Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Injuction granted, demolition thwarted
The Bukit Jalil estate residents obtained an interim injunction for 21 days from the court, thwarting DBKL's plan of evicting them.
KUALA LUMPUR: Bukit Jalil estate residents scored a minor victory this morning when the court granted an injunction against the demolition of their houses.
When lawyers N Surendran and Fadiah Nadwa Fikri told the residents about the court order, the news was greeted with a resounding applause.
Also present were Human Rights Party (HRP) pro-tem secretary-general P Uthayakumar, Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) secretary-general S Arutchelvan, Sungai Siput MP Dr Michael Jeyakumar, Suhakam commissioner Muhammad Shaani Abdullah, MIC Youth members and scores of other activists.
There were no Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) enforcement officers at the scene.
DBKL is looking to evict some 41 families, some of whom have been living on the estate for generations.
In 1980, the government acquired the land for redevelopment and the land is said to be owned by Bukit Jalil Development Sdn Bhd.
The government offered RM23,000 each to residents who have worked on the estate for more than 15 years while the rest were offered RM11,000 each.
However, DBKL refused to grant four acres of land requested by the residents to build low cost houses.
On March 1, DBKL issued new eviction notices to the residents and the deadline expired yesterday.
Arutchelvan, however, reminded the residents that their problem was merely postponed for the time being.
“This is a political struggle. It’s now up to the Barisan Nasional government whether they want grant the four acre land or get a court order to quash the injunction,” said the PSM leader.
He added that there was no law in Malaysia that provided a safety net for the poor and was sceptical that the court would give residents a fair trial.
“We will take it up in the courts but it is up to the latter whether they want to uphold justice or serve to please its political masters,” he added.
Shaani called upon the government not to neglect its social responsibility when dealing with the poor.
“This is not only about former estate workers but the democratic process itself.
“As a responsible government, they should respect democracy and not resort to using emergency laws to evict people as it is against human rights,” he said, refering to the previous eviction orders issued under the Emergency Ordinance.
Among the non-governmental organisations present were Oppressed People’s Network (Jerit), Gabungan Mahasiswa Islam Malaysia (Gamis) and Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Residents Association (Permas).
KUALA LUMPUR: Bukit Jalil estate residents scored a minor victory this morning when the court granted an injunction against the demolition of their houses.Also present were Human Rights Party (HRP) pro-tem secretary-general P Uthayakumar, Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) secretary-general S Arutchelvan, Sungai Siput MP Dr Michael Jeyakumar, Suhakam commissioner Muhammad Shaani Abdullah, MIC Youth members and scores of other activists.
There were no Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) enforcement officers at the scene.
DBKL is looking to evict some 41 families, some of whom have been living on the estate for generations.
In 1980, the government acquired the land for redevelopment and the land is said to be owned by Bukit Jalil Development Sdn Bhd.
The government offered RM23,000 each to residents who have worked on the estate for more than 15 years while the rest were offered RM11,000 each.
However, DBKL refused to grant four acres of land requested by the residents to build low cost houses.
On March 1, DBKL issued new eviction notices to the residents and the deadline expired yesterday.
Arutchelvan, however, reminded the residents that their problem was merely postponed for the time being.
“This is a political struggle. It’s now up to the Barisan Nasional government whether they want grant the four acre land or get a court order to quash the injunction,” said the PSM leader.
He added that there was no law in Malaysia that provided a safety net for the poor and was sceptical that the court would give residents a fair trial.
“We will take it up in the courts but it is up to the latter whether they want to uphold justice or serve to please its political masters,” he added.
Shaani called upon the government not to neglect its social responsibility when dealing with the poor.
“This is not only about former estate workers but the democratic process itself.
“As a responsible government, they should respect democracy and not resort to using emergency laws to evict people as it is against human rights,” he said, refering to the previous eviction orders issued under the Emergency Ordinance.
Among the non-governmental organisations present were Oppressed People’s Network (Jerit), Gabungan Mahasiswa Islam Malaysia (Gamis) and Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Residents Association (Permas).
Malaysia broke human rights pledges, says watchdog report
The Malaysian Insider
by Shannon Teoh
by Shannon Teoh
KUALA LUMPUR, March 15 — Malaysia failed to live up to the human rights standards it had committed to in 2006 in its pre-election pledge to the United Nations Human Rights Council (Council), a Commonwealth human rights watchdog said yesterday.
A report by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) that corresponds to the first two years after the March 2008 election said that Malaysia made little progress to advance human rights domestically, allegedly using “draconian legislation” to stifle dissent instead.
“While Malaysia claimed in its pledge that it had succeeded in achieving a balance between human rights and security requirements, the continued use of draconian colonial-era security legislation suggests otherwise,” said the CHRI.
“Malaysia made specific commitments to advance the rights of vulnerable groups, including refugees and asylum seekers. The findings of the report indicate, however, that little substantive progress was made on this pledge.
A report by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) that corresponds to the first two years after the March 2008 election said that Malaysia made little progress to advance human rights domestically, allegedly using “draconian legislation” to stifle dissent instead.
