Senator S. Ramakrishnan,
28/5/2012 Last Saturday a group of concerned individuals called reflex organized a hunger strike to pressure MIC to return the land allocated for Effingham Tamil School. This hunger strike has attracted public attention towards land stolen by MIC and created awareness of the plunders of other lands allocated to Tamil Schools but quietly alienated to MIC leaders. Today is the third day of this severe hunger strike without any kind of food and water. Seven persons started hunger strike but 2 gave up after 1 day and 5 persons continued to the third day(28/5/2012). The health of hunger strikers must be monitored closely now onwards. We want these activist to live and the battle another day and not die of hunger strike. ![]()
makkal osai
The housing developer who converted the former
Effingham estate to housing project gave 6 acres of Tamil school land
to Selangor state government. Since Pakatan Rakyat is the state
government, REFLEX was able to obtain a copy of the letter dated
30th june 1999 where MIC applied to previous BN government asking for
half of lot 28814 which was broken up into 2 lots. One was given to
school and the other was issued to Dato Seri Samy Vellu holding as
trustee for MIC. In 2007 one member of the PIBG made a MACC report alleging the 3 acres immoral and unethical land scam by MIC. After the mass media reporting on this land grab, the land legal owner Samy Vellu transferred it to MIC. Since then the public and PIBG have been campaigning for the return of the 3 acres land to the school. The school can have better sports facilities and extra classes with land returned. There is a government policy that if a primary school has more than 420 students, they are entitled to 5.4 acres of land. Dato G Palanivel and Dato M saravanan has responded by saying that as far as MIC is concerned the land has been given to them. They will not return it to the school. MIC has also siphoned off pieces of lands given to other Tamil Schools. In 2006 Bukit Raja Tamil School was given 5.4 acres of land. The then Selangor state exco Dato S.Sivalingam allotted 3 acres to School and 2.4 acres to private parties. Through the intervention of Dr Xavier Jayakumar, the current Pakatan Rakyat Exco the 2.4 acres of land was retrieved and given back to school. Similarly in Razak Tamil School Shah Alam out of 4 acres given to Tamil schools, only 2 acres given to school, in 1 acres there is petrol pump on it and another 1 acre no trace of what happened to it. In Selangor we can trace back the land allotted to Tamil schools. But how many of Tamil school land grabbed by MIC in other states, we don’t know? Since the start of hunger strike 3 days ago MIC president did not issue any statement. Why the silence Dato G. Palani? Do not hide behind UMNO and be indifferent. Indian community is watching you and MIC leaders? PKR president Datin seri wan Azizah has said that should PR go to Putrajaya, they will ensure the return of this piece of land to the school. But BN leaders have not issued any statement. |
![]() |
makkal osai
|
![]() |
FMT |
Five on hunger strike over school land
Aneesa Alphonsus | May 27, 2012
They want MIC to return three acres of land originally given to SRJK (T) Effingham.
![]() The hunger strike commenced with seven participants at 8.20am yesterday at the water fountain in Brickfield’s Little India. Two hunger strike protesters dropped out at 6.30pm on Saturday and 12.30am on Sunday citing personal reasons. Reflax which has been holding candlelight vigils every Saturday night for the past 14 weeks said that the three out of six acres have been grabbed by the MIC, a component party in the Barisan National. PKR’s MP for Subang R Sivarasa said that MIC had initially planned to build their headquarters on the three acres, but as of May 3 this year claimed that it will now house a hostel for urban students from the estates. “All the other schools (allocated the land in the area) have kept their six acres – no one has tried to take it from them. But here, with the Tamil school, MIC is trying to grab the three acres for personal use,” said Sivarasa. Reflax chairman Manivanan Gowin added that after procuring the services of a land surveyor, they have since found out that the three acres is valued at an estimated RM52 million. ![]() “This is a peaceful protest and if MIC fails to return the land in light of this hunger strike, then I don’t think they understand the Hindu concept of what it means and stands for,” said Manivaran. Last resort This hunger strike is seen as the last resort to urge the return of the three acres land for the future expansion of the school. “When G Palanivel became MIC president in 2009, he kept mum about this issue which has been in existence since 2007. And now suddenly, there are plans for a hostel,” added Manivaran. “Here, we have five people who have volunteered their time, and lives for this cause. They are roughing it out with the hope that it will bring about the desired outcome. ![]() Dr Streram Sinnasamy who examined the 5 protesters today said they are doing well without any signs of fatigue after over 30 hours without food or drink. “The average person can go without water or food for about three days. After that, they will start to show signs of fatique, lethargy and dizziness. We had checked them before the hunger strike commenced and will perform daily checks to monitor their health,” he said. |
FMT |
MIC, PKR to work together to solve Effingham land issue
Teoh El Sen
| May 28, 2012
Hunger strikers agree to drop the term "thief"
to describe MIC while the party in turn would consider a proposal for
the land to be given to the Effingham Tamil School.
![]() The initiative was taken by MIC vice-president and Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Deputy Minister M Saravanan who visited five members of Reflax who had been in a hunger strike since Saturday morning seeking for the return of a three acre land for the school which they claimed had been taken by MIC. However after Saravanan’s visit to the hunger stikers, followed by a short discussion involving PKR’s R Sivarasa as well as MIC secretary-general S Murugessan, both Reflax and PKR agreed to stop calling MIC “thieves” who “stole” the said piece of land. The hunger strikers also agreed to replace their demand for MIC to “return the land” with a new one which will “seek for the land” for the school. In return, Saravanan agreed that he would bring up the group’s proposal to MIC’s highest leadership level, the central working committee, to consider the request for the land to be allocated for the school. ![]() Currently there are five people, out of an original seven, who are taking part in the hunger strike at the water fountain in Brickfield’s Little India. They said that they would continue with their hunger strike until MIC confirms that it would release the piece of land. Reflax and PKR had originally accused the MIC of stealing the land which was given for the school. |

They want villains to hate and heroes to cheer - and they don't want explanations that do not give them that. - Thomas Sowell (Dismantling America)
COMMENT Some people, Indians mostly, ask me, why I bother writing about Hindraf? I realise this question points more to a particular class mindset and political alliance allegiance rather than to any genuine interest on the part of the persons asking the question.

I make it a point to touch base with my favourite status quo agitators via the Human Rights Party (HRP) website, and I suggest that anyone interested in learning more about the entity that supposedly speaks for ‘working class' Indians and the issues they face should make it a point to look up this site to discover for themselves how Hindraf and the HRP (at this point in time the two are interchangeable) view the Malaysian political and social landscapes.
There, I'm known as a "classical pseudo [multiracial] Indian" - I assume the writer meant "classic" - "who will never be chief of Navy but calls Hindraf racist".
The fact that I never once called Hindraf racist, in fact I defended Hindraf against such allegations in every one of my comment pieces, escaped the writer of the piece but seeing as how the writer chose only to publish a snippet of my comment piece and a paltry one Malaysiakini comment against the piece, is just further evidence of how Hindraf intentionally builds rhetorical straw men in lieu of any rational discussion.
Many Pakatan supporters are aghast that Uthayakumar and Hindraf are choosing to exercise their democratic right by fielding candidates in the upcoming general election or rather are aghast that Hindraf is fielding candidates against Pakatan, which just goes to show you that for some Pakatan supporters democracy is a one-way street, that street being the way to Putrajaya and the banishment of Umno.

This of course is amusing because they have labelled Pakatan just as racist and vile as Umno-BN but yet believe they stand a better chance of gaining some support from whatever racial mix residing in those areas.
And by advocating that Indians abstain from voting ("it's an option") even if they (Hindraf) lose, either Umno (with a proven record of systemic discrimination) or Pakatan (which according to Hindraf is no better) would win. So what exactly is the game plan here?
A throwback to old racial formula
However what is missing from the polemics from both sides is the acknowledgement of the differing political ideologies underpinning this political and racial feud.
I would argue that Hindraf is a throwback to the old racial formula that BN continues to perpetuate. Although Hindraf/HRP and its adherents claim to speak for all Malaysians, a cursory glance at their propaganda organs or representatives tells another story.
And the story focuses on the disenfranchisement of the Indian community mixed up with constant polemical references to the "bi-racial (1Malaysia) Malay and Chinese", "others" who perpetuate the systemic discrimination that Indians face in Malaysia.
Those of us who are critical of the movement are labelled as "mandores" or "elites" (if Indians) who did nothing for the community since independence or thereabouts, or just plain racists, for non-Indians.
This kind of slagging off is common whenever any critical discussion of Hindraf occurs. The comments section in Malaysiakini is filled with this kind of nonsense with the term "hero" used to describe those that Hindraf supporters have decided "did nothing" for the Indian community when an examination of a post-colonial, Indian community reveals a complex narrative poisoned with systemic discrimination but also a period of vibrant growth sustained mainly by the efforts of the community itself.
These racial taunts or an appeal to emotions coupled with Hindraf's own ‘demands' for the Indian community and the response they hope to get (this last bit is the important part of the equation), is a fairly common strain of minority groupthink found across the world.
Thomas Sowell* gives a conservative perspective of the American experience in ‘Black Rednecks and White Liberals', the passage which I reproduce here:

And let's not forget that Hindraf claims to represent ‘working class' Indians, which is not as convenient as it first seems. If the Malay demographic is changing because of external influences, I assure you the same is happening to the Indian/Hindu demographic.
So while Hindraf's agenda may not be racist but rather a restatement of a political ideology (which failed us mainly because of the corruption of Umno and its partners) we as a nation subscribed to pre-Pakatan, this does not mean that the movement itself is free from racist members. You want to see the worse of Malaysians, just read the flame wars concerning Hindraf.
So while I dismiss Hindraf's claims of a class-based approach to the ‘Indian issue' as disingenuous since nothing in their rhetoric or deeds backs up this claim, I don't think anyone should dismiss their race-based approach as racist simply because the general orientation of oppositional politics has shifted from that of a race-based approach to a supposed class-based ethos.
So how does Pakatan deal with Hindraf?
Hindraf is getting nowhere with BN. The possible consequences of blackmailing Pakatan could be either Hindraf does manage to get representation in Parliament or deny Pakatan that chance, thereby proving their political worth to BN. If the outcome is the former, how does Hindraf intend to work with political parties which it has labelled as racists?
Depending on the outcome of the elections, in the wet dreams of Hindraf supporters, they believe Hindraf in Parliament could be kingmakers, but the reality is they would probably end up as whipping boys.
The question is, if Hindraf manages to do for the Indian community (and their best bet for the time being is the federal reach of Umno) what MIC (and according to Hindraf, everyone else) has failed to do, what then are the ramifications to the so-called multiracial platform that Pakatan supporters subscribe to?
Understand now, that Hindraf is speaking the same race-based language as Umno. When Uthayakumar laments the fact that Pakatan won't give them the seats they need even though it is less then MIC, it demonstrates that for some, certainly for Hindraf, Pakatan is merely a stand-in for BN. In other words for some, Pakatan speaks the same language as BN but merely uses a different dialect.
And because the DAP has done such a sterling job presenting itself as a multiracial party, you still have large swathes of the non-Chinese voting population sceptical of the inclusiveness of the DAP.
Make no mistake, I think Pakatan and its partners have been doing the best job that they can by pushing their class-based agenda but at the end of the day all that effort has been hampered by the malfeasances of the federal government and their own internal bickering.
And the lure of a race-based solutions to problems is hypnotic. It makes everything easier when you can come up with formulas that appeases various communities but would seem arbitrary in any other context.
And for years this worked for us. For years we got the government we deserved embroiled in our own petty communal concerns and by the time we realised we deserved something better, we were too deep in the rabbit hole of our own racial preoccupations.

It's difficult to claim the moral high ground when the reality is that nearly every issue be it education, the economy or culture is still viewed through a racial/religious lens but neatly camouflaged in the ‘new' multicultural/racial spin of Pakatan.
The only way to render any type of race-based philosophy obsolete is to ensure that the class-based approach is not only done but seen to be done and so far either because of lack of political will or being sidetracked by the machinations of Umno or both, Pakatan has a lot more to do in fulfilling this expectation.
*Anyone familiar with the works of Sowell would be having a good chuckle seeing as how I'm quoting him in a piece sympathetic to class-based solutions to problems.
S THAYAPARAN is Commander (rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy.