ISA – Who Got To Play God

(This article appeared as a commentary on The Mole – 30 October 2017)

October 30, 2017

THIS would be my mellow version of the Ops Lalang.

The Internal Security Act, 1960 or the ISA, was probably the most draconian law to ever exist in Malaysia.  Prior to having the ISA, preventive detention was done through the Emergency Regulations Ordinance of 1948 aimed at combatting the communist threats.

With the end of the first Malayan Emergency in 1960, the Ordinance of 148 was done away with but was replaced with the ISA.  The mood of the period must be understood to see the reason for having such law.

Although the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) had lost the fight, the struggle was continued from across the Thai border by cadres, as well as their supporters (Min Yuen) in Malaya.  They penetrated unions, the press, as well as associations, causing occasional racial tensions in the country.

Pre-1970 Malaysia was not all dandy when it came to race relations.  The economic power was held by the Chinese since the days of the British administration while the Malays had been relegated to being farmers or lower ranking civil servants.

The Chinese immigrants first came to the Malay states in 1777, and first settled in the state of Perak in 1830 (Patrick Sullivan, 1982: 13). Within 44 years, they numbered 26,000 in Perak alone.  In 1921, the number of Chinese immigrants in the Malay states numbered 1,171,740.  Ten years later, it was 1,704,452. In 1941, it became 2,377,990 while the Malays were at 2,277,352 (Paul H Kratoska, 1997:318). The Malays remained as a minority until the census of 1970.

During the war, the Malays did not face much hardship as the Chinese did at the hands of the Japanese.

After the war, the CPM/MPAJA and their Chinese supporters took revenge on the Malays. In Batu Pahat, Muslims were forbidden from congregating at mosques or suraus to perform the Terawih prayers (Hairi Abdullah, 1974/5: 8-9).

The same occurred in Perak and some parts of Batu Pahat where Muslims were gunned down and burnt together with the mosque they were in during Friday prayers.

Mosques and suraus were often used as places of meeting for the Chinese community (WO 172/9773, No.30: 478) and were tainted by incidents such as slaughtering of pigs, and mosques’ compound was used to cook pork, where Malays were forced to join the larger Chinese groups. Pages were torn from the Quran to be used by the Chinese using these mosques as toilet paper.

Racial clashes had begun in September 1945 where Malays and Chinese clashed in Kota Bharu, Selama, Taiping, Sitiawan, Raub.

This culminated in the slaughter of Malays early one morning in a hamlet near Kuala Kangsar called Bekor where 57 men and women, and 24 children were killed by about 500 members of the CPM aided by 500 Chinese villagers from Kelian in March 1946 (CO 537/1580: 21 and Majlis, 24 Februari 1947:5).

All in all, 2,000 lives were lost.

Such was the mood and the ISA was introduced to also prevent further racial clashes by preventing instigators from achieving their objective whatever that may be.

Therefore, it was an Act of Parliament that was used to preserve public order and morals.  If one is to read the ISA thoroughly, then it would be easier to see that the Act was not just about detention without trial, but also as a weapon for the Royal Malaysian Police to nip any cancerous threat to public order and morals in the bud.

Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad was Prime Minister as well as Home Minister when Ops Lalang was executed on Oct 26 1987 (arrests were made in the early morning of Oct 27).

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was Umno Youth chief and also Education Minister in Dr Mahathir’s Third Cabinet.

Anwar had made several unpopular moves that earned the wrath of the MCA such as the removal of crucifixes from missionary schools, introduction of Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction for Tamil and Chinese studies at the University of Malaya, as well as the introduction of non-Chinese educated senior assistants and supervisors to Chinese vernacular schools.

Deputy MCA president Datuk Seri (now Tan Sri) Lee Kim Sai who was also Selangor MCA chief, on the other hand, had also uttered words implying that the Malays were also immigrants.

A 2,000-strong gathering by the Dong Jiao Zong that was also attended by the DAP, MCA and Gerakan was held and a resolution was made to call a three-day boycott by Chinese schools.