“While Malaysia claimed in its pledge that it had succeeded in achieving a balance between human rights and security requirements, the continued use of draconian colonial-era security legislation suggests otherwise,” said the CHRI.
“Malaysia made specific commitments to advance the rights of vulnerable groups, including refugees and asylum seekers. The findings of the report indicate, however, that little substantive progress was made on this pledge.
“Malaysia further pledged to work towards making the council a strong body. Despite this pledge, the report’s findings show that Malaysia mostly voted to shield countries with human rights situations of serious concern from international scrutiny,” the international NGO said.
In 2006, Malaysia was one of 18 Asian candidates that contested the 13 seats reserved for Asia in the council. Malaysia was elected fifth in the Asian Group, with 158 votes.
Malaysia decided not to seek re-election to the council when its three-year term ended in May 2009.
The report titled “Easier Said Than Done” said that Malaysia allegedly continued to used “draconian legislation” such as sedition and press laws to stifle dissent.
It noted that “the highly controversial Internal Security Act” which allows for detention without trial remained in effect at the end of the reporting period, which was from mid-2008 to mid-2010.
“Journalists in Malaysia were reportedly harassed and opposition members were intimidated. Much needed police reforms did not occur, while police abuse, custodial deaths and extrajudicial killings were frequently reported.
“Additionally, the death penalty and corporal punishment continued to be practised. Malaysia’s National Human Rights Commission remained weak, while discrimination based on religion and ethnicity continued to be a major concern,” it added.
The CHRI also said that despite Malaysia’s pledge to actively support international action to advance the rights of vulnerable groups including children, refugees, asylum seekers and legal and illegal migrants still suffered and child marriages continued to take place.
Malaysia also discouraged the efforts of United Nations Special Rapporteur investigators on torture to consider whether the death penalty constituted a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, said the report.
“It also reacted strongly against an attempt by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression to comment on the defamation of religions,” the CHRI wrote.
The CHRI also reported that Malaysia discouraged scrutiny of Myanmar and Sri Lanka, looked at Cambodia positively, supported weaker resolutions on Congo and Sudan and abstained from voting North Korea and a resolution on discrimination based on religion or belief.
According to the CHRI website, it is an independent, non-partisan, international non-governmental organisation, mandated to ensure the practical realisation of human rights in the countries of the Commonwealth.
In 2006, Malaysia was one of 18 Asian candidates that contested the 13 seats reserved for Asia in the council. Malaysia was elected fifth in the Asian Group, with 158 votes.
Malaysia decided not to seek re-election to the council when its three-year term ended in May 2009.
The report titled “Easier Said Than Done” said that Malaysia allegedly continued to used “draconian legislation” such as sedition and press laws to stifle dissent.
It noted that “the highly controversial Internal Security Act” which allows for detention without trial remained in effect at the end of the reporting period, which was from mid-2008 to mid-2010.
“Journalists in Malaysia were reportedly harassed and opposition members were intimidated. Much needed police reforms did not occur, while police abuse, custodial deaths and extrajudicial killings were frequently reported.
“Additionally, the death penalty and corporal punishment continued to be practised. Malaysia’s National Human Rights Commission remained weak, while discrimination based on religion and ethnicity continued to be a major concern,” it added.
The CHRI also said that despite Malaysia’s pledge to actively support international action to advance the rights of vulnerable groups including children, refugees, asylum seekers and legal and illegal migrants still suffered and child marriages continued to take place.
Malaysia also discouraged the efforts of United Nations Special Rapporteur investigators on torture to consider whether the death penalty constituted a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, said the report.
“It also reacted strongly against an attempt by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression to comment on the defamation of religions,” the CHRI wrote.
The CHRI also reported that Malaysia discouraged scrutiny of Myanmar and Sri Lanka, looked at Cambodia positively, supported weaker resolutions on Congo and Sudan and abstained from voting North Korea and a resolution on discrimination based on religion or belief.
According to the CHRI website, it is an independent, non-partisan, international non-governmental organisation, mandated to ensure the practical realisation of human rights in the countries of the Commonwealth.
30% drop in serious crimes police trick: arrest and prosecute mere suspects, force them to plead guilty and send them to jail.
When they have no money to raise even RM 1,700 bail what more to pay the lawyers legal fees and cannot take leave to attend the many court hearing days the racially profiled Indian poor mere suspects are forced to plead guilty whether they are guilty or not.
While scores of thousands of these Indian poor are jailed it is win win win for UMNO, their racist police force, racist Attorney General Gani Patail and their mindless DPPs’, UMNO Courts and a big lose, lose, lose for the defenceless Indian poor.
(see NST 10/3/2011 at page 6)
Karunai Nithi @ Compassionate Justice
PROHAM are you serious?
We laud the setting up of “Persatuan Promosi Hak Asasi Manusia” (Proham).(Report in the Star 13th March 2011) As much as we are appreciative of the formation of yet another Human Rights organization in the country, we are equally apprehensive that this may be just another toothless Human Rights organization or worse still yet another organization to legitimize current UMNO regime’s racist practices.What makes us apprehensive at the outset that this organization may amount to very little more, if at all, is the fact that it totally lacks new credible Human Rights Defenders’ in the list of its officers. All the leading office holders except two are ex-Suhakam Commissioners. One does not need to be reminded of Suhakam’s record of defending Human Rights in the country – it is shameful, to say the least. And most of the office holders in this new organization are part of that same Suhakam team to whom that shameful record may be attributed. Can we be faulted for our apprehensions premised on this very very sad and continuing experience.
For starters Proham wants to begin its career on March 21st 2011 with a roundtable discussion on “ the United Nations Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination”, in conjunction with the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrim-ination.
Noble as that sounds, it appears that it will be just more vague talk as with all the toothless talk they have engaged in, in the past while in Suhakam. If the Proham Officers are serious and mean real Human Rights business and want to make a difference to the nation, and not just to use Proham to further burnish their individuals biodata, then they should conduct a more relevant and specific discussion on the current controversy surrounding the novel “Interlok”. They should invite people from across the spectrum for a panel discussion on 21st of March 2011 instead, to evaluate the truth of the allegations that the book is racially divisive and a tool to perpetuate racism by UMNO.
We would like this to be an open and meaningful discussion. It is our clear opinion that the UMNO government promotes its racist ideology through covert means by making this book a part of the compulsory education curriculum for the young of our country. Containing many serious negative racial stereotypes, this book damagingly perpetuates the Ketuanan Melayu racist ideology subtly into the future. It is this kind of racist tendencies within society that organizations like the Human Rights Party or Proham or Suhakam are supposed to check. Does Proham have it in its DNA to rise to the challenge.
So, Proham, if you are serious – do not begin in vagueness, begin with your end clear in mind.
N.Ganesan
National Advisor
Hindraf Makkal Sakthi and the Human Rights Party
2,100 (Malay muslim only) students in Japan studying under full government scholarships. But Indian poor excluded.
(see Sunday Star 13/3/2011 at page N 3)
Monday, March 14, 2011
Uthaya: What Hindraf 5 reunion?
The most well-known face of the Hindraf five claims to be in the dark about the so-called plans for a reunion.
PETALING JAYA: P Uthayakumar is in the dark about the so-called “Hindraf 5 reunion” being planned by the Malaysian Indian Voice (MI-Voice).The Human Rights Party (HRP) pro-tem secretary-general also stressed that he does not recognise the Hindraf 5.
“I am not aware of any Hindraf 5 reunion. I am not aware who the Hindraf 5 are. I am just the legal adviser to Hindraf,” he said.
Uthayakumar was responding to a FMT report on March 7 which quoted former Hindraf leader V Ganabatirao’s brother and MI-Voice chairman Raidu as stating that a reunion was on the cards.
He had said that they were persuading Uthayakumar to attend the reunion, scheduled to be held in Klang in May.
Following their mammoth street protest in 2007, five Hindraf leaders were jailed for nearly two years under the Internal Security Act.
Apart from Uthayakumar and Ganabatirao, the others were M Manoharan, K Vasanthakumar and R Kenghadharan.
However, there was a split in the ranks, leading Uthayakumar and his brother Waythamoorthy to rename Hindraf as Hindraf-Makkal Sakti.
Uthayakumar’s three conditions
Meanwhile, Ganabatirao told FMT that MI-Voice had roped in Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar’s aide, T Balakrishnan to negotiate with Uthayakumar to participate in the reunion dinner.
According to him, Uthayakumar had listed three conditions to confirm his attendance.
They are:
- The RM50,000 bail money posted by Raidu for Uthayakumar must be returned to Uthayakumar.
- A total of 15 parliamentary and 38 state seats that have been identified must be allocated for HRP in the next general election.
- Only Waythamoorthy, who is currently in London, must be acknowledged as Hindraf’s leader.
“The RM50,000 is still deposited in the court because Uthayakumar’s case has not ended,” he said, adding that the movement wanted to use the money for the development of Tamil schools.
He said it was impossible to agree to the second condition because there were already Indian politicians being elected reps in the identified seats.
As for the third condition, Ganabatirao stressed on the importance of equal status as opposed to Waythamoorthy being crowned leader.
MI- Voice said that the reunion dinner would be attended by Pakatan Rakyat heavyweights such as Anwar Ibrahim, Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat and Lim Guan Eng.
HRP: Legal strategy in place to free 53
(Malaysiakini) The Human Rights Party today said that it has formulated a legal strategy to force the government to drop the charges against 53 of its national and grassroots leaders.
"We are preparing a legal strategy to file in the KL High Court. I don't want to reveal too much about it but we are asking the court to declare the 53 charges of taking part in an activity organised by an illegal organisation as ultra vires Article 10 of the constitution," said HRP secretary-general P Uthayakumar at a press conference at the party headquarters in Bangsar.
Article 10 of the federal constitution provides for the freedom of association.
Uthayakumar also questioned the arrest under section 43(5) of the Societies Act for participating in an illegal society, contending that Hindraf has already submitted an application with the Registrar of Societies.
