Vernacular schools: Hanif, Hasan equally guilty of sub judice

 

ADUN SPEAKS | Former inspector-general of police Hanif Omar and Malay Consultative Council (MPM) secretary-general Hasan Mad said that I am ignorant for pre-judging about vernacular schools in the country.

Hanif by the way is the adviser of MPM.

He is an interested party in calling for the abolition of vernacular schools.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court is in the midst of hearing a case initiated by three Malay organisations calling for the abolition of the Chinese and Tamil vernacular schools.

Hanif and Hasan said that I am ignorant of the vernacular schools and why there is a need to do away with them.

Since the case against the vernacular schools is being heard in the court of law, any statement on this subject might be regarded as sub judice.

Moreover, the case against the vernacular schools is rationalised on the grounds that students without the benefit of having Malay as the medium of instruction might lose out in getting good jobs in comparison with those students who attend national schools with Malay as the medium of instruction.

Such an argument makes no sense as students from vernacular schools are found to be proficient in Malay, English, and their mother tongue.

Both Hanif (above) and Hasan are not neutral parties when it comes to the subject of vernacular schools.

They are a party to the case that calls for the abolition of vernacular schools.

Calling for the abolition of vernacular schools does not necessarily endow both of them with knowledge and understanding of these schools and why they are detrimental to students.

Hanif and Hasan might think that they are clever by giving a rational and logical answer as to why vernacular schools have to be done away with.

Thus, by talking of the long-term interests of the students in vernacular schools, they are trying to give the impression of neutrality and well-wishers of students in these schools.

I don’t think that the leopard has changed its spot.

It is just that those initiating the case with their advisers are camouflaging their racism and hatred for the vernacular schools by adopting a benign posture.

They have accused me of being ignorant of the vernacular schools. Maybe in their haste to attack, they forgot to mention where I went wrong on the vernacular schools.

Against the Federal Constitution

If I am ignorant of these schools and why they exist, what can I say of these two eminent personalities?

Are they super-smart so much so that they have all the information at their fingertips?

It is not they are stupid, but they simply refuse to acknowledge the diversity of our education system.

The case against the vernacular schools is against the Federal Constitution of the country.

The supreme law of the land gives inalienable rights to different ethnic communities inclusive of their educational system.

Surely, Hanif, who cannot restrain himself from attacking others, should know the constitution. If not, he should not have been the former IGP.

I have given my reasons earlier as to why I defend the vernacular system of education. It is not disjointed from the national system but integrated. Their popularity need not be elaborated.

The argument that by bringing up matter that was being heard in the court is sub judice is untenable.

By the same token, Hanif and Hasan are equally guilty of sub judice by criticising me for bringing up the matter of the vernacular school in the public. - Mkini

---

P RAMASAMY is Perai assemblyperson and Penang deputy chief minister II.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.