Christian Malaysians form about 11 percent of the nation\’s population of about 25 million people. If only citizens are considered, this figure totals about two million people. With an average non-Muslim family size of about five, that makes for about 400,000 Christian household heads and consequently about 800,000 or more voters. With the majority of these households now concentrated in the urban areas, I propose that voting Christians are about at least 25 percent in almost every urban constituency. This is a critical mass of a majority.
Therefore, it was very prudent and wise of the New Straits Times to significantly highlight core issues raised at CFM\’s 7th Biannual National Conference. Nevertheless, I believe that Abdul Razak Ahmad\’s very comprehensive write-up misses the core issues raised at the CFM Conference. Since I attended as an observer, I would like to make these comments to correct the incomplete reporting.
The NST headline of the article read, \’It is more about economics\’ which sadly fails to capture the central concerns addressed by the three plenary presentations. More tragically, the NST write-up seems to have selectively excluded mention of the paper by Malik Imtiaz Sarwar and his outstanding treatise tracing of the primacy of the doctrine of our secular Constitution and the preamble for the preservation of the religious rights of the minorities of Malaysia.
To make my point, I refer to NST\’s own accompanying summary on the same page which quotes CFM Chairperson Bishop Paul Tan highlighting four main points. They are:
1. Rich-poor gap regardless of ethnicity,
2. Deterioration of basic civil liberties,
3. Ethnic discrimination for employment, and
4. Trust building to reduce suspicion between communities.
Allow me therefore to expound on some of these issues. Absolute poverty still remains a serious problem, especially in outlying areas, whether in Peninsular Malaysia or Sabah and Sarawak. The Department of Statistics\’ publicly declared data does not allow the full dis-aggregating of the problem to the level of the different ethnic communities, especially of the original and aboriginal communities of Malaysia. The 9th Malaysia Plan must explicitly address this issue and problem head-on, without getting emotional every time someone like the UNDP highlights the problem. Yes, it hurts our \’developed society image\’ but the truth must be addressed.
There is also full and ample evidence of the deterioration of civil liberties. With embedded corruption in almost all government systems, their service delivery is skewed in their perception and definition of the real problem. The glaring disparity of discrimination against non-bumiputeras in the public services sector is becoming more and more apparent. Is it not strange that out of so many public universities, not one is headed or has even a deputy vice-chancellor who is non-bumi? How is it that after 48 years of independence, our public services are becoming more and more strangely homogenous? What has happened to the 4 to 1 ratio at the point of recruitment agreed to at Independence? I would also like to know the proportion of non-bumiputera residents in Putrajaya? If this is the national capital, should not the composition of Putrajaya be also reflective of our national constitution (pun intended)? Maybe we need to give non-bumiputra discounts to attract them to relocate there! That is a matter of \”mere economics!\”
National unity today must move beyond the \’wayang kulit\’ of durian parties and muhibbah dinners. When an individual\’s personal freedom of choice is denied by the system it is a blatant and violent denial of their God-given dignity and human right for living a life of destiny before the Almighty. As in the recent case of the International Islamic University student who did not get to attend her convocation , when the public space of life is hijacked by sectarian interests, the God-given human right of dignity of choice and destiny of life are denied. Here, the trust building programmess like the one to be started by National Unity of \’religion sensitisation\’ programs are absolutely essential and critical. \’Syabas\’ also to the cabinet for the wise ruling on \’non-compulsion\’ of superficial religiosity which is merely worn on the sleeves. The UIA is a public-funded university, and all Malaysians have the freedom to not only study there but also to do so without the denial of their God-given dignity of choice. To my mind, only privately-funded universities can make such narrow regulations but even then to their own business detriment.
Where then do we go from here? The CFM Conference, as with the National Congress on Integrity (NCI 2005) held earlier this year co-organised by the Oriental Hearts and Mind Study Institute (OHMSI) and the GCF, are primarily Christian or faith-driven conferences to inform and educate the Christian community regarding issues of Christian citizenship in Malaysia while adhering to the teachings of Jesus Christ. They are spiritual-political statements about what is good, right, and righteous for Malaysia. Economics may be a factor but surely that will be less than the central thesis of such a meeting of the faithful. We leave that to the sphere of an individual\’s personal economic judgment, and the Church should and will not make business her main business! Many such lessons have been learnt in the past through bad decisions.
The writer is the convenor, Oriental Hearts and Mind Study Institute (OHMSI).