Zahid argues his Malay rights and Islam thrusts won’t outweigh other constitutional rights
(Malay Mail Online) – Umno’s focus on four “key thrusts” related to Malay rights and Islam will not weigh on other provisions in the Federal Constitution, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said today, amid criticism that no provision can be made to be greater than others.
The Umno vice-president said the party has no choice but to defend the four thrusts — Malay privileges, the Malay rulers, Islam and the national language — as they have been “belittled”.
“By my upholding these four thrusts, it doesn’t mean I am denying the other provisions. It’s just that this is what becomes the priority for Umno,” he said at a news conference here.
“These four thrusts have never been debated in the past. This was to maintain harmony… as an Umno vice-president, I will definitely uphold the pillars of harmony in our country,” he added.
Zahid acknowledged the criticism over his earlier statement on the “four thrusts”, saying that he “respects” the views of any individuals or groups that are pushing for a more holistic interpretation of the Federal Constitution.
On Saturday, Zahid was quoted by national news agency Bernama as saying that action would be taken against those who violate the “four key thrusts” of the “social contract”, but the minister did not specify what would constitute an offence against such provisions.
The Home Minister, however, said today that any discourse related to the apex law should avoid issues that could stoke discontent over religion, race, culture or language.
“I need to stress that our priority is to translate (our efforts into) harmony, not just to find the faults of one or two parties in this matter,” he said.
Zahid’s statement raised concerns among lawyers and civil society leaders that the government is not going to let up on its ongoing crackdown under the Sedition Act 1948, which has mainly targeted those who criticised the royalty, Islam and the police.
At least 20 people have been variously investigated and charged under the colonial era law over the past month, including opposition lawmakers, lawyers, activists, and an academic.
Lawyers have argued that no provision can supercede other provisions under the apex law, even if aspects of the “social contract” have been embedded into the Federal Constitution.
The so-called “social contract”, an unwritten accord said to be agreed upon before Independence in 1957, is purportedly a quid pro quo trade-off with the Bumiputera communities for granting citizenship to the immigrant Chinese and Indians.
It is repeatedly raised to defend the what is categorised as the special “rights” of the Malays, despite many of these originating from the now-defunct New Economic Policy implemented in the 70s.
