Written by Farish A. Noor
Friday, 17 November 2006
http://www.othermal aysia.org/ content/view/ 52/52/
A nation is as rich as its geography; and geography is enriched when it is overdetermined. In this respect, we in Malaysia are – or were – rich indeed. Rich because of the fact that being located as we are at the crossroads of Asia this patch of earth was the meeting point of so many cultures and civilisations that stretched from mainland China to South Asia, Central Asia, the Mediterranean and Europe.
Looking back at the maps (both oral and graphic) left since the days of Ptolemy and others, we see that this was indeed a land blessed in many ways. Across the archipelago we find some of the greatest kingdoms and empires that have ever graced the earth of humankind: Angkor, Majapahit, Srivijaya, Langkasuka, Khmer, Mataram, Vijaya, Champa, Indrapura… the list goes on endlessly. Nor were these settlements isolated: They traded with the empires of China and the numerous dynasties that ruled over mainland India and Lanka. During my trip to Sri Lanka earlier this year, I stood amidst the ruins of the great monasteries of Anuradhapura, and sat awhile in thought as I contemplated the journeys that were made by the monks of Lanka as they travelled all the way to Java, bringing with them the Theravada tradition as well as a sprinkling of Tantraism along the way. In turn the landscape of Southeast Asia bears silent witness to the great migrations of the past, with the great temple complexes of Pagan, Angkor and Borobudur reminding us of the days when the peoples of Southeast Asia were indeed global in outlook and their daily lives. No, we were never a parochial lot, us Southeast Asians.
Sadly, geography has not evolved a means of defending itself against the writing of a political and politicised history, and landscapes have precious little means to defend themselves against the onslaught of ideological reconstructionism. Southeast Asia today remains a contested landscape though the contestation in question has less to do with the scramble for resources but more with the need to erase the past in order to plant ever more firmly the stamp of the present.
We should have seen it all coming when, in the 1970s and 1980s the region was swept by a new wave of conservative religiosity that was wedded to the interests of sectarian politics: The great temple of Borobudur was the first victim, when it was bombed by radical Islamists who claimed that the time had come to `cleanse' Indonesia of its Hindu-Buddhist past, and that the destruction of the magnificent Buddhist monument would signal the coming of a new age. Some of the more radical Islamists were undoubtedly disappointed that millions of tourists were flocking to the country to see Borobudur in all her glory, and were not equally awe-struck by the Soviet-realist statues and monuments of Jakarta dedicated to the inflated egos of Indonesian politicians, or worse still, the painfully ugly utilitarian- modernist edifices built by Saudi money in the same capital…
In Malaysia we have come to hear similar voices being raised. Not too long ago a prominent religious scholar and politician known more for his arcane knowledge of Djinns and other assorted spirit-folk uttered the lament that a town up north was still named `Indera Kayangan'; and in his speech stated quite bluntly that the name of the town should be changed to something more Islamic to mirror the mood of the day. (One wonders what would serve as an appropriately Islamic name then, as if pronouns had a religious identity…)
Of late we have also witnessed the sad spectacle of the erasure of history in no uncertain terms: The destruction of Hindu temples all over the Peninsula has been cited as a case in point, though in practically every case of Hindu temple demolition we have been told that it was for the sake of `development' and that the temples in question were illegally built anyway.
One wonders if the foundations of Angkor Wat or Borobudur were laid on legally-sanctified ground as well, or whether those who built them had applied for planning permits.
One such case is the Sri Mariamman Muniswaran temple, located at Batu Lima, Jalan Tampin, near Seremban. Historical records of the estate that used to sit at the site indicate that the temple was built around 1870-1890, and so the temple may be anything between 110 to 130 years old.
Furthermore the temple – a modest structure with a simple roof sheltering the image of the local deity – is backed by a spectacular specimen of the Banyan tree species, a sprawling mass of vegetation that would bolster the claim of its relative antiquity. Even more interesting is the fact that during my visit there a couple of weeks ago, I found a tiny Chinese shrine situated behind the temple and tree, with – of all things – what appeared to be a small statue of a Javanese King as the primary totem of devotion! Here was multiculturalism at its best and most unapologetically hybrid. The combination of Hindu, Chinese and Malay elements was evident for all to see, including those who seem bent of levelling the structure down for the sake of road expansion.
Those who speak the jargon of legalese may be able to understand the rationale for its scheduled demolition. In fact on 26 February 2005 the temple structure was smashed by men wielding sledge hammers, though it was immediately rebuilt by regular devotees who visit the temple. The fate of the tiny temple is now being decided in the courts, though opinion on the matter remains divided.
Partisans to the development argument will undoubtedly claim that the loss of one more temple would make no difference to the landscape. After all, many others have fallen under the hammer and the bulldozer, so why not this one? But here one is forced to interject by stating the obvious.
It has often been said that such `Indian temples' are an eyesore, that they have been built illegally, that they somehow do not `match' with the overall flavour and patterns of the Malaysian landscape. Lest it be forgotten, let us remind ourselves of some basic facts:
Firstly, these are NOT `Indian' temples that are being destroyed, but rather Malaysian temples that are just as much a part of the Malaysian cultural-religious landscape as any other mosque, church or pagoda in the country. To call them `Indian temples' would suggest an Otherness and alterity they do not profess nor possess. They were built by Malaysian Hindus on Malaysian soil and are therefore a part of the Malaysian landscape.
Secondly the recognition of the Malaysian character of these temples would mean recognising that Hinduism has been and remains part of the cultural fabric of Malaysian society, and is not some alien faith and cultural system that was transplanted to the country yesterday while we were all sleeping. There is nothing new, odd, alien or unusual about Hinduism in Malaysia. In fact it counts as one of the foundations of Malaysian and Malay identity and has been part of the organic culture and history of the Malaysian peoples more than any other belief and cultural system.
The Malay language itself is proof of this, and if you wish I can cite you a Malay sentence that is made up almost entirely of Sanskrit words: "Mahasiswa-mahasiswi berasmara di asrama bersama pandita yang curiga".
Thirdly, the defence of these temples should be seen by all Malaysians as a Malaysian concern, and not that of the Hindus of Malaysia solely or exclusively. Living as we do in a country whose history is being diluted on an hourly basis, we all need to recognise the fact that this land of ours is rich in culture and history only as long as we collectively preserve and protect it. The systematic destruction of the spiritual landscape of Malaysia should therefore be seen as a Malaysian concern, for all Malaysians; and this should not be pathologised as simply a `Hindu' problem, or worse still, an `Indian problem'. (To which one might add that there are no `Indians' in Malaysia save for those who carry Indian passports and happen to be citizens of India. The rest are Malaysians who may or may not identify themselves as believing, practising, nominal or even atheistic Hindus.)
In short, what we are witnessing today is the destruction of Malaysian temples, and that is why we Malaysians should be concerned. It doesn't matter what religion you may or may not choose to profess: this is an issue that needs to be addressed by us collectively. To recognise that these temples are Malaysian temples means locating them here, at home, as part of our collective identity and what defines us as what we are. I grew up in a neighbourhood of Kuala Lumpur where at dawn I could hear the sound of the azan from the mosque and the chimes of the Hindu temple nearby. Today the temple bells are being silenced; and my world – and yours – is poorer as a result.
posted by Admin.Hindraf@gmail.com
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Malaysia: Racism is allowed, protest against racism isn't
Malaysia is in the news again after hundreds of its citizens of Indian origin under the aegis of the Hindu Rights Action Force demonstrated on 25 November 2007 outside the British High Commission in Kuala Lumpur seeking US$ 4 trillion compensation from the British government for bringing the indentured labourers from India. The real focus was not the British government but the Malaysian government's racist policies and practices which have crippled the Indian origin Malaysians.
The Malaysian government banned the demonstration on the ground that the protest may create "racial tensions". Obviously, State-sponsored racism and racial preferences are allowed but any protest against such racism and racial discrimination is classified by the State as "seditious" and "criminal".
I. Racism and its impact on minorities in Malaysia
Under Article 2(2) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, State parties can "when the circumstances so warrant, take, in the social, economic, cultural and other fields, special and concrete measures to ensure the adequate development and protection of certain racial groups or individuals belonging to them, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the full and equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms". It further states, "These measures shall in no case entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved".
These measures are intended towards the oppressed groups. But in 1971, the Malaysian government introduced New Economic Policy (NEP) to perpetuate the rule of the majority Malays. The NEP provided affirmative action programmes for the majority "Bhumiputras" (sons of the soil) i.e. the ethnic Malays in business, education and the civil service. Within two decades, the NEP had crippled the Indian and Chinese origin Malaysians. Yet, in 1991, the NEP was revised under the New Development Plan (1991-2000) to achieve further socio-economic upliftment of the Bhumiputras. The same preferential treatment of the majority Malays continues under the New Vision Policy (2001-2010).
The statistics of the devastating impact of the pro-Bhumiputra policies are telling.
Today, Malaysia is one of the South-East Asia's most vibrant economies and the socio-economic conditions of the majority Malays have improved exponentially. But there has been little improvement of the conditions of the Indian origin Malaysians.
In 1970, the overall share of wealth of the ethnic Indians stood at 1.1 percent but three decades later, their overall share of wealth increased only slightly to about 1.5 percent which is disproportionately less in relation to their population. [1]
Indian origin Malaysians constitute about 8% of the total population. But, they also constituted 15 percent of juvenile delinquents, about 50 percent of all convicts in prisons in 2004, [2] and 41% of the beggars in 2003. [3] According to Hindu Rights Action Force, the percentage of Indians in the civil service fell from 40% in 1957 to less than 2% in 2005. [4] According to official records, 30-35 Indian origin Malaysians per 100,000 committed or attempted to commit suicide annually as compared to 10-12 Malaysians per 100,000 in 2006. [5]
In education, Indian origin Malaysians made up of less than 5% of the total university intake of over 45,000 annually. Nearly half of the 523 Tamil vernacular schools do not receive any government funds although they are in shambles. [6]
In addition, their religious freedoms are violated. Under Article 3 (1) of the Constitution of Malaysia, Islam is the religion of the Federation. According to the Hindu Rights Action Force, there is an "unofficial policy of Hindu temple cleansing in Malaysia". At least three Hindu temples were demolished, one was partly destroyed and two others had been served demolition notices in Kuala Lumpur and neighboring Selangor state since February 2006. [7]
II. Repression to silence protest against racism
Malaysia remains a truly Police State. It resorted to high-handedness to bludgeon the protestors on 25 November 2007. The Malaysian riot police broke up the rally by using disproportionate force – using batons, tear gas and water cannon against unarmed protestors. [8]
The state also invoked the Sedition Act though on 26 November 2007, police had to release three Hindu Rights Action Force leaders including its President, Waythamoorthy, legal advisor, P. Uthayakumar and V.S. Ganapathi Rao [9] for failing to produce any evidence of their alleged seditious statements. [10] On 27 November 2007, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi stated that the draconian Internal Security Act, whch allows suspects to be detained for indefinite period without charge or trial, could be used against the demonstrators arrested on 25 November 2007. [11] More than 70 people are currently detained without trial under the Internal Security Act and some of them have been detained for more than six years. [12]
Moreover, many students face suspension under the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 which prohibits undergraduate students from taking part in demonstrations. Under this Act, those arrested and charged in court are suspended and are allowed to resume their studies only if the cases against them are dropped or if they are acquitted. Hence, those who participated in the rally on 25 November 2007 could face suspension of their studies.
It is high time that the international community protested against the racist policies and practices of the Malaysian government and the use of the Internal Security Act against those who protest against the policies and practices of the "racism and racial discrimination" .
[1] . Criticism of 30-Year-Old Affirmative- Action Policy Grows in Malaysia, The International Herald Tribune, 5 JANUARY 2001, http://www.iht. com/articles/ 2001/01/05/ kuala.2.t. php?page= 2
[2] . RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Ethnic Indians Demand Fair Share of Prosperity, IPS, 17 October 2005, http://ipsnews. net/interna. asp?idnews= 30656
[3] MALAYSIAN INDIANS: The third class race by C. S. Kuppuswamy, South Asia Analysis Group, 28 February 2003, available at http://www.saag. org/papers7/ paper618. html
[4] . RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Ethnic Indians Blame Britain for Sorry Plight, IPS, 11 September 2007, available at http://ipsnews. net/news. asp?idnews= 39221
[5] . Suicide rate high among ethnic Indians in Malaysia, Daily News and Analysis, 23 July 2006, http://www.dnaindia .com/report. asp?NewsID= 1043361
[6] . RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Ethnic Indians Blame Britain for Sorry Plight, IPS, 11 September 2007, available at http://ipsnews. net/news. asp?idnews= 39221
[7] . Hindu group protests 'temple cleansing' in Malaysia, The Financial Express, 23 May 2006, available at http://www.financia lexpress. com/old/latest_ full_story. php?content_ id=128069
[8] . Malaysian police break up rally, BBC News, 25 November 2007
[9] . Police arrest Hindraf leaders, The Star, 23 November 2007, available at http://thestar. com.my/news/ story.asp? file=/2007/ 11/23/nation/ 20071123123403&sec=nation
[10] . Malaysia Hindu activists released, BBC News, 26 November 2007
[11] . Malaysia PM issues demo warning, BBC News, 27 November 2007
[12] . Malaysia PM issues demo warning, BBC News, 27 November 2007
The Malaysian government banned the demonstration on the ground that the protest may create "racial tensions". Obviously, State-sponsored racism and racial preferences are allowed but any protest against such racism and racial discrimination is classified by the State as "seditious" and "criminal".
I. Racism and its impact on minorities in Malaysia
Under Article 2(2) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, State parties can "when the circumstances so warrant, take, in the social, economic, cultural and other fields, special and concrete measures to ensure the adequate development and protection of certain racial groups or individuals belonging to them, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the full and equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms". It further states, "These measures shall in no case entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved".
These measures are intended towards the oppressed groups. But in 1971, the Malaysian government introduced New Economic Policy (NEP) to perpetuate the rule of the majority Malays. The NEP provided affirmative action programmes for the majority "Bhumiputras" (sons of the soil) i.e. the ethnic Malays in business, education and the civil service. Within two decades, the NEP had crippled the Indian and Chinese origin Malaysians. Yet, in 1991, the NEP was revised under the New Development Plan (1991-2000) to achieve further socio-economic upliftment of the Bhumiputras. The same preferential treatment of the majority Malays continues under the New Vision Policy (2001-2010).
The statistics of the devastating impact of the pro-Bhumiputra policies are telling.
Today, Malaysia is one of the South-East Asia's most vibrant economies and the socio-economic conditions of the majority Malays have improved exponentially. But there has been little improvement of the conditions of the Indian origin Malaysians.
In 1970, the overall share of wealth of the ethnic Indians stood at 1.1 percent but three decades later, their overall share of wealth increased only slightly to about 1.5 percent which is disproportionately less in relation to their population. [1]
Indian origin Malaysians constitute about 8% of the total population. But, they also constituted 15 percent of juvenile delinquents, about 50 percent of all convicts in prisons in 2004, [2] and 41% of the beggars in 2003. [3] According to Hindu Rights Action Force, the percentage of Indians in the civil service fell from 40% in 1957 to less than 2% in 2005. [4] According to official records, 30-35 Indian origin Malaysians per 100,000 committed or attempted to commit suicide annually as compared to 10-12 Malaysians per 100,000 in 2006. [5]
In education, Indian origin Malaysians made up of less than 5% of the total university intake of over 45,000 annually. Nearly half of the 523 Tamil vernacular schools do not receive any government funds although they are in shambles. [6]
In addition, their religious freedoms are violated. Under Article 3 (1) of the Constitution of Malaysia, Islam is the religion of the Federation. According to the Hindu Rights Action Force, there is an "unofficial policy of Hindu temple cleansing in Malaysia". At least three Hindu temples were demolished, one was partly destroyed and two others had been served demolition notices in Kuala Lumpur and neighboring Selangor state since February 2006. [7]
II. Repression to silence protest against racism
Malaysia remains a truly Police State. It resorted to high-handedness to bludgeon the protestors on 25 November 2007. The Malaysian riot police broke up the rally by using disproportionate force – using batons, tear gas and water cannon against unarmed protestors. [8]
The state also invoked the Sedition Act though on 26 November 2007, police had to release three Hindu Rights Action Force leaders including its President, Waythamoorthy, legal advisor, P. Uthayakumar and V.S. Ganapathi Rao [9] for failing to produce any evidence of their alleged seditious statements. [10] On 27 November 2007, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi stated that the draconian Internal Security Act, whch allows suspects to be detained for indefinite period without charge or trial, could be used against the demonstrators arrested on 25 November 2007. [11] More than 70 people are currently detained without trial under the Internal Security Act and some of them have been detained for more than six years. [12]
Moreover, many students face suspension under the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 which prohibits undergraduate students from taking part in demonstrations. Under this Act, those arrested and charged in court are suspended and are allowed to resume their studies only if the cases against them are dropped or if they are acquitted. Hence, those who participated in the rally on 25 November 2007 could face suspension of their studies.
It is high time that the international community protested against the racist policies and practices of the Malaysian government and the use of the Internal Security Act against those who protest against the policies and practices of the "racism and racial discrimination" .
[1] . Criticism of 30-Year-Old Affirmative- Action Policy Grows in Malaysia, The International Herald Tribune, 5 JANUARY 2001, http://www.iht. com/articles/ 2001/01/05/ kuala.2.t. php?page= 2
[2] . RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Ethnic Indians Demand Fair Share of Prosperity, IPS, 17 October 2005, http://ipsnews. net/interna. asp?idnews= 30656
[3] MALAYSIAN INDIANS: The third class race by C. S. Kuppuswamy, South Asia Analysis Group, 28 February 2003, available at http://www.saag. org/papers7/ paper618. html
[4] . RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Ethnic Indians Blame Britain for Sorry Plight, IPS, 11 September 2007, available at http://ipsnews. net/news. asp?idnews= 39221
[5] . Suicide rate high among ethnic Indians in Malaysia, Daily News and Analysis, 23 July 2006, http://www.dnaindia .com/report. asp?NewsID= 1043361
[6] . RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Ethnic Indians Blame Britain for Sorry Plight, IPS, 11 September 2007, available at http://ipsnews. net/news. asp?idnews= 39221
[7] . Hindu group protests 'temple cleansing' in Malaysia, The Financial Express, 23 May 2006, available at http://www.financia lexpress. com/old/latest_ full_story. php?content_ id=128069
[8] . Malaysian police break up rally, BBC News, 25 November 2007
[9] . Police arrest Hindraf leaders, The Star, 23 November 2007, available at http://thestar. com.my/news/ story.asp? file=/2007/ 11/23/nation/ 20071123123403&sec=nation
[10] . Malaysia Hindu activists released, BBC News, 26 November 2007
[11] . Malaysia PM issues demo warning, BBC News, 27 November 2007
[12] . Malaysia PM issues demo warning, BBC News, 27 November 2007
Monday, May 5, 2008
Msian NGOs- urged HINDRAF leaders to be released
NGO India gesa Hindraf 5 dibebaskan
May 3, 08 12:52pm
Gabungan Pertubuhan India Malaysia menyokong gesaan Barisan Bertindak Hak Hindu (Hindraf) supaya dibebaskan segera lima pemimpin mereka yang sedang ditahan di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA).Ia juga menggesa rakyat supaya turut menyokong rayuan mereka melalui kempen poskad di seluruh negara, meminta perdana menteri supaya membebaskan segera pemimpin HIndraf terbabit.Kempen itu juga bertujuan untuk meyakinkan kerajaan bahawa keputusannya untuk menahan mereka adalah satu penyalahgunaan proses undang-undang.Setiausaha gabungan tersebut, Gunaraj George berkata, persepsi rakyat bahawa penahanan pemimpin Hindraf itu adalah wajar, kini semakin terhakis dan langkah segera perlu diambil untuk memperbetulkan keadaan."Kerajaan mungkin boleh mencadang tempoh bila mereka akan dibebaskan dan boleh meminta anggota (Hindraf) jangan mengadakan demonstrasi dan perhimpunan untuk menuntut pembebasan lima pemimpin mereka itu," katanya.Lima pemimpin Hindraf itu - M Manohan, P Uthayakumar, V Ganabatirau, R Kengadharan dan K Vasantha Kumar - ditahan pada 13 Disember lalu bawah ISA selepas terbabit menganjurkan perhimpunan 25 November lalu serta membuat kenyataan yang berunsur hasutan terhadap kerajaan.Dalam pilihanraya umum 8 Mac lalu, Manoharan, yang mewakili DAP, menewaskan calon Barisan Nasional (BN) Ching Su Chen dengan majoriti 7,184 undi di kerusi Dewan Undangan Negeri Kota Alam Shah, Selangor.
Hadap ke mahkamah
Beliau akan mengangkat pada pagi 8 Mei depan di Kem Tahanan Kamunting.Gunaraj berkata, beliau yakin pemimpin Hindraf itu akan dibebaskan tidak lama lagi tanpa perlu melalui menjalani tahanan selama dua tahun, memandangkan kes mereka telah menarik perhatian masyarakat antarabangsa dan implikasinya terhadap hak asasi manusia di Malaysia."Malaysia adalah sebuah negara yang progresif dan pesat membangun."Publisiti negatif bahawa kerajaan sedang menahan lima pemimpin masyarakat tanpa bicara, akan menjejaskan reputasi Malaysia di arena antarabangsa, " katanya.Menurut Gunaraj lagi, beliau pasti kerajaan menyedari perkara itu dan akan berbuat sesuatu untuk menyelamatkan reputasi negara.Beliau juga menggesa kerajaan supaya sama ada membebaskan pemimpin Hindraf berkenaan atau mendakwa mereka di mahkamah."Adalah tidak adil untuk menahan mereka di bahawa ISA hanya kerana menyuarakan rasa tidak puashati mereka terhadap dasar-dasar kerajaan yang meminggirkan masyarakat India," katanya.Menurutnya, pemimpin Hindraf bukanlah penjenayah dan ini harusi diambilkira boleh pihak berkuasa di samping terdapat undang-undang yang mencukupi untuk digunakan sekiranya mereka melakukan sebarang kesalahan.
May 3, 08 12:52pm
Gabungan Pertubuhan India Malaysia menyokong gesaan Barisan Bertindak Hak Hindu (Hindraf) supaya dibebaskan segera lima pemimpin mereka yang sedang ditahan di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA).Ia juga menggesa rakyat supaya turut menyokong rayuan mereka melalui kempen poskad di seluruh negara, meminta perdana menteri supaya membebaskan segera pemimpin HIndraf terbabit.Kempen itu juga bertujuan untuk meyakinkan kerajaan bahawa keputusannya untuk menahan mereka adalah satu penyalahgunaan proses undang-undang.Setiausaha gabungan tersebut, Gunaraj George berkata, persepsi rakyat bahawa penahanan pemimpin Hindraf itu adalah wajar, kini semakin terhakis dan langkah segera perlu diambil untuk memperbetulkan keadaan."Kerajaan mungkin boleh mencadang tempoh bila mereka akan dibebaskan dan boleh meminta anggota (Hindraf) jangan mengadakan demonstrasi dan perhimpunan untuk menuntut pembebasan lima pemimpin mereka itu," katanya.Lima pemimpin Hindraf itu - M Manohan, P Uthayakumar, V Ganabatirau, R Kengadharan dan K Vasantha Kumar - ditahan pada 13 Disember lalu bawah ISA selepas terbabit menganjurkan perhimpunan 25 November lalu serta membuat kenyataan yang berunsur hasutan terhadap kerajaan.Dalam pilihanraya umum 8 Mac lalu, Manoharan, yang mewakili DAP, menewaskan calon Barisan Nasional (BN) Ching Su Chen dengan majoriti 7,184 undi di kerusi Dewan Undangan Negeri Kota Alam Shah, Selangor.
Hadap ke mahkamah
Beliau akan mengangkat pada pagi 8 Mei depan di Kem Tahanan Kamunting.Gunaraj berkata, beliau yakin pemimpin Hindraf itu akan dibebaskan tidak lama lagi tanpa perlu melalui menjalani tahanan selama dua tahun, memandangkan kes mereka telah menarik perhatian masyarakat antarabangsa dan implikasinya terhadap hak asasi manusia di Malaysia."Malaysia adalah sebuah negara yang progresif dan pesat membangun."Publisiti negatif bahawa kerajaan sedang menahan lima pemimpin masyarakat tanpa bicara, akan menjejaskan reputasi Malaysia di arena antarabangsa, " katanya.Menurut Gunaraj lagi, beliau pasti kerajaan menyedari perkara itu dan akan berbuat sesuatu untuk menyelamatkan reputasi negara.Beliau juga menggesa kerajaan supaya sama ada membebaskan pemimpin Hindraf berkenaan atau mendakwa mereka di mahkamah."Adalah tidak adil untuk menahan mereka di bahawa ISA hanya kerana menyuarakan rasa tidak puashati mereka terhadap dasar-dasar kerajaan yang meminggirkan masyarakat India," katanya.Menurutnya, pemimpin Hindraf bukanlah penjenayah dan ini harusi diambilkira boleh pihak berkuasa di samping terdapat undang-undang yang mencukupi untuk digunakan sekiranya mereka melakukan sebarang kesalahan.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Mkini- Delimma of an ISA detainee's wife
Dilemma of an ISA detainee's wife
Rahmah Ghazali Apr 30, 08 7:48pm
Her husband has been held under the Internal Security Act (ISA) at the Kamunting detention camp for the last six years, as a suspected member of regional terrorism group Jemaah Islamiah.This afternoon, her frustration spilled over, despite the knowledge that going public with her views could expose Mat Sah Mohd Satray to some kind of punishment.Norlaila Othman was in a 20-member delegation in Parliament House to support the submission of a memorandum to Opposition Leader Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ibrahim and Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar.The joint memorandum, by Abolish ISA Movement (GMI) and the Human Rights Committee (HRC) of the Bar Council, demanded the release all the detainees and the abolition of the ISA.Syed Hamid did not show up, but at a press conference, Norlaila alleged that she has been warned to keep quiet about her husband.“I was told by the Special Branch that my husband could be detained for another six years if I talk to Wan Azizah and the media. But I can’t keep quiet. I need to tell everyone about this.“Two years ago, I ambushed the prime minister in Seremban. The next day, my husband was put in a confinement cell. There was no window, no lights, just a few small holes for air.“My biggest worry is my husband’s condition. I don’t know what will happen to him when this (story) is published. But I don’t give a damn what happens to us.”Apart from Wan Azizah, other MPs at the press conference were Charles Santiago (DAP-Klang), Tian Chua (PKR-Batu) and Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena).
Syed Hamid was criticised for not having visited the ISA detainees or taking a closer look at the situation on the ground.“I urge the minister to go to Kamunting and visit them personally, rather than sign detention orders in his office,” said HRC deputy chairperson Amer Hamzah Arshad.The 20-member delegation included S Pushpaneela, the wife of M Manoharan, and V Raidu, the brother of S Ganapathi Rao.Manoharan and Ganapathi are among five Hindu Rights Action Force leaders currently being detained in Kamunting for two years, on grounds that they are a ‘threat to national security’. The group handed out Malaysia Bebas dari ISA (ISA-free Malaysia) badges to those present, which Wan Azizah then distributed personally to other MPs in the lobby and cafetaria.Among those who accepted the badges were Mukhriz Mahathir (BN-Jerlun) and Khairy Jamaluddin (BN-Rembau).When Wan Azizah placed a badge against Khairy’s chest (right), he smilingly remarked: “You’re very naughty, you know I can’t remove your hand. I will not wear it, but I will accept it.”
Rahmah Ghazali Apr 30, 08 7:48pm
Her husband has been held under the Internal Security Act (ISA) at the Kamunting detention camp for the last six years, as a suspected member of regional terrorism group Jemaah Islamiah.This afternoon, her frustration spilled over, despite the knowledge that going public with her views could expose Mat Sah Mohd Satray to some kind of punishment.Norlaila Othman was in a 20-member delegation in Parliament House to support the submission of a memorandum to Opposition Leader Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ibrahim and Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar.The joint memorandum, by Abolish ISA Movement (GMI) and the Human Rights Committee (HRC) of the Bar Council, demanded the release all the detainees and the abolition of the ISA.Syed Hamid did not show up, but at a press conference, Norlaila alleged that she has been warned to keep quiet about her husband.“I was told by the Special Branch that my husband could be detained for another six years if I talk to Wan Azizah and the media. But I can’t keep quiet. I need to tell everyone about this.“Two years ago, I ambushed the prime minister in Seremban. The next day, my husband was put in a confinement cell. There was no window, no lights, just a few small holes for air.“My biggest worry is my husband’s condition. I don’t know what will happen to him when this (story) is published. But I don’t give a damn what happens to us.”Apart from Wan Azizah, other MPs at the press conference were Charles Santiago (DAP-Klang), Tian Chua (PKR-Batu) and Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena).
Syed Hamid was criticised for not having visited the ISA detainees or taking a closer look at the situation on the ground.“I urge the minister to go to Kamunting and visit them personally, rather than sign detention orders in his office,” said HRC deputy chairperson Amer Hamzah Arshad.The 20-member delegation included S Pushpaneela, the wife of M Manoharan, and V Raidu, the brother of S Ganapathi Rao.Manoharan and Ganapathi are among five Hindu Rights Action Force leaders currently being detained in Kamunting for two years, on grounds that they are a ‘threat to national security’. The group handed out Malaysia Bebas dari ISA (ISA-free Malaysia) badges to those present, which Wan Azizah then distributed personally to other MPs in the lobby and cafetaria.Among those who accepted the badges were Mukhriz Mahathir (BN-Jerlun) and Khairy Jamaluddin (BN-Rembau).When Wan Azizah placed a badge against Khairy’s chest (right), he smilingly remarked: “You’re very naughty, you know I can’t remove your hand. I will not wear it, but I will accept it.”
Mkini- Letter - True Democracy cannot mature with ISA around
True democracy cannot mature with ISA around
Ashvin Raj May 2, 08 4:46pm
I read with much scepticism of Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Zaid Ibrahim’s recent statement that he finds the Internal Security Act (ISA) and Official Secrets Act (OSA) unacceptable. He was quoted as saying that he is against any unjust and harsh laws which and this includes the ISA and OSA.
However, this was contradicted by the Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar who said that such laws will not be abolished, as they are needed for the purpose of maintaining public order. In such a scenario between two conflicting statements, what would be the public stand of the prime minister?
Would he seek to abolish such oppressive laws in the newly-convened Parliament in agreement with his own minister in his department? Or would he seek not to, in the interest of the home minister’s recent remarks?
I would certainly not be surprised if Pak Lah remains defiant in not wanting to abolish the ISA and OSA, as it has served to protect BN’s interests for the past 51 years after Merdeka. After all, he was the one who authorised the detention of the Hindraf activists and accused them on baseless grounds of being a threat to national security.
The opposition and the vast majority of the general public have long seen the ISA to be a notoriously oppressive law. In the name of national security, the ISA has been used as a convenient political tool that allows for indefinite detention without trial. The ISA is an obnoxious piece of legislation that has no place in a democracy.
Former detainees have published horrifying accounts of their detention under the ISA when they have been subjected to solitary confinement without access to family members, lawyers and friends. Police interrogators have routinely subjected ISA detainees to physical and mental torture in order to 'turn them over’.
All this amounts to human rights abuse and a barbaric treatment of individuals who have never been tried, let alone convicted, in an open court. These acts of injustices are an obscene affront to human dignity and a mockery of democracy. They violate the teachings of all religions in our nation, because it has demeaned human life.
The ISA is an unjust law, where its so-called legal practices represent a crime against humanity. As always, the 'threat to national security' has been a flimsy catch-all excuse for not charging and trying so-called suspects in open courts.
How do you expect the continued existence of the ISA to foster a reformed democratic society when this oppressive law looms as an ever-present threat over the lives and liberty of ordinary Malaysian citizens? True democracy cannot mature when people are being threatened with detention without trial.
The basic principle of natural justice is that the accused must be given the right to be heard must be unconditionally upheld. I therefore sincerely hope that Zaid Ibrahim and Pakatan Rakyat will pressure the federal government in Parliament to immediately charge and try all ISA detainees in an open court or release all ISA detainees still incarcerated.
Otherwise, there will not be any true judicial reform as pledged by the prime minister - through the appointment of Zaid Ibrahim to be in charge of legal affairs - and it will only remain a mere rhetoric.
Ashvin Raj May 2, 08 4:46pm
I read with much scepticism of Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Zaid Ibrahim’s recent statement that he finds the Internal Security Act (ISA) and Official Secrets Act (OSA) unacceptable. He was quoted as saying that he is against any unjust and harsh laws which and this includes the ISA and OSA.
However, this was contradicted by the Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar who said that such laws will not be abolished, as they are needed for the purpose of maintaining public order. In such a scenario between two conflicting statements, what would be the public stand of the prime minister?
Would he seek to abolish such oppressive laws in the newly-convened Parliament in agreement with his own minister in his department? Or would he seek not to, in the interest of the home minister’s recent remarks?
I would certainly not be surprised if Pak Lah remains defiant in not wanting to abolish the ISA and OSA, as it has served to protect BN’s interests for the past 51 years after Merdeka. After all, he was the one who authorised the detention of the Hindraf activists and accused them on baseless grounds of being a threat to national security.
The opposition and the vast majority of the general public have long seen the ISA to be a notoriously oppressive law. In the name of national security, the ISA has been used as a convenient political tool that allows for indefinite detention without trial. The ISA is an obnoxious piece of legislation that has no place in a democracy.
Former detainees have published horrifying accounts of their detention under the ISA when they have been subjected to solitary confinement without access to family members, lawyers and friends. Police interrogators have routinely subjected ISA detainees to physical and mental torture in order to 'turn them over’.
All this amounts to human rights abuse and a barbaric treatment of individuals who have never been tried, let alone convicted, in an open court. These acts of injustices are an obscene affront to human dignity and a mockery of democracy. They violate the teachings of all religions in our nation, because it has demeaned human life.
The ISA is an unjust law, where its so-called legal practices represent a crime against humanity. As always, the 'threat to national security' has been a flimsy catch-all excuse for not charging and trying so-called suspects in open courts.
How do you expect the continued existence of the ISA to foster a reformed democratic society when this oppressive law looms as an ever-present threat over the lives and liberty of ordinary Malaysian citizens? True democracy cannot mature when people are being threatened with detention without trial.
The basic principle of natural justice is that the accused must be given the right to be heard must be unconditionally upheld. I therefore sincerely hope that Zaid Ibrahim and Pakatan Rakyat will pressure the federal government in Parliament to immediately charge and try all ISA detainees in an open court or release all ISA detainees still incarcerated.
Otherwise, there will not be any true judicial reform as pledged by the prime minister - through the appointment of Zaid Ibrahim to be in charge of legal affairs - and it will only remain a mere rhetoric.
Economist- Wind of change in Msia
The winds of change
Could the opposition take power after 51 years?
AFP Prime minister in waiting again
AS MALAYSIA'S new parliament opened this week, a mood of change was in the air not felt since the country's independence from Britain in 1957. The governing coalition, led since then by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), is panicking after suffering its poorest-ever showing in the general election held in March. The knives are out for Abdullah Badawi, the prime minister. The opposition, newly assertive and, so far, united behind its leader, Anwar Ibrahim, claims that at least 30 MPs from the ruling coalition are preparing to defect, which would be enough for it to take power. A change of government in Malaysia—a fanciful notion until recently—now seems a real possibility.
To fend off calls for his resignation Mr Badawi has said that after UMNO's annual conference, which has been postponed until December, he will discuss handing the party leadership (and thus the prime ministership) to his deputy, Najib Razak. Not soon enough, say his internal critics, including Mahathir Mohamad, the prime minister's embittered predecessor, and Razaleigh Hamzah, a former finance minister and rival to Dr Mahathir, who intends to run for the leadership. Mr Badawi has pleaded with local party branches to stop calling emergency meetings to discuss the poor election result and question his leadership, so far to no avail.
In a bid to salvage his reputation, Mr Badawi has belatedly started keeping the bold promises of reform that he made on coming to office in 2003. Foremost among these was curbing corruption within the government. But the public thinks it has actually worsened under his administration. Last year, grave allegations against the then head of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) and the national police chief were dismissed by the attorney-general's office for “lack of evidence”. The prime minister announced this month that the ACA, widely seen as subservient to the politicians it is supposed to supervise, would be replaced by a more independent body. Opposition leaders are pressing him to create an independent police-complaints body, a promise Mr Badawi had broken after meeting stiff resistance from police chiefs.
Another of Mr Badawi's pledges, unkept until now, was to reform the country's weak and mistrusted judiciary. The justice system was wrecked by Dr Mahathir in 1988, after the courts ordered UMNO's dissolution. Dr Mahathir had the constitution changed to strip the courts of their independence from government. He also sacked the head of the Supreme Court and five other senior judges. Last year the opposition highlighted the need for judicial reforms by releasing a video-clip of a top lawyer apparently boasting of his ability to fix judicial appointments. In his cabinet shuffle after the election Mr Badawi appointed a prominent legal reformer, Zaid Ibrahim, to shake up the justice system. Last month the prime minister announced that the changes would include a new, independent commission to recommend candidates for the judiciary. The six judges sacked in 1988 will be given compensation but no apology.
