Posts Tagged ‘discrimination’

What actually happened during the 1969 tragedy

May 14th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


May 11, 07 1:11pm
The series of events surrounding the ‘May 13′ riot has been documented by Dr Kua Kia Soong in his latest book May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969 which will be launched on Sunday in conjunction with the 38th anniversary of the tragedy.
This compilation, based on various sets of foreign dispatches and confidential reports at the time – which were declassified recently and made available at the Public Records Office in London – has been dubbed as the first credible account on the incident.
“The real circumstances surrounding the worst racial riot in the history of Malaysia have so far not been made available to the Malaysian public. The official version is fraught with contradictions and inadequacies to which few pay credence,” Kua wrote in the book.
Below are excerpts and summary of the chronology of events based on the declassified documents taken from Kua’s book:
May 10:
The ruling Alliance Party suffered a major setback in the general election although it had managed to retain a simple parliamentary majority. They had lost Penang to the Gerakan Party; Kelantan to the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party while Perak and Selangor were at the brink of falling into the opposition’s hands.
May 11 and May 12:
On both nights, the opposition celebrated their victory. A large Gerakan procession was held to welcome the left-wing Gerakan leader V David back from winning the federal seat in Penang.
May 13:
The MCA which had suffered badly at the polls, announced that it would withdraw from the cabinet while remaining within the Alliance.
A dispatch from a foreign correspondent showed it is evident that there was a plan for youths mobilised by Umno elements to assemble at then Selangor menteri besar Harun Idris’ residence in the late afternoon. A retaliatory march had been planned although police permission was withheld.
When people were still assembling for the parade, trouble broke out in the nearby Malay section of Kampung Baru, where two Chinese lorries were burnt. The ensuing carnage at Kampung Baru and Batu Road quickly spread elsewhere in Kuala Lumpur.
The foreign correspondent noted the curfew that was imposed was not fairly applied to all.
“In the side streets off Jalan Hale, I could see bands of Malay youths armed with parangs and sharpened bamboo spears assembled in full view of troops posted at road junctions. Meanwhile, at Batu Road, a number of foreign correspondents saw members of the Royal Malay Regiment firing into Chinese shophouses for no apparent reason.”
Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman immediately attributed the violence as triggered off by the behaviour of opposition supporters after the election result announcement while his deputy Tun Abdul Razak pinned the blame on the communists.
May 14:
The riots continued but on a smaller scale. The curfew was only lifted in staggered hours in various districts to allow people to buy food. The police called out all possible reserves and handed over the northern part of the city to the army.
Police put casualties for the previous night incident at 44 killed and about 150 injured. Another dispatch showed the casualties were mainly Chinese as it stated that out of 77 corpses in the morgue of the General Hospital on May 14, at least 60 were Chinese.
The government’s attempts to blame the communists for the riots were however not taken seriously by the officials at the British High Commission (BHC) who could see that the Tunku was not prepared to blame his own people for the riots, nor was he going to blame it on the Chinese “as a whole”.
May 15:
The King proclaimed a state of emergency. The National Operations Council headed by Tun Razak was formed. Tun Razak was still responsible to the Tunku, but all the powers under Emergency Regulations were vested in him.
The curfew had been lifted temporarily in Kuala Lumpur that morning but the situation had rapidly worsened and more sporadic fighting had broken out. Curfews were re-imposed but food was very short.
The local press was suspended until censorship regulations could be drawn up but no attempt was made to supervise reports sent out by foreign correspondents.
May 16:
The situation was still tense in Selangor with cars and houses being burned and fatalities rising. Death tolls had risen to 89 with over 300 injured. 24 hour curfew remained in force in Selangor and had also been imposed in Malacca. In Penang and Perak, the situation had improved although the curfew remained in force.
Tunku made a broadcast in which he announced the setting up of a National Defence Force to be manned by volunteers. The new information minister Hamzah Abu Samah and Tun Razak gave a press conference pinning the blame for the riots on communist infiltration of the opposition parties.
There were reports of looting by the largely Malay military and their bias against the Chinese Malaysians. Number of refugees were increasing.
May 17:
From a BHC telegram, it showed there were skepticism among British officers toward the official figures for fatalities and the preponderance of Chinese casualties among the dead. The police estimated the deaths at about 100 now while British officers estimated the proportion of Chinese to Malay casualties is about 85:15.
The press censorship invited criticism not only from the local press but also in diplomatic circles especially when official statements lacked clarity and credibility.
