Helen Ang
Jun 17, 10
2:45pm
This photograph (below, right) of the PAS muktamar last weekend shows Malay men stepping on the Star of David. Now how would you feel if it were the cross or crescent? The event organizer deliberately etched the religious symbol of Judaism on the floor so that those present could not avoid trampling on it.
Two weeks ago at an anti-Israel protest, the demonstrators chanted 'Allahu akhbar' and 'Khaibar ya Yahud' (the Arabian Jews were subjugated when Khaibar was conquered), marching from Kampung Baru. Sidenote: Prime real estate slated for development, Kg Baru will remain "100 percent bumiputera" as its landowners strongly object to non-Malays investing in this area located in the heart of KL.
Another popular rally cry by the Malays is 'Yahudi laknatullah' or accursed Jews. Then there was that brilliant idea of a nationwide 'Teach children to hate Israel' campaign in schools, mooted by Hishamuddin Hussein back when he was education minister.
If you read Malay media and Malay blogosphere, you'd be acquainted with the fevered pitch of race hate exhibited against Jews.
Yet even in English, media coverage is lopsidedly anti-Israel. On June 7 alone, The Star online carried nine articles that made it proudly deserving of the tagline 'The Palestinian People's Paper'. A day earlier on June 6, it published not one, not two but three! opinion-editorials excoriating the Jewish state – I wrote about that piece of top brass initiative in my CPI article 'Umno heroes and Star spear Israel'.
The frenzy of race hate in cyberspace is patent each time the Israeli-Palestinian conflict flares up and Malaysian blogs start bashing Israel. "MM, most of the time, you only posted international news about Gaza and Palestinians here, very few others. I bet your whole world spin around that tiny land?" one reader calling himself 'Joseph' wrote in Marina Mahathir's blog last Dec 30, directing his comment at her.
However the hatred manifested is not confined to anti-Jewish sentiments. In some of the Malay-ultra blogs, expressions of hate are targeted at Chinese and Indians. The common denominator of these blogs is that they all have Che Det (Mahathir Mohamad's blog) on their blogroll.
'Mahathiracism' speech
The May 13 death toll was predominantly Chinese, hacked to pieces. Malays were the aggressors armed with parangs.
It is a monumental task to untangle distortion about the massacre because the ketuanan melayu hegemony tightly controls official storylines permitted public airing. However, through studying the coverage of Gaza as a present-day comparison, we can get an inkling of the one-sidedness on what content the Malaysian public is encouraged or allowed access to.
It is fair to assume that a lot of information has been obscured, withheld or doctored, be it about Israel, Palestine or May 13.
In such a vacuum and hedging on our absence of knowledge, Mahathir Mohamad (left) in his 'Gertak' speech attempted to turn the Malays into May 13 victims – instead of the perpetrators that they were – by calling the bloodletting a "class war".
It is not to say that the economics of class struggle as well as the politics of divide-and-rule did not play a part in precipitating the outbreak of racial violence.
What I'm saying is Mahathir's motives are suspect since he has never been a socialist icon like Ahmad Boestamam, Pak Sako and the like. His posturing now as a champion of the working class rings hollow, especially when Umno was led by the elites just as its Alliance partner MCA had the reputation as a towkay party.
A major factor for the mass killings to have happened – really, it takes the utmost extremism for a man, or a mob to beat a victim till he bleeds to death – is that the Chinese were nothing short of hated by the Kg Baru amoks.
And lately, loathing again has been fanned after the opposition made great strides in the 2008 general election, similar to May 13 occurring after opposition gains in the 1969 GE.
This suspicion of minorities is egged on by stereotyping. Mahathir wrote in 1970's 'Malay Dilemma': "The Jews, for example, are not merely hook-nosed but understand money instinctively. … And the Chinese are not just almond-eyed people, but are also inherently good businessmen."
His keynote address in Terengganu on Monday is a facsimile of the Dilemma screed. After 40 years, Mahathir is still repeating his sly insinuation that Chinese, as a race and collective, were filthy rich in the 1960s.
While the above is disingenuous, it becomes quite dangerous for him to be trotting out accusations that Chinese today are still robbing the riches of Tanah Melayu. The gist of Mahathir's continual agitprop bodes ill for peace and stability, particularly if Malaysia were to go bankrupt in a few years and prompting social unrest.
'Gertak' is to intimidate
The ketuanan melayu demagoguery conveniently ignores the fact that prior to 1969, British suppression of the communist insurgency saw 1.2 million Chinese resettled in more than 500 New Villages which were little more than shantytowns fenced behind barbed wire.
How could those one million-plus Chinese villagers in the peninsula – out of a population totalling only 10.5 million in 1969 including Sabah and Sarawak – be considered prosperous in such huge numbers as to provoke the 'rich Chinese-poor Malay' class war that Mahathir invokes?
Lest it be forgotten, the Chinese came to this land as coolies. The dictionary does not define 'coolie' as millionaire. A great number of the community remained the underclass eking out a meagre living.
But even before the ex-premier's devotees turned up at the stadium for their dose of vintage 'Mahathiracism', the Gertak gathering already started from a lie. Its organizer Razali Idris claimed he chose the acronym Gertak meaning 'bridge' [sic] for his group Gerakan Kebangkitan Rakyat because it "embodied all that they stood for", i.e. "to connect" the races and foster harmony.
Oi! Jangan nak tipu lah. In the Terengganu dialect, bridge is 'getok'. The pronunciation of 'getok' is quite distinguishable from 'gertak'. And Gertak itself was a mono-racial rally scheduled for May 13 – a date picked by Mahathir himself.
The intent to intimidate was clear from the outset, and framing the event as 'Malay uprising' does not leave room for doubt. The identical 'Melayu bangkit' battlecry was a front-page banner headline not too long ago in Utusan Malaysia, and unmistakably to incite.
Everyone bumi except Chinese
At the Gertak occasion also, Mahathir as head of the Perdana Global Peace Foundation was presented the proceeds from the Fly2Gaza drive, totalling more than RM120,000. Interesting isn't it, that the Malay supremacist showboating just had to tie in with the Malaysian Muslims' pet cause?
The Kuala Terengganu (KT) venue of Gertak (right) may have something to do with the lukewarm response the event received.
Terengganu is 95 percent Malay in population. There were no May 13 tensions there or in its East Coast cousin Kelantan which has a similar demographic. May 13 happened not in the Malay heartland but in Kuala Lumpur where the populace was racially half-half.
By the same token, the Kg Medan racial clash would not have happened in KT or Kota Bharu because the minorities there are not significant enough to be a threat or to cause friction. This could be the reason why Mahathir when in Terengganu (that has only 2.6% Chinese) failed to draw the crowd the organisers wanted.
Adding to that, the Gertak gathering was held in the morning of a working day during World Cup season – which football fans have waited four years for. The turnout might be a different story another time, another place though … say, in Kg Baru.
The institutional basis of this country that makes it almost a point of honour to discriminate against Chinese and Indians rests on racism, period.
Make no bones about this selectivity in discrimination as Malaysians of Siamese and Portuguese descent are inexplicably categorized bumiputera, although Article 153 of the federal constitution denotes the 'special position' as referring to Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak.
'Bumiputera' is a coined word facilitating the suppression of Chinese and Indians. I'm just surprised that some women rights sub-committee from political groups like Kimma (comprising wannabe princes and princesses of the soil) has not yet campaigned for the use of 'bumiputeri'.
Showing posts with label 感觉释放 [Voice It Out]. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 感觉释放 [Voice It Out]. Show all posts
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Will minorities be made increasingly syariah-compliant
Helen Ang
Friday, 28 May 2010 09:45
Today is Wesak.
Last week the country was told about a Chinese Muslim Faizal Wong Abdullah who wanted to return to Buddhism – a religion of depleting numbers in Malaysia.
Faizal Wong had filed an application in March to renounce Islam. It’s not surprising though that Wong had converted as the proselytization drive is intense.
Being a civil servant, Wong was in a predominantly Malay-Muslim working environment. Looking at the organization chart of RTM (below), as one example of a state agency, we can get an idea of the racial composition in the civil service.
Out of the 40 top people in RTM, only one is of Chinese ethnicity and he is Rashid Woon Abdullah.
Here’s another example of the same phenomenon. “On the University of Malaya’s ‘Expert Page’ which details the researchers and thereby essentially the academic staff of the university, of 1,240 persons listed, only 20 Chinese names are included, eight of whom also have Islamic names” – found Dr Geoff Wade in his Asia Research Institute paper ‘The Origins and Evolution of Ethnocracy in Malaysia’.
The substantial number of converts to Islam could be due to peer influence as in Faizal Wong’s case, the many active missionary bodies, the Islamization of our public sphere and space, the Islamic programmes constantly broadcast in Mandarin and Tamil by RTM, or even the shenanigans of our National Registration Department.
Rigorously applying syariah
An academic studying political Islam in Southeast Asia and Malaysia, Prof. Gordon P. Means, observed that “[b]y 1970, nearly all the state governments had revised their Islamic laws to provide for more vigorous enforcement of Syariah law with increased penalties for violations in matters of personal behaviour and public deportment”.1
Nowadays the enforcement of Islamic law has become comparatively stricter still.