Other better-late-than-never measures from Mr Badawi include loosening the state's tight grip on the press. Mr Anwar's People's Justice Party is to be allowed to publish its own newspaper, a right it has been seeking for ten years. The government has also revoked its ban on Makkal Osai, a paper read by the country's ethnic-Indian minority, which had given ample coverage to the opposition's election campaign and to Hindraf, a radical protest group campaigning for the Indian minority's rights, which the government has accused of terrorist links. The government is also reconsidering some of its lavish public-works projects, which have a tendency to be awarded to UMNO-friendly firms. A high-speed “bullet” train link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, costing 10 billion Malaysian ringgit ($3.2 billion), was the first to come under review.
Welcome as they are, these moves seem unlikely to save Mr Badawi. Mr Anwar crows that his opposition coalition, the People's Alliance, will be in government by September. He says he is simply waiting until he has enough potential defections from the government benches to secure a comfortable majority before making his move. There have been a few defections at state level but, so far, no MPs have jumped. Mr Anwar has been courting support in the Malaysian part of Borneo, hoping that some of the gaggle of pro-government parties there—on which the ruling coalition now depends for its majority—might defect en masse.
Mr Anwar has been prime minister in waiting before. He was deputy to Dr Mahathir until 1998 but the two men fell out and the then prime minister had him jailed on dubious charges. A ban on Mr Anwar's taking political office expired last month. Rebranded as an anti-UMNO reformer, he can now stand for parliament again. His chances of success in his second shot at power hinge not just on whether he can attract enough government MPs—ideally principled ones, not just those available to the highest bidder—but on whether his opposition coalition, an uneasy mix of secularists, Islamists and ethnic-Chinese activists can hold together.
http://www.economist.com/
Could the opposition take power after 51 years?
AFP Prime minister in waiting again
AS MALAYSIA'S new parliament opened this week, a mood of change was in the air not felt since the country's independence from Britain in 1957. The governing coalition, led since then by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), is panicking after suffering its poorest-ever showing in the general election held in March. The knives are out for Abdullah Badawi, the prime minister. The opposition, newly assertive and, so far, united behind its leader, Anwar Ibrahim, claims that at least 30 MPs from the ruling coalition are preparing to defect, which would be enough for it to take power. A change of government in Malaysia—a fanciful notion until recently—now seems a real possibility.
To fend off calls for his resignation Mr Badawi has said that after UMNO's annual conference, which has been postponed until December, he will discuss handing the party leadership (and thus the prime ministership) to his deputy, Najib Razak. Not soon enough, say his internal critics, including Mahathir Mohamad, the prime minister's embittered predecessor, and Razaleigh Hamzah, a former finance minister and rival to Dr Mahathir, who intends to run for the leadership. Mr Badawi has pleaded with local party branches to stop calling emergency meetings to discuss the poor election result and question his leadership, so far to no avail.
In a bid to salvage his reputation, Mr Badawi has belatedly started keeping the bold promises of reform that he made on coming to office in 2003. Foremost among these was curbing corruption within the government. But the public thinks it has actually worsened under his administration. Last year, grave allegations against the then head of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) and the national police chief were dismissed by the attorney-general's office for “lack of evidence”. The prime minister announced this month that the ACA, widely seen as subservient to the politicians it is supposed to supervise, would be replaced by a more independent body. Opposition leaders are pressing him to create an independent police-complaints body, a promise Mr Badawi had broken after meeting stiff resistance from police chiefs.
Another of Mr Badawi's pledges, unkept until now, was to reform the country's weak and mistrusted judiciary. The justice system was wrecked by Dr Mahathir in 1988, after the courts ordered UMNO's dissolution. Dr Mahathir had the constitution changed to strip the courts of their independence from government. He also sacked the head of the Supreme Court and five other senior judges. Last year the opposition highlighted the need for judicial reforms by releasing a video-clip of a top lawyer apparently boasting of his ability to fix judicial appointments. In his cabinet shuffle after the election Mr Badawi appointed a prominent legal reformer, Zaid Ibrahim, to shake up the justice system. Last month the prime minister announced that the changes would include a new, independent commission to recommend candidates for the judiciary. The six judges sacked in 1988 will be given compensation but no apology.
Other better-late-than-never measures from Mr Badawi include loosening the state's tight grip on the press. Mr Anwar's People's Justice Party is to be allowed to publish its own newspaper, a right it has been seeking for ten years. The government has also revoked its ban on Makkal Osai, a paper read by the country's ethnic-Indian minority, which had given ample coverage to the opposition's election campaign and to Hindraf, a radical protest group campaigning for the Indian minority's rights, which the government has accused of terrorist links. The government is also reconsidering some of its lavish public-works projects, which have a tendency to be awarded to UMNO-friendly firms. A high-speed “bullet” train link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, costing 10 billion Malaysian ringgit ($3.2 billion), was the first to come under review.
Welcome as they are, these moves seem unlikely to save Mr Badawi. Mr Anwar crows that his opposition coalition, the People's Alliance, will be in government by September. He says he is simply waiting until he has enough potential defections from the government benches to secure a comfortable majority before making his move. There have been a few defections at state level but, so far, no MPs have jumped. Mr Anwar has been courting support in the Malaysian part of Borneo, hoping that some of the gaggle of pro-government parties there—on which the ruling coalition now depends for its majority—might defect en masse.
Mr Anwar has been prime minister in waiting before. He was deputy to Dr Mahathir until 1998 but the two men fell out and the then prime minister had him jailed on dubious charges. A ban on Mr Anwar's taking political office expired last month. Rebranded as an anti-UMNO reformer, he can now stand for parliament again. His chances of success in his second shot at power hinge not just on whether he can attract enough government MPs—ideally principled ones, not just those available to the highest bidder—but on whether his opposition coalition, an uneasy mix of secularists, Islamists and ethnic-Chinese activists can hold together.
http://www.economist.com/
MalaysiaToday- RPK on Karpal's Appeal on release Hindraf 5
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Karpal Appeals To PM For Hindraf Leaders' Release
KUALA LUMPUR, April 23 (Bernama) -- DAP Chairman Karpal Singh today appealed to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to instruct Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to revoke the detention order on the five Hindraf leaders detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
Karpal said that despite the detention orders by the King, Syed Hamid could at any time under the law revoke the orders on the five leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf).
The King had on March 26 ordered for the leaders two-year detention, effective Dec 13 last year, be continued until completion.
"I would have thought, in line with the reconciliatory stance of the government in bringing about reforms, including setting up of a judicial commission for the appointment and promotion of judges, the five leaders would have been set free to rejoin their families.
"In fact, the Government should, in line with this approach, repeal the ISA," said Karpal, who is also Bukit Gelugor MP, in a statement tonight.
On Dec 13 last year, the authorities detained M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar for organising a mass rally in the federal capital and making demands for the rights of Indians in the country.
*************************************************
Nik Aziz’s son was detained for more than five years. Do you know the name of this son? There are about 90 or so ‘Muslim terrorists’ who are in their seventh year of detention. Okay, we have five Hindraf activitists, now popularly known as the HINDRAF 5, who have been under detention for the last four months. And their names are M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar. Yes, that’s right, five Indians going by the name of M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar have been under detention without trial since the last four months and we want them freed without any further delay.
That’s work with me. I am all for it. Now, can be list down the names of the other 90 or so Malaysians who have been detained for up to six to seven years? The five Indians are called M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar. I want to know the names of the other 90 Malaysians -- Malays, Chinese, Indians, and other ‘natives’. Can we also list their names down? Who are they? Where are they from? The five Indians have been under detention since Christmas last year. Some of the other 90 have been under detention for six or seven Christmases.
I believe in FIFO (first in, first out) not LIFO (last in, first out). Okay, we know that the HINDRAF 5 -- M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar -- have been detained for the ‘crime’ of organising a massive demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on 25 November 2007. What are the crimes of the other 90 -- whom no one cares what their names are?
According to the government, the HINDRAF 5 are under detention because they have links with international terrorists and had planned to create chaos in Malaysia. Of course, that is a government lie and we certainly don’t believe that lie. Also according to the government, the other 90 have been detained because they too have links with international terrorists and they too had planned to create chaos in Malaysia. The government could be correct on this one because most of these 90 or so are Muslims and, according to America, all Muslims are terrorists.
Okay, maybe not all 1.2 billion or so Muslims are terrorists. Maybe only 0.1% of Muslims are terrorists. But that means we have to be careful about the balance 99.9% because they could also be terrorists since they share the same religion.
Hmm…is not the government using this same argument to detain the HINDRAF 5? Since 0.1% Indians in Sri Lanka are terrorists then M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar must also be terrorists since they share the same skin colour and religion.
As I said in my earlier piece, yes, let us fight for the release of the HINDRAF 5. I agree that they are victims of political persecution. But if you do not want to also fight for the release of the other 90 at least mention their names to show that you know who they are.
In fact, there are also some Chinese amongst those 90. Yes, and I bet you did not know that. I bet you do not know how many of them are Chinese. And I further bet you do not know what their names are. And I dare bet my last dollar that you don’t know why they were detained and how long they have been under detention.
Do you know, 20 years ago, a young Chinese girl from Kuala Terengganu was detained because she spoke about Jesus Christ to some Malays. The Malays reported her and the unfortunate girl was detained under ISA. Don’t you Chinese, in particular you Christians, feel outraged? Or is it you don’t dare express outrage or else you will also have to express outrage about the Muslims who have been detained for more than six or seven years?
One of my schoolmates, Hilmi, was also detained under ISA. He was detained because he left Islam to become a Christian and eventually went up to become a senior priest in the church. I bet you will now express outrage about Hilmi’s detention because he is a Malay who became a Christian. But if he was a Malay who remained a Muslim then you probably would not be interested to know why he was detained.
I met one Chinese woman while she was still under ISA detention who told the Suhakam Commission of Inquiry that she was asked to strip naked so that her Malay jailors could feast their eyes on her naked body. Still not outraged yet? Okay, I also met a Chinese chap who was beaten senseless. He no longer knew how long he had been detained. He just sat there and cried and was not able to utter a word. They had beaten him so bad that he had lost his mind. The Suhakam Commissioners were speechless and did not know what to say. I hope, now, you are outraged and can see the ‘logic’ of broadening your focus beyond just the HINDRAF 5.
DAP is not a Chinese party. No doubt 30 Indians contested under DAP’s banner on 8 March 2008 and Hindraf was certainly a factor that swung the election results. But we must not just ‘bodek’ the Indians. If DAP wants to be perceived as a ‘Malaysian’ party, rather than a Chinese party that is merely exploiting the Indian issue, then it has to broaden its ‘perjuangan’. PAS is currently debating whether to admit non-Muslims into the party. If they vote in favour of that move, and Chinese Christians and Indian Hindus join PAS, then DAP may become irrelevant. And there are Indians and Chinese waiting to jump into PAS the instant it opens it doors to the non-Muslims.
The new Speaker of the Selangor State Assembly finally wore a songkok when he went before the palace to take his oath of office. Earlier, this Chinese State Assemblyman from DAP wrote in his Blog that he will never wear a songkok and that he will boycott any function that requires him to wear one.
Kurang ajar sungguh! He has been a State Assemblyman for many terms and is now the Speaker of the Selangor State Assembly and he still does not know that one must never mengadap Tuanku with a ‘kepala gondol’ (naked head). Even if you mengadap the Queen of England or the Emperor of Japan you can’t do so with a naked head. This is called ‘dress code’.
I remember once when Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah, the Sixth Sultan of Selangor, was denied entry into the Lake Club. He was actually the guest of honour of the Club President and was being escorted there by my grandfather, Raja Sir Tun Uda. But they were both denied entry into the Lake Club, so the Sultan and my grandfather just turned around and went home without a fuss.
Even a Sultan can be denied entry. And he did not say anything or protest even though he was a Sultan and wielded immense power in those pre-Merdeka days. Do you think it is unfair if the Sultan denies someone entry into the palace if that person refuses to observe the proper dress code? Anyway, some were in fact not properly attired when they mengadap the Sultan recently but Tuanku did not make an issue out of it. Tuanku was very accommodating and chatted with everyone in a very friendly manner even though some were ‘disrespectful’ or, in palace lingo, tidak beradat.
Let us grow up and move ahead (even the Sultan was prepared to close his eyes to the DAP ‘protest’). We need to rise above the ‘I refuse to wear anything that is Malay’ tantrum. And Karpal Singh should stop whacking those DAP leaders who wore the songkok during the recent swearing-in ceremony because this will just make these people suffer from songkok phobia. And to throw up the excuse that they refuse to wear the songkok because ‘it is something Malay’ does not go down well with the Malay grassroots who are already being poisoned by Umno that ‘Malay land is falling into the hands of the Chinese’. Why make it easier for Umno to convince the Malays that this is so?
Okay, the very stubborn State Assemblyman who would rather get sent to hell than wear a songkok finally relented and wore one. Of course, wearing a songkok is a small sacrifice when the prize is the position of Speaker of the Selangor State Assembly. DAP had earlier decided that they will leave it to each state to decide whether to wear one or not. And Selangor decided that they will wear one when they mengadap Tuanku in keeping with proper adat istiadat istana. So can Karpal please now leave them alone and stop whacking them for ‘becoming like Malays’.
And if these Wakil Rakyat, both Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen, do a good job, the Rulers may want to reward them. I know Karpal is not happy if any of the DAP leaders become Datuk or Tan Sri or, heaven forbid, Tun. Hey, this is the way the Rulers reward dedicated, hardworking, loyal and faithful servants of the people. So please stop warning the DAP leaders that if the Rulers offer them any award, decoration or title they should reject them like how Lim Kit Siang did so some years back.
Would you rather they buy them from Umno like all those other Chinese towkays and tycoons? For RM100,000 to RM250,000, depending on the state, the Chinese and Indians tycoons can get a datukship. Fortunately, though, those are not states that are under Pakatan Rakyat control. If the Rulers feel that some DAP leaders have done a great job and Their Highnesses would like to decorate them, then let it be. Hey, maybe not a single DAP leader will get a datukship until the day he or she dies. But in the event the Rulers decide they would like to dish some out, then stop getting in the way. Just allow the DAP leaders to accept these awards. After all, if they have done a good job then they deserve these awards.
Karpal Appeals To PM For Hindraf Leaders' Release
KUALA LUMPUR, April 23 (Bernama) -- DAP Chairman Karpal Singh today appealed to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to instruct Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to revoke the detention order on the five Hindraf leaders detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
Karpal said that despite the detention orders by the King, Syed Hamid could at any time under the law revoke the orders on the five leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf).
The King had on March 26 ordered for the leaders two-year detention, effective Dec 13 last year, be continued until completion.
"I would have thought, in line with the reconciliatory stance of the government in bringing about reforms, including setting up of a judicial commission for the appointment and promotion of judges, the five leaders would have been set free to rejoin their families.
"In fact, the Government should, in line with this approach, repeal the ISA," said Karpal, who is also Bukit Gelugor MP, in a statement tonight.
On Dec 13 last year, the authorities detained M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar for organising a mass rally in the federal capital and making demands for the rights of Indians in the country.
*************************************************
Nik Aziz’s son was detained for more than five years. Do you know the name of this son? There are about 90 or so ‘Muslim terrorists’ who are in their seventh year of detention. Okay, we have five Hindraf activitists, now popularly known as the HINDRAF 5, who have been under detention for the last four months. And their names are M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar. Yes, that’s right, five Indians going by the name of M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar have been under detention without trial since the last four months and we want them freed without any further delay.
That’s work with me. I am all for it. Now, can be list down the names of the other 90 or so Malaysians who have been detained for up to six to seven years? The five Indians are called M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar. I want to know the names of the other 90 Malaysians -- Malays, Chinese, Indians, and other ‘natives’. Can we also list their names down? Who are they? Where are they from? The five Indians have been under detention since Christmas last year. Some of the other 90 have been under detention for six or seven Christmases.
I believe in FIFO (first in, first out) not LIFO (last in, first out). Okay, we know that the HINDRAF 5 -- M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar -- have been detained for the ‘crime’ of organising a massive demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on 25 November 2007. What are the crimes of the other 90 -- whom no one cares what their names are?
According to the government, the HINDRAF 5 are under detention because they have links with international terrorists and had planned to create chaos in Malaysia. Of course, that is a government lie and we certainly don’t believe that lie. Also according to the government, the other 90 have been detained because they too have links with international terrorists and they too had planned to create chaos in Malaysia. The government could be correct on this one because most of these 90 or so are Muslims and, according to America, all Muslims are terrorists.
Okay, maybe not all 1.2 billion or so Muslims are terrorists. Maybe only 0.1% of Muslims are terrorists. But that means we have to be careful about the balance 99.9% because they could also be terrorists since they share the same religion.
Hmm…is not the government using this same argument to detain the HINDRAF 5? Since 0.1% Indians in Sri Lanka are terrorists then M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and K. Vasanthakumar must also be terrorists since they share the same skin colour and religion.
As I said in my earlier piece, yes, let us fight for the release of the HINDRAF 5. I agree that they are victims of political persecution. But if you do not want to also fight for the release of the other 90 at least mention their names to show that you know who they are.
In fact, there are also some Chinese amongst those 90. Yes, and I bet you did not know that. I bet you do not know how many of them are Chinese. And I further bet you do not know what their names are. And I dare bet my last dollar that you don’t know why they were detained and how long they have been under detention.
Do you know, 20 years ago, a young Chinese girl from Kuala Terengganu was detained because she spoke about Jesus Christ to some Malays. The Malays reported her and the unfortunate girl was detained under ISA. Don’t you Chinese, in particular you Christians, feel outraged? Or is it you don’t dare express outrage or else you will also have to express outrage about the Muslims who have been detained for more than six or seven years?
One of my schoolmates, Hilmi, was also detained under ISA. He was detained because he left Islam to become a Christian and eventually went up to become a senior priest in the church. I bet you will now express outrage about Hilmi’s detention because he is a Malay who became a Christian. But if he was a Malay who remained a Muslim then you probably would not be interested to know why he was detained.
I met one Chinese woman while she was still under ISA detention who told the Suhakam Commission of Inquiry that she was asked to strip naked so that her Malay jailors could feast their eyes on her naked body. Still not outraged yet? Okay, I also met a Chinese chap who was beaten senseless. He no longer knew how long he had been detained. He just sat there and cried and was not able to utter a word. They had beaten him so bad that he had lost his mind. The Suhakam Commissioners were speechless and did not know what to say. I hope, now, you are outraged and can see the ‘logic’ of broadening your focus beyond just the HINDRAF 5.
DAP is not a Chinese party. No doubt 30 Indians contested under DAP’s banner on 8 March 2008 and Hindraf was certainly a factor that swung the election results. But we must not just ‘bodek’ the Indians. If DAP wants to be perceived as a ‘Malaysian’ party, rather than a Chinese party that is merely exploiting the Indian issue, then it has to broaden its ‘perjuangan’. PAS is currently debating whether to admit non-Muslims into the party. If they vote in favour of that move, and Chinese Christians and Indian Hindus join PAS, then DAP may become irrelevant. And there are Indians and Chinese waiting to jump into PAS the instant it opens it doors to the non-Muslims.
The new Speaker of the Selangor State Assembly finally wore a songkok when he went before the palace to take his oath of office. Earlier, this Chinese State Assemblyman from DAP wrote in his Blog that he will never wear a songkok and that he will boycott any function that requires him to wear one.
Kurang ajar sungguh! He has been a State Assemblyman for many terms and is now the Speaker of the Selangor State Assembly and he still does not know that one must never mengadap Tuanku with a ‘kepala gondol’ (naked head). Even if you mengadap the Queen of England or the Emperor of Japan you can’t do so with a naked head. This is called ‘dress code’.
I remember once when Sultan Hisamuddin Alam Shah, the Sixth Sultan of Selangor, was denied entry into the Lake Club. He was actually the guest of honour of the Club President and was being escorted there by my grandfather, Raja Sir Tun Uda. But they were both denied entry into the Lake Club, so the Sultan and my grandfather just turned around and went home without a fuss.
Even a Sultan can be denied entry. And he did not say anything or protest even though he was a Sultan and wielded immense power in those pre-Merdeka days. Do you think it is unfair if the Sultan denies someone entry into the palace if that person refuses to observe the proper dress code? Anyway, some were in fact not properly attired when they mengadap the Sultan recently but Tuanku did not make an issue out of it. Tuanku was very accommodating and chatted with everyone in a very friendly manner even though some were ‘disrespectful’ or, in palace lingo, tidak beradat.
Let us grow up and move ahead (even the Sultan was prepared to close his eyes to the DAP ‘protest’). We need to rise above the ‘I refuse to wear anything that is Malay’ tantrum. And Karpal Singh should stop whacking those DAP leaders who wore the songkok during the recent swearing-in ceremony because this will just make these people suffer from songkok phobia. And to throw up the excuse that they refuse to wear the songkok because ‘it is something Malay’ does not go down well with the Malay grassroots who are already being poisoned by Umno that ‘Malay land is falling into the hands of the Chinese’. Why make it easier for Umno to convince the Malays that this is so?
Okay, the very stubborn State Assemblyman who would rather get sent to hell than wear a songkok finally relented and wore one. Of course, wearing a songkok is a small sacrifice when the prize is the position of Speaker of the Selangor State Assembly. DAP had earlier decided that they will leave it to each state to decide whether to wear one or not. And Selangor decided that they will wear one when they mengadap Tuanku in keeping with proper adat istiadat istana. So can Karpal please now leave them alone and stop whacking them for ‘becoming like Malays’.
And if these Wakil Rakyat, both Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen, do a good job, the Rulers may want to reward them. I know Karpal is not happy if any of the DAP leaders become Datuk or Tan Sri or, heaven forbid, Tun. Hey, this is the way the Rulers reward dedicated, hardworking, loyal and faithful servants of the people. So please stop warning the DAP leaders that if the Rulers offer them any award, decoration or title they should reject them like how Lim Kit Siang did so some years back.
Would you rather they buy them from Umno like all those other Chinese towkays and tycoons? For RM100,000 to RM250,000, depending on the state, the Chinese and Indians tycoons can get a datukship. Fortunately, though, those are not states that are under Pakatan Rakyat control. If the Rulers feel that some DAP leaders have done a great job and Their Highnesses would like to decorate them, then let it be. Hey, maybe not a single DAP leader will get a datukship until the day he or she dies. But in the event the Rulers decide they would like to dish some out, then stop getting in the way. Just allow the DAP leaders to accept these awards. After all, if they have done a good job then they deserve these awards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)