Umno Youth responded with a 10,000-strong gathering at the TPCA Stadium in Kampung Baru.  It is said that Dr Mahathir then instructed Datuk Seri (Tan Sri) Sanusi Junid, who was Umno  secretary-general then, to organise a rally of 500,000 members in Kuala Lumpur.

I remember feeling the tension in the air, especially when an army personnel, Private Adam Jaafar, ran amok with his M-16 in Kampung Baru, adding more fuel to a potentially explosive situation.

The senior police management met in Fraser’s Hill to plan and then launched Ops Lalang to prevent bloodshed.

Whether or not Dr Mahathir disagreed with the police for Ops Lalang to be launched, it must be remembered that even if the police had wanted to launch the operations unilaterally, Section 8(1) of the ISA specifically mentions that it is the Home Minister who, upon being satisfied that the detention of any person is necessary, may make an order for the person to be detained for a period of not more than two years.

According to Section 73 of the Act, the police were not given the power to detain a person for more than 30 days unless the Inspector-General of Police had reported of the detention and its reason to the Home Minister.

Nowhere does the Act mention that the Home Minister SHALL or MUST act as advised by the police.  The police provided the names in a list, with reasons why they should be or were detained, but only the Minister could sign the detention order.

Dr Mahathir may now claim that Ops Lalang was the police’s idea, which may be true.  But as mentioned at the beginning of this article that the ISA is an Act of Parliament giving powers to the police to diffuse potentially explosive situations and also to protect and preserve public safety and morals.

The police used the ISA during Ops Lalang as it was intended to be used (there were also detainees from Umno during the sweep), but the Home Minister was the one who played God, and decided whom to be released before the 60 days was up, and whom to hold up to two years.

And that Home Minister is the same unrepentant person now touted to become the next PM by the DAP.

It Is Okay Being Racist If You Are A Minority

It is called “reverse racism” and among the ways it works is by making racist remarks against the majority claiming it is a reaction against oppression.

Yesterday I received a WhatsApp message that has been making its way around on the Internet purportedly sent by DAP’s people:

deb01

deb02

deb03

deb04

deb05

deb06

deb07

deb08

Forgive me for getting technical with this but I have to endeavour to make people understand the background of this nation to understand the current situation we are in. I cannot possibly answer all the allegations above as I do not work for the government therefore I do not have all the data needed but I shall make references to publicly-available documents.

The Malay States were rich with tin and land for rubber plantations.  This led to the signing of treaties to enable the British to have a share of the wealth and the creation of British protectorates of the Federated Malay States (formed in 1895 with common institutions such as the State Constitution, and a Resident-General administering the states on behalf of, and answerable to the Sultans and Yam DiPertuan Besar as his salary was paid by them) and the Unfederated Malay States (C.D Cowan, 1961; Emily Sadka, 1968; Eunice Thio, 1969).

The economy was divided into two systems – tin mining and rubber plantations dominated by the Chinese, and peasant farming and inshore fishing conducted by the Malays (M Yusof Saari, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia; Erik Dietzenbacher and Bart Los, Univeristy of Groningen, The Netherlands – World Development, Volume 76, December 2015, pp. 311-328).

With the expansion of mining and rubber lands, the Malays got pushed back to the edges of primary forests, and away from economic wealth that both the Chinese and Indians were enjoying.

EW Birch, the 8th British Resident of Perak, recognized this dire situation and quickly proposed a policy of preserving the Malay land. The only way to him to preserve the Malay race was to “free them from the clutches of those people who now remit to Indian large sums of money, which they bleed from the (Malay) people.”

This later became the Malay Reservation Land Act which spirit is preserved in the Malaysian Federal Constitution. Even Sir Frank Athelstane Swettenham conceded that something had to be done to preserve the Malays. He wrote:

“In the Malay sketches contained in this and a previous volume, I have endeavoured to portray,…the Malay as he is in own country, against his own picturesque and fascinating background…The position he occupies in the body politic is that of the heir to the inheritance. The land is Malaya and he is the Malay. Let the infidel Chinese and evil-smelling Hindu from southern India toil, but of their work let some profit come to him.”

