Scholarships: The Sultan of Perak disappoints again

By Lim Teck Ghee (Suara Keadilan)

It is not only the weather but also our political climate that has gotten unbearably hazy. Youngsters who excel in their studies but have been deprived of opportunity might, rather worryingly, be misconstrued as questioning the sovereignty of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Malay rulers.

Some 17-year-olds with outstanding exam results have asked why they failed to get a Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA) scholarship.

Some 19-year-olds have asked why they were not admitted into the course of their choice in local public universities despite doing well.

Little do they know that by asking these perplexing questions, they are viewed by some quarters as somehow challenging the entrenched interests of the Malays or engaged in potentially anti-national activities.

It appears that young (and old) Malaysians are increasingly trespassing into the dreaded Tak Bolehland through ‘violating the fundamental provisions in the federal and state constitutions’.

It is understandable though why many young Malaysians should ask these difficult questions of our scholarship and university entrance policies. At this stage of their life, perhaps all else pales in importance to deciding which road to take on higher education?

It is left to the silver-haired to remind about the weighty matter of sovereignty and the constitution bearing on scholarships; and the Sultan of Perak has just weighed in, according to a Bernama report on Thursday.

NEP and what the federal constitution actually says

Opening a ‘Discourse on Knowledge’, Sultan Azlan Shah alluded to the special provisions for Malay and bumiputera which are legally safeguarded, citing his own state constitution’s Article 27 (b)(2), and the Federal Constitution Article 153(2).

The Federal Constitution provides that the Agong can reserve scholarships in “such proportion as he may deem reasonable” for the natives. It does not assign a specific or fixed percentage to the quota.

Here, it is the New Economic Policy (NEP) that steps in to determine the apportionment. In no other country in the world is there to be found a similar preoccupation with ethnic preference as seen in the longevity and intensity of this policy and its subsequent incarnations.

What the Agong may deem ‘reasonable’ in distribution of government scholarships is not questioned nor challenged.

Instead it is that other safeguard — “the legitimate interests of the other Communities” — a corollary to the provisions of the oft-quoted Article 153(2), and which, in fact, is contained in the oft-overlooked first clause of Article 153, that is being invoked.

Other commentators have pointed out that it is equally incumbent upon the Agong to exercise his function to balance and protect the legitimate interests of the other communities under Article 153(1) as much as His Majesty is concerned about upholding the special position of the Malays and other natives.

Historians have also noted that in fact the Reid Commission drafting the Constitution had initially proposed that these provisions would be temporary in nature and be revisited in 15 years, and that a report should be presented to the appropriate legislature (currently the Parliament of Malaysia) and that the “legislature should then determine either to retain or to reduce any quota or to discontinue it entirely.”

The crucial point – on the scholarship issue – is that the Agong and and the other Rulers should be facilitated to make wise decisions on it by the full and transparent disclosure by the Ministry of Education and scholarship authorities of scholarship numbers for the respective communities — Malay, non-Muslim Bumiputera and other communities – and by the Government’s initiation of a rational and polemic-free analysis of the current scholarship policy, its achievements and its failures.

Smokescreen to obscure

Under the successive Umno-led federal governments, discriminative programmes gave short shrift to minorities. The wide array of NEP intervention has been, and continues to be shrouded in haze, if not smoke and mirrors.

The JPA scholarship particularly makes a strong case for the NEP acting as a smog screen. Is the ‘1scholarship, many prongs’ meant for the brightest student, or the poor bright student, or the bright but not best bumiputera student? Is it a two-state (East Malaysian) quota? For the underprivileged or alternatively, a birthright by privilege? Who and which, pray tell.

JPA director-general Tan Sri Ismail Adam has revealed that for the year 2009, 60% of the scholarships were awarded based on the racial breakdown of the Malaysian population, 20% given on merit, 10% to Sabah and Sarawak bumiputera and the remaining 10% to the underprivileged.

Because JPA (in English, the Public Services Department) scholarships are publicly funded, taxpayers are entitled to full transparency of the selection process and disclosure of who have been awarded them. Categories alone are not sufficient to soothe the highly suspicious Malaysian minds.

It is the public and especially taxpayers’ money invested in our country’s human resource development, and we want to see a visible and viable return on it by having the best and brightest receive it; and for the scholarship recipients to come back and serve Malaysia.

If Sultan Azlan thinks — as he seems to — that Malaysian citizens are questioning the Agong’s functions under the operation of Article 153, he is mistaken in this view.

But there is a likelihood now that the affected students and their families will be disappointed with Sultan Azlan’s take on this perennial issue. Public outcry by sidelined top scorers has predictably become an annual affair just like the ceremonial award of Datukships on royal birthdays.

This disenchantment recurring year after year has come to a head at the present juncture because of the unprecedented number of SPM distinctions bagged in double digits. This disenchantment is not occasioned by the monarchy or the Constitution but by public concern (including among many Malays) of the ever creeping, never retreating NEP.

In its diverted and distorted form, NEP represents Malaysia’s biggest obstacle to competitiveness, social cohesion and meeting the goal of Vision 2020 … only 11 years away. It is doubly destructive when it impacts so unjustly on the innocent segment of our youthful human capital.

Broad base of Malay professionals

In retrospect, it should not be denied the country has done very well in implementing article 153. The all-time record for best SPM result belongs to a Malay lad from Yan, Kedah who notched 21As.

A strong Malay professional class has been built up — arguably the fastest growth ever experienced by any marginalized community anywhere in the world — and this group no longer needs crutches.

After close to 40 years of NEP implementation, the majority of Malays have already been uplifted and are more than capable of standing on their own two feet. The Third Outline Perspective Plan (2001-2010) indicated that the bumiputera had already comprised 63.5 per cent of the Professional and Technical Category of employment in year 2000.

That was a decade ago, what more now? If this vital information were made known to a more widespread audience, there will be less talk about Malay under-achievement and less insecurity within the Malay community that they are losing out to the other races.

The royal houses, emblematic of Malay (and Malaysian) pride, custom and heritage should rightly instill confidence in the Malays so that they can be proud that so many are in highly paid and prestigious occupations serving as CEOs or captains on industry or in similar high positions in the private and public sector – at home and abroad.

Should we not have the confidence at least (if nothing else) to discuss current inequities or injustices, bearing in mind that the original aim of the NEP was to bring about equitable economic participation and social justice?

The flagrant flaws in our government scholarship and public university admission procedures cannot be remedied if our leaders still insist on making so-called sensitive issues off-limits.

Are the names of JPA scholarship recipients an official secret under the OSA? Will disclosure on the relative merits of their claim to the scholarship undermine the monarchy and violate the constitution?

In an ironic Malaysia Boleh twist, the terms ‘transparency’ and ‘accountability’ while remaining theories in the abstract to some adults has turned out to be a practical, if not bitter, life lesson for our teenagers.

The sultans are rulers of all their subjects, not only one particular race.

Malaysians look to them as enlightened sovereigns who will foster inclusive principles eliciting the best ‘Performance Now’ — to borrow the Prime Minister’s new slogan.

Let us not continue to have the best and brightest become disillusioned, alienated and tempted to look away from Malaysia to neighbouring countries just because of an anachronistic and inward-looking government scholarship policy that badly needs reform, beginning with the mindset of those at the very top.

[Dr Lim Teck Ghee is the Director of the Center for Policy Initiatives]