Apart from model Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno whose caning sentence for drinking beer was commuted after intercession by the Pahang sultan, another Malay was arrested for the same offence last month. The Pahang Syariah Court sentenced cook Mohamad Sabri Zulkepli to a year’s jail and six strokes of the cane for imbibing liquor in a mall.
But should the enforcement of Islamic mores concern Malaysians of other faiths as well?
Under Section 19 (2) of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act, those found guilty of abetting the sale of alcohol can face a jail term of three years and/or a RM5,000 fine. It is unclear what happens presently if the beer seller or pub owner is a non-Muslim.
It is rumoured that the federal authorities may do something to streamline our civil and Islamic laws that are mired in a seeming overlap of jurisdictions. In the event of which, the lacuna indicated above – where a Muslim is punished and a non-Muslim escapes charge – might possibly be addressed during the procedure.
The late Zaitun Mohamed Kasim, a civil society activist, commented: “In addition to [conversion and child custody cases], notions of proper gender/sexual/moral conduct that are founded on orthodox notions of Islamic understanding’ have increasingly become applied to Malaysia’s significant non-Muslim minorities”.2
Zaitun told a symposium in 2007, “To give but two examples of this: non-Muslim couples have been charged under municipal laws for holding hands in public. In one prominent case, an elderly married American couple, who were holidaying in [Langkawi] Malaysia, were asked in their hotel room to demonstrate to Malaysian Islamic authorities that they were married.”
Fatwas can become law
Another area of concern is how the issuance of fatwa has been turned into a state matter and granted “the exceptional status” as a source of lawmaking.
There is no requirement for religious edicts to be tabled in Parliament or the state legislature for approval. All it needs is for a fatwa to be gazetted, and then for it to become law, is that it is approved by the state Islamic religious council and the sultan.
“This is not a new development as the state authorities had fatwa-making powers under most of the State Administration of Islamic Law Enactments that have been in force for several decades,” noted Prof. Mohammad Kamali Hashim.3
“The issue took a new turn, however, during the 1990s when legislation on fatwa went a step further to declare it an offence for ‘any person who gives, propagates or disseminates any opinion contrary to any fatwa’ in force,” Prof. Kamali further wrote.
Although he cited Section 9 of the Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment of Johor, this legislation has equivalent provisions in most of the other states, c.f. Article 9 on “contempt and defiance of religious authorities” under the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997 .
Do recall that in November 2008, the National Fatwa Council issued a prohibition against yoga if the practice included haram chanting – an element of Hindu worship. A month earlier in October, the council also issued a fatwa against pengkid (tomboys).
[Sidenote: In 2007, a transsexual Ayu was detained by officials from Malacca’s Islamic Religious Affairs Department (JAIM) for committing the offence of “men dressing up as women in public space” under Section 72 of the Malacca Syariah Offences Enactment.]
If the prohibition against yoga is gazetted, then it will become a religious law on the statute book and carrying the corresponding penalties. Some of the states have indicated that they are considering or in the process of gazetting it.
One wonders too if the case for yoga is analogous to that for beer, i.e. if the yoga instructor or proprietor of the health centre/gym is a non-Muslim, would he nonetheless be punished for aiding and abetting the offence?
Apostasy is a serious crime
State Muslim laws in Malaysia allow for deviationism and apostasy to be prosecuted in court with criminal sanctions of a maximum of three years or a fine up to RM5,000 or whipping up to six strokes or a combination of these.
There are also laws in the states under various articles providing for rehabilitation to restore the faith of lapsed Muslims. Or those that the state declares to be Muslim like the young Indian woman M. Revathi who became a cause celebre not too long ago.
An Ayah Pin follower Kamariah Ali was convicted on charges of apostasy under Section 7 of the Syariah Criminal Offence Enactment (Takzir) Terengganu and sentenced to a jail term of two years in March 2008.
Hudud laws passed in Terengganu and Kelantan prescribe death for apostasy, although they have thus far never been implemented. 4
Former International Islamic University law lecturer Salbiah Ahmad asks: “A question may be posed to our High Court in adjudicating freedoms under the constitution: should Article 11 privilege the Sunni school or recognize the reality of diversity of beliefs and practices among Malaysians who still choose to be called Muslims”? 5
Adding another perspective, Syed Husin Ali cites clause (4) of the same Article 11 to point out that “The constitution does not allow others to induce Malays to leave Islam; the consequences are serious when a Malay leaves his religion, even of his own volition”.6
The federal constitution was promulgated in 1957 when Muslims were synonymous with Malays. The situation has since then changed significantly where Muslims are not only Malays but are to be found among Indians, Orang Asli, the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and Chinese too.
So now Faizal Wong is caught in a predicament of his own making; he embraced Islam out of choice as a mature adult.
For an oblique comparison, Buddhists are predominantly if not almost all Chinese in the country, although all Chinese need not necessarily be Buddhist. And even those Chinese here who style themselves Buddhists might be more accurately said to be practicing some mix of Taoism, Confucianism, ancestral worship and polytheism.
There is no such eclecticism for the Malay – at least not in the eyes of the religious authorities – despite what Salbiah may say on actual diversity of beliefs and practices among those who nominally call themselves Muslims.
Only 1Islam in M’sia
The state through a slew of laws strives to make Malays monolithic in faith instead. Article 160 of the Federal Constitution defines ‘Malay’ as a person who professes Islam – a stipulation which technically renders ‘un-Malay’ a person such as Lina Joy.
Malaysia follows the Shafii mazhab of Sunni Islam – a school predominant in Indonesia, Brunei, and in Southeast Asia generally. On the other hand, Shi’ite Islam is prohibited in the country, and its followers have been detained under ISA in the past. 7
State Islamic law enactments adhere to Sunni jurisprudence and the Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) is among the federal agencies responsible for its implementation.
Jakim enforces faith (akidah) conceptualized along the principles of ahli Sunnah wal Jamaah. Other beliefs outside the one officially sanctioned are proscribed, e.g., the Al-Arqam movement is banned. The Ahmadiyah community in Selangor numbering some 2,000 individuals is also on the Jakim blacklist as a deviant organization or teaching.8
In 2002, Jakim published a pamphlet‘Malaysia adalah sebuah Negara Islam’ in response to then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and his deputy Abdullah Ahmad Badawi affirming that Malaysia had attained Islamic state status. In it, Jakim director-general Mohamad Shahir Abdullah listed what he said was a series of proofs that the country is indeed Islamic. 9
According to statistics from the 2000 census, Muslims make up 60.8 percent of the population.10 Our next census – an exercise conducted every 10 years – will be carried out this July-August. It is expected that Muslims as a population ratio will rise further in percentage point.
All Muslims automatically fall under syariah law, which is being accorded a wider reach and coverage over ever more areas, what with the relentless Islamization that is taking place. Hence, even when some quarters are futilely contending whether Malaysia is secular or an Islamic state, the facts on the ground already bespeaks two-thirds of the country’s population.
********************
Citations
1. Gordon P. Means, ‘Political Islam in Southeast Asia’, Petaling Jaya: SIRD, 2009.
2. Zaitun Mohamed Kasim, “Religious Fundamentalisms in Muslim Societies” in ‘Selected Papers on Religious Fundamentalisms and their Impact on Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights’, Kuala Lumpur: Arrow, 2008.
3. Mohammad Kamali Hashim, ‘An Introduction to Shariah’, Kuala Lumpur: Ilmiah Publishers, 2006.
4. After PAS enacted hudud and qisas in 1993, Zaid Ibrahim petitioned the courts on the basis that Kelantan and Terengganu had contravened the federal constitution because criminal laws cannot be enacted by the state legislative assembly. Only Parliament has the legal capacity to enact criminal laws, and thus Zaid challenged if the actions of the two states were valid. (Zaid Ibrahim, ‘Saya Pun Melayu’, Petaling Jaya: ZI Publications, 2009).
5. Salbiah Ahmad, ‘Critical Thoughts on Islam, Rights and Freedom in Malaysia’, Petaling Jaya: SIRD, 2007.
6. Syed Husin Ali, ‘The Malays – Their Problems and Future’, Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press, 2008.
7. ‘Malaysia Human Rights Report 2008’, Petaling Jaya: Suaram Komunikasi, 2009.
8. Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim), Bahagian Penyelidikan
9. ‘Religion under Siege? Lina Joy, the Islamic State and Freedom of Faith’, Kuala Lumpur: Kinibooks, 2008.
10. Population and Housing Census of Malaysia 2000, Department of Statistics Malaysia.
Friday, 28 May 2010 09:45
Today is Wesak.
Last week the country was told about a Chinese Muslim Faizal Wong Abdullah who wanted to return to Buddhism – a religion of depleting numbers in Malaysia.
Faizal Wong had filed an application in March to renounce Islam. It’s not surprising though that Wong had converted as the proselytization drive is intense.
Being a civil servant, Wong was in a predominantly Malay-Muslim working environment. Looking at the organization chart of RTM (below), as one example of a state agency, we can get an idea of the racial composition in the civil service.
Out of the 40 top people in RTM, only one is of Chinese ethnicity and he is Rashid Woon Abdullah.
Here’s another example of the same phenomenon. “On the University of Malaya’s ‘Expert Page’ which details the researchers and thereby essentially the academic staff of the university, of 1,240 persons listed, only 20 Chinese names are included, eight of whom also have Islamic names” – found Dr Geoff Wade in his Asia Research Institute paper ‘The Origins and Evolution of Ethnocracy in Malaysia’.
The substantial number of converts to Islam could be due to peer influence as in Faizal Wong’s case, the many active missionary bodies, the Islamization of our public sphere and space, the Islamic programmes constantly broadcast in Mandarin and Tamil by RTM, or even the shenanigans of our National Registration Department.
Rigorously applying syariah
An academic studying political Islam in Southeast Asia and Malaysia, Prof. Gordon P. Means, observed that “[b]y 1970, nearly all the state governments had revised their Islamic laws to provide for more vigorous enforcement of Syariah law with increased penalties for violations in matters of personal behaviour and public deportment”.1
Nowadays the enforcement of Islamic law has become comparatively stricter still.
Apart from model Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno whose caning sentence for drinking beer was commuted after intercession by the Pahang sultan, another Malay was arrested for the same offence last month. The Pahang Syariah Court sentenced cook Mohamad Sabri Zulkepli to a year’s jail and six strokes of the cane for imbibing liquor in a mall.
But should the enforcement of Islamic mores concern Malaysians of other faiths as well?
Under Section 19 (2) of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act, those found guilty of abetting the sale of alcohol can face a jail term of three years and/or a RM5,000 fine. It is unclear what happens presently if the beer seller or pub owner is a non-Muslim.
It is rumoured that the federal authorities may do something to streamline our civil and Islamic laws that are mired in a seeming overlap of jurisdictions. In the event of which, the lacuna indicated above – where a Muslim is punished and a non-Muslim escapes charge – might possibly be addressed during the procedure.
The late Zaitun Mohamed Kasim, a civil society activist, commented: “In addition to [conversion and child custody cases], notions of proper gender/sexual/moral conduct that are founded on orthodox notions of Islamic understanding’ have increasingly become applied to Malaysia’s significant non-Muslim minorities”.2
Zaitun told a symposium in 2007, “To give but two examples of this: non-Muslim couples have been charged under municipal laws for holding hands in public. In one prominent case, an elderly married American couple, who were holidaying in [Langkawi] Malaysia, were asked in their hotel room to demonstrate to Malaysian Islamic authorities that they were married.”
Fatwas can become law
Another area of concern is how the issuance of fatwa has been turned into a state matter and granted “the exceptional status” as a source of lawmaking.
There is no requirement for religious edicts to be tabled in Parliament or the state legislature for approval. All it needs is for a fatwa to be gazetted, and then for it to become law, is that it is approved by the state Islamic religious council and the sultan.
“This is not a new development as the state authorities had fatwa-making powers under most of the State Administration of Islamic Law Enactments that have been in force for several decades,” noted Prof. Mohammad Kamali Hashim.3
“The issue took a new turn, however, during the 1990s when legislation on fatwa went a step further to declare it an offence for ‘any person who gives, propagates or disseminates any opinion contrary to any fatwa’ in force,” Prof. Kamali further wrote.
Although he cited Section 9 of the Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment of Johor, this legislation has equivalent provisions in most of the other states, c.f. Article 9 on “contempt and defiance of religious authorities” under the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997 .
Do recall that in November 2008, the National Fatwa Council issued a prohibition against yoga if the practice included haram chanting – an element of Hindu worship. A month earlier in October, the council also issued a fatwa against pengkid (tomboys).
[Sidenote: In 2007, a transsexual Ayu was detained by officials from Malacca’s Islamic Religious Affairs Department (JAIM) for committing the offence of “men dressing up as women in public space” under Section 72 of the Malacca Syariah Offences Enactment.]
If the prohibition against yoga is gazetted, then it will become a religious law on the statute book and carrying the corresponding penalties. Some of the states have indicated that they are considering or in the process of gazetting it.
One wonders too if the case for yoga is analogous to that for beer, i.e. if the yoga instructor or proprietor of the health centre/gym is a non-Muslim, would he nonetheless be punished for aiding and abetting the offence?
Apostasy is a serious crime
State Muslim laws in Malaysia allow for deviationism and apostasy to be prosecuted in court with criminal sanctions of a maximum of three years or a fine up to RM5,000 or whipping up to six strokes or a combination of these.
There are also laws in the states under various articles providing for rehabilitation to restore the faith of lapsed Muslims. Or those that the state declares to be Muslim like the young Indian woman M. Revathi who became a cause celebre not too long ago.
An Ayah Pin follower Kamariah Ali was convicted on charges of apostasy under Section 7 of the Syariah Criminal Offence Enactment (Takzir) Terengganu and sentenced to a jail term of two years in March 2008.
Hudud laws passed in Terengganu and Kelantan prescribe death for apostasy, although they have thus far never been implemented. 4
Former International Islamic University law lecturer Salbiah Ahmad asks: “A question may be posed to our High Court in adjudicating freedoms under the constitution: should Article 11 privilege the Sunni school or recognize the reality of diversity of beliefs and practices among Malaysians who still choose to be called Muslims”? 5
Adding another perspective, Syed Husin Ali cites clause (4) of the same Article 11 to point out that “The constitution does not allow others to induce Malays to leave Islam; the consequences are serious when a Malay leaves his religion, even of his own volition”.6
The federal constitution was promulgated in 1957 when Muslims were synonymous with Malays. The situation has since then changed significantly where Muslims are not only Malays but are to be found among Indians, Orang Asli, the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and Chinese too.
So now Faizal Wong is caught in a predicament of his own making; he embraced Islam out of choice as a mature adult.
For an oblique comparison, Buddhists are predominantly if not almost all Chinese in the country, although all Chinese need not necessarily be Buddhist. And even those Chinese here who style themselves Buddhists might be more accurately said to be practicing some mix of Taoism, Confucianism, ancestral worship and polytheism.
There is no such eclecticism for the Malay – at least not in the eyes of the religious authorities – despite what Salbiah may say on actual diversity of beliefs and practices among those who nominally call themselves Muslims.
Only 1Islam in M’sia
The state through a slew of laws strives to make Malays monolithic in faith instead. Article 160 of the Federal Constitution defines ‘Malay’ as a person who professes Islam – a stipulation which technically renders ‘un-Malay’ a person such as Lina Joy.
Malaysia follows the Shafii mazhab of Sunni Islam – a school predominant in Indonesia, Brunei, and in Southeast Asia generally. On the other hand, Shi’ite Islam is prohibited in the country, and its followers have been detained under ISA in the past. 7
State Islamic law enactments adhere to Sunni jurisprudence and the Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) is among the federal agencies responsible for its implementation.
Jakim enforces faith (akidah) conceptualized along the principles of ahli Sunnah wal Jamaah. Other beliefs outside the one officially sanctioned are proscribed, e.g., the Al-Arqam movement is banned. The Ahmadiyah community in Selangor numbering some 2,000 individuals is also on the Jakim blacklist as a deviant organization or teaching.8
In 2002, Jakim published a pamphlet‘Malaysia adalah sebuah Negara Islam’ in response to then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and his deputy Abdullah Ahmad Badawi affirming that Malaysia had attained Islamic state status. In it, Jakim director-general Mohamad Shahir Abdullah listed what he said was a series of proofs that the country is indeed Islamic. 9
According to statistics from the 2000 census, Muslims make up 60.8 percent of the population.10 Our next census – an exercise conducted every 10 years – will be carried out this July-August. It is expected that Muslims as a population ratio will rise further in percentage point.
All Muslims automatically fall under syariah law, which is being accorded a wider reach and coverage over ever more areas, what with the relentless Islamization that is taking place. Hence, even when some quarters are futilely contending whether Malaysia is secular or an Islamic state, the facts on the ground already bespeaks two-thirds of the country’s population.
********************
Citations
1. Gordon P. Means, ‘Political Islam in Southeast Asia’, Petaling Jaya: SIRD, 2009.
2. Zaitun Mohamed Kasim, “Religious Fundamentalisms in Muslim Societies” in ‘Selected Papers on Religious Fundamentalisms and their Impact on Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights’, Kuala Lumpur: Arrow, 2008.
3. Mohammad Kamali Hashim, ‘An Introduction to Shariah’, Kuala Lumpur: Ilmiah Publishers, 2006.
4. After PAS enacted hudud and qisas in 1993, Zaid Ibrahim petitioned the courts on the basis that Kelantan and Terengganu had contravened the federal constitution because criminal laws cannot be enacted by the state legislative assembly. Only Parliament has the legal capacity to enact criminal laws, and thus Zaid challenged if the actions of the two states were valid. (Zaid Ibrahim, ‘Saya Pun Melayu’, Petaling Jaya: ZI Publications, 2009).
5. Salbiah Ahmad, ‘Critical Thoughts on Islam, Rights and Freedom in Malaysia’, Petaling Jaya: SIRD, 2007.
6. Syed Husin Ali, ‘The Malays – Their Problems and Future’, Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press, 2008.
7. ‘Malaysia Human Rights Report 2008’, Petaling Jaya: Suaram Komunikasi, 2009.
8. Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim), Bahagian Penyelidikan
9. ‘Religion under Siege? Lina Joy, the Islamic State and Freedom of Faith’, Kuala Lumpur: Kinibooks, 2008.
10. Population and Housing Census of Malaysia 2000, Department of Statistics Malaysia.
One Dispirited Malaysian
Mariam Mokhtar
Jun 9, 10
2:11pm
The Youth and Sports deputy minister, Razali Ibrahim, said that Malaysians who belittled the country lacked a national spirit and prevented the country from becoming a developed nation. How very patronising of him to have such a low opinion of us.
He is wrong or in denial. Malaysians have a strong sense of national spirit and identity.
He compared us unfavourably with our neighbours, whom he considered more nationalistic, even with their anti-government protests.
He even claimed that kiasu was the “national spirit” of Singapore and the “secret to Singapore's success”. I was under the impression that Singapore's success was because of its strong leadership and long-term vision.
Razali (left) firmly believes that Malaysia's key to being a developed nation is by being kiasu. If only it were that easy – to be successful by riding rough-shod over people.
The only kiasu I see are our political masters and institutions like the police, who completely disregard the wishes of the people they should serve.
A 'victim' of kiasu despairs at the intolerable arrogance and pushy behaviour. It is neither an appealing trait nor a good example to emulate. In my eyes, success only comes through hard work and perseverance. Not through being kiasu.
Excelling with minimum effort
Take for instance the Malays. The previous National Economic Policy allowed Malays to excel in their studies or work performance with the minimum of effort.
Work was never valued. Responsibility was always someone else's. Sensitive topics were taken personally. And no serious attempt to integrate into the modern world, one where the woman was an equal, was made.
With this diet of false support and false hope, Malays were rendered weak and became intolerant of others. They did not know their own weaknesses and strengths. They became hostile to others who did not share their views. With little stimulation, they became mentally challenged.
They demanded rather than earned respect. They expected rather than encouraged people to behave. They dictated rather than engaged in discussions which displayed mental astuteness.
By contrast, non-Malays had to perform with what little they had. Success, when it came to them, tasted even sweeter.
Both the Malay and non-Malay started off from an unequal platform. The non-Malays persevered for success, would demand life-changing decisions which would also affect their immediate families. We are familiar with tales of houses being mortgaged or parents holding several jobs to pay off education loans.
For the Malays, whatever they did was a walkover. They were content with coasting along.
The devil is in the details
So, if Razali is serious about Malaysia becoming a developed nation, he must appreciate that the devil is in the details.
Most Malaysians are loyal, tolerant, hospitable, genteel and diplomatic. The genuine interaction of Malaysians can be acutely observed in overseas Malaysians, more so than in the false window-dressing found at the local '1Malaysia' rallies.
How does Razali expect the Chinese and Indians who make-up 40% of the population, the so-called pendatangs (immigrants), to feel patriotic?
If we are to become a developed nation, we will have to stamp out all corruption in the government and civil services.
Should we feign ignorance when things go disastrously wrong and no one is held accountable?
Should we ignore the cronyism, racism, religious intolerance, scandals, political conspiracies, kangaroo trials, a politicised police force, a tainted judiciary…?
Is Razali content with Malaysia's poor human rights record and that we have draconian laws to detain people without trial?
Malaysians are neither blind nor stupid. The country is bankrupt and we have been told to tighten our belts. Prices of many commodities are increasing. Rice, flour, oil and sugar are in short supply. Employers cannot find suitable workers. The unemployed cannot find suitable work.
Razali said that the '1Malaysia' concept to make the people and nation developed was under attack by some ungrateful Malaysians, saying “Will running down your own country make others respect us more?” He claimed that such an attitude would make other nations lose confidence in Malaysia.
Time for complacency over
Razali is wrong. Malaysians have only lost faith in their leaders. For 53 years, the masses have subsidised those at the top and believed their false rhetoric. The time for complacency is over.
He referred to the strong nationalism of the South Koreans, Japanese and Singaporeans, saying “This is what we are lacking,” and claimed that “….people in developed countries rarely talked bad about their own countries but would defend them.”
Wrong again. People in developed countries do talk bad about their own countries and especially their leaders.
Criticism leads to change, and the chance to progress. That these citizens can comment without censure is known as democracy. The countries he praised have despatched with all speed corrupt or incompetent officials and politicians, including prime ministers. Some did the honorable thing.
However, these countries have a good system of governance guided by their constitution. Their needs are addressed and their rights defended. The same can't be said for Malaysia.
Jun 9, 10
2:11pm
The Youth and Sports deputy minister, Razali Ibrahim, said that Malaysians who belittled the country lacked a national spirit and prevented the country from becoming a developed nation. How very patronising of him to have such a low opinion of us.
He is wrong or in denial. Malaysians have a strong sense of national spirit and identity.
He compared us unfavourably with our neighbours, whom he considered more nationalistic, even with their anti-government protests.
He even claimed that kiasu was the “national spirit” of Singapore and the “secret to Singapore's success”. I was under the impression that Singapore's success was because of its strong leadership and long-term vision.
Razali (left) firmly believes that Malaysia's key to being a developed nation is by being kiasu. If only it were that easy – to be successful by riding rough-shod over people.
The only kiasu I see are our political masters and institutions like the police, who completely disregard the wishes of the people they should serve.
A 'victim' of kiasu despairs at the intolerable arrogance and pushy behaviour. It is neither an appealing trait nor a good example to emulate. In my eyes, success only comes through hard work and perseverance. Not through being kiasu.
Excelling with minimum effort
Take for instance the Malays. The previous National Economic Policy allowed Malays to excel in their studies or work performance with the minimum of effort.
Work was never valued. Responsibility was always someone else's. Sensitive topics were taken personally. And no serious attempt to integrate into the modern world, one where the woman was an equal, was made.
With this diet of false support and false hope, Malays were rendered weak and became intolerant of others. They did not know their own weaknesses and strengths. They became hostile to others who did not share their views. With little stimulation, they became mentally challenged.
They demanded rather than earned respect. They expected rather than encouraged people to behave. They dictated rather than engaged in discussions which displayed mental astuteness.
By contrast, non-Malays had to perform with what little they had. Success, when it came to them, tasted even sweeter.
Both the Malay and non-Malay started off from an unequal platform. The non-Malays persevered for success, would demand life-changing decisions which would also affect their immediate families. We are familiar with tales of houses being mortgaged or parents holding several jobs to pay off education loans.
For the Malays, whatever they did was a walkover. They were content with coasting along.
The devil is in the details
So, if Razali is serious about Malaysia becoming a developed nation, he must appreciate that the devil is in the details.
Most Malaysians are loyal, tolerant, hospitable, genteel and diplomatic. The genuine interaction of Malaysians can be acutely observed in overseas Malaysians, more so than in the false window-dressing found at the local '1Malaysia' rallies.
How does Razali expect the Chinese and Indians who make-up 40% of the population, the so-called pendatangs (immigrants), to feel patriotic?
If we are to become a developed nation, we will have to stamp out all corruption in the government and civil services.
Should we feign ignorance when things go disastrously wrong and no one is held accountable?
Should we ignore the cronyism, racism, religious intolerance, scandals, political conspiracies, kangaroo trials, a politicised police force, a tainted judiciary…?
Is Razali content with Malaysia's poor human rights record and that we have draconian laws to detain people without trial?
Malaysians are neither blind nor stupid. The country is bankrupt and we have been told to tighten our belts. Prices of many commodities are increasing. Rice, flour, oil and sugar are in short supply. Employers cannot find suitable workers. The unemployed cannot find suitable work.
Razali said that the '1Malaysia' concept to make the people and nation developed was under attack by some ungrateful Malaysians, saying “Will running down your own country make others respect us more?” He claimed that such an attitude would make other nations lose confidence in Malaysia.
Time for complacency over
Razali is wrong. Malaysians have only lost faith in their leaders. For 53 years, the masses have subsidised those at the top and believed their false rhetoric. The time for complacency is over.
He referred to the strong nationalism of the South Koreans, Japanese and Singaporeans, saying “This is what we are lacking,” and claimed that “….people in developed countries rarely talked bad about their own countries but would defend them.”
Wrong again. People in developed countries do talk bad about their own countries and especially their leaders.
Criticism leads to change, and the chance to progress. That these citizens can comment without censure is known as democracy. The countries he praised have despatched with all speed corrupt or incompetent officials and politicians, including prime ministers. Some did the honorable thing.
However, these countries have a good system of governance guided by their constitution. Their needs are addressed and their rights defended. The same can't be said for Malaysia.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
The party is over!
Mariam Mokhtar
16 December 2009
Malaysians are living in an Age of Denial and fast speeding into the Age of Desolation. I hesitate to say the Age of Despair, for despair suggests loss of hope.
And I have faith. Faith, in my fellow Malaysians, moved by a groundswell of anti-racism sentiment.
Over the past few years, the voice of racism has reached a crescendo. Our society does not dare utter the R word. And I blame politicians for not addressing this issue head on. Each expects the next wave of leaders to tackle it. They didn't or wouldn't. So, now we succumb to conflict and confusion.
Malaysia is supposed to be the bed-rock of multiculturalism. But the horrid slogan ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) is throttling the other soundbite - '1Malaysia'. I don't like the former and I dislike the latter even more.
Without qualifying ketuanan Melayu, the term is impotent. Similarly '1Malaysia' remains another empty slogan - sounds good, but lacks substance and definition.
