LEMBAGA Perpustakaan Negara (NLB) akan melakar satu proses yang lebih jelas untuk buku-buku yang telah ditarik keluar dari senarai bacaan awam “disebabkan kandungan yang kontroversi”.
Menerusi pendekatan yang dikemaskinikan, NLB tidak akan terus memusnahkan buku-buku yang dianggap tidak sesuai, sebaliknya akan mencari jalan lain untuk mengenepikan buku-buku ini.
Jaminan ini diberikan Menteri Penerangan dan Maklumat, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, yang berkata, NLB tidak akan terus memusnahkan buku-buku yang dianggap tidak sesuai dibaca khalayak umum.
“Untuk buku-buku yang masih berkeadaan baik tetapi telah ditarik keluar disebabkan kandungannya yang kontroversi, NLB akan mempertimbangkan pilihan lain selain memusnahkannya.
“Saya tidak mahu mendahului pertimbangan mereka, tetapi salah satu kemungkinan adalah untuk meletakkan buku-buku ini di bahagian yang lebih sesuai untuk khalayak pembacanya membuat pinjaman, sepertimana yang dilakukan dalam kes ini (kes tiga buku kanak-kanak berbaur homoseksual yang kini ditarik keluar dan dua ditempatkan di bahagian dewasa).
“Kemungkinan lain termasuklah meletakkannya di bahagian rujukan, atau dijual atau didermakan,” kata Dr Yaacob.
Tengkarah tercetus awal bulan lalu menyusuli tindakan NLB menarik keluar tiga buku kanak-kanak berbahasa Inggeris yang berbaur homoseksual – And Tango Makes Three, mengenai dua penguin jantan yang menetaskan telur; The White Swan Express: A Story About Adoption, yang antara lain memaparkan pasangan lesbian dan ibu tunggal; dan, Who’s In My Family?: All About Our Families, tentang pelbagai struktur keluarga.
Keputusan itu dibuat NLB menyusuli maklum balas awam yang mendapati buku-buku tersebut tidak mencerminkan resam hidup masyarakat di sini yang konservatif.
There was a sharp exchange yesterday between Minister of State (National Development) Maliki Osman and Workers’ Party Member of Parliament Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, which even saw Parliament Speaker Halimah Yacob stepping in to remind MPs of the importance of providing details when they cite incidents involving government agencies and public servants.
During the debate on the Family Justice Bill, Mr Faisal had alleged that when he was a counsellor, he came across a couple who were having housing issues and advised to file for a divorce by the Housing and Development Board — so that the wife would be eligible to buy a house under the Singles Scheme and she could subsequently remarry her husband. Mr Faisal, however, could not provide the details. Here are excerpts of the exchange:
Dr Maliki (left): It is very important for Members of the House to understand that if we highlight cases in this House, we have to be prepared to disclose all information … Because I don’t think allegations of such a nature can be allowed to go past without verification. I hope Mr Faisal will be able to get back to the (client) and ask … for permission for us to clarify this situation. If not, I hope the case that was highlighted here should not be considered seriously in this Chamber.
Mr Faisal (right): I don’t have (the) contacts since I am no longer a counsellor. But again, I used that as one example of many cases I have encountered of such difficulties … I don’t have the details of my client.
Mdm Halimah: It is quite different to say that HDB rejected the appeal (compared) to saying that it is because of the advice of the HDB officer that the couple should divorce … So since you cited the person and you said you got her approval to raise the issue, the question asked by the Minister of State is whether you can provide particulars so he can verify and prevent (the situation) from repeating if (it) is indeed … as you have said.
Dr Maliki: These are very serious statements that are being made against our civil servants … If such allegations are made, we must give them a chance to clarify …
Mr Faisal: I have no intention of disregarding the good work that has been done by civil servants in our public services. I just wanted to feedback the experiences that I had encountered …
Dr Maliki: It is very important for us to uphold the integrity of this Chamber and … that of our Civil Service. The Member highlighted a case and made very serious allegations that a HDB officer actually asked the couple to divorce … For such allegations to be made in this Chamber, it is very serious.
Mdm Halimah: Although Members are covered by parliamentary privilege, it is important when incidents are cited, particularly involving government agencies and public servants, the particulars can be provided … to verify … the facts. That will really help to improve the debate in the House, it adds credibility to the whole process … as well.
(After Law and Foreign Minister K Shanmugam had wrapped up the debate)
Mr Faisal: It is not my intention to give a negative impression of any of the public services or government offices. I will be more careful in future and I apologise.
