It is disappointing and ironic indeed that the Bar Council have to kowtow to undemocratic and unjust laws on the occasion that is supposed to celebrate and advance human rights in our country. In light of recent events, I believe that there is all the more reason that the Bar Council and Malaysian Bar should be taking the lead to fight for rights and freedoms that every Malaysian is entitled to.

Despite what the Federal Constitution says, and what some laws require, we must first acknowledge that the right to freedom of assembly is an inherent and inalienable right of every single person, irrespective of her race, religion or political beliefs. And this is one of those freedoms that guarantee the dignity of the human person. After all, we must remember that that is what human rights are all about – human dignity. (See the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular Article 20; and bear in mind that Malaysia is a proud member of the United Nations.)

In Malaysia, not only are the laws restrictive in terms of peaceful assemblies, it appears that the application of such laws are made in bad faith. The manner in which the police dealt with the recent large but peaceful assemblies as well as the venomous reactions of various government ministers are good starting points.

Right from the start, the police denied permits for the peaceful assemblies by giving the feeble excuse of maintaining public order. I wonder if such concerns only arise when organisations unrelated to the ruling Umno organise events because I note that a particular rally against the U.S. led by the Umno Deputy Youth Chief last year seemed to last three hours without wasting a drop of water from police water-cannons.

Indeed, I know that the Royal Malaysian Police are capable of handling peaceful assemblies and maitaining public order if they want to because I personally witnessed the recent demonstration (that included several marches from embassy to embassy in Kuala Lumpur) by a few thousand Burmese nationals against the cruelty of the Junta in Burma.

There ought to be a presumption that people’s assemblies are peaceful, and instead of giving excuses the police should be making the effort to maintain public order. The role of the police at peaceful assemblies ought to be supervisory, not chaos creation.

Moreover, if I am not mistaken, a government minister has recently made a blanket statement that police permits will not be given for assemblies, indicating that the laws on peaceful assemblies are only for show and there is no intent whatsoever to respect basic human and democratic rights.

Further, the recent absurd charging of Hindraf supporters for attempted murder and denial of bail reeks of malicious and punitive prosecution, and is clearly an abuse of the legal system.

There appears to be a mistaken belief by most Umno and Barisan Nasional politicians that democracy means an absolute absence of dissent and opposition. And they continue to delude themselves that they have the full support of the people because they keep winning heavily rigged elections where voters do not have the benefit of press freedom.

Just as we ought to pray for wisdom and strength to overcome difficulties and not the absence of difficulties in our lives, the government should be working towards policies that addresses people’s issues and concerns, and not the absence of these. If the government has confidence in its own policies, then it ought to have the courage to face public debate and discuss issues openly. In a democracry, differing views and criticisms are normal and ought to be encouraged for the progress of the country, not stifled and hammered down by using brute force.

Thus, the Malaysian Bar ought to take the lead to defend justice and reclaim our rights and freedoms in Malaysia. And if we have to defy some unjust laws in the process, so be it.

When I heard this news yesterday, I was at a Suhakam conference in Kuala Lumpur. The conference was entitled “Human Rights & Election”. The ceramah in Kuala Terengganu was organised by Bersih, a coalition for clean and fair elections, on 8 September – the eve of the Malaysian Human Rights Day.

At the conference, as expected, several speakers spoke about human rights and elections. Notably, in light of the incident in Kuala Terengganu, Dr. Mavis Puthucheary said that the police should not simply use the excuse of “public order” to deny people the freedom of assembly. Indeed, she said that the police should instead be using their resources to ensure that public order is maintained and protect the rakyat’s right to freedom of expression and assembly. (If I am not mistaken, at that time, Dr. Puthucheary was not aware of what happened in Kuala Terengganu the night before.)

Overall, the speakers made it quite clear that Elections Commission and the Barisan Nasional government have undermined the legitimacy of the electoral process in Malaysia. Indeed, Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim even referred to the real social contract and pointed out that it is a contract between the state and the people (as opposed to the one between the different racial groupings supposedly embodied in the Federal Constitution).

