The revocation of the passport of the Hindraf Chairman P. Waytha Moorthy by the Malaysian government is most undemocratic and deplorable.
The Home Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar should make a ministerial statement for the government’s high-handed action when Parliament reconvenes next Tuesday.
The following is Waytha Moorth’s statement on the revocation of his passport:
I was travelling back to London from Geneva after the HINDRAF briefing with the United Nations High Commissioner’s office on Human Rights on April 21, 2008 and was totally shocked to be informed by the UK immigration officer at Gatwick Airport that the Malaysian government had revoked my passport thus making me de facto stateless.
I see only one purpose. The Malaysian Government had intended that I be deported back to Malaysia by the British authorities so that I too could be arrested under the draconian Internal Security Act and be detained for unspecified period of time without trial and be subject to torture and inhumane treatment for my political beliefs. I have not committed any offence or crime other than to champion the cause of the systematically marginalized, discriminated and alienated ethnic Indian community in Malaysia who remained a permanently colonized community despite achieving independence 51 years ago.
It is most distressing to learn that, the land that my forefathers toiled as indentured labourers and one that I had been made citizen by the will of the unavoidable circumstances has decided to banish and exile me for speaking and advocating the truth that was never spoken off before.
The government has once again acted according to its whims and fancy without a second thought of the public or for the good of the public.
The Malaysian government repetitively had oppressed , suppressed and persecuted all causes of HINDRAF by their act of totalitarianism from the very beginning but nevertheless the will and spirit of the HINDRAF supporters have been the beacon of hope for the new strength founded upon our new found MAKKAL SAKTHI (people power).
The callous and cowardly acts of the government against me not only undermine their credibility domestically but also internationally. The government needs to realize that the Malaysian public can no longer be cowed as the public are no longer the sheeps that begets the government wolves.
The government may use its best weapon in attempting to stall and break me but they fail to realize that I derive my strength from my MAKKAL SAKTHI and that is all that I need to carry on the torch and fight for the unjust cause of the ethnic Indians in Malaysia even if it means championing my cause from exile.
As much as I have been coerced, castigated by the Malaysian government, so have the HINDRAF supporters. HINDRAF supporters have shown unprecedented courage and character for the truth. It only motivates me further to pursue our goals.
The revocation of my passport is probably the last ditch desperate effort by the Malaysian government in crippling my international lobby for the cause of the Malaysian Indians. This unwarranted act has given me a greater “inner” strength to continue to fight for the struggle of the Malaysian Indians and for the unconditional release of my fellow brothers held unjustly in Kamunting. The government can unleash all the man made mechanism to stifle and silence me, but I have the backing of MAKKAL SAKTHI and that alone is sufficient for me to continue my fight for the people.
In MAKKAL SAKTHI, I have found the truthness of my cause for the people. In today’s world, utterance of truth is seen as a revolutionary action, and my quest for the truthness has resulted as a hindrance for the government. My judge is the people not the government.
I will continue this struggle until my last breath. They may break me but they will never be able to break my will and spirit that is derived from the people for the truthness is in it.
I shall continue the struggle for the “freedom” of the ethnic Malaysian Indians from London and urge all HINDRAF supporters to remain calm as they have always been. I shall forever remain a loyal Malaysian and will return to Malaysia soon to continue and accomplish what I had started.
P.Waytha Moorthy
Chairman
HINDRAF
#1 by k1980 on Saturday, 17 May 2008 - 1:09 pm
An Indian, a Chinese, 3 Malays and a Mamak—- when will their passports be revoked? Or sent to Kamunting for subversion?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2152/2497059793_b5d9cb9b69_o.gif
#2 by chuchueey on Saturday, 17 May 2008 - 1:31 pm
Off topic but please allow me to present this heart rending story before its currency expires:-
The following is a letter written to the SUN on Fri 16th May 2008:-
High achiever losing faith
I AM an SPM 2007 school leaver and it grieves me that having achieved 10A1s has got me nowhere in my homeland.
I was rejected by the Public Services Department (PSD), Public Institutes of Higher Learning (IPTA) and matriculation programmes, while Petronas, Bank Negara and the Telekom Malaysia Foundation did not even call me for an interview – all of which has started me wondering if we can really make a difference through education.
To put myself in the best position, I went all out in taking part in co-curricular activities. I represented my school in the national level Robotic Carnival 2007 and won the third prize in the national level Mathematics Carnival in 2006. I was a prefect in school, sub-editor on the school editorial board, homeroom president and Mandarin Club treasurer. In terms of community involvement, I was a student reporter at the Sin Chew Daily.
My parents are government servants nearing retirement age. My father, tormented by renal failure, continues to work for a meagre income, for this income sustains his medical bills, for this income keeps my siblings in school. It wrenches my heart to learn that I am anything but an extra burden. It saddens me deeply, for the price my father pays – his deteriorating health – is too dear for us to bear.
