Actually, I didn’t want to dignify the MMMM and ABIM’s statements regarding PSD’s ratio with a reply. But I thought of highlighting some issues/mistakes/points in their arguement:

1. There’s not mention of 90% and 10% breakdown in Article 153 (3). It just says:

The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may, in order to ensure in accordance with Clause (2) the reservation to Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of positions in the public service and of scholarships, exhibitions and other educational or training privileges or special facilities, give such general directions as may be required for that purpose to any Commission to which Part X applies or to any authority charged with responsibility for the grant of such scholarships, exhibitions or other educational or training privileges or special facilities; and the Commission or authority shall duly comply with the directions.

Clause(2) mentioned above is as below:

Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, but subject to the provisions of Article 40 and of this Article, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall exercise his functions under this Constitution and federal law in such manner as may be necessary to safeguard the special provision of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and to ensure the reservation for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of such proportion as he may deem reasonable of positions in the public service (other than the public service of a State) and of scholarships, exhibitions and other similar educational or training privileges or special facilities given or accorded by the Federal Government and, when any permit or licence for the operation of any trade or business is required by federal law, then, subject to the provisions of that law and this Article, of such permits and licences.

Since the above Clause(2) refers to Article 40, here it is:

In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law and of the Second Schedule, by him or by the Cabinet or any Minister authorised by the Cabinet, but Parliament made by law confer executive function on other persons.

This means that the Agong can decide on such porpotion that he may deem reasonable to ensure reservation for Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak. Maybe His Highness in his wisdom realises the 90/10 quota being used all this while is utter nonsense and outdated.  So, questioning the ratio is akin to questioning the King? Can it be called seditious? Maybe treason? Now, how many reports were made against Karpal? Perhaps we can set another record, this time against ABIM and MMMM?

2. Article 152 covers issue of language. So I think the newspaper miswrote the number.

3. The NGOs use population as a criteria to establish ratio. Fine, I guess. But what if some of the recipients in 65% group scored lower than those who did not get selected under the 45% group? Wouldn’t that be against the sense of natural justice, fair play and even any version of Islam? Isn’t it plain simple and clear that the solution is to choose the best 2000 students based on results, income, extra-curricular activities, and interview results? » Read more: MMMM and ABIM against scholarship ratio