This brings me to a point that I have often made: the BN government is an illegitimate government. It has no real authority to govern Malaysia because its electoral success is based on manipulation, corruption and coercion. Most importantly, the BN government’s continued administration of this country does not reflect the will of the people.

According to Wikipedia, “the fundamental features of democracies include government based on majority rule and the consent of the governed, the existence of free and fair elections, the protection of political minorities, respect for basic human rights, equality before the law, due process, and political pluralism.”

Can the BN government honestly say that they fulfill any of these aspects of democracy?

From a political-legal standpoint, I would say that the BN government has fundamentally breached the social contract with the rakyat. If we look at the branches of government, none of them can claim to be independent and effective – the executive serves a few corrupt leaders, the legislature is a mere rubber stamp for the executive and the judiciary is now also well-trained to obey instructions from the executive. Indeed, even the Human Rights Commission is a toothless tiger.

Considering the state of affairs in Malaysia, I personally believe that it is our duty as citizens to defy unjust laws and exercise our human rights with pride and commitment. It goes without saying that we must act responsibly, but that must not stop us from making the bold and correct decision to fight for justice.

Anyway, what’s interesting was that I’ve been wanting to write a post about the good vs. evil concept – some autobots protect, others destroy. Well, it’s pretty obvious who represents the Decepticons in Malaysia. I don’t know if you’d agree that the opposition parties represent the humans-friendly autobots.

Whatever it is, I liked what Optimus Prime said at the end of the movie – something about humanity’s “capacity for courage”.

Insofar as earth and humanity are concerned, we definitely have to do something about the climate crisis and our environment. Happily and proudly, I attended a protest today with some groups of residents in Puchong Lestari. The SCT Saujana Puchong folks have been fighting for the Ayer Hitam Forest Reserve for a few years now.

There were about 100 people coming together from five tamans to protect the forest reserve. The Selangor state government approved the project for some influential businessmen to set up a cemetery and build a crematorium there. Indeed, the plan to build a previously approved access road between the housing areas have been scrapped and swept under the carpet.

To ensure that the peace is kept, and perhaps to send a signal to the residents that the authorities are watching them, a few squad cars were sent to the scene of the protest. And, of course, the SBs were there to take photos and mingle with the crowd.

In Malaysia, citizens asserting their fundmental liberties – it’s our constitutional right to assemble peaceably – is a rare sight. So, I congratulate them for having the courage to face the authorities and fight for what’s right. It’s a simple thing to do, but it takes a whole lot of courage!

(Check out the Keadilan Puchong website for pics)

For what it’s worth, I must say that that’s an ingenius and interesting idea from Dr. Chen. I wonder what Raja Nazrin thinks. (By the way, Raja Nazrin’s credentials are quite impressive. Check out the link to his entry in Wikipedia above.)

Anyway, I wanted to see how Dr. Chen would develop his argument after reading his analysis on the lack of national unity:

“This is happening because of the strains on unity by introducing a bumiputra policy in 1966, the NEP in 1970 and Islamic state during Dr Mahathir’s premiership.

To make matters worse, at the UMNO general assembly last year, the ultras rejected the concept of ‘bangsa malaysa’ and proposed the implementation of a ‘Malay agenda’ where Malays are conferred ‘ketuanan melayu’ status, while the rest are plain or ordinary Malaysians.

Then last month, the deputy prime minister heightened the unease amongst the people when he unilaterally announced that Malaysia was Islamic and not secular, claiming that the constitution did not state Malaysia was secular. This claim was contrary to the declaration by former prime ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn that the Malaysian constitution was secular.”

And, somewhat expectedly, Dr. Chen concluded by saying, “Let us start with the advice by Raja Nazrin to respect and adhere to the Constitution.”

