Focus on Rights

Malaysia sees unity in diversity
Wednesday, 28th April, 2004, Kuala Lumpur - With all the contradictions that beset one in analyzing the Malaysian political and constitutional structures, one cannot but feel immediately astounded at the manner in which far sighted economic progress has defused what could have been a combustible nation of twenty three million people, divided by historic racial, religious and cultural legacies.

There was a time when, in the sixties, following rioting between the ethnic Malays (sixty percent), the Chinese, (thirty one percent), and Indians (eight percent), Malaysia was on the brink of becoming a potential Sri Lanka. The issues of language and religion, (Islam is the official religion), were poignantly similar as were, in a sense, the percentages of the minority and majority communities. However, swift albeit authoritarian measures by Malaysia's political leaders thereafter coupled with the amazing take off of the country's economy saved its people from what we are still struggling with, decades later.

Thus, we have the most recent eleventh general elections, just prior to Sri Lanka's own hastily precipitated parliamentary elections where the main Barisan Nasional party (led this time by Dr Mahathir Mohammed's successor, Abdullah Badawi), won a resounding ninety two percent of the popular vote. The fact that the main opposition was comprised of fundamentalist Moslem radicals who called for the implementation of the Islamic State including the banning of working women, the implementation of strict religious codes and the Hudud law, was a not insignificant factor in this process. The country can be justly proud of this rolling back of the radical Islamic tide that, spurred on by American arrogance in Iraq and Afghanistan, is increasingly being manifested in other countries in the region.

This is not to say, of course, that all is perfect in the country. During the more than two decades rule by Dr Mahathir Mohammed, Malaysia's most forthright Prime Minister who distinguished himself by his blunt and often scathing attacks on institutions of the first world, including the World Bank and the IMF as well as by his superb handling of the national economy, political and civil rights of its citizens were the first victims.

This time around, the emphasis on the balancing of civil and political rights as opposed to economic and social rights by the new administration appears to be much softer. There have been key concessions made by the current political leaders regarding the guaranteeing of the freedoms of the press and of speech and expression as well as the official acknowledgement that human rights institutions in general and those dealing with police abuse in particular ought to be strengthened. The country has, however, yet to sign the major international United Nations treaties on human rights.

From another perspective, civil action groups have also become revitalised. The Malaysian Bar, noted for its fierce independence in a system which has been strongly critiqued for its inability to ensure the independence and integrity of its judiciary, has been noticeably prominent on issues as diverse as police abuse and election malpractice.

Thus, we have the eleven thousand strong body calling for an independent commission of inquiry to probe allegations of electoral discrepancies during the recent elections. It has emphasised that the commission should have wide and adequate terms of reference, should be constituted of persons of independence and integrity and should carry out investigations openly and transparently. The lawyers also want the commission to make public its findings and recommendations once investigations are completed.

The Bar has pointed out that this was the only "acceptable way" to address concerns of importance and magnitude, given that the Elections Commission of Malaysia itself had been found culpable in some respects such as suddenly extending the hours of voting.

The setting up of the independent body was one of two resolutions passed at the Bar's annual general meeting recently while the second related to growing instances of police abuse, in particular the Kampung Medan incident that left about six dead and about 100 injured.

Then again, the functioning of the country's Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) has also led to criticism by national activists who, despite the far less liberal structures prevalent in Malaysia as opposed to Sri Lanka, are more activist in their work than our dormant civil society institutions. Suhakam has been referred to as a toothless tiger in the fight for human rights. The body has, for example, submitted three annual reports with recommendations but none of these have been debated in Parliament.

Yet again, despite the new premier appointing a Royal Commission to investigate into police abuse, its statement recently in the daily newspapers that it would hand over all its cases to the IGP to look into and then report back to the Commission, provoked a storm of protests by rights activists. This was spurred on by the fact that the Commission had reportedly taken the advice of the Prime Minister into question in so deciding to refer the investigations to the IGP in the first instance.

The very fact that these discussions are taking place with such fervour in the public forum however, augurs well for the country. Despite still considerable restraints on the functioning of the media, Malaysia's safeguards against political anarchy appears, in that sense, to be working far better than in Sri Lanka where media freedom is far more apparent and respect for civil liberties theoretically guaranteed internationally and domestically. There, we have the profoundest contradiction in terms but one on which we would do well to dwell on at this point in time.

Back to Columns