Special Branch presents

Civil Suit Meeting 2

Civil Suit Meeting 1

Hindraf collecting evidence against British gov't

(Malaysiakini) Suresh Grover, the attorney acting on behalf of outlawed Hindu rights group Hindraf, is making the rounds of Indian communities in Malaysia, 'to collect evidence' for its civil suit against the British government.

The suit, initiated and filed by Hindraf chief P Waythamoorthy (right) in 2007, prior to the group being outlawed and its leaders picked up under the Internal Security Act or forced to flee the country, has been in limbo since then.

"Because of the time limitation, we must go to trial before 30 August 2013," said Grover, explaining why his evidence gathering visit is of the utmost urgency.

He was speaking today to over 1,500 supporters of Hindraf and members of the Indian community at the Hokkien Assembly Hall, Klang.

Grover is scheduled to visit more locations around Malaysia to meet with more citizens of Indian descent to explain about the legal challenge, gather evidence and add more names to the list of claimants.

The civil suit which named the British Crown and government as the defendants, is to seek recompense for the alleged victimisation of Indians, whose forced relocation to then Malaya by the Empire, Hindraf claimed, had led to them a life of abject poverty.

Grover said that it is essential that he meet with as many Malaysians of Indian descent as soon as possible to include them in the list of claimants to the civil claim and to use evidence of their current life as a basis for their abject poverty argument.

However he assured those who may want to come forward that as provided under British law, their identity will be kept confidential in case of intimidation or possible reprisal by the Malaysian government.

'It will not stop here'

Grover also condemned the deportation of his fellow London based legal colleague Imran Khan.

"It does not make sense to exclude Mr Khan, when I am also going to do the same thing.

"They (the government) don't want the suit to succeed. They are afraid of you and your tenacity," claimed the London-based legal professional.

Khan (left) who is legal advisor to Waythamoorthy, was supposed to accompany Grover but was deported by Malaysian authorities yesterday for being a "prohibited immigrant.

Grover said that they will not stop there but will continue their fight for the case, including to challenge Khan's deportatation.

"Mr Khan will travel here again," said the lawyer.

The lawyer arrived at the packed hall to the cries of "Hindraf Vaalzhal!" by youths waving the orange flag of the outlawed organisation.

There was no obvious police presence throughout the event although there were individuals who could have been plainsclothes officers.

Prior to his arrival the sizeable crowd gave their rapt attention to videos and slideshow of photos featuring Waythamoorthy and other Hindraf leaders in heroic moments to the rousing 60s era Tamil songs.

‘British let down the non-Malays’

A tin mining tycoon from Ipoh had warned the British that giving special rights to the Malays would create resentment among the non-Malays.

By  Athi Sankar - FMT
GEORGE TOWN: During the pre-independence talks, a Chinese tin mining tycoon from Perak warned the British that giving special rights to Malays would create resentment among the non-Malays.

Lau Pak Kuan in a memorandum submitted to the Reid Commission has argued that “the perpetuation of unjust and inequitable laws breeds distrust, jealousy, resentment and hatred, and must in the end give rise to disastrous repercussions”.

This was disclosed by Hindraf Makkal Sakti leader P Waythamoorthy who said that Lau has stated clearly to the colonial government that such provisions were undemocratic features in a democratic set-up.

The memorandum to the Reid Commission was submitted on July 20, 1956, by Lau as the president of Pan-Malayan Federation of Chinese Associations (PMFCA), a coalition representing 1,179 Chinese clans. The memorandum carried the signatures of leaders of these groups.

London-based Waythamoorthy said when the Federation of Malaya Bill was tabled in the United Kingdom Parliament, Lau had even gone on an international lobby to vehemently protest it.

Lau had gone to London, consulted the Queen’s counsel and lobbied British parliamentarians to object to the discriminatory and apartheid-like provisions in Article 153 of the Malaya constitutional draft.

In the memorandum, Waythamoorthy said Lau has cautioned that erecting barriers against non-Malays in the hope of improving the (lot of the) Malays was not a sure way of obtaining the desired effect.

“Lau correctly predicted it would create class divisions among citizens,” he said.

Dangerous breakdown

Despite the PMFCA memorandum and protests by several ethnic-Indian based organisations to the Reid Commission, Waythamoorthy said the British betrayed non-Malays and still went on to pass the bill.

The British colonial government and Umno led by the country’s first prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman later colluded to enact and legitimise the much-opposed Malaya Constitution.

“After more than half century, Lau’s prediction of disastrous repercussions and a dangerous breakdown in racial ties proved to be true.

“The visionary Lau was the first civil rights champion in the country. He fought social justice, equality and fairness for all under the independent Malayan umbrella,” claimed Waythamoorthy.

Waythamoorthy is scrutinising the pre-independence documents to prepare for his US$4 trillion class-action suit against the UK government.

He originally filed the class-action suit in London on Aug 31, 2007, the 50th anniversary of Malaysia’s independence, to demand compensation for Indian Malaysians, whose ancestors were brought in by the colonial government as indentured labour.

However, the suit was stalled following the Malaysian government’s clampdown on Hindraf and the arrest of several lawyers under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

The suit claimed that, after granting independence to Malaya, the British had left the Indians without representation and at the mercy of the Umno government.

Superior class

A two-man legal team from London will be in Malaysia today to meet local clients for consideration as co-claimants in the suit.

In the memorandum, Waythamoorthy said Lau had argued that the Federal Constitution was founded upon a policy of appeasement vis-à-vis Malay ultra nationalism.

“To grant favouritism to one community in preference to the others would be to create a superior class and an inferior class of citizens in the future Malaya.

“This would not make for inter-racial goodwill and harmony, without which Malays could not thrive.
“A multi racial society must depend on goodwill and harmony for its well-being,” Lau noted in the memorandum.

Lau contended that the Malays needed help not through legislation but through the co-operation of the more advanced communities.

While such legislation tended to make them a privileged class, he claimed that it also reduced them to a dependent and undignified community.

“Malays must not expect to be spoon-fed and be made to lose all senses of incentives. They must be trained the hard way to rely on their own efforts and initiatives for success,” Lau said in the memorandum.

Equal treatment

He said for the good of the country, all unequal and unjust laws should be scrapped and citizens of all races should be accorded equal and just treatment.

He said voluntary inter-racial co-operation and goodwill would ensure a new era of hope for Malaya.
The memorandum urged for the new constitution to be written before independence and all existing discriminatory and unjust laws be revoked.

“Equal treatment must be extended to all citizens without distinction as to race, colour or creed,” Lau said in the memorandum.

Lau was a founder-member of the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) in 1949 together with Tan Cheng Lock, Leong Yew Koh and Lee Hau Shik.

The prominent businessman quit MCA following his unsuccessful London mission.

Born in 1894, Lau came to Malaya in 1912 when he was 18. He passed away on April 16, 1971 and is survived by three wives, six sons and three daughters.

In recognition of his dedication to the people of Ipoh, the council named a one-km stretch of road as Jalan Dato’ Lau Pak Kuan in Ipoh Garden.

In 1966, Lau became the first ethnic Chinese leader to be awarded the Datuk Seri title by the Perak Sultan.

‘Non-Malays saved Malaya from ruin’

If not for the economic contributions of the Chinese and Indians, Hindraf leader P Waythamoorthy says, the newly-born nation would have gone bankrupt.

GEORGE TOWN: The Federation of Malaya would have gone bankrupt if ethnic Indians and Chinese had not adopted the fledgling independent nation as their home, said Hindraf Makkal Sakti chief P Waythamoorthy.

“We should be grateful to Indians and Chinese who sacrificed their rights to save the newly-born Malaya from economic ruin,” he said when revealing findings of his research into thousands of documents pertaining to Malaya’s pre-independence talks.

He said the then auditor-general HM Watson’s report on the accounts of Federation of Malaya as of Dec 31, 1957 revealed that rubber and tin export constituted the top two contributors of export duty for the country.

Rubber contributions made up 68% of tax revenue at $124.4 million in 1957 and $143.9 in 1956. Tin contributions came in second at 28%, generating tax revenue of $54.2 million in 1957 and $60.2 million in 1956.

The workers in the rubber industry were predominantly Indians while the Chinese dominated tin mining.
“If the British deported the Indians and Chinese out of the Federation following independence, obviously Malaya would be bankrupt instantly,” he said.

His studies also revealed that Malaya would not have survived if the Straits Settlements of Penang and Malacca stayed out of an independent Malaya and remained British crown states.

He said Penangites and Malaccans were British subjects then entitled to United Kingdom citizenships and the Malay rulers had no powers over these two states.

“But the non-Malays sacrificed their rights to make Malaya their home,” he disclosed.

He said ethnic Indians and Chinese were dominant communities in the Straits Settlements then, numbering some 1.3 million. The difference in population and property ownership between the two communities was razor thin.

The total population of both Malays and non-Malays in the other states was about four million then.

‘Special position only for 15 years’

During constitutional talks and submissions to the Reid commission, Waythamoorthy said document revealed that the Tunku Abdul Rahman-led Umno delegation wanted the Straits Settlements to be part of the federation in return for citizenship and equality for non-Malays.

At the same time, Waythamoorthy said Tunku and Abdul Razak Hussein requested and assured the Reid Commission that the Malay special position would be implemented “only for 15 years, between 1957 and 1972, and after that all citizens shall be treated with equal status.”

He claimed that Umno later manipulated and colluded with the British to make the provisions in Article 153, which governs the Malay special position, a permanent feature against their submissions and undertakings to the Reid Commission.

Based on his findings, Waythamoorthy said the notion that Indians and Chinese were immigrants and should be thankful for the opportunity given to prosper here “should stop once and for all.”

“The country would have been impoverished should the Indians and Chinese decided to stay out of the Federation while Penang and Malacca remained as British colonies.


“Should the two states have remained under the British, the ethnic Indian and Chinese populations would be entitled to equality under the British laws. They would have prospered.

“It would have encouraged Indians and Chinese in other states to migrate to the Crown Straits Settlements and they would not be subjected to a racist system and be treated as second-class citizens like today,” argued the London-based Hindraf chairman.

Waythamoorthy is scrutinising the pre-independence documents to prepare for his US$4 trillion class action suit against the former colonial master, the British government.

He originally filed the class action suit in London on Aug 31, 2007, the 50th anniversary of Malaysia’s independence, to demand compensation for Indian Malaysians, whose ancestors were brought in by the colonial government as indentured labour.

However, the suit was stalled following the Malaysian government’s clampdown on Hindraf and arrest of several lawyers under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

The suit claimed that, after granting independence to Malaya, the British had left the Indians without representation and at the mercy of the Umno government.

Hindraf’s London-based lawyers would be in Malaysia for several days from Thursday onwards to meet potential ethnic Indian clients to become co-claimants in the suit.

‘Built on their sweat, blood and tears’

Waythamoorthy said his findings proved that the newly-born Malaya was “over-dependent” on the economic contributions of the Indian and Chinese communities.

He said the rubber and tin industries generated other parallel revenues and development for the country such as infrastructure, transport and taxes.

He believes that the socio-economic factor compelled the British to keep the Indians and Chinese in Malaya.

He said the British wanted to protect the interests of their business and that of Malay rulers, who were direct beneficiaries of the contributions of the so-called “pendatangs”.

“Non-Malays adopted Malaya as their new home as they were encouraged and welcomed by the British and Malay Rulers then. Truth is, this country was built on the blood, sweat and tears of ethnic Indians and Chinese,” he said. - FMT

About 14th Aug 2011 from Mr. Ramesh - Perak State HRP Leader

By Viki Logan, 

Mr. Ramesh and HRP supporters in Perak feel that Malaysian Indians are not given their legitimate rights that are stated in the constitution i.e. educational rights, business opportunities and also job opportunities. All grass root supporters are direct or indirectly victims of marginalisation.

He adds that the people have actually approached other Indian parties for aid or assistance, however as usual, empty promises are given. Indians in general are aware that they have been pratically sidelined by government in terms of educational rights, job and business opportunities.

In terms of publicising the upcoming 14th August event, Mr. Ramesh and HRP Supporters in Perak have been distributing flyers and have held mini forums to educate and explain to people on what this event is all about.

Generally Indians are aware that they have been sidelined for years. However, Mr. Ramesh does feel that HRP needs to do more in educating Indians of their deserving rights.

UK lawyers to meet clients for Hindraf suit

The movement's London-based lawyers will be down to meet potential clients for the class action suit against the British government.

By Athi Sankar - FMT,

GEORGE TOWN: Hindraf Makkal Sakti’s London-based lawyers, who will be here starting Thursday, want to meet potential co-clients for the class action suit against the British government.

In a statement to FMT, Hindraf counsel Imran Khan said he would be in Malaysia for several days to accept instructions from ethnic Indians as their legal representative in order to consider including them as co-claimants in the suit.

The two-man delegation would also engage in a fact-finding mission to obtain first-hand information on the perceived injustices meted out on ethnic Indians.
Hindraf would be organising a public forum on this at the Hokkien Hall in Klang on Aug 14.

Imran said the suit was initiated by Hindraf chairman P Waythamoorthy due to the former colonial master’s failure to protect the ethnic Indian community’s rights, interests and benefits under the Malaya Federal Constitution.
He said his client saw the legal action as a class action on behalf of current ethnic Malaysian Indians, whose forefathers were transported as labourers under the indentured labour system.
He pointed out that Waythmoorthy’s own great grandfather was forcibly abducted and transported to Malaya as a labourer.

The indentured labour system was devised by the British colonial office to address the acute labour shortage in Malaya. Most ethnic Indians were brought in to work in rubber plantations.

Waythamoorthy’s research of British records on Malaya revealed that rubber export was undisputedly the number one revenue earner for the country for decades, even after independence.

He originally filed the class action suit on Aug 31, 2007, in conjunction with the 50th anniversary of Malaysia’s independence, in London seeking US$4 trillion as compensation for Indian Malaysians.

However, the suit was stalled following the Malaysian government’s clampdown on Hindraf and arrest of several lawyers, including Waythamoorthy’s brother and the movement’s legal adviser P Uthayakumar, under the Internal Security Act.

Among others, the suit claimed that after granting independence to Malaya, the British had left the Indians without representation and at the mercy of Malay extremism practiced by the Umno government.

Suit to be re-filed

Following Waythamoorthy’s instruction in 2009 to re-file the stalled class action, Imran had the opportunity to consider several documents pertaining to the independence of Malaya.

After a perusal of the documents, Imran and Waythamoorthy had a conference on issues of relevance with a senior Queen’s Counsel in June, 2010.

“Due to client confidentiality, I am not able to reveal the outcome of the conference,” said Imran.
Acting on the QC’s advice, Imran wrote to the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) in London to request the release of all documents pertaining to Malaya’s independence.

The documents kept under the British Freedom of Information (FoI) Act 2000 were mostly from the period between 1945 and1957.

Imran said FCO recently confirmed that some documents in its possession remained classified.
Access to those documents would not be possible until FCO consulted relevant departments before deciding on whether to declassify the documents.

As of now, the FCO had used its discretionary powers vested under the FoI to deny Hindraf access to the documents.

Following this, Imran took legal steps under the recommended appeal procedure to challenge the FCO decision.