Who really is a Malaysian?

 

Now, who is and is not a Malaysian? Does Umno decide this? Worse still, does Perkasa, or its cousin, Isma, decide this? This question needs to be now be truthfully taught in Malaysian history so that everyone knows who, what, and how the value of Malaysian citizenship is protected and preserved by UN Human Rights Convention. But, that, too, is very different from whoever is a Melayusian; as, this, too, is defined by the federal constitution.

All human beings are ‘pendatangs’ of one form or another; according to human race development theories. In fact, we may all be part and parcel of the original African Race. Colour has little or nothing to do with it, as I understand it. It is all defined by genome science and its investigations about the structure of our genes.

But, is not the more relevant question: does it all really matter? Are we not all human beings, of the only human race; and with almost identical features and characteristics, with minor differences endowed by the Almighty?

And therefore, as boys at the Royal Military Colege (RMC), we said as we bathed naked; “semuanya lebih-kurang sahaja!”

What is Malaysia?

Malaysia is a gathering of English colonies that were historically ‘artificially created’ to make sense of some existing realities; like the Federation of Peninsular Malay States with their sultans, the Borneo States of Sabah and Sarawak, and Singapore being desirous of becoming a new modern nation-state, according the UN System of Global Governance.

Therefore, the UN actually moderated the plebiscite wherein the legitimate residents of two states voted for the Malaysia option. Brunei had a similar choice but they chose not to, whereas Singapore was part of the similar calculus of colonial history.

Therefore also, I have always argued that “the name Malaysia” is an English etymological word and not a Melayu word from Bahasa Melayu. What is the implication of this historically well recorded reality?

It is simply that we could have been ‘Melayusia’ if we had chosen a Bahasa Melayu word, or some other Sanskrit equivalent. But, when we opted for the English compound word; and the fact that it was agreed by all relevant stakeholders; my point is that: history was created such and can never be rewritten.

Today Malaysia has no choice but to follow international norms and traditions in all such matters, or otherwise, it is inevitable that these matters will land itself in the International Human Rights Court.

Who is my grandson?

For all young people, and for some of us, much later in life: the question of one’s identity becomes a big deal, usually between 15-21 years. It is usually within our college years, or post-secondary years (usually between ages 18-22). Very often, up till that point, we are merely our parents’ children, and whatever they said, or whatever the other authorities said, will be accepted as definition of one’s identity.

But the real challenge starts when we begin to learn to “question all assumptions made up till this point because of real college-level education”.

These questions are inevitable. I have therefore dedicated this column to this kind and quality of questions which my two-week old grandson will ask about 18 years from now.

He already has a clear enough biblical name: Mikhael  Elisha Isaacs. The name Mikhael means, ‘who is like god?’ His parents are known; with his grandfather and mother on the dad’s family residing in Terengganu state, and from a well-known family whose heritage includes even a road named after their family in Kuala Terengganu.

On his mother’s side, again the grandparents are from Kedah and Wisconsin in the US. The grandmother has a pure Germanic heritage with a family tree traceable to towns in Germany, even today, thanks to their incredible records and the search by Mikhael’s 91- year old great mother’s due diligence.

On the grandfather’s side, the KJ Siblings have recorded a book of their identity and heritage on the 90th birthday of their father entitled: The Legacy of a Father’s Love. This great grandfather is now 95 years old and fading rather quickly, although he has now seen his first great grandson last weekend. Their family heritage is visibly recorded at No 4, Jalan Ibrahim, Sungai Petani.

With such a genealogy and heritage, who then is Mikhael Elisha? First and foremost he is a Malaysian citizen; and there can be zero doubts about this. The federal constitution guarantees all of this.  The only issue of contention remains is “how should the parents fill out the column called ‘keturunan’ in the birth certificate?” This former column used to be called Bangsa.

If ‘keturunan’ is still used for his birth registration, the law, if I am not mistaken, states that the ethnicity of the father defines it. Now, within current human rights logic, does the mother not matter at all, in such a consideration? Worse still, if the mother’s parents were of mixed parentage; like in our case, of Malayalee and Germanic heritage, not ‘Indian and American as misnamed’, which are really nationalities and not ethnicities.

What then is the ethnicity of my grandson?

What they have done in Singapore is to allow the parents to record the one-quarter heritage in the selected order of preference, and not simply falsely or politically impose this definition of identity.

A way forward for Malaysia

All citizens are Malaysian by nationality. But if we think their ethnicity and heritage is needed for some strange reason, the most obvious thing would be to allow them to record their ethnic heritage. Therefore, for instance, I think in all the case of my kids, we recorded them as ‘Malayalees’ as the ethnic heritage of the father. So then, what is the great error or mistake if we have him recorded as of Malayalee-German heritage for ethnicity?

So, why could not my grandson be recorded as a Malaylee, as the heritage of the father, or even one-quarter German, if that is allowed, but what is not and never is correct is that their heritage is ‘Indian’. India is a nation-state and we are not Indians; although from Kerala by heritage. Indians only exist overseas; because of their nationality. Within India there are at least 14 nationally accepted languages and different ethnicities. But there are no Indians.

Moreover, now that the Dayak National Congress has finally publicly articulated that their ethnicity must be recorded in the birth certificates, maybe it is time for us to close down the generalised notions of ‘racial heritage’ and seek to expand their ethnic categories under the ‘lain lain’ to give all citizens a choice of declaring their ethnic heritage. Dear home affairs minister, please tell me why not?

---

KJ JOHN was in public service for 29 years. The views expressed here are his personal views and not those of any institution he is involved with. Write to him at kjjohn@ohmsi.net with any feedback or views.