Two years ago, I took up the challenge of studying at Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM). The stay instilled in me tolerance, people skills and the importance of cherishing differences. After the pain of living far away from home and rising every time I fell, I arrived at my latest achievement – the Best Student award.
I saw hope on my reflection in the shimmering trophy, and now, it grieves me to find that I have nowhere to go. Besides, another non-bumiputra friend – the Best Student from another MRSM, having achieved a CGPA of 4.0 in three semesters out of four – and who is outspoken and active in co-curricular activities, was also denied by the PSD, IPTA, Petronas etc.
It kills me when my friends came to seek my opinion on whether to go for IPTA, matriculation or Mara (they have multiple choices). Being non-bumiputras, we are not entitled to any Mara-related scholarship. Yet, the PSD still has a quota (only 20%) for non-bumiputras, which is not commensurate with the ratio of the Malaysian population.
Out of 2000 PSD scholarships, only roughly 400 is for non-bumiputras. Please bear in mind that Mara offers various other scholarships, with many benefiting through the SPC (skim pelajar cemerlang) programme that uses trial exam results – which only bumiputras are entitled to – and others through SPM result. All Malaysians are the backbone of this land, so why distinguish bumiputras from non-bumiputras?
My faith diminishes with time.
I don’t understand why after the years at MRSM, and being financially needy, active in co-curricular activities and excelling academically, I still need to seek clarification on why I am still lacking. I have seen people with combined household incomes of RM15,000 getting scholarships. This only makes the rich richer, while the poor stumble at the financial barrier.
MRSM makes no difference for the non-bumiputra. Will I ever see a colour-blind society in my lifetime? Please don’t punish me because of my skin colour, this is where I live and this is where my loyalties lie.
Tan Jun Yen
Ampang
……………………
And the following are comments taken from this blog:
http://malaysianpolitics.com/
It was heartbroken to hear and see so many talented Malaysians left the country for their future: singers, scholars, entrepreneurs and many more.
Every year, a lot of brilliant students are deprived a chance to obtain a scholarship to study overseas. Again, a lot of students could not pursue the course that they like in universities. Students who eagerly want to study are not given a chance; students who merely scraped through the exams are offered scholarships, competitive courses in universities, etc. Has our beloved Malaysia gone haywire?
Once, my friend sighed to me, a country that he has sang “tanah tumpahnya darahku…” for so many years did not offer him the course which he liked. On the other hand, a country which has no kinship with him offered him a course that he chose, together with a full scholarship and yearly allowance. So, tell me, what is happening?
Instead of always looking for external faults, why not change the perspective? Look internally instead. What has gone wrong with all the policies? Find out the fundamentals, find out the roots of each problem. Do not just mending issues at the surface or sweep under the mat. Be brave to face it, admit it and appreciate, recognise the talents that are around who are willingly committing for the better future of Malaysia.
#3 by pky103 on Saturday, 17 May 2008 - 2:32 pm
- This only shows how ‘low’ the BN government has stooped! *tsk tsk*
#4 by konek on Saturday, 17 May 2008 - 4:56 pm
True enough, Article 153 of the 1957 Federal Constitution does provide for the special position of Malays, natives of Sabah and Sarawak, and other marginalised groups.
However, what this special position means is open for debate.
Some believe it merely meant socio-economic position, one that changes dynamically and hence can be renegotiated.
Further, pre-independence documents – the Cobbold Commission Report, Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals and the Reid Commission Report – reveal that this position was meant to be temporary.
The “special right” of Malays was therefore understood not as a God-given mark, but recognition of socioeconomic status until such a time this could be elevated.
#5 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 17 May 2008 - 6:18 pm
Whether Waytha Moorthy could successfully obtain asylum or deported is a complex question decided at first instance not by any court but by Secretary of State of UK Home Office. The ISA though draconian in sense that it overrides due process of trial is however not dissimilar to other draconian preventive laws enforced in these western countries post 9-11 : so the nice question is whether Malaysian government’s invocation of ISA per se automatically raises presumption that the person politically persecuted (in sense of being subject to discriminatory police & judicial measure) is in real risk of serious harm making him eligible for refugee status under UN Convention or humanitarian protection. That has to be balanced against the disqualifying factors, that is: (1) the applicant for asylum has not committed or participated in a group a serious crime; (2) whether there is a serious reason to consider that the applicant constitutes a danger to the community or security of UK.
The Malaysian government’s case against Waytha Moorthy & rest of HINDRAF’s leaders is that they misrepresented and lied – about genocide in Malaysia and have committed the offence of sedition. Would UK Home Office give Waytha Moorthy benefit of doubt and dismiss Malaysian government’s allegations? The fact that he is party to a group that was responsible to bring a RM trillion frivolous legal suit against British Crown, knowing that it has no legal basis but just to draw international attention to the Malaysian situation, does not exactly help his cause on the issue of credibility. These are some of the vexed problems on this issue of whether he is entitled to political asylum.
#6 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 17 May 2008 - 9:04 pm
“However, he is not, at least in first instance, applying to a court but to the UK Home Office for an administrative/ministerial decision to be granted asylum.” Jeffery QC
You are partly right.
First, if you are applying for asylum make sure the country you are applying is a signatory to the 1951 U.N. Convention and the 1967 U.N. Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees – Malaysia is not among them which explains the ill-treatment meted by the government of Malaysia to refugees ( a subject for another day).
If Moorthy found out about the revocation of his passport whilst in the U.K. then obviously he has no travel document he could use to travel out of U.K. – unless he also holds an Indian passport (The Malaysian government does not allow its citizens to hold another passport from any other country. Some countries do. Indian nationals are allowed to hold U.K. passports). The natural thing for anyone in his predicament would do at that point is to apply for asylum to the Asylum Office (presumably part of the Home Office). We call this part of the process affirmative application for asylum. If his application is refused or if there are issues which have to be adjudicated it enters into the next stage. The case then goes before an immigration judge – part of the removal proceedings.
During the interview with the asylum officer, he needs to demonstrate that he has a convincing case. Some form filling and some newspaper cuttings from papers in Malaysia would do the job including correspondences if any from Malaysia’s Ministry of Home Affairs including threats to his life if these could be documented. If the asylum officer grants him political asylum, he will be issued with papers authorizing him to stay indefinitely and to work and within a year he should get his permanent resident status and later U.K. citizenship.
The issue you raise i.e. the fact that he is on record recently for having commenced public interest litigation against the U.K. government, is relevant. The other issue is the issue of his reported connection to the LTTE (deemed a terrorist organization by the U.S.). The asylum officer is not a lawyer, legally trained to adjudicate on the issues. He would be too happy to pass it on to the immigration judge to adjudicate on the issues.
When his case goes before the immigration judge as part of the removal proceedings, his case starts all over again. He has to demonstrate to the judge just like he did to the asylum officer, that he is a refugee who has a well-founded fear of persecution if he were to return to Malaysia based on one or more of the five statutory grounds i.e. race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, political opinion. He can take the case pro se or have a lawyer represent him but the burden of proof is on the applicant, and the standard of proof is higher than the civil standard – close to the criminal standard but not quite there.
Then don’t forget he could also rely on the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. He could try and make a case that the Malaysian government would use the ISA and have him thrown into jail if forced to return to Malaysia where he will be subject to mental torture and other degrading treatment for an indefinite number of years.
In my opinion, he has a good case for both. But he must remember it is discretionary and involves the balancing of equities by the immigration judge. The immigration judge’s decision is subject to appeal.
So there you go, Moorthy! Let me know where I can send you my bill!
#7 by anak sungeisiput on Sunday, 18 May 2008 - 12:33 am
Quote undergrad: “If their detention is unlawful under the Act, an application for habeas corpus should have done the trick and freed them – but it did not!”
The court proceedings were on legality of procedural issues, and not the gorunds of their detention. In fact the amendments to the ISA gives the Minister absolute power in that his decision is one that cannot be questioned, in violation of natural justice.
#8 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 18 May 2008 - 12:56 am
“The court proceedings were on legality of procedural issues, and not the gorunds of their detention.”
The ground for the detention under ISA is for being a “threat to national security” – which could mean almost anything! And they don’t have to reveal the evidence they have if any. These detainees are not even charged! They don’t know what crimes they have been alleged to have committed.
No right to judicial review of the Minister’s decision. Yes.
In violation of the law of natural justice? Sure.
All these are remedies available at common law. But they negotiate around that so to speak by making it statutory when P’ment passed the Act we now know as the Internal Security Act or ISA.
#9 by pjboy on Sunday, 18 May 2008 - 10:04 am
Where is the evidence to claim or charge the Hindraf detainees as terrorist?
#10 by negarawan on Sunday, 18 May 2008 - 11:21 pm
Syed Hamid, like all UMNO politicians, are dishonest and are very good in telling lies to the rakyat with a straight face. Your days are numbered!
#11 by undergrad2 on Monday, 19 May 2008 - 3:44 am
Hamid never did have a straight face to begin with!
#12 by anak sungeisiput on Monday, 19 May 2008 - 10:01 am
Mr. Waytha Morrthy has clearly refuted the the worm of lies of Hamid. See Malayskini report of 18/5. It is amazing the a senioor cabinet Minsiter can descend to such a disgraceful dishonesty of balatant lies. It now beg the question can the public have any confidence in the veracity of any Ministerial media statements. Lies and more lies. Hamid has no alternative but to resign from his Minsiterial position or be saked by the Abdullah Badawi, failing which the HINDRAF now has well documented proof to discredit the UMNO Minister internationally.
These pack of lies strteches to the very core of the unlawful detention of the H5 on trumped grounds of detention under ISA.
The future of Malaysia managed by liers is doomed to that of Mynmar and Zimbabwe where their currency now worthless.