constitute 23.7 per cent and the Indians 7.1 per cent. An important clue to the understanding of the political economy is the social and political contract arrived by the elite of the three communities on the eve of independence. It was assumed that the economic predominance of the Chinese would be offset by the political supremacy of the Malays.
It was believed that with the passage of time this equilibrium would give way to a more balanced one, the Malays would play a greater role in the economic life and the Chinese and the Indians would play a greater role in politics. The pre-eminent position of the Malays was enshrined in the Constitution – the retention of the Malay Sultanate, the acceptance of Islam as the State Religion, constitutional provisions safeguarding the “special rights” of the Malays and the acceptance of Malay as the national and official language.
The major concession made to the non-Malays was the conferment of citizenship on them. The fragility of the Malaysian political system came out into the open on May 13, 1969, when following the reverses suffered by the Alliance in the general elections, large-scale Sino-Malay clashes took place in Kuala Lumpur. Emergency was proclaimed and when democratic process was restored after amending the Constitution, Malay political power was further entrenched. The Royal Commission appointed to enquire into the riots was of the view that the crisis was due to the disenchantment and frustration of the Malays, who had not enjoyed the fruits of independence. In 1970, Malay corporate ownership was a meager 2.4 per cent, compared with 63.3 per cent enjoyed by the foreigners, 22.4 per cent enjoyed by the Chinese and 10.0 per cent by unknown parties.
While the overall poverty incidence was high, 51.2 per cent in 1970, 76.0 per cent of them were Malays. A New Economic Policy (replaced by National Integrity Plan in 2004) was launched to bring about economic transformation, with particular emphasis on the development of the Malays. In the political sphere, democratic rights were curtailed, it was made a seditious criminal offence to challenge the special rights conferred on the Malays, the language provisions in the Constitution, institution of Sultanate and citizenship laws.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Mahathir (1981-2003) Malaysia underwent a fundamental transformation. From being a producer of primary commodities, it had become an industrialized country, virtually an economic power house in the ASEAN region. Despite occasional hiccups, for example, during the Asian economic crisis, the country registered an economic growth averaging 8.0 per cent. The absolute poverty level came down from 51.2 per cent in 1970 to 7.0 per cent in 2000. By 1990, the Malay share in the corporate capital went up to 19.2 per cent, Chinese 46.8 per cent and the Indians 1.5 per cent, the nominee companies 8.5 per cent and the balance owned by the foreigners.
What further endeared Dr. Mahathir was his strong criticism of American foreign policy in West Asia and Southeast Asia. The negative side of the story was increasing authoritarianism. In addition to continuing criticism of the non-Malays about the pro-Malay and pro-Islamic policies of the government, the discontent also spread to Malay middle class. T
he first to raise the banner of revolt was Tunku Razaleigh Hamzah, who in 1987 formed a secular Malay party, Parti Sengamat 46 (Spirit of 46). Subsequently Razaleigh was readmitted into UMNO. Far more important was the revolt led by Anwar Ibrahim in 1998, who formed a political party called Kedilan (Justice Party) under the leadership of his wife.
The unfair trial of Anwar Ibrahim, coupled with the third degree treatment meted out to him, has earned him considerable good will in Malaysia and abroad. After his release, Anwar Ibrahim started speaking in a more democratic idiom, for widening the democratic space, tolerance of dissent and the establishment of a truly pluralist society, with emphasis on redistributive justice. He was prepared to champion the non-Malay cause when he promised to abolish the New Economic Policy and to promote equality for all.
The cumulative effect was the ruling Barisan Nasional suffered serious reverses in the general election held in March 2008. In the 12th general election, the UMNO and its coalition partners in the Barisan Nasional suffered unprecedented reverses. It lost its two third majority in parliament. What is more, it was removed from power in four states – Kedah, Perak, Penang and Selangor – besides failing to regain power in Kelantan. What is more, Anwar Ibrahim re-entered parliament by winning the by election in the Permatang Pauh, with a huge majority. Anwar Ibrahim is openly making a bid for power by enticing ruling party members of parliament into his fold. Another important consequence was the decision of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to expedite the transfer of power to his deputy Najib Abdul Razak.
An important political reality must be highlighted. It is extremely difficult for opposition parties to function in Malaysia. The dracnonian Internal Security Act, which provides for detention without trial, has been frequently used against opposition leaders, Malay and non-Malay alike. The Internal Security Act is inhuman, because it denies the victim a fundamental human right, the right to a fair trial. Anwar Ibrahim underlined some of the evils of the Malaysian political system in an international conference in New Delhi, few months ago, “What is an election if the political parties in the opposition do not have access to freedom of speech, assembly and movement, necessary to voice their criticisms of the government openly and to bring alternative policies and candidates to the voters?
Where I come from, the opposition is barred from the air waves, rallies are not allowed and opposition newspapers operate underground”. Prof. Harold Crouch, an astute observer of the Malaysian political scene, has remarked, “It is hard to place Malaysia in a clear cut category between democracy and authoritarianism”.
He concludes “Malaysia is neither democratic nor authoritarian … as the Malaysian political system has been oscillating between repression and responsiveness”. Let me now take up the second part of the essay dealing with the complex issues relating to the marginalization of the vast majority of Malaysian Indian community.
At the end of the Second World War, the Indians (the term today includes Indians, Pakistanis, Nepalis, Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans) constituted about 14.0 per cent of the population of Malaya. Number of them returned to India during the years of the communist insurgency and the dark days following the communal riots in May 1969.
By 2,000, Indians numbered 1.8 million, representing 7.7 per cent of the total Malaysian population of 21.89 million. According to the Singhvi Committee Report, the total number of Indians in Malaysia is 1,665,000, of which 1,600,000 are Malaysian citizens, 15,000 are non resident Indians and 50,000 are stateless people. Approximately, 80.0 per cent of them are Tamils; followed by North Indians (mainly Sikhs) 7.7 per cent; Malayalis 4.7 per cent; Telugus 3.4 per cent; Sri Lankan Tamils 2.7 per cent; Pakistanis and Bangladeshis 1.1 per cent and others 0.4 per cent. As far as religion is concerned, Hindus number 81.2 per cent; Christians 8.4 per cent; Muslims 6.7 per cent; Sikhs 3.1 per cent; Buddhists 0.5 per cent and others 0.1 per cent.
In the specific context of Malaysia, where Islam, the religion of the Malays, is the State religion, sections of the Muslim community of Indian origin have got assimilated into the Malay society.
We should make a distinction between the middle class (mainly non-Tamils and Sri Lankan Tamils) whose standard of living is fairly high and the working class (mainly Tamil) who are poor and getting marginalized. The working class belongs to the lower castes of the Hindu society like Adi Dravidar, Vannan, Maruttuvar, Nadar, Vanniyar etc.
The Indians, especially Tamils from the Madras Presidency, were the preferred labourers to develop the rubber plantations, because they displayed unquestioned loyalty and obedience, content with what they earned and were non-rebellious by nature. Most of them continue to be weighed down by low esteem, which is worsened by lack of interaction between the well-off and the less well-off sections.
A notable feature of the Indian community is its changing socio-economic profile. In 1970, 47 per cent of the Indians were engaged in agriculture, 74 per cent of them in the plantations. With rapid economic expansion and diversification of the economy, the plantations have been converted for other purposes, including the construction of luxury homes. The uprooted Indians were only paid a pittance as compensation. They naturally migrated to urban areas and joined the squatter population.
Few years ago, Samy Velu, the President of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), deplored the plight of thousands of estate workers “living in squalor in slums in dozens of long-houses and squatter settlements all over Selangor”.
Aliran, the well-known journal of the Malaysian reform movement, provided statistical details, few years ago, which made alarming reading. 40 per cent of the serious crimes in Malaysia are committed by the Indians; there are 38 Indian based gangs with 1,500 active members; during the last few years, there had been a hundred per cent increase in the number of Indian gangsters; Indians recorded the highest number of those detained under the Emergency Regulations and banished to Simpang Rengamm prison.
In the field of social woes, it is the same story. In Kuala Lumpur, 14 per cent of the squatters are Indians; they have the highest suicide rates; 41 per cent of the vagrants and beggars are Indians; 20 per cent of the child abusers are Indians and also 14 per cent of the juvenile delinquents.
The communal clashes that took place between the Indians and the Malays in Kuala Lumpur in March 2001 sent shock waves throughout Malaysia. It was the worst ethnic riots since the communal clashes in May 1969. Ethnic tensions in Malaysia are mainly due to Sino-Malay rivalry; but the Indian involvement in 2001 riots (five of the six killed were Indians and the other was an Indonesian) was a sad reminder that in Malaysia’s progress towards prosperity, the Indians were being left behind.
The disadvantaged status is clearly visible in the economic sphere. The Chinese are firmly entrenched in trade, business and industry. They are reconciled to the subordinate status in the political life of the country; at the same time, they have sharpened entrepreneurial skills and have become indispensable.
The status of the Malays has steadily improved as a result of the energetic drive of the Malaysian Government since the introduction of the New Economic Policy. In 1970, the Indians owned only 1.0 per cent of the share capital in limited companies, while the Chinese controlled 22.5 per cent, Malays 1.0 per cent and the rest being held by the foreigners. At the turn of the century, the Indians held only 1.5 per cent, compared to 19.4 per cent of the Malays and 38.5 per cent of the Chinese, the balance being held by the foreigners.
The deplorable status of the Tamils is directly related to poor educational attainments. Though the Malaysian Government has expanded educational facilities in a big way since independence, the fruits of education have not percolated to the disadvantaged sections of Indians population. The importance of education in the development of disadvantaged sections of population has been highlighted by many writers.
It is a means of upward social and economic mobility; an avenue of modernization; an instrument to enrich cultural life and, above all, in the Malaysian context, a means of national unity and integration. The Indians continue to be the most disadvantaged section at all levels of education. The Tamil medium primary schools are in a deplorable stage. Single teacher handling multiple classes; ill equipped schools with teachers having no commitment and high drop rates are some of the serious drawbacks. The family life is characterized by alcoholism, violence against women and addiction to Tamil TV Channels.
