An Equal Malaysia

In Malaysia, last Saturday may have been one of the most anticipated weekends ever. The Premier of the Federation of Malaysia, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak unveiled a slew of economic measures targeting the Bumiputra (indigenous population of Malaysia encompassing the Malay race and the aborigines) under the Bumiputra Economic Empowerment Plan.

This is widely seen as a continuance of affirmative action scoping on a particular group in Malaysia, which is in this case, the Bumiputra group. Whilst this has been received with inundating support from various quarters, particularly the Malay-business groups (with PERKASA, a Malay supremacist group demanding even more up to RM 1.4 trillion of Bumiputra Economic measures), many politicians and public figures have been quite critical of such announcement.

Bumiputra Economic Plan; Good or Bad?

In Malaysia, a country which boasts with a multiracial community (I know it’s quite cliché), inclusiveness of public policy which favours all the races is significantly needed. Any initiative that only puts emphasis to the development of only one race can be detrimental to the growth of the nation, in macro view. In the name of affirmative action, the Bumiputra group has been aided by the Government with the intention to elevate the economic status of the community. But, by saying this, has all the other races in Malaysia, the Indians, the Chinese, the Punjabis, etc, to name a few, been left out?

The special focus on the Bumiputra community has been closely linked with the so-called “social contract” (which in my opinion is non-existence). To the uninitiated, the Social Contract is usually referred to Articles 14-18, 152, 153 of the Malaysian Constitution. This social contract is said to be “verbally” agreed by the founding fathers and is based on “quid pro quo” basis. It was purportedly agreed that in return for the Malays’ consent in awarding citizenship to the new group of other races by the concept of “jus soli” rather than “jus sanguinis”, the non-Malays agree that special positions or “benefits” as mentioned in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution shall be given to the predominant Malays. But history aside, the idea of existence of this “social contract” is widely debated. In my perception, any contract which is made verbally, without any documentation, does not hold water. But, even if it exists, is the social contract still relevant?

Article 153?

This particular article in the Federal Constitution elaborates about the special positions reserved for the Bumiputras. These special positions include having quota reservations for the Bumiputras in education, public service employment, public scholarships and issuance of governmental permits and tenders. While I believe in equality regardless of skin complexion, I believe the Reid Commission (which drafted the Constitution) had noted the need of such constitutional provision. In 1957, when Malaya gained its independence, the polarization amongst the various races is inevitable. The blame for such polarization is usually put on the colonial masters for their divide-and-rule approach in administering Malaya prior to independence. Thus, it is understandable that in order to convince the Malays on the need for “accepting the new family members mainly from mainland India and China”. To put it succinctly, our ancestors made a trade which lasts up to now.

This Article 153 has been used by many, namely the Malay-supremacist groups to indicate that socio-economic benefits for the Bumiputras need to be increased more extensively. But, one has to remember…when Lord Reid and his team of five drafted the Constitution, this particular Article is given duration of merely 15 years that is up to 1972. Supposedly, in 1972, the bicameral Parliament should have made a review, whether to retain or to repeal the Article, This constitutional provision was never meant to stay indefinitely. This review, however never materialised as in the aftermath of the 1969 racial riot, a ruling was made that any discussion or debate relating to the special positions of the Bumiputras are strictly prohibited. One could now only wonder what could have happened if the review was really made in 1972.

As a further matter, the introduction of the New Economic Policy in 1971 has made the expansion of affirmative action more possible. More and more plans and benefits were introduced for the Bumiputras, and these include issuance of Approved Permits to import foreign-made automobiles, government tenders for supply and service below RM 100,000, government tenders on works below RM 50,000 and much more.

Many politicians have tried and will continuously defend these actions under the name of “affirmative actions” or “positive discrimination”. For them, the Bumiputras constitute of almost 80% of the household and priority should be given to improve their lifestyle. Plus, they might even argue that the Government’s aim to achieve 30% of equity ownership among the Bumiputras is yet to be attained and thus, such affirmative actions should resume.

What these public figures fail to understand is, there are also members of the other races that fall in the low-income group and suffers from poverty. Since 1971, Bumiputras percentage of equity ownership has increased, but why are many Bumiputras out there, still suffering from low-income plague. Affirmative actions have been implemented in many other countries apart from Malaysia. One good example is South Africa. After the election in 1994 which was won by the blacks-majority African National Congress for the first time, affirmative actions were introduced to elevate the economic status of the blacks. Fast forward, now after 19 years, achievements of such affirmative actions are very much doubted. Yet, one can be very certain to highlight whilst not many blacks have benefitted from the actions, the elite blacks have surely made their bucks.

This also happens in Malaysia where it is widely argued that the Malay elites have benefitted a lot from the affirmative actions. While it may be true that many other poor Malays have now escape poverty and attain high percentage of literacy, the number is still relatively small. It is evident that affirmative actions in Malaysia only favoured a small percentage of Bumiputras.

To summarize, what Malaysia NEEDS is an economy distribution that promotes inclusiveness. Ruling leaders should understand that words of unity alone are unwanted.

•   Bring in meritocracy into administration
•  award public scholarships to anyone with excellent grades regardless of race,
•  entrance to public universities should be made equal, any preference of a particular race must be eliminated
• Government tenders and those related government-owned companies should be opened to everyone, without exception
• Housing discount which is now only entitled for the Bumiputras should be stopped (perhaps, such discount can be given to people of low-income group; this will certainly help everyone)
• Abolish the requirement that 30% of unit under new housing projects should be sold to the Bumiputras
•  Matriculation programme seats should be given on merit, not according to quota
•  And many more….

If a major overhaul is done in creating a just economy distribution to all the races, Malaysia definitely will achieve better aspirations.

P/S: Please stop talking about the “Malay rights (hak kaum Melayu)” or the “Malay Supremacy (Ketuanan Melayu), they never existed in the Constitution and were never mentioned by the founding fathers.

“Well done is better than well said"