Tag: discrimination

Tudung Issue: In Defence Of Faisal Manap

A motion on the achievements of Singapore women took a drastic turn when Minister Masagos had an intense exchange with WP MP Faisal Manap in Parliament over the tudung issue yesterday.

The exchange took place in a middle of a debate on supporting the aspirations of women in Singapore, after Faisal Manap had raised the tudung issue in an earlier speech.

In a nut shell, Masagos was taking Faisal Manap to task for constantly raising “divisive” issues such as the tudung issue, role of Malays in the SAF, and Palestine etc. You get the drift. Difficult issues that tend to put the government in a spot. That might drive a wedge by making these issues into what Masagos called a “state vs religion” matter.

Why keep focusing on such issues, Masagos asked, instead of focusing on issues that matter most to the Malay-Muslim community – education, housing, jobs. Why not focus on issues that are more important and constructive?

Now, Faisal Manap is a politician at the end of the day. While I’m sure that issues such as tudung, role of Malays in the SAF and Palestine do matter to many Malay-Muslims, I am also sure that Faisal Manap specifically raised these issues precisely because these were tough issues that would put the government in a spot. And to gain some political mileage out of it too by playing to the gallery. i.e. Faisal Manap is just being a politician.

E.g. remember the photo of him praying before a GE rally in 2015, which appeared on social media?

Like what many other politicians do actually. Including PAP ones. Just that sometimes they are lousier at it – e.g remember. Koh Poh Koon helping an old auntie to carrying 32kg of old newspapers.

Yet, three points in defense of Faisal Manap:

1) Sole Malay Opposition MP

Now, the PAP is accusing Faisal Manap of raising “divisive” issues on a regular basis. The thing is, if not him, then who? There aren’t any other Malay-Muslim opposition MPs, so the onus is on him to raise certain issues that members of the Malay-Muslims want answers to.

Perhaps Faisal Manap wouldn’t need to raise such issues if Malay-Muslim PAP MPs have the guts to raise them in Parliament in the first place.

2) If not in Parliament, then where?

Masagos said that the government does not discuss such issues in public forums, such as Parliament, as they are sensitive and potentially divisive, and can be easily misunderstood because they are complex and difficult to resolve. Instead, Masagos said, the government addresses these issues behind closed doors with community leaders.

Not that we can’t discuss behind closed doors at times, but honestly, what’s so wrong about an elected representative raising issues that matter to his constituents in Parliament? And if we can’t have an open debate in Parliament, then where is a right platform for law makers to debate sensitive, but important stuff?

At least Parliament is a public forum where everything that’s said is recorded into the Hansard – so we know what exactly is said. As opposed to doing things behind closed doors all the time, where the public wouldn’t know what’s going on.

When can this society have an honest conversation about things, rather than sweep them under the rug?

3) Point about Zulfikar was a red herring

In his speech, Masagos raised the point about Zulfikar (remember the dude who was detained under the ISA last year for promoting violence and ISIS?) and Faisal Manap being at an event at the same time.

That was a classic red herring that is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand:

Somewhat insinuating something else also. Which is an ad hominem:

Nope. Not cool at all, Masagos.

That is all.

The end.

Source: www.thoughtssg.com

April 5, 2017
Masagos Zulkifli Should Be More Patient, Address Issues, Instead Of Using Diversionary Tactics

So Masagos Zulkifli came out with all guns blazing accusing WP’s Faisal Manap of playing to the gallery to score political points. What did Faisal Manap do to earn the ire of Masagos? Well, once again, Faisal brought up an issue dear to the Muslim community which is the hijab issue. This, according to Masagos, was tantamount to being divisive. From Masagos’ point of view, the correct way to bring the issue forward was to discuss it behind closed doors.

Excuse me Mr Masagos, Faisal Manap, as an MP representing the minority Malay community in his ward, was just doing his job. If as an MP he cannot voice out such issues in Parliament, where else can he voice out? Does he have to resort to speaking to nobody at the Speaker’s Corner? Why the need for minority representation in a GRC if matters like this cannot be raised in Parliament?

You, as a Minister, was also being disrespectful by attacking him like this. Why didn’t you use the parliamentary platform to address the issues? Where is your patience, a virtue of Prophet Muhammad SAW which is encouraged in Islam?

How many times has the government engaged the Malay/Muslim community, as well as the wider community, on the topic of hijab and discrimination in NS? These are matters that not only affect our community but also the wider Singaporean community?

Why the need to discuss behind closed doors all the time? Has there been any improvements using this approach? Yes this is a sensitive and emotive issue but don’t forget that Malays are now more integrated than ever and are more educated. We can accept decisions based on sound reasoning and if they are not in conflict with our religious tenets. We understand that there are other issues that need to be considered. We are not myopic and narrow minded.

Rahman

[Reader Contribution]

April 5, 2017
Malays Most Racially Discriminated Group In Malaysia, Says Former Minister

Contrary to what some may believe, Malays are the most discriminated race in Malaysia, Mr Zaid Ibrahim said on Tuesday (March 21).

The former law minister said that while all ethnic groups in the country are prejudiced racially, none compare to the discrimination faced by Malays, especially on issues like khalwat or close proximity among men and women who are not married to each other or have no family relations.

“Non-Malays are not only the victims. I think the Malays are discriminated too. You think khalwat laws are not discriminating against the Malays.

“Most of the victims of discrimination in this country are Malays. Malays however unfortunately have low grade leaders leading them. They are taught false teachings or understandings,” Mr Zaid said during a forum on racial discrimination here.

The DAP member however added that many Malays fail to see this as they are disillusioned by the current crop of leaders.

“Discrimination happens to all of us. When a policy discriminates one, we have to take ownership

“My greatest fear for this county is Malays being given a false sense of power, ownership of the country. They will not be able to see for themselves. The Malays will be left out,” Mr Zaid said.

Ms Noor Farida Ariffin of the G25 civil group started by prominent Malay government pensioners who was also present, said that there were government institutions that undermined Putrajaya’s other efforts to promote racial harmony.

She named the National Civics Bureau, popularly known by its Malay abbreviation, as an example.

“Not only there is minor racism but there are institutions in government that covertly promoting racism.

“BTN’s course is supposed to promote national unity but instead is promoting Malay supremacy,” she said during the forum.

The former diplomat also said the National Economic Policy (NEP) was supposed to help the poor of all races, but instead was “hijacked” to promote a Malay agenda.

“The NEP has been hijacked. It is supposed to eradicate poverty but it has only concentrated on the Malay agenda,” Noor Farida said.

She added that though the Barisan Nasional coalition had formed a multiracial government, its component parties still played the racial card to garner voter support.

“Racial politics are entrenched in the country. Political parties are raced based. The government is making efforts to stamp out racism and promote unity, but the main partner in the ruling coalition is promoting racism, day in day out,” Ms Noor Farida said.

On Tuesday, a report was also released which found that discrimination based on the colour of one’s skin seems to be on the rise in Malaysia despite the government’s efforts to promote moderation and racial harmony.

The Racial Discrimination Report 2016 by non-profit social outfit Pusat Komas found that strained ethnic relations are growing although the National Unity Consultative Council has been working to bolster ties.

“Recent incidents of racial discrimination, racism and stained ethnic relations within the Malaysian society have increasingly surfaced over the years despite the Prime Minister’s numerous assurances and claims at home and abroad that the government promotes moderation in the country,” the report presented by programme coordinator Ryan Chua read.

The report added that the growth of social media has also made the racial divide further with more room for such negative sentiments to be propagated.

“The emergence of the Internet and social media platforms has provided more open spaces and platforms for widespread expression of racial sentiments and hate speech,” it read.

The report was based on news reports on racial discrimination in 2015 and 2016. It also found that many Malaysians were critical of the authorities for their “lack of enforcement and actions towards overt and public declarations of racial sentiments” by groups perceived as racial supremacist.

Among several recommendations, Pusat Komas urged the government to immediately sign and ratify the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination under the United Nations to promote equality among Malaysians.

It also recommended harsher punishments for individuals, especially politicians, who make racially inciting statements.

“The government must be willing to impose heavy legal and formal sanctions on any government Minister’s, senior officers, elected representatives, organisations and groups, individuals… who exhibit racist and discriminatory tendencies and in speech and action,” the report read.

The report highlighted various cases of racial discrimination which happened over the past year which includes statements made by political figures like Umno grassroots leader Jamal Yunos and Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali.

Source: Today

March 23, 2017
Preference Or Just Racist: Prefer A Non-Malay Baby Sitter

Too many Malay men sex abusing infants in Singapore? Like pedophiles?! I haven’t heard of one such incident in Singapore. As much as we’d like to think we are very multi-racial, everyday I still come across racism in Singapore. Be it finding a job or doing anything else, most Chinese people/employers always seem to play the race card. Pretty sick of this.

Source: Nana Bruns

March 16, 2017
Firms Can Ban Wearing Of Religious Symbols: EU Court

European companies can ban employees from wearing religious or political symbols including the Islamic headscarf, the European Union’s top court ruled on Tuesday (March 14) in a landmark case.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) said it does not constitute “direct discrimination” if a firm has an internal rule banning the wearing of “any political, philosophical or religious sign”.

The Luxembourg-based court was ruling on the case of a Muslim woman fired by the security company G4S in Belgium after she insisted on wearing a headscarf.

The ruling came on the eve of a Dutch election in which Muslim immigration has been a key issue and a bellwether for attitudes to migration and refugee policies across Europe. Terror attacks by over the past year or so have raised alarms in the continent, where the wearing of religious symbols, and especially Islamic symbols such as the headscarf has become a hot button issue.

Mr Manfred Weber, head of the centre-right European People’s Party, the biggest in the European Parliament, welcomed the ruling.

“Important ruling by the European Court of Justice: employers have the right to ban the Islamic veil at work. European values must apply in public life,” Mr Weber said in a tweet.

The ECJ was ruling on a case dating to 2003 when Ms Samira Achbita, a Muslim, was employed as a receptionist by G4S security services in Belgium.

At the time, the company had an “unwritten rule” that employees should not wear any political, religious or philosophical symbols at work, the ECJ said.

In 2006, Ms Achbita told G4S she wanted to wear the Islamic headscarf at work but was told this would not be allowed.

Subsequently, the company introduced a formal ban. Ms Achbita was dismissed and she went to court claiming discrimination.

The ECJ said European Union law does bar discrimination on religious grounds, but G4S’s actions were based on treating all employees the same, meaning no one person was singled out for application of the ban.

“The rule thus treats all employees of the undertaking in the same way, notably by requiring them, generally and without any differentiation, to dress neutrally,” the ECJ said.

“Accordingly, such an internal rule does not introduce a difference of treatment that is directly based on religion or belief,” it said.

However in a related case in France, the ECJ ruled that a customer could not demand that a company employee not wear the Islamic headscarf when conducting business with them on its behalf.

Design engineer Asma Bougnaoui was employed full-time by Micropole, a private company, in 2008, having been told that wearing the headscarf might cause problems with clients.

Following a customer complaint, Micropole asked Ms Bougnaoui not to wear the headscarf on the grounds employees should be dressed neutrally.

She was subsequently dismissed and went to court claiming discrimination.

The ECJ said the case turned on whether there was an internal company rule in place applicable to all, as in the G4S instance, or whether the client’s demand meant Ms Bougnaoui was treated differently.

The ECJ concluded that Ms Bougnaoui had indeed been treated differently and so the client’s demand that she not wear a headscarf “cannot be considered a genuine and determining occupational requirement”.

Source: Today

March 15, 2017