The Third National Conference: Malaysia on the Path to Non-Discrimination, Is Equality for All was well attended by 90 delegates from all sectors – the public service, civil society, the academia and political leaders.
Keynote Address
UN Independent Expert on Minority Issues, Ms Rita Izsak, set the stage at the beginning of the conference by pointing to the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, which was adopted unanimously by the UN member states in 1992, as the guiding framework. She noted that there had not been an overt definition of who constitutes “minorities”, at the same time throwing caution that any specific definitions may not be a perfect in identifying minorities as they exist in different varieties and forms.
Ms Izsak said that state members are responsible to protect, preserve, promote and ensure the continued enjoyment of the rights that are tied to the identity of minority groups. It is also important for the state to acknowledge the existence of such minorities in order for their needs to be addressed, and this is determined through collection of data, and objective analysis on the situation faced.
Session 1
Session 1 entitled “Minority Reasserting Rights in a Big Malaysia: Are there spaces for equality?” was moderated by Dr Helen Ling, Research Fellow of IKMAS (UKM), with panelists being Mr Ho Keck Hua from the JPNIN, Dr KJ John from OHMSI and Mr Jerald Joseph from Pusat KOMAS.
The session began with Mr Ho acknowledging the challenge in bringing about true equality for all, given the current “pains” felt in society, and the different nuances of community profiles. Three players were identified that were involved in asserting rights of different groups – politicians asserting ethnic rights, NGOs for common rights and activists for causes. With the Internet and technology age, citizen journalism has propelled the assertion of individual views not necessarily tied to views of a group of persons. A recent study by the JPNIN had shown that religious issues were the topmost “painful” issues in the country, and the JPNIN were taking serious measures to foster inter religious understanding.
A broad framework was provided by Dr KJ John to show the common points that the state and society needs to move towards – a shared identity as a nation of peoples, the concept of good governance as enshrined in the Federal Constitution and a strong sense of responsibility in the civil service to build the nation.
Mr Jerald Joseph pointed out that the protection of minorities is not a concept that is alien to Malaysia, as the state has been actively involved in protecting the rights of minorities in other countries. He highlighted that racial politics is a key problem in the Malaysian socio-political landscape, and communities continued to feel alienated by the practice of filling up forms that identify them by race rather than nationality. He emphasized the importance of equal opportunity for all, saying that a child should not be limited in his ambitions simply because of the color of his skin.
Session 2
Session 2 was entitled “Laws and Standards in Protection of Minority Rights” and was moderated by Ms Siti Kasim for a panel consisting of Mr Roger Chan, Mr Ahmad Fuad Rahmat and Mr Anthony Jayaseelan.
Mr Roger Chan brought up two minorities in Malaysia that are facing ongoing opposition and problems – the indigenous peoples and those of alternative sexual orientations. The encroachment by authorities and loss of customary land are matters of grave impact to the indigenous peoples. High handed actions by the authorities to take over lands without consultation goes against the articles within the UNDRIP, despite Malaysia having being signatory. Similarly, the LGBT is an oppressed group within Malaysia and culminates in the Court of Appeal’s upholding of the High Court’s decision to ban Seksualiti Merdeka, which is a platform for exchange of ideas. This runs contrary to freedom of speech and restricts the opening of public spaces for engagement. This minority has also experienced attacks on mainstream media, loss of job opportunities on top of the prejudice and ridicule already faced in society. Regardless of the beliefs of others about LGBT practices, this group cannot be limited in their opportunity on the basis of their sexuality.
Mr Anthony Jayaseelan spoke on the rights of minorities to the basic rights for food, work, culture and housing. Under the Constitution, affirmative action is clearly spelled out to apply to public services, public universities and Class F contractors. However, this practice has seeped into GLCs and some insurance companies, where a 30 per cent bumiputera participation, which is unconstitutional. He shed light on the vast inequalities in the issuance of contractor’s licenses on the basis of affirmative action that is not applicable today. Such unjust preferential treatment has severely thrown off the opportunities to other communities – thus creating inequalities.
Mr Fuad Rahmat shared that the majority Muslim-Malay population were overall traditional and conservative in their views, despite the progressive stance undertaken by civil society on human rights. There is currently a big gulf between those who look to the traditional interpretations of the Quran and Hadiths, and those who are prepared to stand for human rights. This is because of the basic yet key doctrinal difference between the two – the former that Allah, or God, is their master; and the latter that they themselves are masters of their own destiny. This is further exacerbated by the fact that proponent countries such as the United States do actually practice human rights in totality.
Islam is also the most regulated religion in the country, where almost every activity or speaker needs to obtain license from religious authorities. It needs to be recognised that the legal system is as good as the hands who run it – those with a conservative stance will interpret the documents according to their worldview. Whilst a legal system can solve certain problems, the answer seems to rely more on building relationship among communities and individuals.
Session 3
Session 3 entitled “Envisioning another Malaysia: A Nation built on Equality” was moderated by Ms Ho Yock Lin with a panel compromising Dr Mohd Faisal Musa, Mr Eric Paulsen and Associate Prof Dr Ramy Bulan.
Dr Mohd Faisal Musa highlighted the “apartheid” of the minority Shiite sect in Malaysia by the majority Sunni by the state and the mainstream media. The community comes up to 250,000 members according to KDN. Shiites have been thrown into prison by way of the ISA, have been faced with mental and psychological harassments and although they are allowed to practice, are not allowed to spread the religion. Under the UDHR and the Federal Constitution, the Shiites should be allowed to practice their religion peacefully.
Dr Ramy Bulan highlighted the position of the Orang Asli group, saying that equality can still be undermined if differential treatment is practiced. Differential treatment can sometimes be necessary to produce equality. True equality does not necessarily arise from identical treatment, and it is necessary to accommodate differences. Therefore, a law that applies uniformly to all sections of society may still violate the claimants’ rights. A subtle form of persecution can arise when the minority is forced to be something to match the majority.
Therefore, for indigenous peoples, customary laws of the peoples must be recognised and not placed at the bottom rung of importance. It must be treated as valid and of high value to the indigenous people groups, and not be set aside as non-binding. As seen in the case of Mabo, we need to move away from the culture of domination and inappropriate control, and we cannot view their laws as inferior. However, having said that, this must be balanced by the recognition that customary laws evolves as the indigenous peoples themselves revolve, otherwise it is too restrictive an interpretation that may result in another form of inequality.
Mr Eric Paulsen provided his views on what civil society needs to do gain some traction in the protection of minorities rights, opining that the CERD would not be ratified anytime soon in Malaysia, as the government has nothing to be gained by doing so. The CERD would also pose problems to Malay rights. In order there to be change, a middle ground and engagement needs to be developed with the right personalities and authorities. Laws are as good as the institutions that enforce these laws, and so the point to stress is that not everything can be litigated. Mr Paulsen reiterated that civil society needs to engage the middle ground, conservative groups and get people who are closer to the authorities to pressure at all sides – before changes happen.
Key concerns from the floor
Overall, members from the floor raised concerns of an almost mono-ethnic civil service. There were also concerns that the Malay-Muslim group, despite being a majority, was also oppressed in their fundamental freedoms by religious authorities. There was also confusion expressed as to sectarianism, and how this matter is handled at the OIC level. The Orang Asli community expressed their dissatisfaction in the lack of consultation by the authorities in policy making. The attitude of non-Orang Asli who wish to change the Orang Asli peoples are viewed with great frustration and offence. Members of the floor also concluded that beyond desiring the ratification of the ICERD and the execution of other signed documents, clear action needs to be taken by civil society for the benefit of the minorities. The balance, overlaps and even contradictions between international treatise vis a vis national laws, and national law vis a vis syariah law was also discussed.
Closing
In closing, Ms Rita Iszak observed that Malaysians tended to be proud of the country when they are overseas, but become confused as to their real identities when they are back home, due to the ‘boxes’ which they are forced to identify themselves with.
The government must do what should be done, instead of what must be done, tackling actual problems being faced the minority one by one, and correcting what is wrong. The answer of how should also be answered, as to the way in which these problems should be tackled, in order to come to a positive result. Civil society should also continue to build allies within and outside in its causes.
Finally, Mr Jerald Joseph gave the final word that civil society needs to be keep pressing on, working together and pushing the benchmark higher for human rights and equality for all.