They do not provide a congenial atmosphere for study. As a result, only limited number of Tamil students reaches the university stage. The current intake of Indian students in Malaysian universities is only 6.2 per cent, most of these students hail from non-Tamil and Sri Lankan Tamil sections; the few Indian Tamils, who are lucky to get admission in the Universities, are also from relatively affluent families.
Compounding the complex situation is the general perception that increasing Islamisation of the country and destruction of Hindu temples are posing grave threats to the Hindu way of life. Given below are two illustrations which took place in 2003. The first related to Shyamala Sathiaseelan. Shyamala’s husband got converted to Islam, he gained custody of their two children and had them converted to Islam without the permission of his wife. Shyamala’s appeal for help from authorities went unheeded. The second case involved Murthy Maniam, a convert to Islam, whose dead body was buried according to Muslim rites by the religious authorities despite his widow’s claim that he had remained a practicing Hindu until his death.
The non-Muslim members of the Malaysian cabinet requested the Prime Minister to provide constitutional guarantees for religious freedom, but their appeal was ignored by Prime Minister Badawi. Many Hindus also were deeply hurt when, for the first time, the UMNO General Assembly was held during Deepavali. As Dilip Lahiri, former Indian diplomat has written the UMNO youth leaders brandished and kissed the Kris (dagger) and threatened to shed Chinese and Indian blood if Malay supremacy was challenged. The Hindus also began to feel that the Government was lukewarm on the sensitive question of destruction of Hindu temples. As a result, the HINDRAF and allied organizations began to take deep roots in the Hindu community. In the preservation of the Hindu identity, in the prevailing atmosphere of increasing Islamisation, the temples do play a very big role.
The temples and religious festivals are the only visible attachment to traditions and the Hindus cling to them tenaciously. Needless to say, there is a close nexus between religion and Malay politics. The policies of the Malaysian Government have been double edged. On the one hand the leaders of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) are committed to the promotion of Islam in all possible ways. Dr. Mahathir has mentioned several times that Malaysia is an Islamic State and the Islamic identity is projected in a big way both within the country and outside. Such a policy is necessary to mobilize the Malays under the UMNO banner.
Otherwise, the Malays will flock to Parti Islam (PAS) for leadership and inspiration. At the same time, the realities of Malaysia and the needs of modernization dictate that the Government must encourage a less exclusivist approach towards Islam. When the desecration of the Hindu temples began in 1978, the most horrendous being the destruction of the Murugan temple in Kerling, Prime Minister Hussein Onn came down heavily on the Islamic extremists. But the situation has been allowed to drift during recent years.
In its Memorandum, the HINDRAF has pointed out that in every three weeks one Hindu temple is destroyed in Malaysia, the most significant being the demolition of the Mariamman temple in Shah Alam. The Government maintains that most of these temples have been constructed in government owned lands without proper authorization. But the temples have been functioning for many years; strangely there are no reports of the destruction of Chinese places of worship. Is it because the Chinese are more organized and will hit back if their religious beliefs are tampered with?
The question should legitimately be asked – to what extent has the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), which represents the Indian community in the government, has succeeded in its primary objective of safeguarding the interests of the Indian community? An Indian observer of the Malaysian scene comes to a dismal conclusion. Factional struggle and disunity had been the major curse of the Indian community.
Since its inception in 1946, fight for power, petty politicking and mud slinging had been its major attributes. The rivalry between Devaser and Sambandan; between Sambandan and Manickavasagam; Manickavasagam and Sami Velu; and among Sami Velu, Padmanabhan, Subramaniam and Panditan – it brings no laurels to the Indian community. Samy Velu is more interested in ingratiating himself with the Malay leadership rather than championing legitimate Indian interests and aspirations. What is more, self-help measures, initiated by the MIC, with much fanfare, have not led to desired results.
For example, the Maika Holdings Bhd, started in 1982, as an investment vehicle for the Malaysian Indians, incurred heavy losses, resulting in the loss of savings of large number of poor Indians. Frustration and anger against the leadership found expression when the Indian youth began to disturb the functions organized by the MIC; very often Samy Velu was booed and jeered. How distant the MIC was from the ordinary Indians became evident when the results of the 2008 parliamentary elections were announced.
Of the nine MIC candidates of the Barisan Nasional, only three could win their seats, and that too with slender margins, those who were defeated included Samy Velu, the President of the MIC, who lost the Sungai Siput constituency in the Perak State. The emergence of the HINDRAF has to be viewed in the backdrop of the alienation of large sections of Indians, coupled with a non-performing MIC. The unfortunate events in Malaysia naturally attracted the attention of Indian leaders. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Foreign Affairs Minister Pranab Mukerjee and Chief Minister Karunanidhi have expressed concern and regret over the turn of events in Malaysia.
Their objective is not to interfere with the internal affairs of a friendly country, but to influence the Malaysian Government to initiate immediate steps for the redressal of long pending grievances. The Malaysian response has been unfortunate. Representatives of the Malaysian Government, including the Prime Minister, have demanded that the Government of Tamil Nadu should keep off from what it considers to be an internal matter of Malaysia.
What is the record of the Malaysian Government in this respect? As a leading member of the international Islamic organization, the Malaysian Government has sharply criticized many governments for pursuing policies, which have adversely affected the Moslem communities. The UMNO and the PAS, the two leading Malay parties, have, on several occasions since independence, criticized the policies of the Thai Government which has led to the alienation of the Malay minority in Southern Thailand.
The Malay leaders have also criticized the Government of Singapore for pursuing discriminatory policies against the Malay minority in the island. The Malaysian criticism of India, to say the least, is an illustration of the pot calling the kettle black. The increasing intolerance of the Malaysian Government and its vocal advocacy of OIC sponsored causes have cast a long shadow over India – Malaysia relations. As the former Indian diplomat, Dilip Lahiri has pointed out, on a range of issues affecting India-Southeast Asia relations, Malaysia had been the “most difficult” among the member states of ASEAN.
The Malaysian Government is preparing itself to crack down on the HINDRAF; few government spokesmen have started leveling the unsubstantiated charge that the HINDRAF has links with the Tamil Tigers. The perceptive Indian observers of the Southeast Asian scene remember that when General Rabuka began systematically to discriminate against the Indian community in Fiji, in order to justify himself, he was quoting chapter and verse from Dr. Mahathir’s book, The Malay Dilemma.
Few years ago, in Brickfields in Kuala Lumpur, few Indian expatriates, who were working in the IT industry, were rounded up and detained as illegal immigrants, though they had proper documents to prove that they had entered Malaysia through legal channels. The shocked Indian diplomats immediately protested, and the Malaysian Government had to tender an apology for its inhuman behaviour.
Turbluent times are ahead in Malaysia and for the Malaysian Indians. The Malaysian Indian community is at the cross roads today. If the present situation is allowed to drift and deteriorate, the community would suffer untold damages and would be left behind in the economic and educational advancement of the country. If the present hardships are to be overcome, it is important the Indian community must re-evaluate its role and chalk out a new destiny by sinking its differences and working as a team.
The minority character of the Indian community and its vulnerable position makes such a task all the more urgent and imperative. The Malaysian Government must also view the marginalized and impoverished Indian community with greater sympathy and understanding and ensure that the Indians, to begin with, at least obtain a share equal to their proportion in the population.
(Dr. V. Suryanarayan is Senior Professor and Director (Retd), Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Madras. This paper was presented in the International Seminar on India and Asia-Pacific: Convergence and Divergence at the Centre for Southeast Asian and Pacific Studies, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati on 13th October 2008).
The unprecedented demonstration by Malaysian Indians before the British High Commission in Kula Lumpur at the end of November 2007, under the sponsorship of the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF), has brought into sharp focus the pathetic situation in which the Indian community finds itself today. The HINDRAF is a coalition of 30 non-governmental organizations, committed to the preservation and promotion of the Hindu identity. The coalition had been agitating against what it calls the unofficial policy of temple demolition and the steady introduction of Sharia-based law.
The Memorandum, submitted to the British High Commission, demanded that the United Kingdom should move an emergency resolution in the United Nations condemning the “ethnic cleansing” taking place in Malaysia. It also appealed that the issue should be referred to the World Court and International Criminal Court of Justice for crimes against its own ethnic minority Indians. In August 2007 the Malaysian Indians had approached the Royal Court of Justice demanding compensation of US Dollars 4 Trillion, which works out to US Dollars one million to every Malaysian Indian, for bringing their forefathers as indentured labourers and failing to protect their rights and interests on the eve of Malayan independence.
The Malaysian Government, true to its authoritarian traditions, refused permission to hold the rally, arrested the leaders and used tear gas and water cannon to disperse the nearly 35,000 demonstrators. The leaders of the HINDRAF should know that historical wrongs perpetrated during the colonial era, like the indenture system, cannot be undone. Presumably their objective was to highlight the increasing marginalization of the Indian community in the social, economic, political and cultural life of Malaysia. A Malaysian Indian student, Ananthi, a Rhodes Scholar, reading for her PhD in Oxford University, echoed the feelings of the overwhelming majority of her community, in a letter widely circulated in Malaysia.
To quote Ananthi, “It was about being neglected, about not having a seat at the table to bargain, about having a national and communal leadership that we do not trust and is utterly discreditable. It is about saying no to being the forgotten Indians, and not enough of us in our comfortable houses, those of us who worked to manage to work the system to our benefit – stood with the other Indians, who are not so different from us”. For the first time, the marginalized Malaysian Indians displayed the power of Makkal Shakti (people’s power).
