Malaysian Federal Constitution of 1957 begins with a social contract between the Malays and the Chinese-Indians immigrants, who were brought to Malaya (currently acknowledged as Malaysia) as British labours.
Among the core foundations of the constitution as in Article 153, grants the Supreme Ruler (King of Malaysia) as responsible to “safeguarding the special position of the Malays and the indigenous communities” as for instance, establishing quotas for entry into the civil service, public scholarships, public education, permits and licences as well as some other special provisions.
The article is primarily seen to protect the Malays and the indigenous peoples from being overwhelmed by the immigrants. In the years after independence in 1957, the Chinese and Indians were generally rich urban dwellers, whilst the Malays and the indigenous, were mostly poor traditional farmers or manual labourers.
While Article 3 of the Constitution declares that Islam is the religion of the Federation. Nevertheless, the practice of other religions among the immigrants is permitted, but the Constitution restricts the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among Muslims excepts the teaching of Islam.
Article 152 states that the national language is the Malay language. In relation to other languages, the Constitution provides that anyone is free to teach, learn or use any other languages, except for official purposes.
All of the above are considered as the core ‘social contracts’ agreed upon between the founding fathers of Malaysia and the immigrant communities.
The agreement and the consent of the social contract then authorized the immigrants to be accepted as Malaysian citizens or otherwise the immigrants will have to be sent back to their homeland.
Any action considered to be in breach of the social contracts or the Constitution provisions will retain the status quo of each party, where the Malays and the indigenous remain in their homeland, while the immigrants will be illegible to stay in Malaysia.
With regards to the Constitution that provisioned some other special attention to the Malays as well as the indigenous community, the UN-ICERD is seen to hold significant elements that will jeopardise the social contracts.
If China is considered as the motherland of the Chinese, and India as the motherland of the Indians, then on the similar notion, the immigrants have to accept that Malaysia is the motherland of the Malays. The Malays deserved their rights upon the special provisions of the Constitution.
ICERD merely highlights equality, but it fails to understand that equality is not fairness and discriminatory.
How could equality be applied on two parties when one of them is handicapped? The majority of the Malays and the indigenous are legitimately the owner of the state but yet majority of them are living in poverty, while the Chinese and Indians are the riches that controlled the economy.
Fairness acknowledges differences, while contradictorily, equality of ICERD equalised differences.
A fair government will have to give priority to the have-nots and weak folks rather than the riches and the economics powerful society. This is part of the differences that cannot be treated equally.
The so call ‘new government’ of Pakatan Harapan is significantly under the controlled of the non-Malays as well as the non-Muslims, as referred to the numbers of parliament seats that they had won during the May General Election. For such fundament, the Malays see that the are aptitudes where ICERD would be abused to jeopardise the social contracts.
Even within the practices of affirmative policy, the Malays and the indigenous are significantly being left behind economically. The ratification of ICERD would further turn the situation from bad to worst.
The ‘new government’ is inevitably to be stringently warned and informed that the people are viciously rejecting ICERD, absolutely once and for all. They also demand the government to render an assurance through parliament declaration and to document that ICERD is a blunder that the people rigorously accented to be turn down.
Those are the basic rationales, why the 812 (December 8th) Anti-ICERD rally, which is expected to assemble a million participants, is uttermost imperative to combat ICERD. This mass rally will also be witnessed by at least 25 international media all over the globe.