Will Hindraf Choose To Sleep With The Enemy?
Some of the demands are rather unrealistic and supremely difficult to attain, such as the one involving Article 153. Perhaps that’s why they have since been revised by the current Hindraf leadership into a condensed five-year blueprint that was launched last November.
Kee Thuan Chye, Malaysian Digest
The Government has suddenly decided to lift its four-year-old ban on Hindraf, the Hindu Rights Action Force that took to the streets in late 2007 and inspired a massive drop in Indian support for Barisan Nasional (BN) at the 2008 general election.
Its timing is glaringly obvious. With the upcoming general election drawing near, BN is further intensifying its quest for Indian votes. It has been doing everything it can to woo the Indians since its 2008 debacle by making a myriad of promises to improve their lot, almost including throwing in the kitchen sink, and Prime Minister Najib Razak has managed to wriggle his way into some of their hearts; so now the next logical step seems to be to hold discussions with Hindraf and woo it as well.
However, since Hindraf had set the condition that discussions would not take place unless the ban was first lifted, the Government has now swallowed its pride for the sake of political expediency and fulfilled the condition.
Responding to it, Hindraf’s chairman, P Waythamoorthy, seems inclined to go ahead with the talks although the movement will discuss the matter first. But the question is, should Hindraf entertain the Government?
Surely, Waythamoorthy is smart enough to see that the lifting of the ban amounts to legerdemain? Former Hindraf leader P Uthayakumar, who now heads his own Human Rights Party, does, and calls it “a political gimmick”. In which case, how sincere can the Government be?
Besides, if Hindraf were to engage in talks with the very authority that outlawed it, what message would it be sending to its followers?
Waythamoorthy might want to recall the rough times Hindraf had to experience after its rally of Nov 25, 2007, which brought out 30,000 demonstrators to protest against, among other things, the ongoing marginalization of the Indians. The following month, five of his fellow leaders were detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) while he was spared the ordeal because he was out of the country then. He nonetheless spent five years in exile after that.
More than the detentions and the arrest of 136 protestors during the rally, Hindraf was unfairly hyped up to be a terrorist organization and alleged to have had links with the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka as the Government distorted the truth to make Hindraf look dangerous in a way it was not.
If a government could do something like that, how could it be trusted?
How could Hindraf put these things behind it and still have credence in the ruling party that treated it so roughly?
Waythamoorthy should think about the many who sacrificed their safety to emerge on that day of protest out of belief and conviction to send a message to the powers that be that they would not be taken for granted any more. He should recall that instead of being met with understanding, these ordinary folks who came in peace, some carrying photographs of Mahatma Gandhi, were pummeled with tear gas and water cannons.
So, would meeting the party that gave the order for the hostile action not amount to selling short the people who struggled and suffered for the original cause?
At least, Uthayakumar and another former Hindraf leader, M Manoharan, know the score. They have come out to express their reservations about the lifting of the ban.
As Manoharan says, “the Government is doing this… to play with Indian sentiments. What we want are merely our fundamental basic rights.”
He and Uthayakumar are uncompromising in wanting to see Hindraf’s original 18 demands accepted and addressed. Among these are affirmative action plans for all poor Malaysians; stopping the victimization of and discrimination against Indians by the police and all other state authorities; compensation for hardcore poor Indians; ending Article 153 of the Federal Constitution which guarantees the special position of the Malays.
Some of the demands are rather unrealistic and supremely difficult to attain, such as the one involving Article 153. Perhaps that’s why they have since been revised by the current Hindraf leadership into a condensed five-year blueprint that was launched last November.
The blueprint is predicated on the setting-up of a Minority Affairs Ministry which Hindraf proposes to administer in order to resolve the Indian stateless issue; provide equal job and business opportunities to Indians; stop police brutality and death in custody; set up the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC); etc.
During the launch, Hindraf National Advisor N Ganesan declared that if either BN or Pakatan Rakyat accepted it in a “formal treaty”, that coalition would receive Hindraf’s support.
One month later, Waythamoorthy announced that Pakatan had accepted it and was even ready to sign the agreement in January.
