A call for the review of NEP is not a call for the review of Article 153 or attack on Malay special rights. This is because NEP cannot be equated with Article 153.
This argument on the differences between Article 153 and the NEP surfaced in Parliament on Wednesday, October 29th October 2008 in exchanges during the winding-up debate on the 2009 Budget involving two Ministers in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Abdullah and Senator Datuk Amirsham Aziz, as illustrated by the videos here.
#1 by All For The Road on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 1:52 pm
The BN goons are playing games with the review of the NEP and Article 131. They cannot even differentiate between one with the other. The Federal Constitution and the Social Contract protect the rights and equality of ALL Malaysians!
#2 by lakshy on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 2:03 pm
Way to go YB.
Didn’t see any of this in the local toilet(news) papers
#3 by ktteokt on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 2:07 pm
These \jellyfishes\ have been enjoying easy life for more than 3 decades have now become \dead fishes\, waiting only to be fed or be fed away to \predators\. Providing them with the NEP was like giving candy to kids. After being provided with candies for so many years, taking it away from them would definitely make them throw tantrums!!!!!!!
#4 by lakshy on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 2:09 pm
13% equity share for the Indians by 2020! Hmmm very noble. Did not know about it and never heard of any systems in place to help this get achieved. Anyone know?
#5 by Jan on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 2:12 pm
NEP is really an extract of Article 153 but modified and repackaged by UMNOputras to suit their agendas. If anybody start questioning they will say Don’t question the constitution or Social Contract Then they teach young Malay minds in BTN Classes that this NEP is their birth right and nobody can question it. So it evolved until today the NEP is so twisted and warped that even millionaire Malays can buy houses at a discount at the expense of poor non malays and nobody can question it.
#6 by lakshy on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 2:13 pm
How can they claim that the methodolgy is consitent when you have entities like PNB and such today which you didn’t have then? What about Felda?
And when the bumi shares in non-bumi companies are not counted?
#7 by Jan on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 2:18 pm
What about Felda?
——————–
Felda not listed so not counted. Did you know Felda was supposed to be listed but cancelled at the last minute? If listed bumiputra equity participation would have exceeded 30% Go figure.
#8 by bennylohstocks on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 3:00 pm
IT’S FOR SOME LEADERS..
#9 by hadi on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 3:36 pm
YB Kit, sometime no point arguing with an idiot as you will never win. The only way to put thing in perspective is to change the government.
#10 by Loh on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 3:37 pm
Jan is certainly correct. In fact if FELDA was taken into account, the government could not sell the idea that Malay had only 1.43 % in 1970. It should have been 18.9% in 1970 as what the government claimed the figure to be in 1990, and even today 2008.
NEP as implemented covered a wider area of injustice than Article 153 in discriminating against non-Malays. NEP had a sunset clause of 20 years from 1970 while Article 153 should have been reviewed in 1972, 15 years after it was in operation. Any fair minded person would agree that the sunset of NEP would do away with Article 153, had UMNO been sincere in upholding the ideals of NEP where no race is identified with jobs or professions.
Today when you see government servants other than teachers in schools, you are more likely to see Malays than anybody else. You see secretary generals of ministries, you see Malays. You see ministers, you see Malays. You see university lecturers, you see Malays. You see VCs of universities, you see Malays. You see bankers, you see Malays. You see heads of government institutions, you see Malays. People in all these places are educated, and yet the government still says that education opportunities should still be reserved for Malays.
Obviously the government says that if you can change the constitution, so be it. But if the government is still in UMNO hand, whatever is written in the constitution means nothing. Article 153 was supposed to safeguard Malay interest to have certain proportion reserved for Malays. Now Article 153 has the opposite effect for arguing that Malays should not have 100% kept for them. The only saving grace was natural process ensures that injustices somehow do not pay eventually. The 1997 financial crises showed that ill gotten gains had not the natural justice to last, and TDM had to sack Anwar to serve his sons interest.
Malaysians who knew long ago, since the advent of NEP that there was no future for the country under the unfair practices, and voted with their feet had a head start overseas. They are the welcomed members of their adopted society. Malaysians that have stayed behind are busy preparing their children to adopt overseas life, and those who remain, the parents are no different from the silver hair programmes participants. They have only one regret that the land they love and had high hopes turned out to be so hopeless not only in economic and social development but also that personal security are no longer ensured. They may take consolation that though the unfair policies might have enriched a few of the selected race, the people who voted for the continuation of the failed policies are suffering along with them in the environment, social and economic, as they live. The non-Malays Malaysians living like the silver hair participants are in their sunset years, whereas the Malays of the sunrise period are living in twilight days. If this is not to cut the nose to spite the face, we do not know what is.
#11 by sj on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 3:41 pm
So this CEO of Maybank is telling us Par value of Rm1 is consistent??? WTF man. If you have a computer who keeps giving you a 2 + 2 = 5 and it gives consistent result would you say that is right??? No stupid, it is worse than wrong, it is giving you consistently wrong results. If that is how they measure the percentage of equity??
#12 by Xiao He on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 3:44 pm
Mr Lim,
I would like to state here again that there’s never a mention of Malay “special rights” in Article 153.. There is only Malay “special positions” in that Article..
UMNO and BN always talked about this Malay “special rights”, but in reality there’s only “special positions”.. But any ordinary Malaysian will always thought there are these “special rights”, as UMNO and BN and even Pakatan always use this term of “special rights”..
As to whether there’s any difference between “special rights” and “special positions”, it’s for the judiaciary to interpret..
#13 by bclee on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:09 pm
Thanks YB Lim you did all Malaysian a good job.
Looking at current situation i think thier mindset are closed.
the only way out will be change the current government.
#14 by Jimm on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:18 pm
NEP is the umno tools to conned the Malays of their birth rights.
#15 by rider on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:22 pm
In this context ‘special rights’ is a milder expressed version of the actual word ‘begging’. And there’s no way they are going to think that begging is wrong. Pray and hope that Dec 9th will be a new beginning for the nation.
#16 by Mr Smith on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:24 pm
Article 153 highlights the special position of Malays, natives of Sabah and Sarawak, and the legitimate interests of other communities. However, it should also be read
Alongside that is Article 8, which guarantees equality before the law regardless of religion, race, descent, or place of birth. So why is the emphasis on Article 153 and not Article 8.
Because they are UMNO parasites. They will distort, misinterpret and abuse the entire constitution to their own advantage so that thay can plunder the country from the non-Malays and Malays alike by getting more for doing less or nothing.
They want the NEP to exist till eternity because they are parasites.
#17 by Jimm on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:27 pm
we, rakyat can only watch and blamed for all Malays failures in social economies aspects …
umno malays have been drawing all the Malays wealth and painted evil beliefs to the Malays about racism advancement.
since this country are solely claimed by the Malays as their and we are only ‘penumpang’ , who are the sore losers here ?
I took a piece of those map of Malaysia flyers from a hotel and read the summary of the caption.
To my surprise , the caption mentioned about this country original people are the Malays and native people .. as for the rest are immigrants.
strange ?? none of us bother about this caption ??
so , who are the evil ones that created so much hate in social economies, religion and race … ??? umno malays … the evil.
#18 by adobe3333 on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:43 pm
each time if i want to hear something stupid~come to this blog….
haHaha….
#19 by riversandlakes on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:46 pm
NEP has, along the years, been abused to enrich cronies of dictators and mini-Napoleons. We should constantly hammer home this point.
#20 by Kasim Amat on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 4:46 pm
The special rights accorded to the Malay is not a fresh idea and it has been the main founding principle of Malaysia, which is consistent with the notion of “Ketuanan Melayu” mentioned in the Article 153. The “social contract” give Chinese and Indian the rights to live in this country and it further prevents the Malays from repossessing from the Chinese and Indian the properties and profits which they derived from this country. This shows great tolerance adopted by the Malays towards other races. In return, other races should be thankful to the Malays and should show respect to the special rights entitled by the Malays. There should not be any doubt on the special rights given to the rightful owner of this land. The Malay had shared their land with other races and they have been prevented from repossessing their belongings from other races. The influx of other races before independence has resulted in majority of the Malay losing their lands and properties, there should be something there to safeguard the interest of Malay in order to maintain a balanced society. Since there is no policies whereby Chinese and Indian companies must share their wealth with the Malays, similarly, there should not be any doubt whether NEP should be removed. NEP represents a small part of the special rights which are rightfully entitled by the Malays and it should continue to be implemented without any deadline.
#21 by Loh on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 5:07 pm
The talk linking article 153 to granting citizenship to non-Malays is just a way to justify misdeeds, and confuse the issue. Whatever had been agreed to when Article 153 was drawn up should be honoured, and not be negotiated again now. What was agreed to in Article 153 included a provision for review of the article after 15 years in operation, to evaluate whether Malays would still require the protection under that article. It is not a special right to require protection. It would also be wrong to say that protection was a privilege.
When the provision for a review after 15 years had been removed, the rational for that article is subject to dispute. One wonders whether UMNO leaders prefer to have the people fully cognizance of the reason for the existence of that article, or does the ambiguity give them an opportunity to do political battle as champion of the race.
Countries having fever problems about the relationship among the difference races of the citizens are facing financial and other economic problems, and yet politicians in this country choose to magnify the problems between the relationships of different races to the extent of having them cast in stone, just to gain political advantage. Does Malaysia not exist on earth but on Mars?
#22 by yuking on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 5:52 pm
To own 30% or 50% or 100%?
You have to pay for it, not given to you, never free, unless you steal, rob and murder!
You don’t own wealth because you want it then lay sleeping and start threatening.
Go work for it and earn it – you can have more if you have the ability and energy.
I also want to be a billionaire!
#23 by yhsiew on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 6:18 pm
Older people said the special rights accorded to the Malays were only valid for a period of 15 years after Malaya gained independence from the British. Perhaps someone can shed some light on this.
#24 by oversee on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 6:23 pm
Who wants to stay home and serve here where meritocracy gives way to racial preference? I am a two-time graduate in University Malaya (masters and bachelors degree) and I used to hope that my children could enter a local university someday.
But with sliding university ranking and invisible barriers to keep non-malay students away, I have changed my mind. If I have the opportunity and money avails itself, I will send my children to overseas universities and ask them to emigrate there. We can rot and die here, but not the children.
This brain drain is not a problem to Umno at all. In fact, Umno is happy to see more and more of our talents leaving. Their power base will then be more secure.
All this started with Dr Mahathir. He believed that a half competent malay was better than a fully competent non-malay to serve the nation. This is clearly reflected in the progressive exclusion of non-malays from teaching profession academia, public service and other areas in the public sector as well GLCs since the early 1980s.
During Dr Mahathir’s Malaysia public service, thousands of qualified non-malays left the country for Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Such departure was view positively by Dr Mahathir – it meant that there were more positions available for malays. That short-term thinking has had dire consequences.
During the regional economic boom of 1990s, Malaysia prospered. There was plenty of money. Incompetence and corruption did not matter – a failure could always be rectified through bailout; high costs (e.g. Proton) could always be neutralised through subsidies (for export) or higher prices (for local consumption).
The scenario today is different. Competition is stiff. Newcomers such as Vietnam are breathing down our neck. Giants (India and China) have awakened and are marching unimpeded.
Malaysia needs to exploit all its resources to meet the global challenge. Ignoring 40% of its most valuable resource (e.g. human capital – Indians, Chinese and East Malaysians) is no way to meet the challenge.
Badawi needs to put in place a policy for exploiting the most valuable resource Malaysia has – its people, including the Indians, Chinese and others. Otherwise, this resource will move away to the competitors of Malaysia.
If deployed properly, the talents will be a source of competitive advantage. If not deployed appropriately, the talents will become a source of relative competitive disadvantage for Malaysia when they end up in other countries.
Majority of the non-malays work in multinational companies. With the rate our government and GLCs pissing off these MNCs! These MNCs are moving out of Malaysia.
Get real! Why majority of the non-malays don’t work inside GLCs? What do you think they would do when these MNCs are gone? Work in GLCs or emigrate outside Malaysia?