The Chinese and Indians brought over by the British were British subjects as far as the colonised parts of Malaya were (Pulau Pinang, Melaka and Singapore).  However, the ones in the Malay States were disinclined to give allegiance to the respective Sultans as they pledged allegiance to their homeland.

In 1911, the Malays made up 53% of the population. By 1931, they were already outnumbered and in 1941 formed only 41% of the population.  The Chinese community was at 43%, displacing the Malays as the dominant racial group. The Malays were in a disadvantageous position and this proved explosive in 1946 during the Bekor tragedy.  The Malays remained as the minority until 1970.

And if you think the Malays have done well since then, the table below will show that despite the NEP being in place, the income of the Chinese grew tremendously as compared to the Malays (M Yusof Saari, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia; Erik Dietzenbacher and Bart Los, Univeristy of Groningen, The Netherlands – World Development, Volume 76, December 2015, pp. 311-328):

screen-shot-2017-03-06-at-18-02-39

 

Allegation 1 – Of the Top 5 Banks, Only One is Non-Malay

The top five banks are Malayan Banking, CIMB, Public Bank, RHB Capital, and Hong Leong Financial Group.

If you see who the top 30 shareholders of Maybank are, you would see that they are mostly government investment agencies, or nominees especially by Citigroup. Citigroup is NOT Malay.  However, you would see that at Number 28, a private individual is an individual shareholder.  He is NOT Malay.

The top shareholders of CIMB as of 30 June 2015, are Khazanah Nasional – 29.34 %, Employees Provident Fund (EPF) – 17.51 %, Kumpulan Wang Persaraan (KWAP) – 3.61 % and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group – 4.61 %.

Public Bank, although third in the list, was the second largest bank in Malaysia by market capitalisation in September 2016.  Its major shareholder is Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Dr. Teh Hong Piow, who has a 23.79% stake in the bank as of 26 January 2016. Teh is also the bank’s founder and chairman. He is NOT Malay.

I can skip and go on to Hong Leong Financial group if you want to see the shareholding information.

Allegation 2 – 99% of PETRONAS Directors Are Malays

The DAP and Pakatan are famous for plucking numbers from the sky.

Two of 16 directors of PETRONAS are non-Malays so that makes 12.5%.  Therefore, only 87.5% are Malays. Now look at their respective background and tell me of they are not qualified to be there.

PETRONAS is a government-owned company. It is not an Ah Beng Enterprise (no reference to Lim Guan Beng) and the board is answerable to the Government on all matters.

Allegation 5 – 100% PETRONAS Contractors Are Bumiputeras

Bumi Armada is one of the largest suppliers of offshore support vessels, Floating Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) units, Floating Gas Solutions (FLNG/FSRU/FSU) to PETRONAS. It is an Ananda Krishnan company. Ananda Krishnan is NOT Malay.

Allegation 6 – Chinese Companies Must Have 30% Bumiputera Employees; Malay Companies Can Have 0% Chinese

Again, this is very racist and a blatant lie.

There is NO legal requirement that companies have to employ 30% Bumiputera.  Otherwise you will not get these racist advertisements:

chinese04 chinese03 chinese02 chinese01

You are only required to show your Bumiputera equity be it 30%, 51% or 100% if you are tendering for a Bumiputera-open or Bumiputera-limited contracts.  That is EQUITY, not employees.

In reality too, most “Bumiputera” companies that tender for government contracts are actually Chinese-run companies that use Malay names on the license and application forms.  Malays are given 30% allocation while non-Malays have 70% but even the 30% has non-Malay participations.

They always claim that they are the “second-class” citizens of this country yet they are the ones who control the economy.

Do you think if policies are not in place they would care for the Bumiputeras?

And by saying Bumiputera, I mean the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak who are economically second-class citizens in their own land as the Chinese are the ones who dominate the economy there.

Allegations 7-10: Minimum Participation of Non-Malays in Government Sector

In 2014, the Royal Malaysian Police had had to lower the entry requirements to cater for the non-Malays – all they need to do is PASS the Bahasa Malaysia subject in their SPM exams.

Even that they cannot do.

In 2016, out of a force of 90,000, Indians made up 3.3% of the total while Chinese 1.77%. In 2016, the Royal Malaysia Air Force the non-Bumiputeras number about 5% of the total 15,000.

This is not due to the pay offered.  I don’t think they are interested to serve a Malay-majority government.

Allegation 13 – Kedah Chinese Rice Farmers Have To Sell To Malay-owned BERNAS

BERNAS is a company that regulates the supply and price of rice in Malaysia to deny millers exorbitant profit at the expense of end users.

BERNAS’s top 30 share holders in 2012 are as follows.  Note the solo individual top shareholder.  Again, he is NOT Malay.

screen-shot-2017-03-06-at-17-28-38

Allegations 19-22: Malay Schools versus Non-Malay Schools

First – THERE ARE NO “MALAY SCHOOLS.”  They are the National Schools where all children are supposed to go to, mix, learn and grow up together.  Most Chinese or Tamil schools are private schools and are self-funded.  That is why we see only a small chunk of the budget go towards the latter two.

screen-shot-2017-03-06-at-18-01-14

Now if we go back to the first paragraph of the WhatsApp message that I received, it is mentioned that the Malaysian government practices racial discrimination, yet the baseless allegations made that I am familiar with have been shot down.

We have seen also that because of their weakness in their command of the Bahasa Malaysia, a language they are supposed to have mastered after 60 years, they have failed to join the public sector. This is due to the fact that they refuse to learn anything that is not taught in their mother tongue.

They would rather that their children do not grow up with the children of the Malays or learn to speak the language that has always been the language of this land and is enshrined in the Federal Constitution as the language of the nation.

So who is it that wants segragation? Who is being racist?

NOT the Malays.

As for those who migrated from Malaysia, those are the free-riders with no loyalty whatsoever to the nation.  When the going gets tough, leave for seemingly easier life.  For those people, loyalty lies in the pocket.

If this government is being racist do you think that there would be vernacular schools? Do you think DAP’s Chen Man Hin would have made RM790 million from a government company?

So who is being racist here?  Obviously DAP itself.  Out of the 30 Central Executive Committee members there are only four Indians/Indian diaspora. one Malay and two Sabah/Sarawak Bumiputera.

Again, the rest are NOT Malays.

Dysfunctional Linguists

Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi delivering his speech at the 71st UNGA in New York - photo courtesy of BERNAMA
Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi delivering his speech at the 71st UNGA in New York – photo courtesy of BERNAMA

I admit I cringed when Zahid Hamidi delivered his speech at the 71st UNGA in New York yesterday.  My wife and cousins were in fits.  This wasn’t the first time that I cringed when a Malaysian stood in front of an international audience delivering a speech or presentation with a poor command of the English language.  The first was the late Tun Ghafar Baba who also delivered a speech on behalf of the government also at the UNGA 27 years ago next month talking about the Antarctic Treaty System.  In various oil and gas meetings and conferences, I had to endure speeches delivered by Malaysians and cringed everytime they burst out in a self-made English-sounding slang to accompany their already poor command of the English language.  Definitely Zahid et al need to brush up their command of the English language.  However, there have been meetings and conferences that I have attended where even non-Malaysian speakers struggle with their English-language presentations and discussions.  It is not just Malaysians who have this problem.

Most of those who criticise Zahid are those who still use ‘CONGRATES’ and/or ‘STUCKED.’  And many cannot even converse in Bahasa Malaysia despite having Malaysian birth certificate and identity card. Zahid could of course speak in Bahasa Malaysia, Javanese, a Chinese dialect (his foster father is a Chinese) and as we know now, some English.  My only complain is of the quality of some of the English language teachers that we have. I still see some English teachers on social media

Grammar?
Grammar?

We have had two reports on the importance of Bahasa Melayu becoming the National Language published prior to the 13th May tragedy (Razak Report, 1956 and Rahman Talib Report, 1960). The Mahathir Mohamad Cabinet Report (1985) emphasised the importance of Bahasa Melayu as the unifying language for all races in Malaysia.  In fact, Article 152 of the Federal Constitution and the National Language Act 1963/1967 have uphold Bahasa Melayu as the National Language.  The Razak Report pointed out not only should the medium of teaching in schools be in Bahasa Melayu, but also for a uniformed curriculum to be taught at all schools. However, this was not thoroughly implemented. Children still went to schools with different medium of language.  Different languages instill different values; and the use of Bahasa Melayu as a medium of teaching became a serious issue (Abdullah Hassan, 1996: 265).

As an outcome of the 13th May tragedy, political leaders got together and agreed that a single language as a medium of teaching is the way to foster unity amongst the different races of Malaysia.  Tun Datuk Patinggi Hj Abdul Rahman Bin Ya’kub, the Education Minister in 1970 instructed all English-medium schools to use Bahasa Melayu in stages.  Only a few Chinese schools continued to teach lessons in Mandarin (Abdullah Hassan, 1996: 266).

The rift is getting worse now. We have chauvinistic organisations championing the right to teach subjects in the vernacular to their students, while the National Language becomes just one of the subjects. Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Myanmarese now have better command of the National Language than many of the people’s representatives.  Who are we to blame?  So, stop complaining about Zahid. If he can improve his command of the English language, can you improve your Bahasa Malaysia too?

Lest we forget:

Terbulu-bulu
Terbulu-bulu

Malaysia: Unite The Diverse

My wife and friends celebrating the nation
My wife and friends celebrating the nation

52 years it has been since the time when four parts of this region joined together to form the Federation of Malaysia (although two years later Singapore was expelled). We have seen the nation go through some ups and downs, but we always pull through together. Lately, we only see the constant superfluous jeremiad coming from all sorts of people and I wonder if we have all become a bunch of whiners who prefer to do nothing but expect everything in return?

Up until the early 1980s there were still areas especially in the Peninsular that either did not have running water and electricity, or had electricity for only 12 hours in a day.  Those days no one complained about having to fetch a pail or two of water to be used for cooking or to wash clothes.  Then came the supply of treated water and life became much easier.  Then when there is a disruption on supply, they blame the government for not providing them with water.

We whine about everything – especially about other races.  The Malays would blame the Chinese for their woes; the Chinese blame the Malays for the privileges that the latter get; the Indians would blame everyone else for their misfortunes.  I don’t remember us being this divided even five years after the 13th May tragedy.

I went to a Christian missionary primary school, now a National  school (Sekolah Kebangsaan).  In my class then we had almost the same number of Malay and Chinese students, and several from the Indian diaspora.  We learned together, ate together, played together, got punished together.  What is more important is that we grew up together.

Now, we have National schools that are predominantly Malay, while the Chinese and Indians prefer to send their kids to vernacular schools.  When kids don’t grow up together, they don’t learn about each other. When they don’t learn about each other, that is when they grow up not understanding each other. Then we will always have the Yellow shirts and the Red shirts doing rallies, opposing each other.

This is why I am for the abolishing of vernacular schools. Some were quick to jump on me saying that I am against diversity.

Far from it!

I said, schools. And it is not about diversity, but division!

All schools should be National-type schools. Where children regardless of race and religion grow up together and learn things together.  These schools should start at 8am daily and finish at 6pm.  They study together from 8am until lunch at 1pm. Then they attend vernacular classes or religious classes in the afternoon until 6pm.  They should not grow up separately.

That is all I wish for, unity in diversity, as far as education is concerned.  The beneficiaries of such a change would be my grandchildren and yours.  Only then could we truly be Malaysian.

As long as we are not willing to let our children grow up together, we will continue to remain divided.