This paper is divided into two sections. The first deals with the changing political dynamics in Malaysia and the second analyses the factors that have led to the marginalization of the overwhelming sections of the Malaysian Indian community. It has been rightly said that every issue in Malaysia, whether political, cultural or economic, had always been and would continue to be dominated by ethnic considerations. The entire political system is based on communal politics. The ordinary Malaysian grows up and lives under a pervasive communal atmosphere. While ethnicity would continue to dominate, the nature of political discourse is changing from time to time, depending upon the changing political dynamics. In order to put the issues in proper perspective, it is necessary to highlight certain political realities.
The Malays feel that they are the indigenous people (Bhumiputra) and, therefore, they have a special claim for dominance in the political and cultural life of the country. The British colonialists upheld this claim and ruled the country in the name of Malay Sultans, on whom sovereignty vested. At the same time, as part of imperialist objectives, the British also encouraged large-scale immigration of Chinese and Indians for the economic exploitation of the country’s natural resources.
The existence of a plural society prevented the growth of anti-British feelings and a sense of common nationalism in Malaya before the Second World War. As the English novelist Somerset Maugham wrote, “Malaya was a first rate country for third rate English men”.
The political awakening of the Malays, in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, following the introduction of the Malayan Union Proposals (a unitary state to which the Sultans were to cede their sovereignty) and the unity that they forged under the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) had far reaching consequences. Not only did it compel the British to withdraw the Malayan Union proposals, it also clearly revealed that the Malays would never give up their pre-eminent position in the political life of Malaya.
While in later years, the Malay leaders did co-operate with the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC), in the larger interests of Malaya as a whole, the dynamic leadership of Malayan nationalism has always remained in Malay hands. The Alliance, which was voted to power in 1955, was not an alliance of equal partners; it was an alliance in which the supremacy of the Malays was clearly established.
The transformation of the Alliance into Barisan Nasional in the 1970’s, with the incorporation of various Malay and non-Malay political parties, further reduced the political clout of the MCA and the MIC. On the eve of independence in August 1957, the Malays and the non-Malays were roughly equal in numbers (Malays 49.8 per cent, Chinese 37.1 per cent, Indians 11.1 per cent and the others 2.0 per cent). Over the years the demographic structure has radically altered to the advantage of the Malays. Higher rate of natural increase and large scale immigration of Indonesian Malays have contributed to the burgeoning of Malay population.
The Bhumiputras (Malays plus the indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak, which were incorporated into Malaysia in 1963) constitute nearly two thirds of the population; the Chinese constitute 23.7 per cent and the Indians 7.1 per cent. An important clue to the understanding of the political economy is the social and political contract arrived by the elite of the three communities on the eve of independence. It was assumed that the economic predominance of the Chinese would be offset by the political supremacy of the Malays.
It was believed that with the passage of time this equilibrium would give way to a more balanced one, the Malays would play a greater role in the economic life and the Chinese and the Indians would play a greater role in politics. The pre-eminent position of the Malays was enshrined in the Constitution – the retention of the Malay Sultanate, the acceptance of Islam as the State Religion, constitutional provisions safeguarding the “special rights” of the Malays and the acceptance of Malay as the national and official language.
The major concession made to the non-Malays was the conferment of citizenship on them. The fragility of the Malaysian political system came out into the open on May 13, 1969, when following the reverses suffered by the Alliance in the general elections, large-scale Sino-Malay clashes took place in Kuala Lumpur. Emergency was proclaimed and when democratic process was restored after amending the Constitution, Malay political power was further entrenched. The Royal Commission appointed to enquire into the riots was of the view that the crisis was due to the disenchantment and frustration of the Malays, who had not enjoyed the fruits of independence. In 1970, Malay corporate ownership was a meager 2.4 per cent, compared with 63.3 per cent enjoyed by the foreigners, 22.4 per cent enjoyed by the Chinese and 10.0 per cent by unknown parties.
While the overall poverty incidence was high, 51.2 per cent in 1970, 76.0 per cent of them were Malays. A New Economic Policy (replaced by National Integrity Plan in 2004) was launched to bring about economic transformation, with particular emphasis on the development of the Malays. In the political sphere, democratic rights were curtailed, it was made a seditious criminal offence to challenge the special rights conferred on the Malays, the language provisions in the Constitution, institution of Sultanate and citizenship laws.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Mahathir (1981-2003) Malaysia underwent a fundamental transformation. From being a producer of primary commodities, it had become an industrialized country, virtually an economic power house in the ASEAN region. Despite occasional hiccups, for example, during the Asian economic crisis, the country registered an economic growth averaging 8.0 per cent. The absolute poverty level came down from 51.2 per cent in 1970 to 7.0 per cent in 2000. By 1990, the Malay share in the corporate capital went up to 19.2 per cent, Chinese 46.8 per cent and the Indians 1.5 per cent, the nominee companies 8.5 per cent and the balance owned by the foreigners.
What further endeared Dr. Mahathir was his strong criticism of American foreign policy in West Asia and Southeast Asia. The negative side of the story was increasing authoritarianism. In addition to continuing criticism of the non-Malays about the pro-Malay and pro-Islamic policies of the government, the discontent also spread to Malay middle class. T
he first to raise the banner of revolt was Tunku Razaleigh Hamzah, who in 1987 formed a secular Malay party, Parti Sengamat 46 (Spirit of 46). Subsequently Razaleigh was readmitted into UMNO. Far more important was the revolt led by Anwar Ibrahim in 1998, who formed a political party called Kedilan (Justice Party) under the leadership of his wife.
The unfair trial of Anwar Ibrahim, coupled with the third degree treatment meted out to him, has earned him considerable good will in Malaysia and abroad. After his release, Anwar Ibrahim started speaking in a more democratic idiom, for widening the democratic space, tolerance of dissent and the establishment of a truly pluralist society, with emphasis on redistributive justice. He was prepared to champion the non-Malay cause when he promised to abolish the New Economic Policy and to promote equality for all.
The cumulative effect was the ruling Barisan Nasional suffered serious reverses in the general election held in March 2008. In the 12th general election, the UMNO and its coalition partners in the Barisan Nasional suffered unprecedented reverses. It lost its two third majority in parliament. What is more, it was removed from power in four states – Kedah, Perak, Penang and Selangor – besides failing to regain power in Kelantan. What is more, Anwar Ibrahim re-entered parliament by winning the by election in the Permatang Pauh, with a huge majority. Anwar Ibrahim is openly making a bid for power by enticing ruling party members of parliament into his fold. Another important consequence was the decision of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to expedite the transfer of power to his deputy Najib Abdul Razak.
An important political reality must be highlighted. It is extremely difficult for opposition parties to function in Malaysia. The dracnonian Internal Security Act, which provides for detention without trial, has been frequently used against opposition leaders, Malay and non-Malay alike. The Internal Security Act is inhuman, because it denies the victim a fundamental human right, the right to a fair trial. Anwar Ibrahim underlined some of the evils of the Malaysian political system in an international conference in New Delhi, few months ago, “What is an election if the political parties in the opposition do not have access to freedom of speech, assembly and movement, necessary to voice their criticisms of the government openly and to bring alternative policies and candidates to the voters?
Where I come from, the opposition is barred from the air waves, rallies are not allowed and opposition newspapers operate underground”. Prof. Harold Crouch, an astute observer of the Malaysian political scene, has remarked, “It is hard to place Malaysia in a clear cut category between democracy and authoritarianism”.
He concludes “Malaysia is neither democratic nor authoritarian … as the Malaysian political system has been oscillating between repression and responsiveness”. Let me now take up the second part of the essay dealing with the complex issues relating to the marginalization of the vast majority of Malaysian Indian community.
At the end of the Second World War, the Indians (the term today includes Indians, Pakistanis, Nepalis, Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans) constituted about 14.0 per cent of the population of Malaya. Number of them returned to India during the years of the communist insurgency and the dark days following the communal riots in May 1969.
By 2,000, Indians numbered 1.8 million, representing 7.7 per cent of the total Malaysian population of 21.89 million. According to the Singhvi Committee Report, the total number of Indians in Malaysia is 1,665,000, of which 1,600,000 are Malaysian citizens, 15,000 are non resident Indians and 50,000 are stateless people. Approximately, 80.0 per cent of them are Tamils; followed by North Indians (mainly Sikhs) 7.7 per cent; Malayalis 4.7 per cent; Telugus 3.4 per cent; Sri Lankan Tamils 2.7 per cent; Pakistanis and Bangladeshis 1.1 per cent and others 0.4 per cent. As far as religion is concerned, Hindus number 81.2 per cent; Christians 8.4 per cent; Muslims 6.7 per cent; Sikhs 3.1 per cent; Buddhists 0.5 per cent and others 0.1 per cent.
In the specific context of Malaysia, where Islam, the religion of the Malays, is the State religion, sections of the Muslim community of Indian origin have got assimilated into the Malay society.
We should make a distinction between the middle class (mainly non-Tamils and Sri Lankan Tamils) whose standard of living is fairly high and the working class (mainly Tamil) who are poor and getting marginalized. The working class belongs to the lower castes of the Hindu society like Adi Dravidar, Vannan, Maruttuvar, Nadar, Vanniyar etc.
The Indians, especially Tamils from the Madras Presidency, were the preferred labourers to develop the rubber plantations, because they displayed unquestioned loyalty and obedience, content with what they earned and were non-rebellious by nature. Most of them continue to be weighed down by low esteem, which is worsened by lack of interaction between the well-off and the less well-off sections.
A notable feature of the Indian community is its changing socio-economic profile. In 1970, 47 per cent of the Indians were engaged in agriculture, 74 per cent of them in the plantations. With rapid economic expansion and diversification of the economy, the plantations have been converted for other purposes, including the construction of luxury homes. The uprooted Indians were only paid a pittance as compensation. They naturally migrated to urban areas and joined the squatter population.
Few years ago, Samy Velu, the President of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), deplored the plight of thousands of estate workers “living in squalor in slums in dozens of long-houses and squatter settlements all over Selangor”.
Aliran, the well-known journal of the Malaysian reform movement, provided statistical details, few years ago, which made alarming reading. 40 per cent of the serious crimes in Malaysia are committed by the Indians; there are 38 Indian based gangs with 1,500 active members; during the last few years, there had been a hundred per cent increase in the number of Indian gangsters; Indians recorded the highest number of those detained under the Emergency Regulations and banished to Simpang Rengamm prison.
In the field of social woes, it is the same story. In Kuala Lumpur, 14 per cent of the squatters are Indians; they have the highest suicide rates; 41 per cent of the vagrants and beggars are Indians; 20 per cent of the child abusers are Indians and also 14 per cent of the juvenile delinquents.
The communal clashes that took place between the Indians and the Malays in Kuala Lumpur in March 2001 sent shock waves throughout Malaysia. It was the worst ethnic riots since the communal clashes in May 1969. Ethnic tensions in Malaysia are mainly due to Sino-Malay rivalry; but the Indian involvement in 2001 riots (five of the six killed were Indians and the other was an Indonesian) was a sad reminder that in Malaysia’s progress towards prosperity, the Indians were being left behind.
The disadvantaged status is clearly visible in the economic sphere. The Chinese are firmly entrenched in trade, business and industry. They are reconciled to the subordinate status in the political life of the country; at the same time, they have sharpened entrepreneurial skills and have become indispensable.
The status of the Malays has steadily improved as a result of the energetic drive of the Malaysian Government since the introduction of the New Economic Policy. In 1970, the Indians owned only 1.0 per cent of the share capital in limited companies, while the Chinese controlled 22.5 per cent, Malays 1.0 per cent and the rest being held by the foreigners. At the turn of the century, the Indians held only 1.5 per cent, compared to 19.4 per cent of the Malays and 38.5 per cent of the Chinese, the balance being held by the foreigners.
The deplorable status of the Tamils is directly related to poor educational attainments. Though the Malaysian Government has expanded educational facilities in a big way since independence, the fruits of education have not percolated to the disadvantaged sections of Indians population. The importance of education in the development of disadvantaged sections of population has been highlighted by many writers.
It is a means of upward social and economic mobility; an avenue of modernization; an instrument to enrich cultural life and, above all, in the Malaysian context, a means of national unity and integration. The Indians continue to be the most disadvantaged section at all levels of education. The Tamil medium primary schools are in a deplorable stage. Single teacher handling multiple classes; ill equipped schools with teachers having no commitment and high drop rates are some of the serious drawbacks. The family life is characterized by alcoholism, violence against women and addiction to Tamil TV Channels.
They do not provide a congenial atmosphere for study. As a result, only limited number of Tamil students reaches the university stage. The current intake of Indian students in Malaysian universities is only 6.2 per cent, most of these students hail from non-Tamil and Sri Lankan Tamil sections; the few Indian Tamils, who are lucky to get admission in the Universities, are also from relatively affluent families.
Compounding the complex situation is the general perception that increasing Islamisation of the country and destruction of Hindu temples are posing grave threats to the Hindu way of life. Given below are two illustrations which took place in 2003. The first related to Shyamala Sathiaseelan. Shyamala’s husband got converted to Islam, he gained custody of their two children and had them converted to Islam without the permission of his wife. Shyamala’s appeal for help from authorities went unheeded. The second case involved Murthy Maniam, a convert to Islam, whose dead body was buried according to Muslim rites by the religious authorities despite his widow’s claim that he had remained a practicing Hindu until his death.
The non-Muslim members of the Malaysian cabinet requested the Prime Minister to provide constitutional guarantees for religious freedom, but their appeal was ignored by Prime Minister Badawi. Many Hindus also were deeply hurt when, for the first time, the UMNO General Assembly was held during Deepavali. As Dilip Lahiri, former Indian diplomat has written the UMNO youth leaders brandished and kissed the Kris (dagger) and threatened to shed Chinese and Indian blood if Malay supremacy was challenged. The Hindus also began to feel that the Government was lukewarm on the sensitive question of destruction of Hindu temples. As a result, the HINDRAF and allied organizations began to take deep roots in the Hindu community. In the preservation of the Hindu identity, in the prevailing atmosphere of increasing Islamisation, the temples do play a very big role.
The temples and religious festivals are the only visible attachment to traditions and the Hindus cling to them tenaciously. Needless to say, there is a close nexus between religion and Malay politics. The policies of the Malaysian Government have been double edged. On the one hand the leaders of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) are committed to the promotion of Islam in all possible ways. Dr. Mahathir has mentioned several times that Malaysia is an Islamic State and the Islamic identity is projected in a big way both within the country and outside. Such a policy is necessary to mobilize the Malays under the UMNO banner.
Otherwise, the Malays will flock to Parti Islam (PAS) for leadership and inspiration. At the same time, the realities of Malaysia and the needs of modernization dictate that the Government must encourage a less exclusivist approach towards Islam. When the desecration of the Hindu temples began in 1978, the most horrendous being the destruction of the Murugan temple in Kerling, Prime Minister Hussein Onn came down heavily on the Islamic extremists. But the situation has been allowed to drift during recent years.
In its Memorandum, the HINDRAF has pointed out that in every three weeks one Hindu temple is destroyed in Malaysia, the most significant being the demolition of the Mariamman temple in Shah Alam. The Government maintains that most of these temples have been constructed in government owned lands without proper authorization. But the temples have been functioning for many years; strangely there are no reports of the destruction of Chinese places of worship. Is it because the Chinese are more organized and will hit back if their religious beliefs are tampered with?
The question should legitimately be asked – to what extent has the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), which represents the Indian community in the government, has succeeded in its primary objective of safeguarding the interests of the Indian community? An Indian observer of the Malaysian scene comes to a dismal conclusion. Factional struggle and disunity had been the major curse of the Indian community.
Since its inception in 1946, fight for power, petty politicking and mud slinging had been its major attributes. The rivalry between Devaser and Sambandan; between Sambandan and Manickavasagam; Manickavasagam and Sami Velu; and among Sami Velu, Padmanabhan, Subramaniam and Panditan – it brings no laurels to the Indian community. Samy Velu is more interested in ingratiating himself with the Malay leadership rather than championing legitimate Indian interests and aspirations. What is more, self-help measures, initiated by the MIC, with much fanfare, have not led to desired results.
For example, the Maika Holdings Bhd, started in 1982, as an investment vehicle for the Malaysian Indians, incurred heavy losses, resulting in the loss of savings of large number of poor Indians. Frustration and anger against the leadership found expression when the Indian youth began to disturb the functions organized by the MIC; very often Samy Velu was booed and jeered. How distant the MIC was from the ordinary Indians became evident when the results of the 2008 parliamentary elections were announced.
Of the nine MIC candidates of the Barisan Nasional, only three could win their seats, and that too with slender margins, those who were defeated included Samy Velu, the President of the MIC, who lost the Sungai Siput constituency in the Perak State. The emergence of the HINDRAF has to be viewed in the backdrop of the alienation of large sections of Indians, coupled with a non-performing MIC. The unfortunate events in Malaysia naturally attracted the attention of Indian leaders. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Foreign Affairs Minister Pranab Mukerjee and Chief Minister Karunanidhi have expressed concern and regret over the turn of events in Malaysia.
Their objective is not to interfere with the internal affairs of a friendly country, but to influence the Malaysian Government to initiate immediate steps for the redressal of long pending grievances. The Malaysian response has been unfortunate. Representatives of the Malaysian Government, including the Prime Minister, have demanded that the Government of Tamil Nadu should keep off from what it considers to be an internal matter of Malaysia.
What is the record of the Malaysian Government in this respect? As a leading member of the international Islamic organization, the Malaysian Government has sharply criticized many governments for pursuing policies, which have adversely affected the Moslem communities. The UMNO and the PAS, the two leading Malay parties, have, on several occasions since independence, criticized the policies of the Thai Government which has led to the alienation of the Malay minority in Southern Thailand.
The Malay leaders have also criticized the Government of Singapore for pursuing discriminatory policies against the Malay minority in the island. The Malaysian criticism of India, to say the least, is an illustration of the pot calling the kettle black. The increasing intolerance of the Malaysian Government and its vocal advocacy of OIC sponsored causes have cast a long shadow over India – Malaysia relations. As the former Indian diplomat, Dilip Lahiri has pointed out, on a range of issues affecting India-Southeast Asia relations, Malaysia had been the “most difficult” among the member states of ASEAN.
The Malaysian Government is preparing itself to crack down on the HINDRAF; few government spokesmen have started leveling the unsubstantiated charge that the HINDRAF has links with the Tamil Tigers. The perceptive Indian observers of the Southeast Asian scene remember that when General Rabuka began systematically to discriminate against the Indian community in Fiji, in order to justify himself, he was quoting chapter and verse from Dr. Mahathir’s book, The Malay Dilemma.
Few years ago, in Brickfields in Kuala Lumpur, few Indian expatriates, who were working in the IT industry, were rounded up and detained as illegal immigrants, though they had proper documents to prove that they had entered Malaysia through legal channels. The shocked Indian diplomats immediately protested, and the Malaysian Government had to tender an apology for its inhuman behaviour.
Turbluent times are ahead in Malaysia and for the Malaysian Indians. The Malaysian Indian community is at the cross roads today. If the present situation is allowed to drift and deteriorate, the community would suffer untold damages and would be left behind in the economic and educational advancement of the country. If the present hardships are to be overcome, it is important the Indian community must re-evaluate its role and chalk out a new destiny by sinking its differences and working as a team.
The minority character of the Indian community and its vulnerable position makes such a task all the more urgent and imperative. The Malaysian Government must also view the marginalized and impoverished Indian community with greater sympathy and understanding and ensure that the Indians, to begin with, at least obtain a share equal to their proportion in the population.
(Dr. V. Suryanarayan is Senior Professor and Director (Retd), Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Madras. This paper was presented in the International Seminar on India and Asia-Pacific: Convergence and Divergence at the Centre for Southeast Asian and Pacific Studies, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati on 13th October 2008).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