Some of my friends are always skeptical of Singapore.
Of course, Singapore intention is to protect their own interests (isn’t what a government is for) – talented people are very mobile nowadays. Singapore also encounters brain drain to the West (US, EU, Australia), so they need new talents to come in.
They prefer Malaysians, as there are cultural ties – easy to adapt to the environment (multiracialism, language, weather, etc), like their Mr Everest climbers.
But they also welcome white mans, Thais, Indians, and Hong Kong Chinese too etc. Just take a MRT ride or go to the housing estate – you see many foreigners (not the illegal immigrant type).
We have our own national interests and should protect it, but we have more outflow of talent than inflow. Just see how we treat the economist who had a different method of calculating the bumi ratio of the economy – how to attract talent?
Some of my Malaysian friends have been offered citizenship and a few have accepted……….so those talents not going back to Malaysia.
Singapore is following US policy, US still attracted the best brains from all over the world regardless of color, check out the composition of employment in term of nationality in Silicon Valley and Nasa, you will know why it succeed, America is land of immigrants.
Umno policy is that if Umno cannot have it no other Malaysian should have it. Umno prefers a Mat Salleh (because that is a temporary situation) to have it rather than any other non-Umno Malaysian to have it.
I have been advising my relatives and friends for a long time since years ago – to encourage their children to apply for a Singapore scholarship to attend a university in Singapore even it that means she/he has to serve Singapore for 10 years.
At least, that will provide him for the future. So what is 10 years! He is free to utilise his talent as he pleases after that 10 years. I have 3 nephews who got Singapore scholarships, then served the Singapore government and are now working and being successful in Hong Kong and America.
They are heads of multinational companies. They will never be allowed to succeed in Malaysia because there is identification of race with jobs. All jobs even slightly connected with the Umno government must have malay employees. That is the new NEP.
Malaysia pays peanuts and racially biased! That is why! Simple as that! Go to England, Australia and even the US hospitals and take a count of how many Malaysian born doctors are there, good doctors, man!
I traveled the world over and have lived in UK, Australia and the US. I have talked and met to these doctors. They not being unpatriotic, it is the Malaysia that is not doing the right thing!
(deleted)
Malaysia will continue to lose its talents not only to Singapore, and other countries but the Umno malays don’t give a damn. (deleted)
They hold the entrenched view that it is better for Malaysia to be another Zimbabwe or Nepal if being in the ranks of Singapore and Japan means malays losing out to the others.
Lim Keng Yaik said that Singapore was a small country, so it was easily to govern. In fact, it is not so. Because of its size, it lacks most of the factors of production that we learn in economics.
Land is scarce, and its domestic market is small. However, it recognises that what it has is its labours. No wonder that it is wooing all the brains from Malaysia, since Malaysia does not appreciate them.
Instead, Malaysia seems to be attracting the top criminals as shown by the sharp increase in crime rate. Malaysia with its oil, tin, rubber, oil palm etc, will forever not be able to beat a small country like Singapore because of its incompetent leaders and their cronies who are only interested in their own pockets.
Before the NEP, UM was one of the top universities in the world. After the NEP, it has become trash because it rejects the best minds. The only pro of NEP is if you are in Umno or a friend of theirs.
#25 by ktteokt on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 6:32 pm
Does Malaysia want to keep Malay Special Rights or does it want to preach EQUALITY as enshrined in the RUKUNEGARA? Only one can be picked as these two are at the far ends of the spectrum and there is NO WAY to compromise the two and allocate a meeting place somewhere in the middle.
#26 by ktteokt on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 6:34 pm
And how did the TUANs of KETUANAN MELAYU come about? It takes two to play the game. If no one admits inferiority, the other party cannot claim SUPERIORITY! All because MCA and Gerakan had compromised the position of the Chinese that these so called TUANS became so arrogant and superior. If the Chinese can stand united and refuse to be inferior, then how can UMNO ever become SUPERIOR??????
#27 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 6:47 pm
It is hard to understand how people can equate NEP with Article 153.
Lets sharpen the clarity of the differences between 1. Article 153 of the Federal Constitution (special position of Malays) 2. the NEP and 3. “Ketuanan” based on the alleged existence of “Social Contract”.
1. Article 153 is a constitutional provision. It is based on race and addresses reservation of quotas in respect of scholarships and other educational facilities or training privileges, positions in the federal public service and the granting of permits or licences for the operation of any trade or business for Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. (Quotas are not specified in Constitution and are left to the discretion of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as he deems “reasonable”).
To quote the Reid Commission that drafted Article 153 of our Federal Constitution, “our recommendations are made on the footing that the Malays should be assured that the present position will continue for a substantial period, but that in due course the present preferences should be reduced and should ultimately cease so that there should then be no discrimination between races or communities”.
2. There are two essential differences between NEP & article 153 above. The first is that whilst article 153 is an entrenched constitutional provision of uncertain duration – this is because its duration is left left to the discretion of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as he deems “reasonable” – in contrast, the NEP is a mere Outline Perspective Plan of finite duration (20 years reviewable) neither mentioned in nor based on or provided in the constitution. Secondly, in terms of objectives, the NEP, unlike article 153, is not based on special position of a particular race. Instead it is an Outline Perspective Plan based on affirmative action rationale transcending race. The NEP’s two pronged objective is known to all as “the eradication of poverty, irrespective of race and restructuring Malaysia society to reduce and eventually eliminate the identification of race with economic functions…”
3. The concept of “Ketuanan” based on “Social Contract” is on the other hand neither used nor found in either the Federal Constitution or the founding document of the NEP. It is a construct – or one may say an extrapolation from interpretation of article 153 by politicians in the time of Tun Dr Mahathir to justify article 153 and NEP as permanent feature.
The above merely seeks to show the conceptual differences
betwen article 153, NEP & Ketuanan based on alleged Social Contract”. It does not address the issue whether Article 153 or NEP is effective to achieve their purported objectives or the pros and cons of their continuance. No attempt has be made to examine the justification or lack thereof from historical or logical stand point of the Ketuanan concept based on alleged Social Contract” or whether there is really an existence of such a Social Contract beyond the mental construct of those who espouse it.
#28 by Loh on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 7:02 pm
///Older people said the special rights accorded to the Malays were only valid for a period of 15 years after Malaya gained independence from the British. Perhaps someone can shed some light on this.///–yhsiew
That was in the original Constitution of Malaya until it was amended in 1972 when the review provision was dropped. This can only be seen from the hard copy of the original text. Unfortunately that is not listed even in Wikipedia what has a lot of discussions on this article. The 1969 election campaign focused on the review for this article. The rest is history.
#29 by Xiao He on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 7:56 pm
well said, Jeffrey and Loh, thanks for the comments above..
to kasim amat: what u said is what typically said by umno/bn ppl, and has even become “standard textbook explanation” taught in school..
ktteokt, there is never any mention of equality in Rukun Negara..
#30 by yhsiew on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 8:04 pm
Sorry to digress.
Serbia expels Malaysian envoy after Kosovo recognition
KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) – Malaysia’s ambassador to Serbia has been asked to leave the country after the Southeast Asian country recognised Kosovo as an independent nation, a Malaysian Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Saturday…….ambassador Saw Ching Hong was told on Friday to leave Serbia within 48 hours.
@@http://asia.news.yahoo.com/081101/3/3reiw.html
#31 by Tonberry on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 8:11 pm
Those who support the imposition of quotas argue that there exists a “Social Contract” that allows them to do so. But while they mention this “Social Contract”, they fail to mention the terms of this “contract”, what it says, and who is bound by it.
In short, if I am not a party to that contract can I be bound by it? The contract was entered into by the Malays and the then immigrant Indians and Chinese; of course it is not really a written contract as much as a verbal contract and we all know that a verbal contract is not worth the paper it is written on.
Nevertheless, should Malaysian-born Indians and Chinese who have never even visited India and China be made to abide to a verbal “contract” made by their immigrant parents and/or grandparents? How long will this “contract” run? Will Indians and Chinese 1000 years from now still be made to abide to a “contract” made in 1957?
There should be a cut-off date. There must come a point of time when all Malaysians are regarded as equal. How can an Indonesian who migrated to this country a few years ago be regarded as Bumiputra when Chinese and Indians who come to this country in the 1400s are still second class citizens?
Yes, Article 153 accords Malays certain rights and privileges. But that same Article, and Article 8, do not allow imposing of quotas and permits which deny Indians and Chinese their rights in favour of the Malays. This, many people do not seem to understand.
We also seem to have forgotten that the New Economic Policy is a two-pronged attack. Other than reducing the gap between the different races it is also about reducing the gap between the rich and the poor. And this would mean regardless of race.
When we talk about the Malay farmers and fisherman. We do not seem to realize that there are Chinese farmers and fishermen as well. Poverty does not recognize race.
It is time that the “Social Contract” be reviewed. A new “Social Contract” must be drawn up that looks into the SOCIAL structure and not RACIAL structure that the present “Social Contract” addresses. Only then can it be called a “Social Contract”. If not, then let us call it what it really is, a “Racial Contract”.
The poverty level also needs to be reviewed. The new “hardcore” poverty level should be RM1200. Anyone earning below RM1200 per month should be considered poor. That would mean a high percentage of Malaysians. Then the NEW “Social Contract” should address the needs of those who live below the NEW poverty level of RM1200.
And the NEW “Social Contract” should no longer be a verbal contract but chiseled in stone. And it should be a contract to take care of Malays, Indians, Chinese, Portuguese, Ibans, Dayaks, etc. As long as you are poor, meaning earning below RM1200 then you are taken care of. That should be Malaysia’s NEW SOCIAL CONTRACT.
extracted from
http://colour-blind.org/wordpress/?p=833
(article is written by RPK)
#32 by PSM on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 9:10 pm
NEP…Never Ending Policy! That explains it all!
#33 by lofuji on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 10:01 pm
They purposely harp on this issue becos they have nothing else to harp on.It is shown very clearly after the GE12 that they have not only lost the support of non-bumis but also the bumis as well with their racist bigoted stance.Although bumis are 65% of population if we split them 3 ways (i.e.between PAS,PKR and UMNO) the racist buggers get only 21.67% of malay votes. Why allow them so much leeway to talk cock! Its time PKR and PAS show some colors to their electorate and assert their might or are they chicken as well?
BTW,am trying to access malaysia2day website for the past 2 days but cant get thro.Is it blocked again?
#34 by chengho on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 10:09 pm
we almost achieve total unity when we have a lots in common. we went to the same school ,speak the same language bahasa malaysia ,infusion of food ,play the same sport then until political party play communal ploy . Indian go to tamil school , chinese go to chinese school ,malay go to national school this is the very basic ingredient from at tender age we mixed and grown up together BUT not now.
The malay is very sensitive when we talk about 153 , the chinese is very sensitive when we talk about school ,language and chinese culture and the Indian sensitive with almost everything inc temple.
let’s go to very basic of democratic principal Majority Rule and respect to minority interest ,together we can make Malaysia a great nation .
#35 by Tonberry on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 10:32 pm
http://mt.m2day.org/2008/
Bookmark it into your favourite folder.
Amirsham Aziz deserved to be screwed by Uncle Kit. He should just go back to the Senate as advised by Uncle Kit.
#36 by aje on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 11:00 pm
If the bumis want 30% of the equity in the economy which I think is fair then the Chinese and Indians must be allowed 30% participation in civil service.Put in more non malays in education service,police force,military,custom,immigration and the lists go on.Then Malaysia will be a truly multi racial and united nation.Will it happen?
#37 by katdog on Saturday, 1 November 2008 - 11:14 pm
Actually, if i am not mistaken NEP appears to contradict article 8 of our constitution.
Article 8 states that there shall be no form of discrimination pertaining to property and business/trade unless EXPRESSLY authorized in the constitution. And Article 153 clearly does NOT authorize the broad discriminatory policies carried out under the NEP.
Article 12 states that there shall be no discrimination regarding the admission of students to any PUBLIC educational institution. Gee… isn’t UiTM a public university? Then how can they disallow admission based on race? This is clearly a violation of Article 12.
The reason why the UMNOputra’s are so eager to wave the VERBAL Social Contract around rather than the WRITTEN Constitution of Malaysia is because our constitution actually has many articles that clearly prevents the UMNOputras from carrying out their racist policies.
Our founding father’s wisely provided many checks and balances in our constitution to prevent bigots exactly like the UMNOputras from hijacking the country for their own greed. That is why the UMNOputra’s wishes to teach the Social Contract in schools instead of the Constitution of Malaysia.
#38 by kok on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 12:28 am
The special position of the malays as prescribed under Article 153 of the Constitution is limited in scope to only the reservation of reasonable quotas in these 3 sectors: public services, educational places and business licenses.
Hence, the present rampant racial discriminations practiced on almost every facet of our national life are mostly violations of the Constitution. Examples of these violations are:
(a) Racial discrimination in the appointment and promotion of employees in publicly funded bodies, resulting in these becoming almost mono raced bodies. These bodies include: the police, civil service, army and various semi and quasi government agencies.
(b) Imposition of compulsory share quota for malays in non-malay companies.
(c) Imposition of compulsory price discounts and quotas in favour of malays in housing projects.
(d) Completely lop sided allocation of scholarships and seats of learning in clearly unreasonable proportions that reflect racial discriminations.
(e) Blanket barring of non-malays to publicly funded academic institutions (that should include the Mara).
(f) Barring of non-malays from tenders and contracts controlled indirectly or directly by the government.
Our Constitution provides for only one class of citizenship and all citizens are equal before the law.
The presence of Article 153 does not alter this fact, as it is meant only to protect the malays from being “squeezed” by other races by allowing the reservation of reasonable quotas on certain sectors of national life.
However, this Constitution has now been hijacked through decades of hegemony of political power by the ruling party to result in the virtual monopoly of the public sector by a single race.
The ensuing racism, corruption and corrosion of integrity of our democratic institutions have brought serious retrogression to our nation building process in terms of national unity, morality, discipline and competitiveness of our people.
#39 by imranj78 on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 12:44 am
Those who think that a change in government to a PR-led government would result in any major change in the NEP should review their position. Do you think that PAS as a PR member would easily allow such changes when they clearly know they will loose a lot of ground support? This similar argument applies to some segments in PKR.
In my view, the implementation of NEP, special rights etc does not hinge primarily on which side leads the fed government. At the end of the day it depends on the mentality of our people and the distribution of wealth in the country. For as long as there is a perceived view that the wealth of the country lies with the minority group, there will always be some pressure on the government of the day to address this issue to balance wealth distribution.
Absence of any strategy to do so would be detrimental to the stability of the country in the long run. Yes if we want to dismantle NEP thats fine, but how do we address the wealth distribution issue? You cant just say stop NEP and stop all current strategies put in place to address wealth distribution issues but then don’t put in place any alternative mechanisms to address the same wealth distribution issues. Thats not only ignorant, but also reflects poor thought on the matter.
#40 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 4:28 am
“Only then can it be called a “Social Contract”. If not, then let us call it what it really is, a “Racial Contract”.
The truth is there is neither a racial contract nor a social contract. It is a figment of the imagination of people on both sides of the political divide to justify their political ideologies.
#41 by kyototan on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 4:42 am
The UMNO which had been lead, used and cheat the Malay by a MAMAK for over twenty do not seem to be represent the Malayaian Malay anymore. The UMNO putra are all like drug addict is depending on this so call NEP drug for survival. They had been so attach, clinch and depand on this NEP drug and if you try to deprive them from it they will start to get uncontrol. Just like any drug addict they will just rob, cheat, abuse and all sort of nosense just to clinch to it. They can even destroy the nation just for they own habit. A nation cannot be rule by this addict. AS a truly Malaysian stop the rot, stop the NEP drug abuse
#42 by Bigjoe on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 9:07 am
A Senator that acts like he is still a banker, what is the point of making him a politician if he is going to claim ignorance on public issues? If after decades of privilleges and achieving great success, the guys they put in charge is going to run away from responsibilities, taking charge and lead, what hope is there the lies will EVER go away.
Tan Siew Sin and Tunku got it right, so long as the NEP and ‘special right’ is around, the Malays will always be behind, some may do well on the backs of many others but its a comdemnation to mediocrity of an entire race…
#43 by homeblogger on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 9:13 am
The NEP will not be dismantled. It is a goldmine for UMNOputras. But I do want to thank Uncle Kit for standing up for the rights of us non-Bumis. Without people like you, we would not have the check and balance so desperately needed.
#44 by khairi ali on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 9:24 am
It just didnt make sense. The birthdate of NEP itself showed that a new added qualities of social contract is being formalised. The people involved in the NEP formulae, must have considered all factors, including the 153.
Well, looking at the rate things are going, it doesnt mean that a new added qualities of social contract, whether NEP or newly term understanding couldnt be achieve. Now, the way or manner of this new social contract to be formulated is very important and crucial. Mei 13 tells all. We Malaysians must be very very careful in supporting any ideas or deals.
#45 by swipenter on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 9:44 am
Article 153, NEP and Ketuanan Melayu are just being used as justifications as tools for enrichment for the political elites and those in the loop.
Simultaneously 153, NEP and Ketuanan Melayu are also used for the consumption for the malays to make them feel good as master of their own destination and strangely also to make them feel insecured about themselves. There lies the power of Umnoputras over the malays; make them feel good but also make them feel that they cannot do without Umno to protect them whilst insidiously robbing them of their wealth and strength to survive on their own.
If the original lofty and idealistic twin aims of the NEP was carried out to the letter we wont be facing such huge political,racial,religious and wealth divide. We must return to the original aim to eradicate poverty and help those who need help to excel; to a policy based on needs basis and not on race basis or want basis.
Now we are seeing how confused are malaysians regarding special rights and privileges and special positions; it seems that these 3 things are one and the same thing to many malaysians ,in actual fact there are not! Umno deliberately confused malaysians on these 3 separate issues by linking them as one and the same thing.
#46 by passerby on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 9:56 am
Kasim Amat,
Don’t bullsh!t yourself. There were no social contract and that was already clarified by the professor Ungku Aziz. Show us where the founding fathers saying that. Independence was negotiated by the three major races and the agreement has to reflect all the races already present at that time. Otherwise why should they go to negotiate for independence so that you can discriminate against us, does it make any sense?
Let say for argument sake if we were to form a joint-venture company, will you sign an agreement totally against you? No, I don’t think so. I don’t think any agreement that is so one-sided will be valid.
[deleted]
We have no problem if you want to help the poor and the disadvantage but not in the manner as it is.
#47 by monsterball on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 9:59 am
I have been hearing this argument so many times…and it is always….Lim Kit Siang….defending the rights of other races.
I wonder why PAS and keDAILan guys and gals ….so quiet?
Maybe they know Lim can handle all those UMNO thick skinned beggars…all by himself.
#48 by HJ Angus on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 10:17 am
The NEP may have had noble intentions but the political elites hijacked the plan to simply enrich themselves.
Now the gravy train is so heavy and going so fast that the only way to stop the train is to derail it.
We can do that and start again only if the BN government is kicked out of office.
Now the NEP can stand for “Never Ending Parasites” or “Never Ending Piratisation”.
Here is one of the many article I have written on the NEP
http://malaysiawatch.blogspot.com/2006/04/widening-income-gap-no-surprises-with.html
#49 by Kasim Amat on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 11:41 am
Salam sejahtera all bloggers,
I guess no one will ever dispute the fact that the Malay is the only rightful owner of this land. If NEP is removed, Malaysia should change the Constitutions to allow the Malay to repossess their belongings from non-Malay and all the wealth made by the non-Malay in this country should be fairly shared with the Malay.
#50 by Ling Mazen on Sunday, 2 November 2008 - 12:13 pm
Kasim Amad,you are an arrogant ignoramus and an obvious ninny!