This is the second part of the Malaysiakini interview with Waythamoorthy. Read the first part here.

Perhaps someone should verify/clarify about Waytha not having a passport.

Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leader P Waythamoorthy, who has been living in Britain since 2007 under political asylum, is all for returning home, regardless of the consequences that may await.

However, he said the Malaysian government has not responded to his request for a fresh passport.

In the first part of the interview held in London, Waythamoorthy had talked about the civil suit and Nov 25 rally in 2007 that placed Hindraf’s imprint on Malaysia’s human rights activism map.

In the concluding part, he talks about Hindraf came into existence and comments on current issues affecting the movement and its leaders. Edited excerpts follow.

Malaysiakini: Do you intend to return home?

Waythamoorthy: Yes. I would have come back after the five Hindraf activists were detained on Dec 13, 2007. But I rejected the idea because I would have been arrested as well.

On Dec 14, 2007, the day after the five were detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA), my brother sent a message through my sister that I should not come back until they are released. He suggested that I should instead promote the Hindraf cause worldwide.

I knew then that, from a ordinary social activist organisation, Hindraf had grown into a major movement. I knew that, if I were arrested, the cause would be lost and the detainees would be forgotten.

When the Hindraf 5 were released, I decided to return home. I have asked the government to issue me a fresh passport, but it has not responded to date. I am prepared to face the consequences, including detention under the ISA.

I have told my supporters not to campaign for my release if I am detained. But it appears that the Umno-led government does not want me to return.

Why risk your liberty when you can lead a comfortable life in Britain?

I have never feared for my safety. Of course I can live a comfortable life in Britain after being granted political asylum. But I live by my conscience. I have a mission in life.

My mission will never be complete until the Malaysian government grants the rights that Indian Malaysians deserve. I have been stopped from completing what I started. So I have to come home to complete it.

How did Hindraf come into existence?

It surfaced on the human rights landscape after the case of alleged Muslim convert M Moorthy in December 2005. Until then I was just involved an ordinary member of a social organisation in Seremban.

I did not want to get involved in the Moorthy case at first, but received a call from Ramachandran Meyappan (Ramaji) who convinced me that Moorthy (right) was not a convert. He said the Muslim authorities had made a wrongful claim over his body.

I suggested that Ramaji should form a coalition of Indian and Hindu based non-government organisations as an umbrella body to take up the issue, and he agreed to initiate this. I attended the meeting, but the Malaysia Hindu Sangam called on everyone to remain calm pending a court decision on the issue.

I told Ramaji to regroup the leaders to take up the matter up at a higher level. Representatives of some 20 organisations attended the second meeting held in Uthayakumar’s office, after the court decision. Ten others did not attend but assured us of their support for any decision adopted.

I was unanimously elected as the leader of the coalition of organisations. Everyone accepted Ramaji’s proposal to name it the Hindu Rights Action Force.

At the second meeting, Hindraf was formally endorsed. I was appointed chairperson. On Jan 11, 2006, I prepared a memorandum to be presented to the Agong.

It was to be the first time non-Muslims would knock at the gates of Istana Negara to seek protection of their right to religious freedom. But only some 10 representatives turned up although Hindraf had 30 affiliates.

The next day, none of the organisations attended a meeting. Everybody avoided Hindraf because they feared the ISA. The coalition collapsed, but R Mohan – the treasurer – remained on board with me.

Next, Hindraf began to take up issues especially pertaining to temple demolitions and criminal charges against those who tried to stop demolitions.

In early February 2006, Uthayakumar, who was managing the Policewatch NGO, joined me as the legal adviser of Hindraf. He used the Policewatch website to post all my activities on behalf of Hindraf.

He helped me to manage all the publicity and press coverage as I was inexperienced and new to the human rights activities.

Uthayakumar then amalgamated his work with mine. I submitted an application to register Hindraf as legal entity in October 2007.

How have you managed to run the movement from a distance? Who are the Hindraf supporters?

About 10 hardcore supporters had been helping me when Hindraf was a minor organisation. When (police chief) Musa Hassan announced that there was going to be a second round of ISA arrests, I immediately instructed these supporters to disband. It wa my duty to protect them.

With RS Thanenthiran as the next in line on the ground, I set up a new 10-member national coordination team, most of whom I had not met before. All 10 were dedicated to the cause and willing to take instructions.

Within days we had hundreds of volunteers approaching us in all states to assist in any way possible. Most of them were grassroots people, who are simple laymen and victims of the country’s unjust system.

I spoke to them over the phone daily and set up state level coordination teams to organise them to carry out activities and campaigns. This is how the Makkal Sakti or people power proved to be a potent force for change.

It is their power, not Hindraf or me, which has triggered the change in the Malaysian political landscape. Hindraf and I were only the tools.

The government of Najib Abdul Razak released the Hindraf 5 because he feared the long-term effects of Makkal Sakti. The federal government’s fear of Makkal Sakti was the root cause as to why the police special branch infiltrated Hindraf to cause a split.

Will this cause the movement to collapse?

As I said Hindraf is just a tool. The movement may appear split. The (government) can confuse the people with their propaganda and by creating sub-groups. But this will not last long.

I am not worried about the sub-groups. I would prefer them to grow because that would create a false picture on the ground which may satisfy the government.

After their release, the Hindraf 5 seem have gone in different directions. Why?

It’s not surprising given that firstly, they were not Hindraf leaders and were not together from Day One. Manoharan and Kengadharan are lawyers acting for me and Uthayakumar in suits filed by Hindraf.

The cases include temple demolitions and police arrests. Their contributions to Hindraf were specifically pertained to legal work. Uthayakumar (right) advises me on many legal issues.

I didn’t know T Vasanthakumar (left) and Ganabatirau until I met them in early October 2007.

Vasanthakumar said he could do the groundwork and help to organise events. He was involved in printing our leaflets and coordinating road shows. We accepted Vasanthakumar because we were desperate for manpower to carry out our work.

I knew Ganabatirau (carrying daughter in photo) as a lawyer and an aspiring DAP politician at the time. Uthayakumar suggested that speaking at Hindraf road shows would be an ideal launch-pad for Ganabatirau in the political arena. So he was tasked by Uthayakumar to speak on Budget 2008 at Hindraf forums.

It was not a surprise that, after their release from ISA, they have their own agenda, ambitions, motives and directions. I don’t blame them. It’s their right to set their own direction. I acknowledge that they have contributed in their own way to Hindraf prior to their arrest.

Uthayakumar has formed a political party – the Human Rights Party. Any comment on this?

He told me that, during his 514 days in Kamunting, he had given serious thought to becoming a political activist to empower the Indian community politically.

He felt that being marginal voters in majority constituencies was not sufficient for Indians to be politically vibrant and powerful. So he has formulated an Indian political empowerment plan.

He believes he can succeed. If he wants to do that, it’s entirely his right. He should be allowed to do that. My brother and I did not have any difference of opinion on the formation of HRP.

We have different directions and approaches to achieving our objectives. We are both right in our own direction.

Thanenthiran has formed Malaysian Makkal Sakti Party. He claimed he had received approval signals from you – is this true?

Signals? I don’t understand what he meant by signals. I never talked to anyone about forming a political party. I knew about Thanenthiran’s party much later . . . after it was formed.

If Thanenthiran (right) wants to form a political party, it is his constitutional right. If he wants to lead his group of supporters and sympathisers with a political party, it is his right. I respect it.

Hindraf has been criticised of being communal…

Hindraf is a communal-based organisation. But we are not the only one.

What about Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia, Pekida, Tamil Youth Bell Club and Chinese clan associations? Why Hindraf is being singled out as communal? It’s unfair.

I would like to point out that in other parts of the world, the onus is on the majority community to protect and safeguard the minorities. But in Malaysia, the majority exploits and oppresses the minorities.

So here Hindraf has no choice. We are minority fighting for our own cause. No one wants to fight for Indians. Many Malays and Chinese knew about the Indian plight, but are not coming forward to help us. Why can’t Hindraf fight for Indians?

Some say Hindraf will die a natural death. What do you say?

I don’t agree because we are fighting a just cause. So long there is a demand to fight for a marginalised community, Hindraf will exist. We will only die out when all communities are treated equally.

What about the allegation that Hindraf leaders have misappropriated donations from the public?

That is an allegation propagated by the police special branch and their cohorts. The reason is simple – to create doubt about the morality of those leading Hindraf.

The best way to do that is use those who were at some point with Hindraf to tarnish the image. The police should allow us to obtain copies of the Hindraf enterprise account that was opened to collect funds to raise bail for those arrested.

Only then will the truth be revealed and we will know why the alleged collection was hiked up to RM700,000 and then into millions.