"We've got to face the fact that some people say you fight fire best with fire, but we say you put fire out best with water. We say you don't fight racism with racism. We're gonna fight racism with solidarity." - Fred Hampton
INTERVIEW In this second part of a two-part interview, lawyer-cum-activist Haris Ibrahim explained his views on the Malaysian dilemmas that fuel the conflict between the forces which claim to represent change and the current Umno regime.
What is your opinion on affirmative action and why do you think a need-based approach is needed in Malaysia and with the racial make-up of opposition parties, is a need-based approach even workable?
My opinion today is as it was 40 years ago, when I contended with my late father that an affirmative system that had built into it a quota system, ostensibly to preferentially aid one community, on considerations of ethnicity rather than need-based at the expense of others, would create a monster.
It has come to pass.
Today, we have in our midst, members of the Malay community who believe this to be a constitutional right that must carry on until Judgement Day.
We are a rich nation, natural resources-wise. Those resources applied properly and transparently, we should be giving Singapore a run for its recently earned status as the world's richest nation, per capita-wise.
Instead, 40 percent of the population languish in poverty, and this will continue as long as we allow Umno-BN to continue with its race-based divide and rule of the nation.
I do not think it is fair to categorise the main opposition parties as racially made-up. Much of this perception stems from the mainstream media painting them as such.
True, DAP has long been perceived as a Chinese-based party, membership-wise, but surely it is to their fundamentals that we must look to. And DAP has been making efforts to woo more non-Chinese into their ranks.
PAS, first through its Kelab Penyokong PAS and now its non-Muslim wing, is making efforts to shake off its Muslim-only facade. Let us also remember their emphasis now on a welfare state rather than a theocratic one.
Having said this, I take the view that the push for a need-based affirmative programme must come from the people and not the politicians. In this regard, the Social Inclusion Agenda now being pushed by SABM (Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia) and Hakam (National Human Rights Society) deserves careful consideration by all who have a genuine concern for the 40 percent poor and marginalised in the country.
The discourse normally revolves around how Umno has divided this country along racial/religious lines. What role (if any) do you think the non-Malays have played in maintaining those lines?
Umno could not have done it on its own.
Post the advent of BN in place of the Alliance, MCA, MIC and all the other component parties in BN, including those in Sabah and Sarawak, have played a supporting role.
If nothing else, their leaders looked the other way as Umno weaved its race-based politics into the fabric of the nation, and partook of the looting of the national wealth whilst this was going on.
Do you think that vernacular schools are an impediment to national cohesiveness?
Schools must be for the sole purpose of imparting knowledge to our young to prepare them to excel as global citizens.
Vernacular, or mother-tongue education, should not be seen differently and must be fully supported as a basic right of all.
But like so many other benign matters, vernacular schooling, politicised under the charge of Umno-BN, becomes venomous.
Do you think Islam is an impediment to an egalitarian society?
Islam is not. It's politicising and being used as a divisive tool by the powers-that-be is.
Leave faith, in any belief system, for that matter, to be one between man and his Maker to the exclusion of all others, and this world - not just our nation - will be a more peaceful place.
How do you view the so-called Christian political awakening?
I have always known the Catholic community to be more politically aware and active than the other denominations, but I would not categorise what we see today as a Christian political awakening.
Since the run-up to GE12 to the present time, people generally have become more conscious of their rights and the failings of the present regime, and have shown a greater readiness to involve themselves in the processes in the nation.
Do you think there should be laws to censure hate speech?
Yes, there should be.
The Sedition Act should be done away with and in its place, a law that criminalises the racist speeches of the likes of (former prime minister) Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Perkasa's Ibrahim Ali that may have a tendency to sow enmity between different ethnic groups.
There is no such thing as absolute freedom of speech. Libel an individual with malicious and slanderous lies and be prepared to pay with a hefty award in damages.
Should malicious and slanderous lies directed at no one in particular but likely to cause race and religious tension between different communities and, worse, so intended, go unchecked?
I don't think so.
Do you think there should be a race relations act?
Almost all of us have racist tendencies to varying degrees which, wittingly or otherwise, we picked up from our elders and we, in turn, pass down to the next generation.
A race relations act which criminalises acts seen as 'racist' will help to, in time, weed these tendencies out from our society.
An example might help. We still see coffee shops with signage announcing, 'Please do not spit', even in this day and age.
A law to criminalise spitting in any public place, and effectively policed and enforced through prosecution through our courts, may one day see those signage become redundant.
Similarly, if it was the law that if a child below say, age 15, was heard uttering "keling", "malai quai", or "cina babi", the parent would be charged with an offence, and this law was effectively policed and enforced, I dare say we would hear less and less of these utterances from future generations.
So, yes, we need a race relations act.
What is your view on syariah law and do you believe that this dual system of laws has further divided Malaysians?
To share my views on syariah without running the risk of being grossly misunderstood would require far more space than this interview will allow.
Dual system of laws?
There is no dual system of laws written into the constitution. The supreme law is the federal constitution.
Our superior courts comprise only the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the civil high courts.
The syariah courts belong to same category of the many other courts commonly referred to as the inferior tribunals.
What is your opinion on affirmative action and why do you think a need-based approach is needed in Malaysia and with the racial make-up of opposition parties, is a need-based approach even workable?
My opinion today is as it was 40 years ago, when I contended with my late father that an affirmative system that had built into it a quota system, ostensibly to preferentially aid one community, on considerations of ethnicity rather than need-based at the expense of others, would create a monster.
It has come to pass.
Today, we have in our midst, members of the Malay community who believe this to be a constitutional right that must carry on until Judgement Day.We are a rich nation, natural resources-wise. Those resources applied properly and transparently, we should be giving Singapore a run for its recently earned status as the world's richest nation, per capita-wise.
Instead, 40 percent of the population languish in poverty, and this will continue as long as we allow Umno-BN to continue with its race-based divide and rule of the nation.
I do not think it is fair to categorise the main opposition parties as racially made-up. Much of this perception stems from the mainstream media painting them as such.
True, DAP has long been perceived as a Chinese-based party, membership-wise, but surely it is to their fundamentals that we must look to. And DAP has been making efforts to woo more non-Chinese into their ranks.
PAS, first through its Kelab Penyokong PAS and now its non-Muslim wing, is making efforts to shake off its Muslim-only facade. Let us also remember their emphasis now on a welfare state rather than a theocratic one.
Having said this, I take the view that the push for a need-based affirmative programme must come from the people and not the politicians. In this regard, the Social Inclusion Agenda now being pushed by SABM (Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia) and Hakam (National Human Rights Society) deserves careful consideration by all who have a genuine concern for the 40 percent poor and marginalised in the country.
The discourse normally revolves around how Umno has divided this country along racial/religious lines. What role (if any) do you think the non-Malays have played in maintaining those lines?
Umno could not have done it on its own.
Post the advent of BN in place of the Alliance, MCA, MIC and all the other component parties in BN, including those in Sabah and Sarawak, have played a supporting role.
If nothing else, their leaders looked the other way as Umno weaved its race-based politics into the fabric of the nation, and partook of the looting of the national wealth whilst this was going on.
Do you think that vernacular schools are an impediment to national cohesiveness?
Schools must be for the sole purpose of imparting knowledge to our young to prepare them to excel as global citizens.
Vernacular, or mother-tongue education, should not be seen differently and must be fully supported as a basic right of all.
But like so many other benign matters, vernacular schooling, politicised under the charge of Umno-BN, becomes venomous.
Do you think Islam is an impediment to an egalitarian society?
Islam is not. It's politicising and being used as a divisive tool by the powers-that-be is.
Leave faith, in any belief system, for that matter, to be one between man and his Maker to the exclusion of all others, and this world - not just our nation - will be a more peaceful place.
How do you view the so-called Christian political awakening?
I have always known the Catholic community to be more politically aware and active than the other denominations, but I would not categorise what we see today as a Christian political awakening.
Since the run-up to GE12 to the present time, people generally have become more conscious of their rights and the failings of the present regime, and have shown a greater readiness to involve themselves in the processes in the nation.
Do you think there should be laws to censure hate speech?
Yes, there should be.
The Sedition Act should be done away with and in its place, a law that criminalises the racist speeches of the likes of (former prime minister) Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Perkasa's Ibrahim Ali that may have a tendency to sow enmity between different ethnic groups.
There is no such thing as absolute freedom of speech. Libel an individual with malicious and slanderous lies and be prepared to pay with a hefty award in damages.
Should malicious and slanderous lies directed at no one in particular but likely to cause race and religious tension between different communities and, worse, so intended, go unchecked?
I don't think so.
Do you think there should be a race relations act?
Almost all of us have racist tendencies to varying degrees which, wittingly or otherwise, we picked up from our elders and we, in turn, pass down to the next generation.
A race relations act which criminalises acts seen as 'racist' will help to, in time, weed these tendencies out from our society.An example might help. We still see coffee shops with signage announcing, 'Please do not spit', even in this day and age.
A law to criminalise spitting in any public place, and effectively policed and enforced through prosecution through our courts, may one day see those signage become redundant.
Similarly, if it was the law that if a child below say, age 15, was heard uttering "keling", "malai quai", or "cina babi", the parent would be charged with an offence, and this law was effectively policed and enforced, I dare say we would hear less and less of these utterances from future generations.
So, yes, we need a race relations act.
What is your view on syariah law and do you believe that this dual system of laws has further divided Malaysians?
To share my views on syariah without running the risk of being grossly misunderstood would require far more space than this interview will allow.
Dual system of laws?
There is no dual system of laws written into the constitution. The supreme law is the federal constitution.
Our superior courts comprise only the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the civil high courts.
The syariah courts belong to same category of the many other courts commonly referred to as the inferior tribunals.
(Former lord president) Salleh (Abas), chairing a five-man coram of the Federal Court, did not think so, saying in the case of Che Omar Che Soh some 24 years ago:
"It can be seen that during the British colonial period, through their system of indirect rule and establishment of secular institutions, Islamic law was rendered isolated in a narrow confinement of the law of marriage, divorce and inheritance only.
"In our view, it is in this sense that the framers of the Constitution understood the meaning of the word ‘Islam' in the context of Article 3."
To this date, his pronouncement of the law has never been overturned or repudiated.
Epilogue
If we do not heed the lessons of the long Umno watch, perhaps there will come a day when Pakatan has to face an ABU (Anything But Umno) of its own.
Robert Fisk relates how the uncompromising Israeli journalist Amira Haas (Ha'aretz) gave the best description of the vocation of a journalist, which was "Our job is to monitor the centres of power".
I would like to think that this is the deeper meaning of ABU and the role we should play as citizens committed to the political process.
"In our view, it is in this sense that the framers of the Constitution understood the meaning of the word ‘Islam' in the context of Article 3."
To this date, his pronouncement of the law has never been overturned or repudiated.
Epilogue
If we do not heed the lessons of the long Umno watch, perhaps there will come a day when Pakatan has to face an ABU (Anything But Umno) of its own.
Robert Fisk relates how the uncompromising Israeli journalist Amira Haas (Ha'aretz) gave the best description of the vocation of a journalist, which was "Our job is to monitor the centres of power".
I would like to think that this is the deeper meaning of ABU and the role we should play as citizens committed to the political process.
S THAYAPARAN is Commander (rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.