Our politicians live in a world pretty much divorced from reality. For decades, they used the race card to divide and rule us. With lives to lead, careers to pursue and mouths to feed, we simply ignored them and carried on earning and living. But things have come to a head. Many working and middle-class Malaysians can no longer contain their disgust.
Ketuanan Melayu = Malay supremacy; 1Malaysia = national unity and ethnic tolerance. You can't insist on the latter while still persisting with the former. It is a contradiction in terms.
The world is getting smaller but not in the Malay universe. Other nations have dismantled their barriers for a more cohesive society, but we Malays are building our walls faster than we can mouth the words ketuanan Melayu. If we are not careful, we'll build our walls high enough and thick enough to hem ourselves in. Bricked up from the real world.
It is all a question of perception. The Malays are misguided if they are convinced by the fallacy of ketuanan Melayu. The politicians who expound this idea are self-serving.
They sell this idea to the poor and poverty-stricken Malay, saying that an equal and fair Malaysia will only encourage the non-Malays to remove what little wealth they have. Recipients of this news become petrified, and cling on firmer to the farcical ketuanan Melayu.
As for the privileged Malay, it would be financial suicide to forego the status, prestige and recognition he's accustomed to.
In reality, politicians are doing more harm to the ordinary Malay and all Malaysians. They only protect their own interests and the interests of those who pander to their wishes.
Cycle of discontent
The wealthy Malay probably constitutes only 3 percent of the Malay population. In relative terms, little, if any, wealth has filtered down to the ordinary Malay.
Gaudy mansions, fast cars, designer clothes, international schooling, holidays abroad, first-class travel, overseas properties, offshore bank accounts, private jets and helicopters are de rigueur for the wealthy Malay.
Of course, the poor Malay aspires to have all these and more. He assumes that the NEP has accorded the rich Malay his correct station in life and rightful place in society.
Can he be so gullible or naïve as to believe that corruption did not figure in any of these vulgar displays of wealth? Those at the top will never relinquish their position. At best, or when it suits them, they will appease those beneath them with a scattering of crumbs.
Thus, from the top and right down to the bottom-feeders, these people are content. But contentment breeds complacency. And complacency breeds contempt.
For every inch that the Malay is entitled to under the current rules, the non-Malay has had to fight for limited spaces in education, job opportunities and wealth creation..
Whilst the Malay has only to sit back and watch things land on his plate, his non-Malay counterpart has had to use his ingenuity to succeed.
Competition brings out the best in people and only the best get selected. But think of the others who are also able but are not chosen. They feel disillusioned and trapped in a system that is unjust and unfair. Disillusionment gives rise to discontentment, which in turn, raises discord..
For every argument that some errant politician makes about non-Malay Malaysians, patronisingly referred to as 'immigrants', the non-Malays feel immense betrayal.
No one doubts the allegiance of non-Malays to King and country. But when your sense of loyalty is questioned and tested, then those whose ideals are shattered will emigrate. Much talent has already been exported. It is Malaysia that suffers.. Malays too feel the pain of injustice and discrimination. Many have also jumped ship.
We need to strike a balance between a just and fair social system, economic growth and job creation. We cannot have one section of society maintaining a separate, inward-looking community that feels it is a cut above the rest of mainstream life and whose values are at conflict with it.
How can the marginalised be expected to inculcate a sense of pride in their national identity? Removing their dignity and worth, removes their sense of belonging. Is this the game plan then?
I fail to understand why our leaders refuse to acknowledge that mistakes have been made by others before them and also by themselves. Do they not comprehend that they too can be part of the solution?
There are signs that our politicians and certain institutions are strongly resisting change. They do not wish to inflame the hyperactive sensitivities of certain groups of people. But in doing so, they hold the rest of the country to ransom.
We need to get our country back on track - we need strong leaders. Not those who swan abroad on one pretext or another. We do not need international statesmen.
We need someone here and now, to address pressing domestic issues - maintaining good and harmonious race relations is no longer an optional matter for the majority group.
16 December 2009
Malaysians are living in an Age of Denial and fast speeding into the Age of Desolation. I hesitate to say the Age of Despair, for despair suggests loss of hope.
And I have faith. Faith, in my fellow Malaysians, moved by a groundswell of anti-racism sentiment.
Over the past few years, the voice of racism has reached a crescendo. Our society does not dare utter the R word. And I blame politicians for not addressing this issue head on. Each expects the next wave of leaders to tackle it. They didn't or wouldn't. So, now we succumb to conflict and confusion.
Malaysia is supposed to be the bed-rock of multiculturalism. But the horrid slogan ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) is throttling the other soundbite - '1Malaysia'. I don't like the former and I dislike the latter even more.
Without qualifying ketuanan Melayu, the term is impotent. Similarly '1Malaysia' remains another empty slogan - sounds good, but lacks substance and definition.
Our politicians live in a world pretty much divorced from reality. For decades, they used the race card to divide and rule us. With lives to lead, careers to pursue and mouths to feed, we simply ignored them and carried on earning and living. But things have come to a head. Many working and middle-class Malaysians can no longer contain their disgust.
Ketuanan Melayu = Malay supremacy; 1Malaysia = national unity and ethnic tolerance. You can't insist on the latter while still persisting with the former. It is a contradiction in terms.
The world is getting smaller but not in the Malay universe. Other nations have dismantled their barriers for a more cohesive society, but we Malays are building our walls faster than we can mouth the words ketuanan Melayu. If we are not careful, we'll build our walls high enough and thick enough to hem ourselves in. Bricked up from the real world.
It is all a question of perception. The Malays are misguided if they are convinced by the fallacy of ketuanan Melayu. The politicians who expound this idea are self-serving.
They sell this idea to the poor and poverty-stricken Malay, saying that an equal and fair Malaysia will only encourage the non-Malays to remove what little wealth they have. Recipients of this news become petrified, and cling on firmer to the farcical ketuanan Melayu.
As for the privileged Malay, it would be financial suicide to forego the status, prestige and recognition he's accustomed to.
In reality, politicians are doing more harm to the ordinary Malay and all Malaysians. They only protect their own interests and the interests of those who pander to their wishes.
Cycle of discontent
The wealthy Malay probably constitutes only 3 percent of the Malay population. In relative terms, little, if any, wealth has filtered down to the ordinary Malay.
Gaudy mansions, fast cars, designer clothes, international schooling, holidays abroad, first-class travel, overseas properties, offshore bank accounts, private jets and helicopters are de rigueur for the wealthy Malay.
Of course, the poor Malay aspires to have all these and more. He assumes that the NEP has accorded the rich Malay his correct station in life and rightful place in society.
Can he be so gullible or naïve as to believe that corruption did not figure in any of these vulgar displays of wealth? Those at the top will never relinquish their position. At best, or when it suits them, they will appease those beneath them with a scattering of crumbs.
Thus, from the top and right down to the bottom-feeders, these people are content. But contentment breeds complacency. And complacency breeds contempt.
For every inch that the Malay is entitled to under the current rules, the non-Malay has had to fight for limited spaces in education, job opportunities and wealth creation..
Whilst the Malay has only to sit back and watch things land on his plate, his non-Malay counterpart has had to use his ingenuity to succeed.
Competition brings out the best in people and only the best get selected. But think of the others who are also able but are not chosen. They feel disillusioned and trapped in a system that is unjust and unfair. Disillusionment gives rise to discontentment, which in turn, raises discord..
For every argument that some errant politician makes about non-Malay Malaysians, patronisingly referred to as 'immigrants', the non-Malays feel immense betrayal.
No one doubts the allegiance of non-Malays to King and country. But when your sense of loyalty is questioned and tested, then those whose ideals are shattered will emigrate. Much talent has already been exported. It is Malaysia that suffers.. Malays too feel the pain of injustice and discrimination. Many have also jumped ship.
We need to strike a balance between a just and fair social system, economic growth and job creation. We cannot have one section of society maintaining a separate, inward-looking community that feels it is a cut above the rest of mainstream life and whose values are at conflict with it.
How can the marginalised be expected to inculcate a sense of pride in their national identity? Removing their dignity and worth, removes their sense of belonging. Is this the game plan then?
I fail to understand why our leaders refuse to acknowledge that mistakes have been made by others before them and also by themselves. Do they not comprehend that they too can be part of the solution?
There are signs that our politicians and certain institutions are strongly resisting change. They do not wish to inflame the hyperactive sensitivities of certain groups of people. But in doing so, they hold the rest of the country to ransom.
We need to get our country back on track - we need strong leaders. Not those who swan abroad on one pretext or another. We do not need international statesmen.
We need someone here and now, to address pressing domestic issues - maintaining good and harmonious race relations is no longer an optional matter for the majority group.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Vernacular schools not the ones causing disunity
Norman Fernandez
4 Dec 2009
I refer to the Malaysiakini report Single stream schools a thorny issue.
Recently, Prof Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim proposed a restructuring of the national education system, including the implementation of a single stream to ensure attainment of the goals of a '1Malaysia'. As often the case, vernacular schools and principally Chinese schools have been singled out as being the root cause for polarisation and the lack of national unity. However, to fault vernacular schools for the cause for polarisation and disunity is premised on multiple fallacies.
Many urge the government to follow in the footsteps of Singapore which has abolished vernacular schools. However, they conveniently forget that in Malaysia, vernacular education is a right guaranteed by constitution and by acts of Parliament. Vernacular education is part of the social contract.
That right ought not to be questioned and the right to vernacular education is the right of the non-Malays and cannot be compromised. Thus, to call for abolishment or to call for a single stream is uncalled for.
Those who continuously fault the vernacular schools ought to be reminded that
it is the desire and wish of every parent to see their children mix, study and play with children of other races. After all, the parents themselves were often the products of national schools where students of different races and religions studied, played and interacted together and forged friendship which extended long after they left school.
What those calling for single stream education and proponents for abolishing vernacular schools fail to admit is that vernacular schools in the past were not necessarily the schools of first choice for the non-Malays. Non-Malay parents sent their children to English-medium schools simply because the education was in English.
The schools had good teachers and English-medium schools provided school-leavers better career opportunities. In fact, Chinese schools such as Han Chiang High School in Penang were on the verge of closing down because of falling attendance and in the 70s, had to depend on students from Indonesia and Thailand to survive. Now the reverse has happened.
According to statistics, Chinese parents who send their children to national schools have fallen from around 50% in the 1970s to about 6% in 2006. The media has reported that 9 out of 10 Chinese send their children to Chinese vernacular schools. Today, there are approximately 630,000 students studying in 1,288 Chinese primary schools. Those blaming vernacular schools and particularly Chinese schools ought to know that there are almost 60,000 non-Chinese students studying in Chinese schools and a substantial proportion of these students are Malays.
Even more alarming is that Tamil parents and particularly Tamil professionals who were educated in national schools are now beating a path to the Tamil schools. Today, approximately 100,142 students study in 523 Tamil schools despite the fact that many Tamil schools lack the facilities national schools or Chinese schools have.
With Chinese and Indian parents abandoning national schools for vernacular schools, the national schools - not by choice - have taken on the image of 'sekolah Melayu'. Those advocating single stream never bother to ask why have the non-Malays abandoned national schools and they are no more the schools of first choice.
4 Dec 2009
I refer to the Malaysiakini report Single stream schools a thorny issue.
Recently, Prof Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim proposed a restructuring of the national education system, including the implementation of a single stream to ensure attainment of the goals of a '1Malaysia'. As often the case, vernacular schools and principally Chinese schools have been singled out as being the root cause for polarisation and the lack of national unity. However, to fault vernacular schools for the cause for polarisation and disunity is premised on multiple fallacies.
Many urge the government to follow in the footsteps of Singapore which has abolished vernacular schools. However, they conveniently forget that in Malaysia, vernacular education is a right guaranteed by constitution and by acts of Parliament. Vernacular education is part of the social contract.
That right ought not to be questioned and the right to vernacular education is the right of the non-Malays and cannot be compromised. Thus, to call for abolishment or to call for a single stream is uncalled for.
Those who continuously fault the vernacular schools ought to be reminded that
it is the desire and wish of every parent to see their children mix, study and play with children of other races. After all, the parents themselves were often the products of national schools where students of different races and religions studied, played and interacted together and forged friendship which extended long after they left school.What those calling for single stream education and proponents for abolishing vernacular schools fail to admit is that vernacular schools in the past were not necessarily the schools of first choice for the non-Malays. Non-Malay parents sent their children to English-medium schools simply because the education was in English.
The schools had good teachers and English-medium schools provided school-leavers better career opportunities. In fact, Chinese schools such as Han Chiang High School in Penang were on the verge of closing down because of falling attendance and in the 70s, had to depend on students from Indonesia and Thailand to survive. Now the reverse has happened.
According to statistics, Chinese parents who send their children to national schools have fallen from around 50% in the 1970s to about 6% in 2006. The media has reported that 9 out of 10 Chinese send their children to Chinese vernacular schools. Today, there are approximately 630,000 students studying in 1,288 Chinese primary schools. Those blaming vernacular schools and particularly Chinese schools ought to know that there are almost 60,000 non-Chinese students studying in Chinese schools and a substantial proportion of these students are Malays.
Even more alarming is that Tamil parents and particularly Tamil professionals who were educated in national schools are now beating a path to the Tamil schools. Today, approximately 100,142 students study in 523 Tamil schools despite the fact that many Tamil schools lack the facilities national schools or Chinese schools have.
With Chinese and Indian parents abandoning national schools for vernacular schools, the national schools - not by choice - have taken on the image of 'sekolah Melayu'. Those advocating single stream never bother to ask why have the non-Malays abandoned national schools and they are no more the schools of first choice.
Rightfully those advocating single-stream education or proposing the closure of vernacular schools ought to ask the parents of the 60,000 non-Malay students (a substantial proportion of them being Malays) studying in Chinese schools, why did they as Malays abandon the national schools which have better facilities and teachers and students of same race and religion.
Why did they instead choose to send their children to Chinese vernacular schools where their children are a minority and will be exposed to Chinese culture, Chinese religious beliefs and having to eat in the school canteen which is more likely to serve food which may not be 'halal'.
Malay parents, seeing the benefits of a Chinese education, are also the abandoning national schools for Chinese schools. If Chinese schools are indeed the root cause of disunity then questions must be asked why the Malays are beginning to see Chinese schools as schools of first choice.
Instead, they repeat the decade old polemic blaming vernacular schools for causing racial polarisation and disunity. Further, they also conveniently choose to ignore that there are also schools which are exclusively for a single race, religious schools for a particular religion, universities catering to a single race and universities with religious orientation of a single religion. Are not the existence of these schools and universities equally divisive?
What logical justification is there to call for single-stream education in primary schools and then allow divisive secondary and tertiary education?
Malaysia is unique with its multiracial, multi-cultural and multi-religious population. The role of a school is not only to create a learning atmosphere. In Malaysia, schools have an added responsibility in that it ought to be a place where students are taught to value and celebrate diversity.
Students should be taught to acknowledge and respect each other's culture, language and religion and to be imbibed with a sense that each other's cultural, language and religious diversities are part and parcel of our national heritage and that this uniqueness should be treasured and protected by all. Schools must inculcate multi-racialism, multi-culturalism and multi-religionism. The question is whether the national schools are doing this.
The character of national schools have changed and they have become overtly and overwhelmingly Malay-Muslim. Malay-Muslim centred actions and policies have caused the exodus of non-Malays from the national schools.
School administrators and the principals in some national schools have turned the school and the school's culture's into one dominantly of Malay-Muslim. While great effort is taken to continuously remind the non-Malay students about respecting Malay cultural mores and religious sensitivities, the same is not done when it comes to non-Malay cultural and religious sensitivities. Even worse, they are blatantly indifferent to the sensitivities of the non-Malays.
Here is a letter which appeared in a news portal where a parent wrote: 'In my children's Sekolah Kebangssan school, the Hari Raya holidays are stretched to well over a week to accommodate the Malays. Replacement classes are planned months ahead and notification letters are sent out very early. However, when it comes to Chinese New Year, not a single extra day is given - not even for the kids who have to travel to make it to their hometowns. Mind you, Malays make up roughly 50% of the student population.'
Razak Baginda who was then the executive director of Malaysian Strategic Research Centre is quoted in the International Herald Tribune on June 7, 2005 as saying that his 'daughter complained that the religious teachers are the culprits. They inculcate very negative views of the other religions. They are always have a 'them and us' attitude that is very destructive.'
This is merely one example. Many non-Malay parents also complain that while the school has religious and religious activities for Muslims students, it is a near impossibility to have the same for the non-Malay-non-Muslim students. In some schools, classes are segregated according to race and religion giving 'time-table convenience' as an excuse. Some schools even forbid their students from wearing shorts for physical education.
Thus, it was not a surprise when in 2002, the then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed, without mincing his words, said that the national school system had been hijacked by obscurantists interested in Islamic practices that emphasise form over substance.
To add to the changing landscape of national schools, is a perception problem. Many parents lament that the standard of teaching in national schools has deteriorated. A lecturer at the teacher's training college in Johor Baru once lamented about the quality of the trainee teachers.
According to him, many of these trainee teachers hardly have a passion for teaching and that teacher-training was their last choice after having failed to secure a place in the universities or other colleges.
Thus, the attraction to teaching is simply its perks - half-day sessions, five-day week and the long term breaks and more importantly, job security. Many have the perception that in the national schools, many of the teachers seem to be disinterested and unmotivated and some instead are more interested in moulding the children for the hereafter.
Rightly or wrongly, many believe that vernacular schools and particularly the Chinese vernacular schools have dedicated teachers with a reputation for quality, rigour and working their students hard. Could this be the reason why more than 60,000 non-Chinese students now study in Chinese schools ?
I believe the exodus in such droves from the national schools to the vernacular schools would not have happened had the government been farsighted and been quick to arrest the problem. Why did the government wait until almost 90% of the non-Malay students abandon the national schools before recognising that there was a problem
Surely the government ought to have known about the overzealous school administrators with their own agenda and about teachers who permeate ill-feelings and racism? The government must have known about the gradual Malay-nisation of these schools. There have been cases of non-Malay students who were racially abused to the extent of being called 'monkeys'. Such teachers rightfully out to have been dismissed with criminal action initiated. Instead, they were sent for 'counseling'.
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has rightly pointed out that any move to a
single-stream education would require a big paradigm shift and it will only happen if the people are ready to make a change and if the society is not ready, the government will carry on with the existing system.
That paradigm shift, I believe must come from the government. If only the government can walk the talk of a '1Malaysia', take the necessary steps to overhaul the standard of national schools, enhance the quality and standard of teaching, ensure that schools are free from zealots and racists, employ teachers and administrators who truly subscribe to multi-culturalism and multi-religionism, make the teaching of vernacular education mandatory and recreate the atmosphere of yesteryears (ie, pre- Merdeka), it is possible that the national schools could regain their past glory and their rightful place
Sunday, June 21, 2009
命运！
命运！
命运！
你相信人的命运早已注定了吗
当我们出身时
我们人生的旅程似乎早有了谱
人家说
佛家相信
“人定胜天”
运固然定了曲
但命却掌握在自己的手里
只要努力 并能成功
事实真是如此吗？
也许这只是少数吧！
我不信命运的主宰
我不信无形力量的威力
但种种的事迹与预言
却不让我不屈服于命运
命运的力量
命运的威力
命运的主宰
原来
这世界上真有其人
能预知你的未来
掌握你的运程 剖析你的性格
看透你的一生
原来
我并不是自己生命的决策者
而是上天小小的一颗棋子
那么地渺小 那么地无助
命运 我信了！
命运！
你相信人的命运早已注定了吗
当我们出身时
我们人生的旅程似乎早有了谱
人家说
佛家相信
“人定胜天”
运固然定了曲
但命却掌握在自己的手里
只要努力 并能成功
事实真是如此吗？
也许这只是少数吧！
我不信命运的主宰
我不信无形力量的威力
但种种的事迹与预言
却不让我不屈服于命运
命运的力量
命运的威力
命运的主宰
原来
这世界上真有其人
能预知你的未来
掌握你的运程 剖析你的性格
看透你的一生
原来
我并不是自己生命的决策者
而是上天小小的一颗棋子
那么地渺小 那么地无助
命运 我信了！
Monday, January 5, 2009
解剖关闭马大华人熟食档
一月四日（星期日）马大第十二宿舍校长召开了华裔生会议。在此会议中，校长以蜻蜓点水的方式带过了华人熟食档的课题，由始至终只说这纯属程序的问题。直到对答环节时，在学生们连珠炮的反问下，事情的来龙去脉才一一浮出水面。综合全部的问问答答，我得到了以下的结论。
简单论述，前华人老板Uncle Lim 是向马来业主租借其档口售卖华人的食物。所以当马来业主被令结束营业时，Uncle Lim自然也就无法继业了。以此逻辑，这似乎合情合理。但其问题就在于为何这马来业主又会忽然间被令停业呢？原来他是以“阿里巴巴”的方式转售经营权给Uncle Lim。早知如此，为何Uncle Lim又不自己投标，宁愿以更高的价钱购买经营权，而又落到如今关门大吉的下场，何苦呢？
此问题的根源并非纯属程序的失误，也非宗教Halal 的课题所致。追根究底，就是“种族特权”的因素。根据政府相关的政策，开办熟食档者须符合三个条件：（-）享有“土著”地位、（二）肉类须附有Halal的印证、（三）食物卫生清洁。以 Uncle Lim的个案为例，无论他如何努力，他最终也只能符合第二和第三的条件。冥冥中注定，身为大马华裔，他永远都不可能符合第一个条例。换句话说，他是不可能以自己华裔的身份申请到马大饮食业的准证。马来业主被喝令停业也就是因为他转让经营权给“华人”吧！如此一来，华裔的身份似乎就是个累赘，妨碍了他申请马大饮食业的执照。华裔身份何罪之有呢？
其实饮食业执照更新的课题只是芝麻小事，在公平竞争下无法继业的案例比比皆是，何足挂齿。但此事却闹得满城风雨，从小小的马大校内课题走向国内新闻，这正说明我们关心的不仅仅是马大华裔生的三餐温饱，而更重要的是我们华裔是否被边缘化了呢？我们少数民族的权力是否也被尊重。以关闭马大唯一华人饮食档的档案为例，这不就印证了种族狭隘的思维模式吗？以“肤色”来审查饮食准证的得标者。此事的偏差并不能完全归咎于马大一方，追根究底，这不就是当今政府拟定的政策吗！大马财政部规定政府学校的建筑工程或物品添购合约一律只能分发予土著公司，因为这涉及政府的金钱。华小前阵子被令只能向土著公司添购练习簿不也就是个活例子吗？
总括而言，政府的金钱只能惠及土著，非土著是不能分一杯羹的。这导致了很多“阿里巴巴式”的买卖案件出现，尤其以土地买卖案件为甚。毕竟，身为非土著，我们也得生活呀！Uncle Lim只不过是这“种族政策”下的一个小小牺牲者。毋庸置疑，这并非单独的案件，而是整个种族政策下的冰山一角而已。
虽然华人熟食档于一月五日（星期一）重开了，但物是人非，档主已是位马来老板了。之前不是说重开华人料理吗？为何如今的菜色与味道却是马来风味？选择也寥寥无几？终究我们看不出，也吃不出这些就是华人料理。学生们深感错愕及不满，因为之前华丽的承诺根本无法兑现，最终只是个空头支票。
依我见，即使华人的料理配套是保留了，问题的症结依旧存在，既是只有土著才能经营政府大学的饮食业。为此，我衷心希望身为华基政党的马华和民政能为我们护航，说服国阵政府摒弃如此荒谬的种族保护政策。在大马，种族偏差的政策数不胜数，也许开放政府大学饮食业可以是个起步，好让非马来主导的饮食档口也能百花齐放。
纵观国内大事，关闭马大华人饮食档也许只是小事一桩，但它掀起得涟漪可不小。它不仅仅是食物料理的课题，而涉及了当今政府行政偏差的大隐忧。在薄利微弱的饮食业也设有如此种族考量的限制的确贻笑大方，太落伍了吧！愿大马民族能在2009年共同迈向更包容、尊重及思想开放的未来。
写于：2009年1月5日（星期一）
简单论述，前华人老板Uncle Lim 是向马来业主租借其档口售卖华人的食物。所以当马来业主被令结束营业时，Uncle Lim自然也就无法继业了。以此逻辑，这似乎合情合理。但其问题就在于为何这马来业主又会忽然间被令停业呢？原来他是以“阿里巴巴”的方式转售经营权给Uncle Lim。早知如此，为何Uncle Lim又不自己投标，宁愿以更高的价钱购买经营权，而又落到如今关门大吉的下场，何苦呢？
此问题的根源并非纯属程序的失误，也非宗教Halal 的课题所致。追根究底，就是“种族特权”的因素。根据政府相关的政策，开办熟食档者须符合三个条件：（-）享有“土著”地位、（二）肉类须附有Halal的印证、（三）食物卫生清洁。以 Uncle Lim的个案为例，无论他如何努力，他最终也只能符合第二和第三的条件。冥冥中注定，身为大马华裔，他永远都不可能符合第一个条例。换句话说，他是不可能以自己华裔的身份申请到马大饮食业的准证。马来业主被喝令停业也就是因为他转让经营权给“华人”吧！如此一来，华裔的身份似乎就是个累赘，妨碍了他申请马大饮食业的执照。华裔身份何罪之有呢？
其实饮食业执照更新的课题只是芝麻小事，在公平竞争下无法继业的案例比比皆是，何足挂齿。但此事却闹得满城风雨，从小小的马大校内课题走向国内新闻，这正说明我们关心的不仅仅是马大华裔生的三餐温饱，而更重要的是我们华裔是否被边缘化了呢？我们少数民族的权力是否也被尊重。以关闭马大唯一华人饮食档的档案为例，这不就印证了种族狭隘的思维模式吗？以“肤色”来审查饮食准证的得标者。此事的偏差并不能完全归咎于马大一方，追根究底，这不就是当今政府拟定的政策吗！大马财政部规定政府学校的建筑工程或物品添购合约一律只能分发予土著公司，因为这涉及政府的金钱。华小前阵子被令只能向土著公司添购练习簿不也就是个活例子吗？
总括而言，政府的金钱只能惠及土著，非土著是不能分一杯羹的。这导致了很多“阿里巴巴式”的买卖案件出现，尤其以土地买卖案件为甚。毕竟，身为非土著，我们也得生活呀！Uncle Lim只不过是这“种族政策”下的一个小小牺牲者。毋庸置疑，这并非单独的案件，而是整个种族政策下的冰山一角而已。
虽然华人熟食档于一月五日（星期一）重开了，但物是人非，档主已是位马来老板了。之前不是说重开华人料理吗？为何如今的菜色与味道却是马来风味？选择也寥寥无几？终究我们看不出，也吃不出这些就是华人料理。学生们深感错愕及不满，因为之前华丽的承诺根本无法兑现，最终只是个空头支票。
依我见，即使华人的料理配套是保留了，问题的症结依旧存在，既是只有土著才能经营政府大学的饮食业。为此，我衷心希望身为华基政党的马华和民政能为我们护航，说服国阵政府摒弃如此荒谬的种族保护政策。在大马，种族偏差的政策数不胜数，也许开放政府大学饮食业可以是个起步，好让非马来主导的饮食档口也能百花齐放。
纵观国内大事，关闭马大华人饮食档也许只是小事一桩，但它掀起得涟漪可不小。它不仅仅是食物料理的课题，而涉及了当今政府行政偏差的大隐忧。在薄利微弱的饮食业也设有如此种族考量的限制的确贻笑大方，太落伍了吧！愿大马民族能在2009年共同迈向更包容、尊重及思想开放的未来。
写于：2009年1月5日（星期一）
关闭马大华人熟食档
最近马大华人熟食档的课题日日见报，闹得满城风雨，但终究无解决方案。马青总团教育局主任张盛闻、马大亲学生阵线协调员吴汉坤及马大学生会代表沈启业同学都各发表了事情的来龙去脉。无论事情的问题出自于宗教的狭隘思维抑或招标程序的疏忽，摆在眼前的事实就是在即将来临的新学期马大唯一的华人熟食档无法继业了。
我此刻的心情是沉重的，毕竟它陪伴了我两年的时间。Uncle Lim的食物价廉物美，四道肉菜、白饭与茶水一律只收RM3，而且选择多样化。晚餐更备有面食煮炒，其鸡饭和云吞面更是招牌菜色。当百物上涨之际，此档口始终维持原价，为学生减轻了不少经济负担。在情在理，其关闭怎不叫人惋惜呢？
更为重要的是，它是百年马大唯一的华人熟食档。届时，华人美食将销声匿迹，并为众多华裔生带来生活的不便，尤其是不习惯马来煎炸及辛辣食物的学生。一、二年级的大学生是不允许携带交通工具的，为此这些学生该如何到校外打包食物呢，尤以住宿在校内的学生为甚。马大也有不少的中国籍国际学生，如果能备有华人饮食料理，这也将为他们提供一个舒适的环境。
