==> Pls visit new site at http://malaysia-today.net/ <==

By G. Krishnan

I know historians will look back on this time period, at least starting around 2007 and into present day, with a much fuller appreciation. They will no doubt note the dark episodes of state repression under the Umno controlled regime. I am also convinced they will more fully appreciate that over the past three years we’ve been undergoing our very own civil rights movement.

We may not have our own Martin Luther King Jr. as the Americans did during their historic civil rights era. But other similarities abound. The non-violent protests of all varieties, that have unfolded over the last three years alone are nothing if not about the corruption of democratic principles, the persistence of racially discriminatory laws, the assault on personal liberties, and an outcry against the disregard of the rule of law for all.

Indeed, in all its forms, this is our civil rights movement. Fragmented and haphazard as it might seem to many people, there’s no mistaking what it is. The street protests to demand equal opportunity was about marginalised and racially discriminated Malaysians wanting their civil rights respected. The candlelight vigils were about Malaysians mourning, among other things, the loss of individual liberties and suppression of free speech. The arrests of political and civil rights leaders were about attempts to thwart our civil rights movement.

In the process, we had a chance in 2008 – in a big way – to register our discontent with the regime’s assault on civil rights. Many so-called experts have claimed that the 2008 political tsunami was a protest vote against the regime’s failure to control crime and corruption. These experts failed to see that this tsunami was an expression of this civil rights movement. The voters who rejected the regime were as much registering their demand for their civil rights as they were about so-called everyday issues like uncontrolled crime and political corruption.

The public was – and is - fed up with civil rights abuses. But the regime, as in the past, only understood one formula. It hoped to reassure us that it can deliver ‘stability,’ ‘prosperity’ and ‘development’ and that we’re still so naïve as to continue taking this bargain at the expense of our civil rights. This time it did not work as well for the regime. It did not work for the simple reason that a vast segment of Malaysian society was – and is - demanding its civil rights. It was not prepared to bargain its civil rights for false promises of ‘stability’ and ‘prosperity.’ If you look back on the months since 3/08, it is evident that while the mainstream media has continued to sing the same tune (as in the past) about ‘stability’ and now of course so-called ‘1Malaysia’, the civil rights movement remains, in all its variety and diversity, focused on the abuse of the ISA, violation of citizens civil and human rights by the police, the continued censoring of free speech and rejection of racial discrimination (as in the education policies). It is quite telling that the former law minister Zaid Ibrahim did not resign from government due to economic mismanagement or due to government failure to control crime, corruption or to promote development. He resigned due to the abuse of the ISA, and specifically the civil rights of Teresa Kok.

Time and again, while the regime’s economic mismanagement has come under scrutiny, the central issue remains that the regime has been unable to resolve a fundamental dilemma: how to address and overcome this civil rights movement.

Read more at: IMAGINE...

Comments (2)