The Definition of Malay in the Federal Constitution is an artificial construct, an aberration in law

9 so-called Malays, 1 Chinese

BULLDOZER Mahathir said in his “The Malay Dilemma” that the so-called Malays were historically genetically inferior people. This was because of incest and in-breeding.

He was referring to those whose roots were in the Archipelago and not the so-called Malays whose roots were in India (Tamil, Malayalee, Pathan, Yemeni and Turk).

Mahathir’s family was from Kerala, southwest India.

Tamils first people in Malaya after the Negrito (Semang) from Kerala, southwest India, 40, 000 years ago.

There’s no such thing as Malay.

It’s an artificial identity created under the Definition of Malay in Article 160, an artificial construct, an aberration in law. Bad law. Unconstitutional.

The so-called Malays in Singapore and Malaya, under Article 160, did not exist “legally” until Merdeka.

That’s in law (bad).

Again, the so-called Malay in the Definition of Malay in Article 160 did not exist before the said Definition came into force.

The so-called Malay in Article 160 came out suddenly from the ground and/or fell from the sky.

The Definition of Malay under Article 160 is not about Austronesian.

The Definition of Malay is an artificial construct, an aberration in law.

The Constitution is colour blind.

If the so-called Malays existed at one time in history, they have ceased to exist. This can be inferred from the Definition of Malay in Article 160.

The so-called Malays in Article 160 are pendatang who came after Indians and Chinese.

What we cannot allow are characters going around with a strong sense of proprietorship based on flawed premises.

The so-called Malays are not bumiputera. Nowhere in the Constitution are the so-called Malays mentioned as bumiputera.

The Definition of Malay in Article 160 is not about bumiputera but an identity for Muslims in Singapore and Malaya by Merdeka, 31 Aug 1957.

The so-called Malay in Malaya occupied gov’t reservation land and began calling it tanah Melayu.

The British created gov’t reservation land, by gazette, on Orang Asli land.

Such land is untitled and can be degazetted to return to the Orang Asli or turned over for public purposes.

Again, the so-called Malays are pendatang who came after Indians and Chinese.

Negrito (Semang) from Kerala, southwest India, were the first people in Malaya. They came 40, 000 years ago.

The Negrito are still there in Malaya mostly in the mountains.

The Austronesians first appeared in history less than 6, 000 years ago.

The Definition of Malay in Article 160 is not about tanah Melayu but about giving an identity to Muslims, able to speak Malay, and born or domiciled in Singapore and Malaya by Merdeka, 31 Aug 1957.

Their descendants are also so-called Malays.

Again, the Definition of Malay in the Federal Constitution is an artificial construct, an aberration in law.

The Constitution is colour blind.

The Definition of Malay in the Federal Constitution can be removed by the Federal Court by a point of law ruling.

The Federation of Malaya Independence Act 1957, the Federal Constitution and the Malaysia Agreement 1963 decide on citizenship.

Subjects of the sultans and British subjects became Malayan and Malaysian citizens.

Again, the so-called Malays are pendatang who came after Indians, Chinese.

Generally, the so-called Malays in Singapore and Malaya are Tamil, Malayalee, Pathan, Yemeni and Turk from India; and Bugis, Javanese, Minang and Acheh from Indonesia.

The Turks in India are the descendants of the Turkish invasions of the subcontinent.

The Yemeni in India and Sri Lanka are descendants of traders.

Those who convert after Merdeka in Singapore and Malaya are not so-called Malays even if they can speak Malay and claim to practise so-called Malay culture, customs and traditions. They are excluded.

If they are listed as so-called Malay in their birth certs and MyKads, they are holding fraudulent documents.

The Definition of Malay in Singapore is under Article 152. Since 1965, so-called Malays in Singapore can leave Islam and still remain Malay.

The so-called Malays under Article 160 who leave Islam cease to be Malay.

Those who hold Malay MyKads in Sabah are holding fraudulent documents if they don’t originate from so-called Malays in Singapore and Malaya. It has been reported that several hundred thousand people in Sabah are listed as so-called Malays.

Sarawak Malays, or Orang Laut, are covered by Article 161A along with the Orang Asal — Dayak — of Sabah and Sarawak.

Brunei Malays, or Barunai, are not mentioned in Article 161A.

There are no local so-called Malays in Sabah.

Author: fernzthegreat

Joe Fernandez holds a honours degree in management, majoring in economics, and has opted from academia in law to being a jurist. He was trained professionally on the job as a journalist. He's a longtime Borneo watcher, keen on the history and legal aspects of Malaya's presence in Sabah and Sarawak. He teaches the English language privately and has emerged as a subject matter expert in public examination techniques.

One thought on “The Definition of Malay in the Federal Constitution is an artificial construct, an aberration in law”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: