P. Waytha Moorthy’s open letter to Ambiga on inbuilt discrimination of our citizenship

The Malaysian public should not be lulled by a false sense of security thinking that the federal constitution is ‘colour blind’ when it certainly is not with Article 153 still intact.

Dear Ambiga,

I admire your yearning and visualizing living in a truly multi-racial and religious Malaysia. I am certain many in Malaysia, like me, share your dreams.

However I cannot remain silent to the statement you made at a gathering in Sungai Siput (published by Malaysiakini on 19 December 2011) that belonging to a minority or a majority community makes no difference to their rights as citizens.

You were reported to have said: “Malaysian citizenship confers upon the people all the rights and duties in accordance with the federal constitution. There is no discrimination as far as rights arising from citizenship.”

You pointed out about the special position of the Malays, the rights of the Orang Asli and the special positions for the states of Sabah and Sarawak.

With regard to the above, you were quoted as saying, “I am talking about fundamental rights” [i.e. that the rest of the communities omitted from your list and deprived of the ‘special’ positions as you’ve mentioned here are ‘fundamentally’ unaffected by all these constitutional provisions].

I honestly hope you were misquoted. As a proponent of equality, I cannot accept the fact that fundamental liberties in Malaysia are unaffected by provisions in Article 153 and Article 121 1(A) of the Federal Constitution.

Malaysia is the only country in the world which institutionalises racism and the only country in the world where special privileges are given to protect the majority race.

Religious Freedom under Article 11 is meaningless and the rights of almost 12 million non-Muslims in Malaysia are trampled upon on daily basis and yet as minorities, I and the rest of the almost 12 million non-Muslims are supposed to be subservient to the rights of the majority Malay-Muslim.

Article 153 has in real terms created two classes of citizenships in Malaysia.

This fact was ventilated and its provisions were rejected even during the pre-Merdeka period. One such notable personality who highlighted the evil of this provision is none other than the great Lau Phak Khuan – who lobbied on behalf of me and millions of others who were not even born at that time – as he had the vision of the peril of such a racist provision.

As early as 1944, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in the South East Asia, Lord Mountbatten warned Her Majesty’s government on the danger of special preferences on racial grounds and had this to say:

“I cannot help feeling that in the long run nothing could perhaps do more to perpetuate sectional antagonisms, to the risk of which you pointedly refer in your letter, than the giving of special recognition to one race.”

“I feel that our objectives should be to break down racial sectionalism in every way open to us, politically, economically and socially, and to endeavour to substitute for it the idea of Malayan citizenship.”

Another notable personality, Lau Cheung Ling who submitted on behalf of the future Malaysians at the Reid commission on 20 July 1956 had this to say – “If Malays were to be privileged then one form of colonialism would be replaced by another.”

Today I would dare say that we (the other Malaysians who are known as non-Malays) have been recolonized by the majority race.

The second limb of Article 153 imposes a duty upon the Yang Dipertuan Agong to safeguard the legitimate interests of other communities. What could be our “legitimate interest” if not to be treated equally as a human being?

Without equality there can be no dignity and we, the other Malaysians are living in silent indignity. I am in serious doubt as to what constitutes the legitimate interests that the Yang Dipertuan Agong is supposed to safeguard when there are no safeguards to the legitimate RIGHTS of Malaysians like me.

Your statement also made reference of the special privileges accorded to the Orang Asli (peninsula Malaysia natives). As an advocate for human rights I am compelled to correct this misconception, that not only you but many Malaysians have, that the Orang Asli enjoy special privileges under Article 153.

Article 153 only provides special privileges for the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak.

The Orang Asli community who were the original inhabitants of Malaya have been sidelined from every aspect of life. Just like the Indians as they are a disenfranchised community, they are unable to articulate their rights. And the majority community sidesteps their plight and suppresses airing of their predicament. Orang Asli do not get any space in the mainstream media and remain an oppressed community.

Coming from a community which has been oppressed and having faced oppression personally, I can empathize with the Orang Asli. They had been conveniently forgotten during the Merdeka talks both by the British and Umno which was controlled by the Malay rulers simply because recognition of Orang Asli would undermine the claim by the monarchs that Malays were the original inhabitants of Malaya.

In the last 16 months, I have researched numerous records from various sources in the United Kingdom. Unless there are other documents which still remain classified, suffice to say that I could not find any significant representations made on their behalf apart from one by a Dato Eusoff on 14 August 1956.

Article 12 of the Federal Constitution states there shall be no discrimination against any citizen on the grounds only of religion, race, descent or place of birth:

(a) in the administration of any educational institution maintained by a public authority, and, in particular, the admission of pupils or students or the payment of fees; or

(b) in providing out of the funds of a public authority financial aid for the maintenance or education of pupils or students in any educational institution (whether or not maintained by a public authority and whether within or outside the Federation).

But the Malaysian government and its racist administrative system blatantly disregard this provision and over the last 54 years have denied millions of other minority Malaysians equal right to education on grounds that it needs to protect the rights of the majority Malay race.

Article 11 provides freedom for every individual to practice his or her religion. But in Malaysia the state controls who practices what religion, and this is condoned by the toothless and irresponsible judiciary that dances to the tune of the majority race against the rights of other minority Malaysians.

Let me give you examples;

(1)  With the backing of the state Islamic authorities, Indira Gandhi’s estranged husband who converted to Islam had their 11-month-old baby forcibly removed from her care in Ipoh. The infant and Indira’s two other children were converted to Islam without her consent and the Constitution is not able to protect her because she belonged to the minority religion.

(2)  Shamala had to flee the country when her husband forcibly and without her knowledge converted her children, and the judiciary did not protect her fundamental rights and the rights of her children.

(3)  Banggarama was forcibly converted by the Islamic authorities at the age of 7 and until today she is unable to seek remedy to her problem. Furthermore, her children are not being issued with birth certificates because she asserts her fundamental right to choose her religion to be Hinduism.

(4)  Thousands of Hindu temples which were built during the colonial era (from up to 200 years before) have been demolished by the Malaysian government on grounds that they were built illegally and without planning permissions whereas they should have been protected under the National Heritage Act.

(5)  Christians are denied their right to build churches in the country.

(6)  The Taoists in Sabah were denied their right to construct a 108-feet Goddess of the Sea Mazu statue simply because they belonged to the minority religion.

(7)  Hundreds of billions of the country’s wealth have been channelled to educate one particular race on grounds of special privileges and millions of other deserving Malaysian children have been denied their legitimate right to equal educational opportunities simply because they belong to the minority race.

(8)  Hundreds of billions have been channelled under the government’s New Economic Policy and its successive economic plans to provide for business opportunities and the economic upliftment of Malays on racial grounds favouring the majority race.

And yet we live in denial and are supposed to be proud to belong to “a great country” as you’ve urged?

(9)  The government has refused to renew thousands of besi buruk (scrap metal) licences and bus permits belonging to the minority Malaysian Indians and Chinese communities against specific provisions in Article 153 (8) (a), (b) and (c).

I could go on citing instances of gross violations of human rights affecting the minority races. I would respectfully urge you to read my presentation in the Washington recently on Malaysia’s institutionalised racism at http://hindraf.org/news-statements/215-institutional-racism-a-religious-freedom.html.

I would urge you to rethink whether there is truly no discrimination based on citizenship in Malaysia.

My primary concern is that the lay public may be lulled by a false sense of security that the Constitution is “colour blind” when it certainly is not with Article 153 still intact.

Political expediencies aside, it is even more troubling when such assertions come from a past president of the Malaysian Bar. This may send the wrong signals to the world that Malaysia is truly a democratic country in accordance to Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which reads;

“ALL human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”

* The writer, P Waytha Moorthy is Hindraf chairman. - CPIAsia