In a confidential BHC memorandum to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), the coup d’etat has been acknowledged and it has effected the transfer of power not only to “Malay hands” but also to the security forces. The latter’s professionalism is questioned.
The BHC also noted the Federal Reserve Unit, which at the time was multiracial in composition, was the more impartial of the security forces while the Malay troops were discriminatory in enforcing the curfew.
“Discriminatory takes the form, for example, of not, repeat not, enforcing the curfew in one of the most violently disposed of the Malay areas in Kuala Lumpur (Kampung Baru) where Malays armed with parangs, etc continue to circulate freely; with the inevitable result that gangs slip through the cordon round the area and attack Chinese outside it. In Chinese areas, the curfew is strictly enforced.”
May 18:
The Tunku qualified his earlier assertion that the disturbances were caused by communists, putting the blame instead on assorted “bad elements”. He also announced the deferment of the Sarawak elections and the continuance of the restrictions on the movement of foreign journalists.
The situation was still unsettled in some parts of the capital city.
May 19:
Less than a week after the riots, the reins of power had effectively passed to Tun Razak, indicating that there had been a plot to bring about the coup d’etat.
“The exact relationship between Tun Razak and the Tunku is not clear. In public Tun Razak says he is directly responsible to the Tunku but he has made it clear privately that he is completely in charge of the country. This could mean the beginning of a process of withdrawal by the Tunku as an effective PM”.
There are some 10,000 reported refugees. The local press was allowed to publish under censorship while foreign journalists had their curfew passes withdrawn. Some opposition politicians were arrested.
May 20:
In a meeting, an Australian High Commissioner had suggested the opposition leaders should be given a role as peace maker but Tun Razak and Ghazali Shafie were firmly against this. “They considered opposition leaders would simply use such an opportunity to promote their own political views.”
The Malaysian Red Cross Society is continuing its daily feeding programme for refugees in various places and over 5,000 had received food supplies.
May 21:
The official statistics of casualties at this juncture were 137 killed (18 Malays), 342 injured, 109 vehicles burned, 118 buildings destroyed and 2,912 persons arrested who were mostly curfew breakers.
May 23:
The declassified documents reveal that Malay troops were not only fraternising with the Malay thugs but were discharging their firearms indiscriminately at Chinese shophouses as they went through the city.
“When confronted by foreign correspondents with reports of racial discrimination, Tun Razak flatly denied them. Following this, curfew passes issued to foreign journalists were withdrawn and reporters were ordered to remain indoors ‘for their own safety’.”
A foreign correspondent’s report showed the Malay hooligans were detested by the law-abiding Malays of Kampung Baru.
Internal security and home minister Tun Dr Ismail indicated that the Internal Security Act would be in future amended to “counter changing communist tactics”. It was disclosed that of the 3,699 arrested during the crisis, 952 were members of secret societies.
May 24:
Law and order has been re-established in Kuala Lumpur and the atmosphere in the town had improved. People were going back to work (in non- curfew hours) and the government offices were limbering into action. The curfew remained in force (from 3pm to 6.30am of the following day). The government was not ready to admit that it was armed Malay youth who had caused the disturbances.
May 27:
The Tunku was under pressure to resign as he was clearly incensed by foreign journalists’ speculations about his weakening position and got his private secretary to write a protest note to the BHC.
May 28:
A confidential report by the BHC to the FCO on this day observed the government’s attempts to blame the communists for the disturbances were an attempt to justify their new authoritarian powers.
June:
The riots had been under control but they were still sporadic outbreaks of civil disturbances. A BHC report noted violence erupted again in one part of Kuala Lumpur on the night of June 28 and 29, a number of houses were burnt and the casualties were officially given as five killed and 25 injured. Some disturbances toward the end of June also involved ethnic Indians.
July:
Renewed trouble in which one policeman was killed was quickly stopped from spreading in Kuala Lumpur by positive police action.
Tun Ismail’s firm stand in ordering the security forces to act firmly ‘without favour or discrimination’ to any communal group and the Tunku’s announcement of a National Goodwill Committee made up of politicians of all parties went some way toward allaying the fears of the people.
Tun Ismail also revealed the total arrests since May now stood at 8,114, comprising people “from all the major racial groups”. Of these, 4,192 had been charged in court, 675 released on bail, 1,552 unconditionally released and 1,695 preventively detained.
Situation in the Peninsula had improved substantially but tension remains high in sensitive areas of Malacca, Perak and Selangor.
Tension had begun to ease until Malay agitation connected with Tunku’s return to a position of influence and the removal of Dr Mahathir Mohamad from Umno’s general committee on July 12 had heightened it again. Malay university students petitioned for Tunku’s resignation and demonstrated on the campus.
*** TAKEN FROM A FWD MAIL***

