Indians in Malaya should focus on the deviations and distortions in the implementation of Article 153

Indians in Malaya should get their politics and relationships right.

That’s only possible if there’s a change in mindset.

Degenerating into rhetoric and polemics is not the way. That’s what MIC did for 60 years, what Waytha Moorthy is doing now and what Uthaya Kumar seems to be doing.

They should control the Narrative.

The politics of the so-called Malays is based on nothing but bullshit.

Indians should not emulate this.

They should emulate the Chinese in DAP.

No point demanding this and that as Indians. The gov’t will not entertain such demands because there’s no basis in law.

Indians are not mentioned directly in the Constitution.

Only the Orang Asal and so-called Malays are mentioned.

Indians should focus on Article 153.

The second prong mentions the legitimate interests/aspirations of non-Malays.

The first prong is about reasonable proportion, by way of a special position for the Orang Asal and so-called Malays, in only four areas viz. intake into the civil service; intake into institutions of higher learning owned by the gov’t and training opportunities; gov’t scholarships; and opportunities from the gov’t to do business.

Giving 90 per cent of matriculation seats to the so-called Malays is unreasonable proportion. The so-called Malays formed only 50.4 per cent of the population in 2010, the last time the census was taken.

Article 153 has been deviated and distorted from reasonable proportion in the said four areas, to unreasonable proportion in the four areas, to unreasonable proportion in all walks of life.

Examples abound. For example, the canteens in all Klinik Kesihatan are run by so-called Malays. During puasa month, these canteens are closed. Non-Malays visiting the clinics can’t get even a drink.

Indians in Malaya should focus on the deviations and distortions in the implementation of Article 153.

By focussing in this manner, Indians in Malaya can secure their legitimate interests/aspirations.

It can be inferred from the Definition of Malay in Article 160 that the so-called Malay race does not exist, and if it ever existed at some point in history, it has ceased to exist.

The Definition is not about race. It’s confined to Singapore and Malaya.

The Definition was to give an identity to a group of Muslims, able to speak Malay, and mostly from India and Indonesia, who were in Singapore and Malaya by Merdeka, 31 Aug 1957.

Their descendants are also Malay.

The so-called Melayu are not bumiputera.

They are pendatang.

Many so-called Melayu in Malaya may be holding fraudulent Malay MyKads.

Under Article 160, they are not eligible to hold Malay MyKads. Those who converted after Merdeka in Singapore and Malaya are not eligible to hold Malay MyKads.

If converts hold Malay MyKads, they are holding fraudulent documents.

Muslims, including Indonesians, who came to Singapore and Malaya after Merdeka are not Malays. If they hold Malay MyKads, they are holding fraudulent MyKads.

Zahid Hamidi, for example, reportedly came to Malaya from Java in 1965. He went on to become Umno deputy president and acting president. If he holds a Malay MyKad, he’s holding a fraudulent MyKad.

The Definition of Malay in Singapore is under Article 152. After Singapore obtained independence from Malaysia in 1965, it amended the Definition of Malay to include non-Muslims.

Muslims in Singapore can leave Islam and still remain Malay.

In Malaya, under Article 160, those who leave Islam cease to be Malay.

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

The Constitution is colour blind.

The so-called Malays in S’pore/Malaya must return to their roots and reclaim their racial heritage as Tamil, Malayalee, Pathan, Yemeni, Turk, all from India; and Bugis, Javanese, Minang and Aceh from Indonesia.

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.

4 thoughts on “Indians in Malaya should focus on the deviations and distortions in the implementation of Article 153”

    1. Hindraf Makkal Sakthi should replace Waytha Moorthy with Uthayakumar.

      Uthayakumar can be expected to ensure that local gov’ts don’t discriminate against Indians.

      Like

  1. Education and training are key approaches.

    Unfortunately, we are more interested in politicising educational and training opportunities. This is a failed approach which will not only deprive the deserving but will also not benefit those given the opportunities they don’t deserve.

    The gov’t should draw a line when it comes to liberalisation and democratisation of educational and training opportunities based on the lowest common denominator.

    The principle in the 1st prong of Article 153 is “reasonable proportion”.

    For example, giving 90 per cent of 40, 000 matriculation seats to so-called Malays is an unreasonable proportion. The so-called Malays formed only 50.4 per cent of the population in 2010, the last time the census was held.

    Reasonable proportion for the so-called Malays should be no more than 5 per cent. 95 per cent should be left open for the brightest and best to lead the way for all.

    The 2nd prong of Article 153 refers to the legitimate interests/aspirations of non-Malays.

    Like

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: