Tag: Association of Muslim Professionals

  • History of Singapore Hadramis

    History of Singapore Hadramis

    Yemen

    Singapore is a cosmopolitan city state made up of various races. The 1990 census shows the Chinese as the majority with around 74% of the population, the indigenous Malays with 14%, the Indians at less than 10% and the balance “others”. This “others” category includes Armenians, Eurasians, Arabs and all other “others”. The census shows Arabs to be around 7,000, but unofficial estimates place the number of Arabs at 10,000. The difference is due to a large number of the Arab community being classified as Malays in official statistics. The Arab community is almost all of Hadrami origin.

    The Arabs had played a dominant role in South East Asian trade since the fifteenth century and when Sir Stamford Raffles founded Singapore in 1819, he hoped to attract the Arab traders to his new city. By 1824, there were 15 Arabs out of a population of 10,683 and Raffles anticipated a rapid growth in Arab immigration. His blueprint for Singapore included provisions for an Arab district. In giving instructions to a Singapore housing committee in 1822, he stated that “The Arab population would require every consideration No situation will be more appropriate for them than the vicinity of the Sultan’s residence.”

    The first Arabs to arrive in Singapore in 1819 were two wealthy merchants from Palembang in Sumatra, Syed Mohammed bin Harun al-Juneid and his nephew, Syed Omar bin Ali al-Juneid. Their numbers gradually increased and by 1846, there were five important Arab merchant houses. The al-Juneid family in Singapore grew to be a rich and influential family along with the al-Kaffs and the al-Saggoffs and there are numerous streets and a town council named after them. The al-Saggoffs appear to have arrived a little later, as spice traders, but acquired further influence by marrying into a Sultanic family from the Celebes and among the many properties they, like the other Arab families, acquired was the “Perseverance Estate” where they grew lemon grass. The estate is now considered the heart of the Muslim community in Singapore. Apart from being successful merchants and land owners, the family also became involved in civic affairs and various members held civic office on and off from the 1870s until independence. The al-Kaff family arrived in 1852. All these families lived in mansions of considerable opulence. The al-Kaff house is now a restaurant called the al-Kaff Mansion, as a gesture to preserve the name, but has no other Hadrami connection, either in architectural style or ownership.

    One distinctive characteristic of Hadrami immigration into Singapore was that it was re-immigration from Indonesia, rather than direct from the Hadramawt. The early settlers came to Singapore with wealth made in Indonesia and being already familiar with local custom, were easily accepted by the Malays. The Arabs in South-East Asia, by the time they came to Singapore, already enjoyed respect as religious scholars who brought Islam to the Malays.

    The Arabs and wakaf properties

    The Singapore Hadramis were major landlords, the large families having substantial properties held in wakafs (trusts), which ranged from private family trusts to public charitable trusts. Most of the land in today’s central business district was once owned by Hadrami wakafs. These wakafs, bearing the family names, whether private or charitable, gave considerable prestige to the Arab community among the Muslims in Singapore.

    In recent years, four factors have affected the wakafs and undermined the status of the community. The first three factors are the more substantial and have been a direct result of government policies. The first was the enactment of the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1968. The Singapore Islamic Council is the corporate body now empowered to oversee the administration of charitable wakafs in Singapore. The Arab trustees were in total control of their wakafs prior to the Act. With the transfer of the wakafs’ administration to the Council, the Arabs’ authority over them was considerably undermined. The association of wakafs with Arabs and the reputation of Arabs as benefactors diminished as their connection with the charitable functions of the wakafs was no longer directly visible to the public.

    The second factor was the Rent Control Act 1947. The rents of pre-war properties were controlled and, in effect, frozen. As the Arab wakafs were mostly pre-war properties, the income of the Arab families correspondingly diminished. The decline of income from the wakafs resulted in Arab economic influence diminishing. The Arabs were also, unfortunately, not prepared for such a drastic drop in income; they had not given their children a Western education. Many Arabs went to madrasahs (Arab schools) and some families never sent their children for any formal education at all. The development in Singapore since the 1960s has made it difficult for the Arabs to compete.

    The third factor was the Land Acquisition Act. Land is scarce in Singapore and it is government policy to have complete control over land usage. The Land Acquisition Act empowered the government to acquire land required for urban renewal and compensation is paid on a predetermined formula. The compensation amounts were significantly lower than the prevailing market value. The government embarked on a major acquisition campaign in the 1970s and 1980s. Pre-war properties were the major target for acquisition as Singapore underwent a modernisation programme. These pre-war properties were subject to rent control and had tenants that could not be removed.

    The wakafs were hence not in a position to develop these properties. Significant properties owned by Arab wakafs were acquired and minimal compensation paid. This eroded Arab wealth and influence. It also diminished the Arab identity as substantial landlords. The Sheikh Salem Talib Family settlement, for example, used to have more than three pages in its audited accounts listing the properties held, but the current accounts have less than one page. More than half of the properties were acquired by the government. The al-Saggoff Perseverence Estate was acquired in 1962 for urban renewal. Another 10-acre plot of land in a prime area was donated by the al-Juneid family to the Muslim Trust Fund (a wakaf created by the al-Saggoffs) to be developed so that the income could be used for welfare projects. The Trust wanted to build a mosque and a madrasah, but building permission was not granted by the government. That piece of land was acquired in 1985. In present-day Singapore, the Arabs are no longer considered as the main landowners. Many Singapore Arabs regard the land acquisition policy as the main reason for both their loss of status and identity.

    The fourth factor is having professional trustees manage the wakafs instead of family members. Most of the large private family trusts had problems of mismanagement or breaches of trust and legal disputes. In many cases a professional trustee was then appointed, which had a similar effect to the Administration of Muslim Law Act: the management of the wakafs became impersonal and the Arab families lost the social status arising therefrom.

    Culture, identity and affiliation with the homeland

    In the heyday of the Arab prosperity, the Arabs of Singapore maintained close links with the Hadramawt and a lot of money was remitted to the homeland. The rich built themselves splendid houses there, the most magnificent being the al-Kaff palaces. They also used to send their sons back to the Hadramawt for a spell to enhance their identity as Hadramis. This custom enabled them to maintain their language and Hadrami culture and even resulted in some Malay being incorporated in the spoken Arabic of the Hadramawt. The Hadramawt was regarded as a cultural training ground and the spell there the final preparation for manhood. Upon their return these youths would take their place in the family businesses.

    During the second world war, it was impossible to go back home, but the practice was resumed thereafter. However, the Rent Control Act came into effect soon after, freezing the Hadrami incomes and signalling to them that the wakaf incomes would not be sufficient for the next generation. So families began to take a keener interest in the education of their children; the richer families sent their children to London to study and others spent time working in Aden rather than just going to the Hadramawt. The cultural and linguistic links were more or less maintained. But the family incomes continued to decline.

    In the 1960s came a major change. The independence of South Yemen with a communist government in power put an end to the Singapore Hadramis returning home. At the same time, the economic developments in Singapore made the importance of the English language and of education even more essential. The new Arab generation has grown up without Arabic and has lost both its identity and its affiliation with the Hadramawt. Some families, in the oil boom of the 1970s, tried sending their sons to the Gulf or Saudi Arabia, where there were first generation Hadrami immigrants already and the young men returned with their Hadrami ties and their Arabic enhanced, but it was not a success. The young men did not like living in Saudi Arabia and their prospects in Singapore were better than in the Arabian peninsula.

    The Hadrami community in Singapore is now facing an identity crisis. The younger generation does not speak Arabic and has lost its affiliation with the Hadramawt, partly because Hadramis have stopped sending their children back there. The Arab community recognises the lack of knowledge of Arabic is a major factor and an Arabic language centre has been set up. It is hoped that the younger generation will learn both the language and about their culture and heritage. The challenge facing the community is to ensure that the new generation maintains its identity. The link with the Hadramawt needs to be re-established and travel to the Hadramawt needs to be encouraged.

    November 1995

    Authored by Ameen Ali Talib

    Source: http://www.al-bab.com/bys/articles/talib95.htm

    letters R1C

    YOUTUBE: youtube.com/user/rilek1corner

    FACEBOOK: facebook.com/rilek1corner

    TWITTER: twitter.com/Rilek1Corner

    WEBSITE: rilek1corner.com

    EMAIL: [email protected]

    FEEDBACK: CONTACT RILEK1CORNER

  • AMP-RIMA Conflict: RIMA Employees Were Laid Off, Board Members Resigned

    rima_closed_AMP_1

     

    RIMA NIZAM ISMAIL AMP

    Credit: https://www.facebook.com/azhar.khalid.18
    Credit: https://www.facebook.com/azhar.khalid.18

    What is left after an effective closure of the only independent research body within the Malay/Muslim Community – after the departure of most of the Board members and the laying off of staff. This sad picture was sent to me by someone who had a meeting next door.

    Was hoping AMP would issue a statement, as this is quite widespread by now. This is what I heard – disagreements between the boards of AMP and RIMA. The Chairman of RIMA and some board members resigned. AMP then commissioned a “review” of RIMA, and then decided to lay off the Centre Director and staff.

    There is only one professional research staff left, now physically back with AMP. RIMA was “repositioned” barely last year, with a bigger team, new Centre Director, a new Board, new logo and new premises. Barely a year on, everything was dismantled.

    I personally feel that it was not given a chance to do what it was supposed to do – provide thought leadership and research support for the Convention strategies. I feel that AMP has lost sight of the woods for the trees. RIMA was supposed to play a key role for the community.

    Now, it’s effectively dead.

    Authored by Nizam Ismail

     

    EDITOR’S NOTE

    Our sympathies to ex-RIMA employees and Centre Director who were laid off recently. We hope you guys are coping well after this dramatic change.

    We couldn’t agree more with Nizam Ismail and Azhar Khalid on the role of AMP in relation to both Malay and Muslim issues. AMP’s silence is deafening when the very fact that community issues are bustling in social media. Who say there is no Malay or Muslim voice?

    Coupled with RIMA’s change in management and direction, we are even more worried what would happened to the future of our community. The phrase ‘only hear the good things’ doesn’t work anymore at this age and time.

    We have contacted AMP and RIMA in the hope to seek their clarification on this matter. Look out for the update folks.

    letters to R1C banner

    YOUTUBE: youtube.com/user/rilek1corner

    FACEBOOK: facebook.com/rilek1corner

    TWITTER: twitter.com/Rilek1Corner

    WEBSITE: rilek1corner.com

    EMAIL: [email protected]

    FEEDBACK: rilek1corner.com/hubungir1c/

     

  • Bekas ketua AMP, Nizam Ismail hutang bank $118,000

    601740_193213774159992_1813734266_n

    nizam1carNizam1racing

     

    A FORMER director of the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP) has failed to get a court order to stop the taxman from coming after him to make good on tax arrears totalling $117,716.

    If Mr Mohd Nizam Ismail does not meet the statutory demand to settle his debt, bankruptcy proceedings can be started against him.

    But this worry has been allayed for the 46-year-old lawyer and former deputy public prosecutor for now, having reached a settlement with the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (Iras).

    He said through his lawyer See Chern Yang last night, that the “parties have reached a mutually acceptable arrangement out of court”.

    Mr Nizam, who has been working as a lawyer drawing $18,000 a month since last July, is a civil society activist who stepped down from the AMP last April. The statutory demand relates to unpaid taxes for three years from 2010.

    Mr Nizam argued that he had worked out an instalment agreement with the Iras in March last year, which it was trying to back out of. He said he had kept to an instalment plan in 2012 but was retrenched in January 2013. That made payments difficult until he came to a new agreement with the taxman two months later.

    But High Court assistant registrar Janice Wong said in judgment grounds released yesterday that she found the agreement “unworkable” and so unclear as to make it void. She said the deal was for parties to meet and reach a “reasonable agreement” on future instalments after the initial two-month period, during which he made part payments. But there was no agreed criteria or clarity as to what would amount to a “reasonable agreement”.

    It would be “odd” to expect the taxman to “hold his hands” until a “reasonable agreement” had been reached, she added.

    She noted the Comptroller had repeatedly made clear in letters from May 2 onwards that enforcement action would be taken if Mr Nizam did not settle the arrears.

    Ms Wong further rejected Mr Nizam’s claim that he relied on the agreement with the taxman as he had other financial obligations such as the maintenance of his ex-wife and children, and the payment of friendly loans.

    She said: “He fought off the most pressing fires by borrowing money to pay off those creditors. (He) must have known that in relation to the debt owed to the (Comptroller), he could buy some time, but actions to recover the debt would ultimately be brought against him.”

    By July, he was a law partner earning $18,000 a month, she said. In August, the Comptroller had offered to allow him a final payment plan of $13,000 a month, which would clear the debt by September this year.

    But he had countered with monthly payments of $6,000 to end in November next year.

    The Comptroller rejected the proposal in October, pointing to the long-outstanding tax arrears and the many attempts to accommodate Mr Nizam. The statutory demand then followed.

    Responding to queries, an Iras spokesman said yesterday that over the past five years, there have been only three applications including this one to set aside a statutory demand and all were rejected by the courts.

    “We will take appropriate actions to recover the outstanding taxes owed by the taxpayer to the State,” he added.

    K.C Vijayan for The Straits Times

    Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd