ICERD is not against affirmative action

Bernama pic

The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a UN convention which obligates its members to eliminate any form of institutional discrimination that is against humanity. It is against discrimination based on race, religion, disability or gender and promotes equality, unity and understanding among all races. The convention calls on governments to educate the public against intolerance and to repeal discriminatory laws.

The ICERD is not a convention that undermines the interest of any racial or religious group. Its aim is to promote equality among all ethnic groups so as not to disrupt the harmony in any society. The convention is not against affirmative action as practised in some developing and developed nations.

It started in 1960, following incidents of anti-semitism and national hatred in several parts of the world. The intention of this convention is noble and essentially based on humanity. Ethnic discrimination has in fact brought about untold misery to the human race.

UN concerns

The Rohingya Muslims, according to critics, are discriminated against by the Myanmar government. No surprise, then, as to why Myanmar has not ratified the convention.

There was a time when apartheid was freely practised in South Africa, when non-whites were manifestly discriminated against. The whites ruled, and others were marginalised in almost all spheres of life. There were whites-only vicinities and facilities which non-whites could not enter or use. This was even practised in the US at one time, before slavery was abolished. There was blatant discrimination and segregation based on race, religion and skin colour.

The Bosnian conflict, an ethnically rooted war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, saw the killing and persecution of Muslims and Croats to carve out a Serb republic. The war saw thousands of Muslims and Croats slaughtered by the Serbians.

All these forms of discrimination and the decimation of minority groups have raised the concerns of the UN.

Some Malaysians are confused. They think the country’s indigenous people will lose their privileges which are already stipulated in the constitution. The opposition – Umno and PAS – are exploiting this issue just to gain cheap publicity despite knowing that the ICERD does not trample the rights of indigenous people. These are desperate groups out to create confusion in society. They should not be allowed to rear their ugly heads and create chaos.

In fact, many signatories to the ICERD insist that they are not bound by all the articles in the convention. Even if Malaysia ratifies the convention, it is not necessarily bound by all the articles contained in it. Many countries, despite being signatories to the ICERD, have affirmative action to ensure that marginalised and indigenous groups are given some privileges to help them up the economic ladder. Countries are obliged to use positive discrimination policies for specific groups to ensure that they enjoy some equal opportunities to uplift their economic status.

Against racial supremacy

The ICERD is against the idea of racial supremacy, and promotes the eradication of all forms of hate speech and incitement. It outlaws hate speech and the incitement of racial activities that could lead to violence and disorder. In other words, political exploitation of ethnic differences should not be allowed. Instead, measures should be promoted mainly in education, to rein in racial prejudice and boost understanding and tolerance between the different racial and ethnic groups.

The ICERD is not a convention that undermines the interest of any racial, ethnic or religious group. There are clear provisions for democratic nations to adopt and adapt clauses to the best of their needs which also conform with the constitution. Malaysia is not the only country in the world with affirmative action to uplift the social and economic status of the underprivileged. Even in the US, Australia, New Zealand, India and China, there is affirmative action in place to help the indigenous population and minority ethnic groups. These are all done as provided for in the countries’ constitutions.

Again, in the local context, some may say that ratifying the ICERD will undermine the special position of the indigenous people, including provisions to allow quotas in public institutions as spelt out in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution. But looking at countries across the world, affirmative action to help underprivileged groups is not considered discriminatory in nature. If meritocracy is the yardstick used for university entrance, for instance, underprivileged indigenous people and minorities will be left behind. Even ethnic Indians will be further marginalised. For this reason, the government has to come up with certain quotas for underprivileged minorities. This cannot be defined as discriminatory in nature.

As such, the ICERD is not against Article 153 of the constitution. Signing the ICERD – now or later – will not affect Article 153. Article 153 does not mention discrimination against any ethnic group. It’s basically formulated with affirmative action in mind to give indigenous people and minorities some privileges. The constitution also ensures the rights of all racial groups.

The minister in charge of unity and social well-being has reiterated that the government will not abolish Article 153 “which guarantees the special position of the Malays” in favour of the ICERD. He added that the government has no intention of abolishing Article 153.

“No discrimination is involved, and the special position of the Malays and natives, including those from Sabah and Sarawak, will be safeguarded and protected,” he said.

Perhaps his view in raising the issue of the ICERD is that the poor and marginalised groups in the country should not be discriminated against but should be helped and propped up, socially and economically, as Malaysian citizens.

Rushing to ratify ICERD

The government may not rush to ratify the ICERD. There has to be a proper explanation to the public on the noble intentions of the treaty to prevent any misperception. Let the fervour deliberately created by the opposition to seek popularity tone down first before any measure is taken to ratify the convention, if there is a need or will to do so.

The world is seeing atrocities committed in many countries. The Palestinians and Rohingya are evicted from their homelands, and minorities are persecuted in non-Western countries just because they are of different races or subscribe to different religions. In our own country, there are marginalised groups. The ICERD is not based solely on a Western value system. It’s a universal system based on the principles of humanity.

In Malaysia, some zealous groups are exploiting the ICERD for their political gain and to disrupt society. They knowingly misrepresent the convention to gain backing from the uninformed. They intentionally snub the core credo of the ICERD that all humans be treated equal in the sense that no one should be purposely discriminated against based on ethnicity or religious affiliation.

Critics of the ICERD should read what is actually stated in the convention’s clauses and look at the many nations, including Muslim countries, which practise affirmative action for their people despite having ratified the ICERD before turning it into a racial or religious issue. Affirmative action cannot be equated with discrimination. Unfortunately, blinded by political agendas and unfounded sentiments, many are up in arms over the ratification of the convention.

Moaz Nair is an FMT reader.