After the last email sent to them, the deputy manager called. Attempting to give excuses for the managers’ actions, saying that it was due to carelessness that the managers behaved that way.
Which is funny because they also mentioned the managers were very experienced and always do routine regulation checks on the promoters. According to the deputy manager, there is an SOP to adhere to but they did not follow the SOP for addressing a regulation problem (in this case-the attire).
Upon further probing, on the SOP for a sensitive issue like shoplifting, the deputy manager explained that in the event of a shoplifting, the SOP that follows requires the manager to bring the shoplifter to a private area away from public eye for further investigations. Did the victim commit a crime far worse than shoplifting that it had to be addressed in the public’s eye there and then?
And the best part, one of the managers involved in the incident tried to contact Puma directly to find out a detailed information of the victim without the knowledge of the deputy manager. In doing so, she has unknowingly revealed her identity.
As of now, there is still no reply from them.
The deputy manager is a nice and friendly man who is trying his best to cater to both parties and is caught in this messy situation. The managers should be the ones addressing this matter.
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.
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.
I’m getting frustrated being labeled as non-Malay. Why? Here’s my story.
My mom is a Filipino Catholic and my dad is a Malay Muslim. None of my parents convert, and so I was brought up going to church several times a year. Never been to a mosque because my dad has never cultivate any Islamic values in me or in our family. At this age, I still don’t know what is my religion, and I like it that way. But this topic is not about my religion. Being brought up speaking both Malay and Tagalog, and having experience both cultures, I do have a valid testimony to this confusion. Today I want to share my story about being a Filipino-Malay.
But first, I think the term Filipino Malay is oxymoronic.
Filipinos are of Malay stock. I know because I study SEA’s history in uni and this is my area of research.
People of ASEAN mostly they came from Malay stock that is why our face and skin complexion looks very much the same. Although there are many mixed marriage it didn’t only happen in the Philippines.
In the Philippines they call it mestizo while in other countries they have their own abbreviation. Please don’t think that Malay people in the Philippines are the only Malay who practice inter-racial marriages. There are many others in Indonesia (Dutch), Malaysia & Singapore (Chinese, Indian, British, Portuguese), Brunei etc.
Because of different religious background people may forget that Filipinos are actually Malay because predominantly Malays in ASEAN are Muslim while in the Philippines almost all of them are Catholic.
You don’t lump the race Malay as people who subscribe to the religion Islam, and therefore they are Muslims. Neither do you claim all Filipinos are Catholics.
Language is a little bit different but they derived from the ancient Malay language. While Indonesians, Malaysians, and Bruneians can understand each other, many find it hard to understand Tagalog because it is completely different language BUT there are words that are similar or sounded similar. I don’t think there is any problem if people from these countries want to learn Tagalog/Bahasa Melayu/Indonesia.
Tagalog is partly influenced by Spanish language, Malay, Chinese and local language like kapampangan, waray, cebuano.
Spanish = trabajo is trabaho in tagalog
Malay = kerbau is carabao in tagalog, mata is same in both language, as of kanan, kambing, anak etc.
If asked about their race, most Filipinos would identify as being Malay. Filipinos are taught in schools to be proud of their Malay heritage and encouraged to strengthen their ties with other Malays in Southeast Asia.
But Filipinos wishing to migrate in Singapore have to deny this fundamental identification because the Singapore government rejects the classification of Filipinos as Malay. But if Filipinos are not Malay, what ethnicity are they? Officially, Singapore recognizes immigrants from the neighboring Philippines as part of the racial category referred to as “Other.”
Singapore’s Immigration and Checkpoints Authority have clarified that new Singapore citizens of Filipino origin are not classified as Malays. They are typically classified as ‘Others’ under the race category. Indeed, this was affirmed by Communications and Information Minister Yaacob Ibrahim who wrote on Facebook that Filipinos are classified as “Others” and not as Malays.
But why refuse the Malay background of Filipinos in the first place? Perhaps it has something to do with the special privileges accorded to the Malay minority in Singapore. Article 152 of the Constitution of Singapore states that the government “shall recognize the special position of the Malays, who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language.”
For Filipino immigrants, it must come as a shock for them to be told by Singaporean authorities that they are not Malays. To avoid immigration troubles, perhaps it is more convenient for Filipino workers to shade the “Others” category when filing paperwork than to insist that they are Malays.
