Does DAP want to make everybody bumiputera?

471
0

 

DAP needs to come clean on whether it intends to grant all Malaysians the “special position” currently reserved for Malays as stipulated in Article 153 of the federal constitution.

Since its formation, DAP has insisted on the “principle that the separation of citizens into ‘Bumiputra’ and ‘non-Bumiputra’ is strongly opposed” − see below the party’s 1967 Setapak Declaration.

There is no indication that DAP has deviated from its demand for “equality” of the races.

‘No Malays, zero Chinese, no Indians too … all Malaysians’

Riding the 2008 and 2013 Chinese tsunami, DAP diligently peddled its Bangsa Malaysia kool-aid − a concept where everyone is ostensibly to be regarded as Malaysian … and there are supposedly “no Malays”, “zero Chinese” and “no Indians too”.

In other words, ethnic distinction is abolished − refer Hannah Yeoh’s tweet below as an illustration of the DAP’s “Anak Malaysia” indoctrination.

If the DAP is successful with its ‘Anak Malaysia’ brainwashing and Malays are eventually persuaded that they no longer wish to be identified as “racist’ Malays, then Article 153 will – by itself – slip into irrelevance.

From its Bangsa Malaysia propaganda onslaught, we can see how DAP is going a roundabout way to weaken Article 153 on the Malay special position.

Sub groups desiring to be bumiputera

The DAP has one self-styled “constitutional law expert” who today accused the prime minister of being ignorant about provisions contained in the federal constitution.

DAP’s Abdul Aziz Bari quibbled over a news report that Najib Razak was mulling the possibility of recognizing Indian Muslims as ‘bumiputera’.

According to the FMT report (below), Aziz Bari told the news portal that “the question of bumiputera status for Indian Muslims did not arise because it was clear in the constitution that they could qualify as Malays”.

Does DAP agree that mamak are Malay?

FMT quoted Aziz Bari as saying Indian Muslims are “by the definition of the constitution, Malays, and [as such] are entitled to Malay rights”.

According to Aziz Bari (touted by some quarters as DAP’s potential Selangor Menteri Besar designate), Indian Muslims fulfill the definition of ‘Malay’ spelled out in Article 160 of the constitution.

Aziz said this meant that anyone of any ethnic background should be accorded Malay rights as long as he fulfilled the Article 160 conditions of professing Islam, habitually speaking Malay language and practising Malay custom, FMT reported.

The portal reported Aziz Bari as adding, “A convert to Islam could also qualify”.

While correctly listing out the three constitutional criteria under Article 160’s definition of ‘Malay’, Aziz Bari neglected to mention that the Muslim or Muslim convert who habitually speaks Malay and conforms to Malay custom is still nonetheless required to meet a fourth criterion in order to be considered legally Malay.

In the context of Indian Muslim converts – as earlier interpreted by Aziz Bari above – what he omitted to explain is that Article 160 also requires this Malay-speaking Muslim individual to be born in Malaya before 1957, or if not then otherwise his (e.g. the Muslim convert’s) parents must also have been born or already staying in Malaya before Merdeka.

The full text of Article 160’s definition of ‘Malay’ is as follows:

‘Malay’ means a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom and –

(a) was before Merdeka Day born in the Federation or in Singapore or born of parents one of whom was born in the Federation or in Singapore, or was on that day domiciled in the Federation or in Singapore; or
(b) is the issue of such a person;

Bangsa M’sia propaganda is DAP strategy to disenfranchise Malays 

DAP’s Aziz Bari in his interview today with FMT provided only a partial interpretation of Article 160.

As someone who has taught law before and is widely promoted by the liberal media as a “constitutional law expert”, you’d think Aziz Bari should know better.

Indeed he likely does.

Therefore we can only suspect that his apparent misdirection, i.e. lack of a complete reading of Article 160, was something done deliberately. Or else why leave out the essential part about any Malay-speaking Muslim individual needing to be born before Merdeka etc, etc, to qualify as a legal/constitutional Malay?

The Malay community must ask themselves if DAP leaders and DAP’s Bangsa Malaysia propaganda is actually a devious means to usurp genuine Malays of their rights under Article 153.

Download PDF