by Loh Meng Kow
“Are the Malays that evil as to be accused of the horrific crime of ethnic cleansing? Are the Malays that ‘bad’ as to allow Chinese and Tamil Schools to continue to receive government funding – something that has no comparison anywhere else in the world?”—A statement by a Malay leader.
I shall deal only with the second question which concerns non-Malays since independence.
Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948 reads:
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
The colonial government in Malaya respected the rights of the parents to choose the kind of education they wanted for their children, and we had Chinese, Indian and Malay schools, in addition to the English schools in Malaya before Independence.
The three main races joined in the ‘fight’ for Independence of Malaya with the objective that the individual community and they together should enjoy as much, if not more, rights and autonomy after the independence than during colonial rule. Thus the availability of schools in the mother tongues of the choice of the parents should be a given. The Chinese and Indian schools should have as a matter of course, received full government funding as it provides to national schools. The comment ‘that it has no comparison anywhere else in the world should be correct in true spirit that the vernacular schools should not have been ‘marginalized’.
The sarcasm is brought about by the fact that succeeding leaders of UMNO considered it appropriate to place obstacles on the vernacular education. It was considered that this was not done elsewhere in the world because other country is blessed or cursed with its multiracial composition like we have here, and yet it was ruled on racial ground, where a slight majority in population could win the right to perpetual rule.
All citizens are equal before the law, including those with respect to Inland Revenue. All schools irrespective of the medium of instructions should have been entitled to receiving government funding. That should have been the responsibility of the government. But, not all Chinese or Indian schools in the country received full funding from the government. Many of the buildings and facilities of vernacular schools depended on donations, unlike those of the ‘national schools’ which are fully funded by government. The number of Chinese and Indian schools does not increase in keeping with population growth. It is the use of political might to place obstacles on the education of the minority groups which would not have happened anywhere in the world. Yes, that was something that has no comparison anywhere in the world.
Some 60,000 Malay students have enrolled in Chinese primary schools. These Malay parents, the silent minority, have indicated that Chinese schools are their choice. The Education Minister could not have missed this fact and he should realize that the surge of Malay students in Chinese schools would put pressure on existing facilities available to them. He pledged no closure of Chinese primary schools, as though that was the greatest gift for buying votes from the Chinese community. It would appear that the minister defies the universal declaration of human rights, and he considers his post in the ministry an extension of his office in UMNO.
The declaration of 1948, article 26 (a) provides also that higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. 59 years after the declaration, and 50 years after Independence, only 10% of the places in matriculation courses is available to non-Malays who formed 40% of the population. Even on quota basis, it was not equally accessible. It was not on the basis merit for admission at the Matriculation level. It was also not on the basis of merit when grades of the Matriculation equate that of STPM for university admission. Again like what the Malay leader said, that is something that has no comparison anywhere else in the world