Scholarships — Perkasa’s demand is unconstitutional

ARCHIVES 2010

By admin-s On Jul 14, 2010

Someone has to pacify the non-Malays, and someone else within the same organisation has to pacify the conservative Malay. Hence, the seemingly inconsistent stands on Perkasa from different personalities within Umno.

By Art Harun

The Malaysian Insider quoted MPM committee member Professor Datuk Dr Kamarudin Kachar as saying that federal scholarships should be allocated in accordance with the country’s racial ratio.

As we all know, MPM stands for “Majlis Perundingan Melayu” or the Malay Consultative Council. It is driven by the ultra-Malay group, Perkasa, led by Datuk Ibrahim Ali, and finds support from luminaries such as Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

While Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz yesterday insisted that we all should get rid of Perkasa — “because Perkasa is not in line with Datuk Seri Najib (Razak’s) 1 Malaysia concept,” and “we (are) against any form of racism and Perkasa certainly doesn’t belong or [is] supported by Umno,” — the deputy prime minister and some other ministers have often said that Perkasa was entitled to voice its opinion on matters affecting Malay rights.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had refused to be associated with Perkasa by declining to attend its gathering at the PWTC some months ago. However, his tacit approval of Perkasa and what it stands for is well perceived upon his refusal to openly state that Perkasa runs counter to his 1 Malaysia concept.

In fact, the prime minister’s posturing on his New Economic Model, which saw him broach the subject of transparency and meritocracy in the awards of government contracts, only to later announce that he would not betray the interests of the Malays after Perkasa had raised its usual Malay rights rants a couple of decibels upwards, lends credence to the perception that he, at the very least, is conscious of Perkasa’s influence among the conservative Malays, even if not wholly in agreement with it.

In the Umno Youth chief, Khairy Jamaluddin, Nazri finds an unlikely ally. Khairy has openly criticised Perkasa and its leader, Ibrahim Ali, whom he (Khairy) described as a “jaguh kampung” (village champion).

Ibrahim responded by asking Khairy to resign from his post as the Umno Youth chief.

The fact that Nazri has said that Perkasa should be gotten rid of came as no surprise as the latter’s connection with Dr Mahathir is not very well hidden. And Nazri’s disdain for anything Dr Mahathir is also quite obvious. In addition, Khairy Jamaluddin is also not exactly in love with Dr Mahathir. The feeling is mutual, I must hasten to add.

As I am writing this article, Ibrahim Ali has responded to Nazri’s call by saying that it was Nazri who should instead be gotten rid of.

Elsewhere, the deputy prime minister had ventured into really murky territory by saying that all can form their own “Perkasa.”

Since the inception of Perkasa and the rise of Ibrahim Ali as the leader of this self-styled Malay pressure group, I have found Perkasa — and it’s various offshoots, such as Gertak, Pekida, Pewaris and MPM — to be nothing but political gimmickry entirely lacking in any form of substantive intellect.

And to think that there is someone in MCA who had suggested that the Chinese should have its own Perkasa is nothing short of comedic. What will the Chinese version of Perkasa be named, PerkaChua?

That Perkasa lacks intellectual credibility is obvious from Ibrahim Ali’s call for Khairy Jamaluddin to resign and for Nazri to be gotten rid of. Why must KJ resign or Nazri be sacked? Just because they disagree with Ibrahim Ali?

This is endemic among Malaysians who are quite obviously less endowed in the cranium, I must say. When one can not rebut what one’s opponent is saying, one attacks the opponent. If no credible attack could be mounted, one calls for his or her resignation. Whatever for? Would the opponent resign just because of that call?