Maybank debate a good lesson

May 11th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


NST:Maybank debate ‘a good lesson’

Farrah Naz Karim
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Friday/National/20070511090100/Article/index_html
PUTRAJAYA: A good lesson to be learnt by all, is how Umno Youth chief Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein described the controversy involving Maybank’s equity requirement for its panel of lawyers.
Hishammuddin said the requirement that law firms needed at least 50 per cent Bumiputera equity before they could do business with the bank was not just an internal matter.
The education minister said the bank’s approach was wrong as such issues could create misperception and anxiety about government policies.
“We are in our 50th year of of independence and people want to learn from our system, and here we are bickering about a matter that shouldn’t have surfaced at all. This is a lesson to us as a multi-racial nation, that a small matter like this can be sensitive.
“It is not a huge issue and could have been resolved between the parties involved. For this issue to be brought up in cabinet was unnecessary,” he said after a meeting with his Thai counterpart Prof Dr Wichit Srisa-an and Higher Education Minister Datuk Mustapa Mohamad. Maybank had come under criticism by lawyers and some political groups which insisted that firms should be judged on their merit and not ethnic composition or equity. » Read more: Maybank debate a good lesson

Cabinet orders Maybank to stop

May 10th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Written no less than Datuk Wong Chun Wai himself…
A mini victory for MCA, Gerakan. As usual, the educated leadership of MIC choose to remain silent and focus on more important things.

Maybank adheres to Cabinet order
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/5/10/nation/17681264&sec=nation
By WONG CHUN WAI
KUALA LUMPUR: The Cabinet has ordered the country’s largest bank, Maybank, to withdraw its requirement that law firms must have a bumiputra partner with at least a 50% stake before they could do any business with the bank.
The move, which generated controversy and criticism that it was discriminatory, was discussed at the weekly Cabinet meeting yesterday.
Highly-placed sources said the Cabinet took the stand because it felt it was not a government policy and that the Finance Ministry had also not issued any such directive to banks.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who is also Finance Minister, chaired the Cabinet meeting.
The sources said that while the bank’s decision was an internal directive, the Cabinet felt it was not a proper decision.
MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting, when contacted, said the Cabinet discussed the issue, and felt that Maybank’s decision was inappropriate and not in line with government policy.
The Housing and Local Government Minister considered the matter settled and resolved.
The Maybank decision had been criticised by various groups including the MCA, Bar Council and the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, which said firms should be judged on their merit and not ethnic composition.
In Boston, FOO YEE PING reports that Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak as saying the government’s policy is to help both bumiputras and non-bumiputras.
He said Maybank should understand that the government policy was to encourage government-linked companies (GLC) to provide work for both bumiputras and non-bumiputras.
On Tuesday, MCA vice-president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek questioned the ruling, asking how Malaysia could compete globally if a government-linked company like Maybank still adopted such a position.
Wanita MCA chief Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen, who is Deputy Finance Minister, expressed regret with Maybank, saying the condition had no legal basis and was certainly not in line with the spirit of the Federal Constitution.
Bar Council chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan had earlier described the requirement as discriminatory and said that all lawyers should be judged on merit.
Yesterday, Maybank issued a statement that the bank wanted to emphasise that selection of solicitor firms would continue to be based primarily on performance, efficiency and merit.
“Moving forward and with immediate effect, all solicitor firms, whether with bumiputra or non-bumiputra equity ownership, are eligible for consideration,” it said.
It said all other revised criteria for emplacement of solicitor firms pursuant to its annual review remain unchanged.
DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, meanwhile, said that Bank Negara should have ordered Maybank to revoke its decision instead of waiting for the Cabinet to act.
“If Bank Negara can order banks to merge, we cannot accept that Bank Negara could not intervene earlier because it was a Maybank internal matter,” he said.
Lim said similar requirements were set out by Ambank Bhd, claiming there had been tacit discrimination by other banks in refusing to parcel out work to those without the 50% bumiputra equity requirement.
However, a statement from the AmBank Group said no restrictions or quota of shares were imposed.
“The group does appoint legal firms that do not have bumiputra partners. This policy has been in place for more than two decades,” it said.
However, to encourage bumiputra participation in the financial services industry, the AmBank Group had always encouraged legal firms to have bumiputra partners, it added.

MCCBCHS comments on parlimentary panel’s output

May 10th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


frankly speaking, i’m dissappointed with the MCCBCHS’s reps comments. They should have been more direct and support the panel’s recommendations of allowing teaching of other religions in school since all taxpayers money is involved and setting up inter-faith dialogues.
Problem is in implementation, say religious groups
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Thursday/National/20070510075005/Article/index_html
KUALA LUMPUR: Walk the talk.
This is the call from religious groups in response to a proposed guidelines by the Parliamentary Select Committee on Unity and National Service on a multi-culturalism policy to promote national unity.
The religious groups said although there were provisions in the Federal Constitution and Rukun Negara that provided an adequate understanding of national integration, the lack of implementation as well as inconsistent interpretation had resulted in a major setback to the government’s efforts to promote unity.
The Malaysian Consultative Council on Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism placed the blame for this on the “Little Napoleans” who wrongly interpret the provisions.
Its spokesperson, Rev Wong Kim Kong, said as a result, integration and multi-culturalism in the country seemed to be deteriorating, especially among the young generation. He said Malaysians were dissatisfied with the way issues relating to race, economy and religion was being handled by the authorities.
He hoped the proposed guidelines by the parliamentary panel would give some form of guidance to the authorities when it came to the implementation of the guidelines.
Wong, who is also the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship secretary-general, said the guidelines should come under the supervision of an authorised body with executive power, otherwise it’ll be just another powerless body.
“Hopefully, with supervised implementation, the guidelines will ensure discrepancies, discrimination and inconsistency of policies are eradicated and, instead, provide a clearer implementation process,” he said.
In echoing Wong’s views, Malaysia Hindu Sangam president Datuk A. Vaithilingam said the government now had various policies and guidelines, but there was still a lack of unity among the people due to bad implementation.
He said national integration and unity was not a problem when he was growing up, but only started in the 1980s.
“I don’t know why this is happening. Maybe it is due to insecurity and lack of understanding by the people.
“The younger generation is no longer together. You see them all segregated among their own race, so how can they be united?” he said.
He said besides finding ways to educate people on the importance of integration, the Rukun Negara should be revived and its principles practised.
On the panel’s call to the Prime Minister’s Department to organise interfaith dialogues among religious leaders, both Vaithi-lingam and Wong said the move would foster greater goodwill.
They added such dialogues should be continuously held in order to come up with concrete views. Now, it only meets on an ad-hoc basis.

Groups express shock over EPF move on contributions

April 22nd, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Are those MPs really representing the rakyat or have sold their souls to the devil?
All of us should write letter of protest to our respective ADUNs. Get their details from www.parlimen.gov.my and send an email/sms/letter.

Groups express shock over EPF move on contributions
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/4/21/nation/17509821&sec=nation
KUALA LUMPUR: Workers groups have expressed shock that employees aged above 55 will have their Employees Provident Fund (EPF) contributions slashed by half under the proposed EPF Bill (Amendment) 2007.
The Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC) described the proposal as unfair and an exploitation of that group of workers. Cuepacs vowed to take up the issue at its Congress meeting today.
“We will not agree to it,” said Cuepacs president Omar Osman.
He said the 43,000 civil servants who had opted for the EPF scheme were already at a disadvantage compared to those under the pension scheme as the Government did not provide them with free medical treatment after retirement.
“So if you slash their EPF contributions too, this will cause them even more hardship,” he added.
It was reported that under the proposed amendments, once an employee reached 55 years of age, he or she would only have to contribute 6.2% of their salary to the EPF instead of the current 12%.
Employees who contribute 11% of their salary to the fund, would, after the age of 55, only contribute 5.7%.
MTUC deputy president Mohamed Shafie Mammal said the proposal was tantamount to punishing senior citizens.
“They are doing the same work. They should be enjoying the same benefits as the rest of us. There is no reason to slash contributions. This is blatant discrimination on those aged 55 and above and very unfair,” he added.
“We are supposed to be a caring society,” he added.
Federation of Consumers Asso-ciation (Fomca) president N. Mari-mutu asked how the contributions could be slashed with the retirement trend moving towards the age of 60.
“Contributions for older and the younger workers should not be different,” he said.