"We submitted our application. It is they who denied it. If at all Hindraf is illegal, then so is Umno because Umno was declared illegal in the 1987 crisis. It is only Umno Baru that is not illegal."
However, he points out, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak calls himself the president of Umno, not Umno Baru.
He argued that under Article 8 of the constitution, all citizens are guaranteed equal treatment and protection under the law.
"If they arrest us, they should also arrest the PM and Umno ministers," contended Uthayakumar who maintains that Umno is an illegal organisation.
Uthayakumar was referring to 53 HRP leaders who are being charged with participating in an activity organised by an illegal organisation.
The 53 were charged during the course of the last two weeks.
He said that the total bail required by the court thus far is RM111,000. While HRP has collected RM18,870 in donations from the public, the party appeals for more help to alleviate the costs, said Uthayakumar.
"We are preparing a legal strategy to file in the KL High Court. I don't want to reveal too much about it but we are asking the court to declare the 53 charges of taking part in an activity organised by an illegal organisation as ultra vires Article 10 of the constitution," said HRP secretary-general P Uthayakumar at a press conference at the party headquarters in Bangsar.Article 10 of the federal constitution provides for the freedom of association.
Uthayakumar also questioned the arrest under section 43(5) of the Societies Act for participating in an illegal society, contending that Hindraf has already submitted an application with the Registrar of Societies.
"We submitted our application. It is they who denied it. If at all Hindraf is illegal, then so is Umno because Umno was declared illegal in the 1987 crisis. It is only Umno Baru that is not illegal."
However, he points out, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak calls himself the president of Umno, not Umno Baru.
He argued that under Article 8 of the constitution, all citizens are guaranteed equal treatment and protection under the law.
"If they arrest us, they should also arrest the PM and Umno ministers," contended Uthayakumar who maintains that Umno is an illegal organisation.Uthayakumar was referring to 53 HRP leaders who are being charged with participating in an activity organised by an illegal organisation.
The 53 were charged during the course of the last two weeks.
He said that the total bail required by the court thus far is RM111,000. While HRP has collected RM18,870 in donations from the public, the party appeals for more help to alleviate the costs, said Uthayakumar.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Apologies made, but Interlok unresolved
'As usual, whenever non-Malays are insulted and bullied, it is a 'misunderstanding'. Had it been the other way around, all hell would have had to be paid.'
Book closed on KKB school Interlok issue
Keturunan Malaysia: What nonsense is this? Why should the Indian boys and their parents apologise? To save the 'masters' faces'? Never mind if the latter are the ones who screwed up the issue first? That's the trouble with us, we are quick to settle for crumbs.
Anonymous_3f74: One cannot fault the students and parents as they did the right thing; all Indian students should rightly return the book or just dump it. The headmaster, discipline teacher, PTA (Parent and Teacher Association) head and police are clearly in the wrong as all of them have exceeded their line of authority and should be dealt with accordingly.
Of course, that will never happen. So to now claim that "they have apologised to one another" is absurd and it is obvious that the students and parents were intimidated and forced to withdraw their reports and offer apologies.
This is a good lesson to those Indians who voted for MIC representative P Kamalanathan. When this hand-kissing stooge won the Hulu Selangor seat, the Indians who voted for him sold their soul to the devil. The irony is that few expected it to boomerang this fast.
JBGuy: The discipline teacher should be charged with sedition and her lies pertaining to the student's brother bringing 100 gangsters is a reflection of her dishonesty. Clearly, she has no moral values. She is a disgrace to Malays and Muslims in Malaysia.
Vijay47: Yes, as usual, whenever non-Malays are insulted and bullied, it is a 'misunderstanding'. Had it been the other way around, all hell would have had to be paid.
Even here, the victims were taken to the police station by one who was clearly abusing his position. Most probably he would be given a promotion for the heroic way he defended his race and religion.
Gerard Samuel Vijayan: Come GE13 if the Indians in Hulu Selangor have any self-respect left they should kick out Kamalanathan out for good. The man is nothing but an apologist for Umno and his servile attitude towards the Malays means that he has no pride in his own race, religion and culture.
If the students don't want to read 'Interlok', that is their right. Of course, that will cause them problems when it comes to their Malay literature exam paper but that is something for the students to reconcile with.
But that does not give the racist discipline teacher and her bigoted PTA chairman who misused his police powers to abuse, denigrate and detain these students using derogatory words like "pariah" and "keling". The parents should sue the police for false imprisonment/unlawful detention and the teacher for slander.
Artchan: Reports withdrawn and everybody is happy. Meanwhile, the book 'Interlok' is still in use and the Indians are still called 'pariah', and this is considered solved? Kamalanathan has sold out the Indians again.
Artchan: Reports withdrawn and everybody is happy. Meanwhile, the book 'Interlok' is still in use and the Indians are still called 'pariah', and this is considered solved? Kamalanathan has sold out the Indians again.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Book closed on KKB school Interlok issue
(Malaysiakini) Tensions between a faculty member and parents of students who locked horns over the novel Interlok in the Kuala Kubu Bharu school have simmered down after a meeting yesterday morning.
At the two-hour meeting, the parents and the discipline teacher who had allegedly verbally abused the students when they tried to return their novels, was said to have agreed to bury the hatchet.
"Everything is calm and resolved. All parties have apologized to each other," said district education officer Mat Jah Roslan when contacted.
According to Mat Jah, who was at the meeting alongside Hulu Selangor parliamentarian P Kamalanathan and representatives from state education department (JPN) and the Parent-Teacher Association, the stand-off was merely a misunderstanding.
As such, the police report lodged by the discipline teacher and a counter-report by the parents have all been withdrawn.
In her report, the discipline teacher alleged that one of the 17-year-old's elder brother had brought 100 thugs from Kuala Lumpur to intimidate her and her family.
The teen's brother was, however, out of town when the incident was said to have taken place.
When questioned, Mat Jah refused to divulge details of the meeting and how the misunderstanding resulting in such allegations had occurred, preferring to close the book on the matter.
Indirect school lesson
The three form five students involved were reportedly brought into the Kuala Kubu Bharu police station for a 10-hour questioning session, without the presence of their guardians, after they tried to return the novel to their principal.
They were hauled in by PTA chairperson Baktiar Md Rashid, who is also a police officer, provoking the ire of a parent who questioned why her child was taken out of the school without her consent.
According to the students, they could not to return the book to the principal as they were stopped by the discipline teacher and made to disperse.
The teacher had reportedly said: "Kenapa orang India garang? India memang suka rosakkan nama sekolah. Keling memang dasar pariah sejak sejarah lagi" (Why are the Indians so fierce? Indians really like to tarnish the school's name. The keling have been pariahs since historical times).
Meanwhile, when contacted, Hulu Selangor police chief Norel-Azmi Yahya Affendi said that police have concluded their investigations on the matter.
"We have now referred the matter to the legal department of the Shah Alam contingent headquarters, and are awaiting their decision," he told Malaysiakini yesterday.
At the two-hour meeting, the parents and the discipline teacher who had allegedly verbally abused the students when they tried to return their novels, was said to have agreed to bury the hatchet.
"Everything is calm and resolved. All parties have apologized to each other," said district education officer Mat Jah Roslan when contacted. According to Mat Jah, who was at the meeting alongside Hulu Selangor parliamentarian P Kamalanathan and representatives from state education department (JPN) and the Parent-Teacher Association, the stand-off was merely a misunderstanding.
As such, the police report lodged by the discipline teacher and a counter-report by the parents have all been withdrawn.
In her report, the discipline teacher alleged that one of the 17-year-old's elder brother had brought 100 thugs from Kuala Lumpur to intimidate her and her family.
The teen's brother was, however, out of town when the incident was said to have taken place.
When questioned, Mat Jah refused to divulge details of the meeting and how the misunderstanding resulting in such allegations had occurred, preferring to close the book on the matter.
Indirect school lesson
The three form five students involved were reportedly brought into the Kuala Kubu Bharu police station for a 10-hour questioning session, without the presence of their guardians, after they tried to return the novel to their principal.
They were hauled in by PTA chairperson Baktiar Md Rashid, who is also a police officer, provoking the ire of a parent who questioned why her child was taken out of the school without her consent.
According to the students, they could not to return the book to the principal as they were stopped by the discipline teacher and made to disperse.
The teacher had reportedly said: "Kenapa orang India garang? India memang suka rosakkan nama sekolah. Keling memang dasar pariah sejak sejarah lagi" (Why are the Indians so fierce? Indians really like to tarnish the school's name. The keling have been pariahs since historical times).
Meanwhile, when contacted, Hulu Selangor police chief Norel-Azmi Yahya Affendi said that police have concluded their investigations on the matter.
"We have now referred the matter to the legal department of the Shah Alam contingent headquarters, and are awaiting their decision," he told Malaysiakini yesterday.
UMNO’s Institutionalized racism – a curse we all need to rid this nation of.
Racism as defined by Stokely Carmichael and Charles V Hamilton in their seminal book “ Black Power” in 1967 is still very applicable 40 odd years on and here in Malaysia. Their definition of racism is “ the predication of decisions and policies on considerations of race for the purpose of subordinating a racial group and maintaining control over that group.” Racism they go on to add is both overt and covert. Acts by individuals they call individual racism is overt and acts committed collectively, they call institutionalized racism is less overt, and in most instances covert.
The first type , individual racism is the sort we see in the likes of utterances of the School Heads, Senior BTN officials and the Mufti of Perlis and the most recent case of a former police PIBG head taking 6 Indian students to the police station who were interrogated for 10 long hours because they rejected the racist book “Interlok”. This type of racism can be easily captured by reports, by the phone or other cameras and displayed in the youtube, in blogs and such other devices and generally it is brought out by acts of commission. There is generally more public condemnation of this type of racism.
The second type, institutional racism is less overt, is subtle, but systematic and many orders of magnitude more pervasive. It is less identifiable in terms of specific individuals committing the acts. This second type originates in the operation of established and respected forces in society and is far less recognizable and it generally receives little public condemnation.
When scores of Indian youth are killed in custody, there is little uproar, for after all they are the scum of society. When there is widespread statelessness among the Indian poor, too bad these stupid people do not know how to take care of themselves, that is their damned fault. When in desperation Indian individuals and families perish in suicides there is public sympathy and derision at the same time for the dead but not the acknowledgement of the impact the system has had on them. When the primary schools that Indian children go to are in shambles, well they have a choice to go the national schools don’t they. This is after all the natural order of things..is it not, so argue the beneficiaries of the racist system.
Institutionalized racism manifests itself in oppression of multiple forms within every sphere of social relations – economic exploitation, political subordination, cultural devaluation, psychological violation,verbal abuse, police harassment, etc. These operate so so normally and naturally and are so much part of the existing institutions of our society that the common people are barely conscious of their operation. Causal racial prejudices have over time transformed into a systematized and codifies ideology and practice of racial subordination.
Najib, however in his UMNO general assembly speech on the 15th of October 2009 said, “If Malays are truly racist as alleged we would not have compromised on the cultures of other ethnic groups being practiced here……..We would also not have allowed vernacular schools to be established, …..The true meaning of racism would be like apartheid as previously practiced by South Africa..”.
So, Najib the leader of the beneficiaries of the system denies the existence of anyhting like institutionalized racism?
To answer this let us take Najib’s suggestion and compare with what existed in the Apartheid regime of South Africa which no one will argue was not a rpime example of institutionalized racism.
Here are some key features of South Africa’s Apartheid (Apartness) system:
1) A central feature of the Apartheid rule was the categorization of all the South African People into Whites, Coloreds, Indian and Blacks – their Bangsa. Everything else was built on this categorization.
2) Using this racial categorization it decided where each category of people lived, who they married, who they had sex with, where they worked and how they moved about.
3) The Group Areas Act of 1950 partitioned the country into areas allocated to different racial groups. Bantu Authorities Act of 1951 created separate government structures for blacks and was the first piece of legislation established to support the government’s plan of separate development in the Bantustans
4) They segregated education, medical care, and other public services on the basis of this racial categorisation .
5) They all had to carry Identity cards which indicated their “Bangsa” so to speak.
6) They had the apartheid laws – The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949, Immorality Act of 1950, The Population Registration Act of 1950 and so on. And they had laws of repression. Laws such as Suppression of Communism Act of 1950, The Public Safety Act of 1953 and the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1953, The Riotous Assembly Act, The Terrorism Act to name a few of the notorious ones.
7) To oversee the apartheid implementation, the bureaucracy expanded, and, by 1977, there were more than half a million white state employees.
8) Blacks were not allowed to run businesses or professional practices in those areas designated as "white South Africa" without a permit.
9) Each of the 4 categories of South Africans had their own education system.
Now let us look at comparative situations in the Malaysian rgime:
1) A central feature of our system is also our categorization into Bumiputras, Chinese, Indians and Others from birth to death.Everywhere we go we have to declare Bangsa, Ugama – at birth, at school registration, in all the applications we make, at marriage, at death and in many many more situations.
2) Large areas of most cities and towns are segregated not by law, but by practice and without the need for such segregation laws. Clear example is in Penang the Island is mainly populated by Chinese, and the Malays mostly prefer to live on the Mainland. In Shah Alam it is mainly Malays. In Seremban it is mainly Chinese in locations like Seremban Garden, and Malays in Ampangan or Paroi areas. In Kuching you have South and North Kuching for the Chinese and the Malays. In practice but not in law.
3) In several housing areas State Consent is required if one wants to sell the property especially if it is in a predominantly Malay area. It is quicker to get consent for inter Bumiputra sale than it is for a sale across the Bumiputra /Non-Bumiputra divide. Again in practice but not in law.
4) Malaysia has repressive laws like the Internal Security Act to put away who UMNO considers to be trouble makers without having to go through the court processes, the Official Secrets Act to blot out all decisions made by the UMNO controlled Administration from public view, The Printing Presses and Publications Act to control the print media from publishing too much anti UMNO news, The Seditions Act to shut people up from speaking up againts UMNO policies – to name a few of the repressive laws that helps maintain the current regime.
5) The bureaucracy is entirely made up of largely one ethnic group , Bumiputras – eight hundred thousands of them, all implementing UMNO Policy. The Police force is almost entirely Malay, the armed forces are almost entirely Malay. The judicial system is almost entirely Malay. The public Universitieis are almost entirely Malay. The GLC managements are entirely Malay. Again in practice but not in law.
6) Most Government and Government linked businesses are off limits to non- Bumiputras. There is a complete system of screening vendors that limits vendors to almost entirely Bumiputras.
![Mara_Phd_Plans[1]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sgBn9KkJBHhbihpE21IjqR_q9bPNa35kNQ6COHSRtMxRZmv6OrqjUCUevCv3QwK2S6Haph2xyfKBBJmmp0TAY4GxcYoLw8QKCYGNNvi-3D3_t9H2OyqyKzz_R5Zhh5qNMvll4vcCW873idMNE=s0-d "Mara_Phd_Plans[1]")
7) Business licences are largely awarded to Bumiputras or must have mandatory minimum Bumiputra participation – Bank Licences, Educational Institutions Licences, Permits in the Transportation businesses and so many more.
8) Participation in all government development schemes are entirely for Bumiputras – MARA, FELDA, FELCRA, RISDA, PERDA, KESEDAR, KEJORA to name a few. In practice but not in law.
9) Educational opportunities in Public Educational Institutions are grossly in favour of Bumiputras.
Mara_Phd_Plans[1]
10) Cross religious relationships between Non muslim Malaysians and Muslim Malaysians is a complicated affair, especially if a problem develops along the way.
If we consider these two sets of situations it is apparent that there are significant number of similarities between the apartheid system and the Malaysian system created, developed, finetuned by UMNO from 1957 to 2011. The key difference seems to be the lack of ambiguity in the South African expression in all its laws. In Malaysia a lot of the racism is in practice not in the law. To any right thinking person it is so obvious, the racism that underlies our daily life. Therefore it is really audacious for Najib to say UMNO is not racist – the party that is responsible for this terrible state of affairs. He is in a terrible state of denial still..
Allowing the practice of cultures of the Indians or the Chinese in Malaysia or allowing Chinese Medium and Tamil Medium schools in Malaysia, or of allowing the use of Chinese and Indian names does not in any way define the character of the regime in Malaysia. Allowing all this actually now becomes convenient argument for UMNO to take everything else away, it seems. It is the structure of the economic political system that defines the character of our system. And it is blatantly racist.
I do not say the Malay people are racists. I am saying that UMNO, the political party is. It is indeed a blue blooded racist party – the entire cause for the racism that is so rampant in Malaysia.
Racism is “the domination of one ethnic group over other ethnic groups on the basis of some claimed superiority”. In South Africa – White Supremacy, In Hitler’s Germany – the Superiority of the German race, In the British Empire – the Civilizing Burden of the White Man, in Malaysia, Ketuanan Melayu or Malay Supremacy.
Do we need to say more.
Let us all wake up and in solidarity fight this curse of institutionalized racism. We have no choice if we all Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Dusuns, Muruts, Dayaks want a vibrant prosperous and robust nation in Malaysia.
Naragan
The first type , individual racism is the sort we see in the likes of utterances of the School Heads, Senior BTN officials and the Mufti of Perlis and the most recent case of a former police PIBG head taking 6 Indian students to the police station who were interrogated for 10 long hours because they rejected the racist book “Interlok”. This type of racism can be easily captured by reports, by the phone or other cameras and displayed in the youtube, in blogs and such other devices and generally it is brought out by acts of commission. There is generally more public condemnation of this type of racism.
The second type, institutional racism is less overt, is subtle, but systematic and many orders of magnitude more pervasive. It is less identifiable in terms of specific individuals committing the acts. This second type originates in the operation of established and respected forces in society and is far less recognizable and it generally receives little public condemnation.
When scores of Indian youth are killed in custody, there is little uproar, for after all they are the scum of society. When there is widespread statelessness among the Indian poor, too bad these stupid people do not know how to take care of themselves, that is their damned fault. When in desperation Indian individuals and families perish in suicides there is public sympathy and derision at the same time for the dead but not the acknowledgement of the impact the system has had on them. When the primary schools that Indian children go to are in shambles, well they have a choice to go the national schools don’t they. This is after all the natural order of things..is it not, so argue the beneficiaries of the racist system.
Institutionalized racism manifests itself in oppression of multiple forms within every sphere of social relations – economic exploitation, political subordination, cultural devaluation, psychological violation,verbal abuse, police harassment, etc. These operate so so normally and naturally and are so much part of the existing institutions of our society that the common people are barely conscious of their operation. Causal racial prejudices have over time transformed into a systematized and codifies ideology and practice of racial subordination.
Najib, however in his UMNO general assembly speech on the 15th of October 2009 said, “If Malays are truly racist as alleged we would not have compromised on the cultures of other ethnic groups being practiced here……..We would also not have allowed vernacular schools to be established, …..The true meaning of racism would be like apartheid as previously practiced by South Africa..”.
So, Najib the leader of the beneficiaries of the system denies the existence of anyhting like institutionalized racism?
To answer this let us take Najib’s suggestion and compare with what existed in the Apartheid regime of South Africa which no one will argue was not a rpime example of institutionalized racism.
Here are some key features of South Africa’s Apartheid (Apartness) system:
1) A central feature of the Apartheid rule was the categorization of all the South African People into Whites, Coloreds, Indian and Blacks – their Bangsa. Everything else was built on this categorization.
2) Using this racial categorization it decided where each category of people lived, who they married, who they had sex with, where they worked and how they moved about.
3) The Group Areas Act of 1950 partitioned the country into areas allocated to different racial groups. Bantu Authorities Act of 1951 created separate government structures for blacks and was the first piece of legislation established to support the government’s plan of separate development in the Bantustans
4) They segregated education, medical care, and other public services on the basis of this racial categorisation .
5) They all had to carry Identity cards which indicated their “Bangsa” so to speak.
6) They had the apartheid laws – The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949, Immorality Act of 1950, The Population Registration Act of 1950 and so on. And they had laws of repression. Laws such as Suppression of Communism Act of 1950, The Public Safety Act of 1953 and the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1953, The Riotous Assembly Act, The Terrorism Act to name a few of the notorious ones.
7) To oversee the apartheid implementation, the bureaucracy expanded, and, by 1977, there were more than half a million white state employees.
8) Blacks were not allowed to run businesses or professional practices in those areas designated as "white South Africa" without a permit.
9) Each of the 4 categories of South Africans had their own education system.
Now let us look at comparative situations in the Malaysian rgime:
1) A central feature of our system is also our categorization into Bumiputras, Chinese, Indians and Others from birth to death.Everywhere we go we have to declare Bangsa, Ugama – at birth, at school registration, in all the applications we make, at marriage, at death and in many many more situations.
2) Large areas of most cities and towns are segregated not by law, but by practice and without the need for such segregation laws. Clear example is in Penang the Island is mainly populated by Chinese, and the Malays mostly prefer to live on the Mainland. In Shah Alam it is mainly Malays. In Seremban it is mainly Chinese in locations like Seremban Garden, and Malays in Ampangan or Paroi areas. In Kuching you have South and North Kuching for the Chinese and the Malays. In practice but not in law.
3) In several housing areas State Consent is required if one wants to sell the property especially if it is in a predominantly Malay area. It is quicker to get consent for inter Bumiputra sale than it is for a sale across the Bumiputra /Non-Bumiputra divide. Again in practice but not in law.
4) Malaysia has repressive laws like the Internal Security Act to put away who UMNO considers to be trouble makers without having to go through the court processes, the Official Secrets Act to blot out all decisions made by the UMNO controlled Administration from public view, The Printing Presses and Publications Act to control the print media from publishing too much anti UMNO news, The Seditions Act to shut people up from speaking up againts UMNO policies – to name a few of the repressive laws that helps maintain the current regime.
5) The bureaucracy is entirely made up of largely one ethnic group , Bumiputras – eight hundred thousands of them, all implementing UMNO Policy. The Police force is almost entirely Malay, the armed forces are almost entirely Malay. The judicial system is almost entirely Malay. The public Universitieis are almost entirely Malay. The GLC managements are entirely Malay. Again in practice but not in law.
6) Most Government and Government linked businesses are off limits to non- Bumiputras. There is a complete system of screening vendors that limits vendors to almost entirely Bumiputras.
![Mara_Phd_Plans[1]](http://www.hrp-my.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Mara_Phd_Plans1.png "Mara_Phd_Plans[1]")
7) Business licences are largely awarded to Bumiputras or must have mandatory minimum Bumiputra participation – Bank Licences, Educational Institutions Licences, Permits in the Transportation businesses and so many more.8) Participation in all government development schemes are entirely for Bumiputras – MARA, FELDA, FELCRA, RISDA, PERDA, KESEDAR, KEJORA to name a few. In practice but not in law.
9) Educational opportunities in Public Educational Institutions are grossly in favour of Bumiputras.
Mara_Phd_Plans[1]
10) Cross religious relationships between Non muslim Malaysians and Muslim Malaysians is a complicated affair, especially if a problem develops along the way.
If we consider these two sets of situations it is apparent that there are significant number of similarities between the apartheid system and the Malaysian system created, developed, finetuned by UMNO from 1957 to 2011. The key difference seems to be the lack of ambiguity in the South African expression in all its laws. In Malaysia a lot of the racism is in practice not in the law. To any right thinking person it is so obvious, the racism that underlies our daily life. Therefore it is really audacious for Najib to say UMNO is not racist – the party that is responsible for this terrible state of affairs. He is in a terrible state of denial still..
Allowing the practice of cultures of the Indians or the Chinese in Malaysia or allowing Chinese Medium and Tamil Medium schools in Malaysia, or of allowing the use of Chinese and Indian names does not in any way define the character of the regime in Malaysia. Allowing all this actually now becomes convenient argument for UMNO to take everything else away, it seems. It is the structure of the economic political system that defines the character of our system. And it is blatantly racist.
I do not say the Malay people are racists. I am saying that UMNO, the political party is. It is indeed a blue blooded racist party – the entire cause for the racism that is so rampant in Malaysia.
Racism is “the domination of one ethnic group over other ethnic groups on the basis of some claimed superiority”. In South Africa – White Supremacy, In Hitler’s Germany – the Superiority of the German race, In the British Empire – the Civilizing Burden of the White Man, in Malaysia, Ketuanan Melayu or Malay Supremacy.
Do we need to say more.
Let us all wake up and in solidarity fight this curse of institutionalized racism. We have no choice if we all Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Dusuns, Muruts, Dayaks want a vibrant prosperous and robust nation in Malaysia.
Naragan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