撇开情感这一怀，追根究底，为什么唯一的华人熟食档会被喝令停业呢？吴沈二位同学各有说法。但奇怪的是，如果有如吴同学所说这是档主的招标失误，那为何几个月前，马大第十二宿舍就已传出校方要关闭华人食档的消息？更谣传这是因为其它档口的施压，表面以Halal 因素为由投诉校方，实际上则是商业嫉妒。也许这只是个流言蜚语，毫无根据，但这巧合无法不令人想入非非，到底这事件的背后是否存在着种族与宗教的因素和支配。如果真的只是纯属技术问题，那就较容易办了；校方必能撇开官方形式，以学生利益为主，重开华人熟食档，终究Uncle Lim是最高的投标者。但如果整件事件涉及隐喻的考量，技术问题实属伎俩或借口，那可是烫手山芋。
还有一星期就是新学期了，当务之急就是解决此问题，还马大一间华人熟食档，为莘莘学子解决三餐的温饱。诚如沈同学所说，这也是一个良机要求校方开放食堂条例，让多元化的美食在马大飘香。愿在来临的2009年，马大能逐渐摒弃种族与宗教的思维枷锁，迈向更开放、更民主的校风。“思想开放”不也就是马大十大中心价值之一吗？
写于：2008年12月25日（星期四）
Saturday, September 13, 2008
哀莫大于心死。。。
此时此刻的国家领袖
黑白不分，颠倒是非
抹煞人权，沾污道德准绳
搞得国家乌烟瘴气，愁云惨雾，藏垢纳污
助长马来回教极端主义
维护流氓土匪
封杀正义之士
赏罚不分
的确人神共愤
哀莫大于心死
朽木不可雕也
唯求一个全新的政府
为我们带来新希望
新未来！
抹煞人权，沾污道德准绳
搞得国家乌烟瘴气，愁云惨雾，藏垢纳污
助长马来回教极端主义
维护流氓土匪
封杀正义之士
赏罚不分
的确人神共愤
哀莫大于心死
朽木不可雕也
唯求一个全新的政府
为我们带来新希望
新未来！
我们需要新政府!!!
拉惹柏特拉、郭素沁、陈云清
2008年9月12日永远会记载您们对国家民主与自由的贡献
报纸与我
报纸
曾是我的精神粮食
我的生活精神脊柱
没报日子是
多么的苦涩 多么的纳闷
也许只有爱报人才能深深地体会
星洲日报 我的挚爱 我从小至大的依归
太阳报 免费 独立 劲爆 英文报的清流
南洋商报 星报 新海峡时报 也各具特色
唯独马来前锋报
一个鼓吹种族主义 令人发指的报章
每日我都得花上两小时
慢慢地咀嚼其内容
政治 体育 娱乐 财经
逐一翻阅 逐一分析
缺一不可
‘有杀过无放过’
哪怕考试时 阅报始终不可免
报纸
增加了我的生活常识
增添了我的生活乐趣
给人心旷神怡的感觉
这叫我如何抗拒它呢
更笑 不阅报人
无知 不长进 漠视时事
自己洋洋得意似的 好了不起
然而 如今
自己已不再热衷于阅报
没报的日子 也不再苦恼
欺诈 抢劫 强奸 谋杀
早已司空见惯
政治里的
尔虞我诈 明争暗斗
马来回教极端主义
更令人
混淆 头疼 心碎
是非颠倒 断章取义
诽谤 诬赖 阴谋
比比皆是
不看也罢！
负面新闻充斥了整个版面
荼毒大家的思想
影响大家的情绪
打击大家的信心
何必日日夜夜阅报
自讨苦吃呢？
不阅报
不是无知 而是智慧
不是逃避 而是选择
不是漠不关心 而是极度关心
原来不阅报
也可以是这么轻松自在的!
编后记：
报章的水平正反映着国家整个社群的人文水平
检验着我国的教育素质，测量着我们的未来。
如果报业依旧无法摆脱政治的枷锁、种族的色彩
那我们的未来该何去何从呢？
曾是我的精神粮食
我的生活精神脊柱
没报日子是
多么的苦涩 多么的纳闷
也许只有爱报人才能深深地体会
星洲日报 我的挚爱 我从小至大的依归
太阳报 免费 独立 劲爆 英文报的清流
南洋商报 星报 新海峡时报 也各具特色
唯独马来前锋报
一个鼓吹种族主义 令人发指的报章
每日我都得花上两小时
慢慢地咀嚼其内容
政治 体育 娱乐 财经
逐一翻阅 逐一分析
缺一不可
‘有杀过无放过’
哪怕考试时 阅报始终不可免
报纸
增加了我的生活常识
增添了我的生活乐趣
给人心旷神怡的感觉
这叫我如何抗拒它呢
更笑 不阅报人
无知 不长进 漠视时事
自己洋洋得意似的 好了不起
然而 如今
自己已不再热衷于阅报
没报的日子 也不再苦恼
欺诈 抢劫 强奸 谋杀
早已司空见惯
政治里的
尔虞我诈 明争暗斗
马来回教极端主义
更令人
混淆 头疼 心碎
是非颠倒 断章取义
诽谤 诬赖 阴谋
比比皆是
不看也罢！
负面新闻充斥了整个版面
荼毒大家的思想
影响大家的情绪
打击大家的信心
何必日日夜夜阅报
自讨苦吃呢？
不阅报
不是无知 而是智慧
不是逃避 而是选择
不是漠不关心 而是极度关心
原来不阅报
也可以是这么轻松自在的!
编后记：
报章的水平正反映着国家整个社群的人文水平
检验着我国的教育素质，测量着我们的未来。
如果报业依旧无法摆脱政治的枷锁、种族的色彩
那我们的未来该何去何从呢？
Thursday, August 28, 2008
MERDEKA!
What’s the meaning of Merdeka (Independence)?
When the racist slurs, colour discriminations and religion suppressions are still rampant in Malaysia, I couldn’t see the point to celebrate the 51st Merdeka in this coming week.
The parade of people wearing the multi-racial costumes, dancing multi-cultural performances, singing multi-languages songs is just a mere ‘show’ to the foreigners that we are harmonious and united.
From the bottom of the heart
Are we united?
When the education system, economy policies and government regulations are still race-and-religion-orientated, please don’t ever proudly pronounce that we all are MALAYSIANS because not all Malaysians are being respected inasmuch as the minorities are always segregated and marginalized in all aspects of lives!
Education! WHY are there different education systems and examinations for different races?
Economy! WHY are the government tenders only reserved to a certain group of races?
Religion! WHY are other religions bound to succumb to one religion?
WHY? WHY? WHY?
Why do we still need to live under such a polarized society when it’s already 51st Merdeka?
MERDEKA
is not an independent Merdeka
if we are yet to free from racial segregation and religious discrimination!!!
When the racist slurs, colour discriminations and religion suppressions are still rampant in Malaysia, I couldn’t see the point to celebrate the 51st Merdeka in this coming week.
The parade of people wearing the multi-racial costumes, dancing multi-cultural performances, singing multi-languages songs is just a mere ‘show’ to the foreigners that we are harmonious and united.
From the bottom of the heart
Are we united?
When the education system, economy policies and government regulations are still race-and-religion-orientated, please don’t ever proudly pronounce that we all are MALAYSIANS because not all Malaysians are being respected inasmuch as the minorities are always segregated and marginalized in all aspects of lives!
Education! WHY are there different education systems and examinations for different races?
Economy! WHY are the government tenders only reserved to a certain group of races?
Religion! WHY are other religions bound to succumb to one religion?
WHY? WHY? WHY?
Why do we still need to live under such a polarized society when it’s already 51st Merdeka?
MERDEKA
is not an independent Merdeka
if we are yet to free from racial segregation and religious discrimination!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)