Feeds
Broken Promises: The Malaysian Constitution and Multiculturalism
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 View as single page
By Dr. Azmi Sharom
In 1835 Malays made up nearly 90% of Malaya’s population. In 1947 this number was closer to 50%. Therefore during a time when Malayan political consciousness was awakening (the 1946 British introduction of the Malayan Union which effectively placed the entire peninsular under direct British rule galvanised what can be described as the Malayan left and the forefathers of the current ruling elite), it could hardly be described as homogenous.
The 1957 Federal Constitution of Malaya reflected this change in the personality of the country. It was and is a strange creature that combines liberal democratic ideals and what can only be described as racially based preferential treatment. It also has elements of religiosity (the establishment of the scripture based Islamic law as the personal law for Muslims for example) which appear to contradict Article 4 of the constitution which reads:
“This Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void”
Race and religion litter the document in a way that scream “different treatment for different people”; a situation, which a mere 12 years after the excesses of Nazi Germany and nine years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (a United Nations document which Malaysia as a prospective new member would have to respect) would seem out of place with the growing zeitgeist of the time. However, considering the socio-political situation at the time, with an indigenous population feeling overwhelmed both in numbers and in economic disparity, the nature of the constitution can be accepted as an understandable compromise.
Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 View as a single page
People who read this also read
Wow!! I am speechless!!! Thanks for giving us a voice.
You referred to “special Malay discounts on housing;!”
Sounds innocent enough. Change the terminology somewhat and you see a completely different thing altogether. A developer of several properties is not going to ever decide that the total sale value of the development shall be the sum of the individual properties and therefrom starts by determining how much each property would be sold for before arriving at the value of the entire development. Instead the developer would under normal circumstances determine what the total development value was going to be for him before then apportioning it to the individual units. In so doing there is the standard equation that is applied to allocate the costs after factoring, what many Malays assume to be their entitled discounts. Indeed the developer is only too pleased to give the discount because he knows that the non-Malay buyer of the property basically compensates him for the discounted property. Indeed where a 10% discount is given, every 10 non-Malay buyers basically pay for the value of one house that can actually be given away for free.
A more appropriate reference to this “discount” should be “non-Malay penalty for the purchase of property” or non-Malay contribution towards property bought by Malays”! These are far more accurate descriptives than “discounts” are. Furthermore the impression that is created in the minds of both giver and receiver is a far more fairer and correct interpretation of what it is. Moving further, the quantum of this “contribution” should be a tax deductible expense to the property buyer and the same should be a taxable income to the recipient!
Dr Azmi, thanks for the article. A good reference anytime.