Zaid has pulse on race relations

(Malaysiakini)news analysis

MCPX

In one of the most important political speeches delivered in recent years, former de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim took on race relations in Malaysia and the evolution of racial politics that has bedeviled the nation for the past few decades.

Delivering a speech titled ‘Malaysia - a lost democracy?’ at the Law Asia 2008 conference in Kuala Lumpur on Oct 31, Zaid recounted how “a shining example of a working democracy” founded half a century ago on the principles of democracy and egalitarianism has degenerated into an authoritarian racist state, characterised by incessant racial and religious dissension and economic malaise.

At independence in 1957, Malaya was a model of parliamentary democracy, governed under a written constitution “that accorded full respect and dignity for each and every Malayan”.

If at all there was a social contract, which should mean the pre-independence consensus reached among the founding fathers representing the various communities, it must be one “that guaranteed equality and the rule of law”, as subsequently reflected in the federal constitution.

The racial riots in 1969 changed the balance of political power and Umno, through the enlarged coalition of Barisan Nasional (BN), eventually assumed absolute control.

With its coalition partners unable to put up any resistance, Umno became increasingly racist and the master affirmative action plan known as the New Economic Policy (NEP), which was intended to eliminate poverty and redress economic imbalance, became synonymous with Malay privileges.

By the 1980s, Umno’s supremacist ideology became entrenched and found expression in ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) and it was then that the term ‘social contract’ started to be flashed around to justify its racist conduct.

In parallel with the growth of racism was the steep rise in authoritarianism through amendments to the constitution and tightening a host of repressive laws. The rule of law became so subverted that democracy in Malaysia became history.

Zaid said: “the ketuanan Melayu model has failed...because it has resulted in waste of crucial resources, energy and time and has distracted from the real issues confronting the country”.

To cope with globalisation, Zaid calls for Malays to discard ketuanan Melayu and re-embrace democracy and rule of law to spur an economic renaissance of reviving innovation and creativity through co-operation and competition.

Predictably, Umno’s reaction to Zaid’s speech was a chorus of abusive language from its leaders, ranging from “traitor to his race” to “apologise and repent, or get out of rumpun Melayu (the Malay stock)”.

And characteristically, none of these vocal critics engaged Zaid on any substance of his wide-ranging speech that also touched on religion, judiciary and the economy. This was reflective of Umno’s traditional role as ‘big bully’ who is good at telling people to shut up but unable to articulate why.

Umno has not only told Zaid to shut up, but his speech has also been largely blacked out by the local press, which is another manifestation of how tightly the press is controlled to shield the incumbent power from unfavourable exposure.

Umno does not have the slightest intention to carry out any reform that may alter the status quo of entrenched racism and corruption. This is evident not only from its angry rejection of Zaid’s speech, but also from the thumping support given to ultras in the nominations for leadership posts ahead of party elections.

BN component parties, which have cherished false hope of political survival through a reformed Umno, would be well advised to take note of this development.

Racial equality

Umno’s rejection aside, the speech must be studied by all Malaysians, for it touches the bottom line of race relations.

At the heart of the issue is racial equality. This may be a non-issue in most countries, where racial equality is taken for granted, but not in Malaysia.

Due to historical factors, and due to the intertwining of race and religion, and economic disparity among the races, racial equality is a sensitive subject in Malaysia.

Suffice to say that all races have recognised the need for some kind of affirmative action in favour of the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak, as they have been conspicuously lagging in education and economics.

The problem lies mainly in the fact that Umno/BN have became too powerful and have ruled without any checks and balances. This has bred unbridled racism and corruption in Umno.

The NEP, in addition to being used to uplift educational and economic level of Malays, was hijacked to enrich party leaders and cronies, who used it abundantly as master key to open up all kinds of channels to state wealth.

As Umno’s hegemony grew, and through mass indoctrination, many came to regard NEP privileges as birthrights of Malays, though this belief is fallacious.

The line between constitutional rights and the privileges derived from a political agenda such as the NEP has thus become blurred.

It has deteriorated to the point that even a cabinet minister (Amirsham Aziz) was unable to answer a question from Lim Kit Siang (right) in Parliament on Oct 29 as to whether NEP could be equated with Article 153 of the constitution, which provides for the special position of Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak. (The answer is: no.)

One may thus ask: is there racial equality under our constitution? The answer is yes, as this is clearly and unambiguously guaranteed under Article 8 and other articles.

The existence of Article 153 does not detract from this guarantee. The racial privileges granted under Article 153 are limited to the provision of quotas.

And these quotas, which fall in the fields of public service, education and commerce are meant as protective measures, and are to be applied to the extent deemed necessary and reasonable by the Agong.

One must also understand that Article 153 mandates the Agong to safeguard not only the special position of Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak, but also the legitimate interests of other communities.

It will be seen from a study of the constitution that many racial privileges and racial discriminations couched under the umbrella of the NEP. Particularly those accorded to party leaders and cronies are extra-constitutional.

What should change?

Should Malays worry when NEP is removed as suggested by Pakatan Rakyat? Certainly not, affirmative action programmes will continue to be implemented, except that these will be needs-based instead of race-based.

This should engender more equitable distribution, promote justice, enhance national unity and eliminate abuses.

The anticipated result should see ordinary Malays enjoying more benefits as the money would otherwise have been leaked through massive corruption and cronyism.

Umno’s recalcitrant leaders who are hell-bent on clinging to this racial supremacist ideology for political survival should realise that such thinking has become extinct since South Africa abandoned its apartheid policy two decades ago. It has no place in a globalised world.

It is an affront to universal values, besides conflicting with fundamental values of all religions including Islam.

Finally, it is detrimental to common Malays whose interests these leaders profess to champion. Continued racial hegemony will require increased repression which, in turn, will cause more political unrest and further economic retardation.

In such a downward spiral, no community will be spared.

---

KIM QUEK is a retired accountant and a member of PKR. He is author of 'Where to, Malaysia?'.