Hmmm, at least Dr. Chen qualified his endorsement of Raja Nazrin’s advice about the constitution by indicating that it’s only a starting point to the solution. Nevertheless, I beg to differ with Dr. Chen’s endorsement and his earlier analysis about the cause of racial problems in this country. Indeed, the whole article was positioned as an issue of “lack of national unity”.

Here, we must note that this country is not even a nation yet, in the sense that the peoples of this geographical area of the world do not entirely and wholeheartedly “pledge allegiance” to her. This is quite apparent in the fact that many so-called Malaysians are more than willing to jump ship and migrate to another country as soon as “the pot gets to hot” here.

Of course, this also reflects, and may be a symptom of the lack of national unity. In any case, I disagree with the assertion that national unity deteriorated because of the bumiputera policy and the New Economic Policy.

From the beginning, as far back as Malaya and its formation, we had a problem of widespread and unquestioned racial discrimination. Even the Mat Sallehs who espoused human rights principles seemed to be quite comfortable with the rampant discrimination. I’m sure that all the British politicians and members of the Reid Commission were quite aware of the consequences of their policies and legal documents (especially our Federal Constitution) on Malaya’s racial relations and “national unity”.

Thus, with that kind of “national history”, especially the widely accepted racial discrimination – then and now – it becomes more than a matter of “political equality”. In terms of international law, I think Malaysia ought to be a international pariah. In terms of morality, I don’t see how any self-respecting and socially-aware person can accept such racial discrimination. In terms of religion and faith, I just can’t find any teachings in Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and/or Christianity, that condones our practice of racial discrimination.

Many of us in this country are hypocrites. Whilst we clap and cheer enthusiastically whenever we hear political rhetoric about national unity and harmony, yet we do not even bother to understand the culture and mindset of “other Malaysians”, much less make the effort to reach out to these “fellow Malaysians”. Do we really want to have “national unity and harmony”? Yes, we can continue to blame the government and the authorities for the racial problems that we face, but that attitude of ours is not going to bring Malaysia forward. Not even one single step forward.

One of the first steps that we must take on the road to national reconciliation, is to face the truth and admit our own ignorance on this whole issue of racial discrimination. Let’s talk openly about this. Don’t hide behind discussions about “national unity”. Let’s call the spade, “spade”. Yes, there is fear to confront the ugly and painful truth of the matter, but is that an acceptable justification for allowing racial discrimination to continue in this country of ours?

No matter what the justification, racial discrimination as a practice is always suspect. For it to be institutionalised unashamedly, with pride even, that’s unacceptable.

Here’s a brief discussion of equality (the twin principle of non-discrimination) by Judge Tanaka, in the context of apartheid:

“What are equal are to be treated equally and what are different are to be treated differently… [and] what is equal and what is different? … All human beings, notwithstanding their differences in their appearance and other minor points, are equal in their dignity as persons. Accordingly, for the point of view of human rights and fundamental freedoms they must be treated equally… The principle of equality does not mean absolute equality, but recognises relative equality, namely different treatment proportionate to concrete individual circumstances. Different treatment must not be given arbitrarily; it requires reasonableness, or must be in conformity with justice…”

So, in the context of Malaysia, are there any reasonable and justifiable circumstances that make racial discrimination necessary? All the usual justifications that we hear are just that. Justifications.

The history of every nation-state in the world will show that some groups of “citizens” were the first inhabitants of the land, and the “others” came later. Is historical origin a satisfactory reason or justification for racial discrimination?

No matter what answer we may try to come up with, in our guts and hearts, we know it’s wrong. It’s simply, morally and politically wrong to discriminate against anybody because they were born of parents (not of their own choosing) that are in the “wrong” ethnic group.

So, I have a problem with our Federal Constitution. It’s flawed, and we need to recognise that. Legally and poltically, we may not be able to do much about it now, but we must not glorify it as a panacea for our racial ills. The “social contract” that is often attributed to the Federal Constitution is yet another lie that puts us in our assigned places.

With all due respect to Dr. Chen and Raja Nazrin, I can only see the Federal Constitution as a temporary dam to stem the tide of racial and religious discontent. For a real long term solution, we need to do much more than just read the constitution and protect it.

For a real turnaround in Malaysia, I think more than political will is needed. The people and the so-called leaders must dig deep into their own spiritual reservoirs of faith and values for the resolve and conviction that is much needed to make a difference, not only at the national stage, but in their own private lives.

Basically, I agree that “when we go beyond labels such as ‘secular’ and ‘Islamic’ and connect with the substance of our three principal documents we will discover that there is a degree of congruence between the two positions.” And the three documents that Dr. Chandra is talking about are the Federal Constitution, the Rukunegara and Vision 2020.

Now, my question is, how do we move forward from this apparent impasse? It’s very obvious that the current hooha is created by the Deputy Prime Minister for political reasons. Indeed, it’s so idiotic for him to make such a statement that I won’t even go into the so-called debate.

What I’m interested in is what can we do to solve the real problems that all Malaysians are facing, irrespective of our race, religion or gender. For example, the Wanita MCA chief Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen, who is a Deputy Minister, has raised the issue of social problems. This is a very real problem faced by the community. Is MCA or Barisan Nasional going to do something about it, or are we happy to just get our names and photos published in the newspapers?

The range of problems that Malaysians face are so wide and varied that it’s sometimes even difficult to find a starting point. Politically, we have mono-ethnic parties that divide us to rule. Legally, we have a supreme law of the land with silly notions of race mixed up with religion. Socially, we have escalating crime rates and, worse still, our youth are being led astray by politicians and their lies.

Sadly, our value system was lost in the midst of all this talk about secularism and spirituality. The situation in Malaysia has become absurd. We have a Deputy Prime Minister that is somehow linked to a murder case, proudly going around announcing that Umno is the conscience of the Malays. We have a police force that is implicated in involvement with triad gangs. We had an anti-corruption agency Director who was allegedly corrupt.

And yet, this government pretends to have legitimacy, and the Rakyat plays along so that their convenient lifestyles are not disturbed. If anything, I find all this media control and realpoliticking to be very disturbing, indeed.

No doubt, this country has a unique history, both in terms of its racial composition and the development of Islam. Nevertheless, if we are serious about transcending this superficial debate and want to reconcile ourselves with the notion of Malaysia, we need to do some profound soul-searching… and perhaps ask, what we can do for our country.

Hence, after some reflection about my “apartheid posting”, I believe there is a better way forward for Malaysia. At least in terms of patching up racial relations between the different ethnic communities.

Actually, I started writing this posting yesterday but had to stop for lunch, meetings and so forth. Anyway, it’s just as well that I didn’t finish it yesterday because I just read Dr. Chandra Muzaffar’s comment in the NST this morning. Frankly, I am surprised Dr. Chandra still has so much confidence in the government and the Parliament.

He was suggesting all sorts of measures to ensure the independence and efficacy of the Institute of Ethnic Relations, which was proposed by the National Unity Advisory Panel. Moreover, research into ethnic relations was also suggested.

With all due respect to Dr. Chandra, if harmonious ethnic relations is what we want to achieve, then I very much doubt that the current administration under Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and the “National Unity Squad” have got what it takes to make racial relations any better in this country.

Please let me be clear. I am not saying that the people in the Squad are not capable or do not have the interest of Malaysia at heart. Frankly, I do not know who half these people are, although I do note there is a former DAP politician in their midst. I am sure they are quite capable people, otherwise the government wouldn’t put them there. Indeed, even if the individuals cannot come up with good ideas, I am sure a 55-member panel can do the job.

However, my scepticism of Dr. Chandra’s suggestions stem from my belief that such projects come to naught if there is no politicial will on the part of the Umno rulers. And as far as I can see, these Umno rulers have no political motivation to share a nation with so-called visitors from foreign lands. Of course, we can debate about the origins of the Malays, Chinese and Indians, but that’s academic.

Now, the question is, what does it really take for us, as Malaysians, to bring the country forward, to achieve true nationhood, as one people, with one vision and one collective future?

The way I see it, on the one hand, the Malays resist sharing this country on an equal basis with the Others because they are afraid that they will lose out in the process, whatever “losing out” may mean to them. On the other hand, the Others (including the Chinese, the Indians, the Kadazan-Dusuns, the Ibans, the Temuan and all the other minority ethnic groups) either feel a lack of affinity to this country or are quite indignant about the whole unjust situation… and they feel quite helpless about it.

In simple terms, I would say that some sort of reconciliation needs to happen before we can move forward. And this sort of reconciliation must happen at the public and national level, not just between neighbours and acquaintances. A lot of major national issues that affect racial relations have not been addressed satisfactorily; e.g. the Federal Constitution and its flaws, the branding of Communists as Chinese, the tragic May 13 incident, the Chinese domination of the economy, the ugly Kampung Medan incident, the existence of mono-ethnic political parties and the Umno Keris episodes.

These issues must be addressed openly, not only in terms of a public discussion, but also approached with an open mind and open heart. Quite obviously, Malaysia will not be able to move forward in this area if we are not prepared to be bold and candid about how we feel, and acknowledge how everyone else is feeling, however justified the feeling may or may not be. The fact is, we all feel it.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the so-called National Unity Squad are prepared to do that. They seem to be more interested in highlighting the “achievements” of Malaysian racial relations for use as propaganda during Umno-BN’s election campaign. And even if they are willing to face the hard facts, will their political masters permit them to do the right thing?

If we are truly sincere and serious about improving racial relations in Malaysia, I propose we consider a royal commission with the mandate and confidence of the people. With the way things are in our political landscape, I wouldn’t even put my confidence in the current Parliament.

The members of this commission, although formally receiving their mandate from the King, should be nominated by the Rakyat, and appointed by the King in consultation with respectable world leaders like Nelson Mandela, Bishop Desmond Tutu and others who have experience in such reconciliatory processes. In other words, leave the local politicians, both the Umno-BN and opposition types, out of the whole thing.

It’s about time the Rakyat drive a process for their own good, and not let the politicians dictate the terms of our co-existence.

Article 11(1) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia – the supreme law of the land, the last time I heard – clearly states that “every person has the right to profess and practise his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.”

I’m not all that familiar with the intricacies of the Lina Joy case, but I do know that she converted to Christianity by her own choice.

Without even reading the judgments of Federal Court, I believe it’s safe to say that the Malaysia Boleh! spirit has done it again – do something stupid that no one in their right mind would.

Whilst reading about the court’s decision on Malaysiakini, I decided to view the accompanying video clip and saw my old friend Yusri Mohamad, who’s now the President of ABIM, speaking on the court’s decision.

I must say that I am very disappointed with my friend’s position on this matter. I don’t seem to remember him having such a conservative approach to religion and spirituality.

Anyway, he mentioned something about the majority of Muslims and non-Muslims being happy with the Court’s decision. Well, my friend, just in case you’ve forgotten, religion and spirituality is not about the majority. It’s about our personal relationship with God, however we may perceive him or her. And, by the way, Islam is submission to the will of God, not the majority.

If the fair conclusion of any matter is simply about the majority, then the lines that I just quoted from the Federal Constitution are completely meaningless and useless. And since we’re on that track, we may as well just have mob rule and victimise every soul who dares to have a different opinion or belief.

Or did I miss a new amendment to the Constitution? Did the Parliament surreptitiously insert the words “except Muslims” when we were all sleeping?

That’s not the end of it, though. Just before he concluded his speech, Yusri suggested that “less confrontational and less controversial” methods be used to address this issue. Isn’t it obvious that this is a matter that is fundamental to a person’s identity and being? What is a less confrontational and less controversial approach when the State tells me that I can’t believe what I want to believe?

And, correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t there a verse in the Holy Quran that says that there is no compulsion in religion? If this is not compulsion, I don’t know what is.