The Hindraf lawsuit in London on March 30

Latest update (2 April 2015):

The Hindraf class action suit has been struck out by the London High Court. Read here.


 

Lawsuit to set aright an historical wrong 

1. Hindraf’s civil suit against the British crown will get its first hearing this coming Monday (March 30) in the London High Court. It was refiled on 2 July 2012 after the initial suit filed on 30 Aug 2007 – preceding the historic Hindraf rally (25 Nov 2007) – had lapsed.

2. According to Hindraf chairman P. Waytha Moorthy, the unprecedented class action “is likely to expand the law beyond the current narrow interpretations of the law of tort and international laws”. He also expects the case to cause great embarrassment to Whitehall.

3. Waytha, who is representing the claimants (descendants of indentured Indian labour), says that the British Nationality Act 1948 meant that the third and fourth generation of Indian plantation workers in Malaya were citizens in a UK colony as India had been under British rule.

By virtue of these rubber tappers being citizens of a British colony, Britain owed a duty of care to them and the other Indian workers imported into Malaya by the colonial masters. The Hindraf class action suit calls to account the British government for its role in the marginalized socio-economic status of the Indian community today as a result of racial discrimination.

4. The Government of Her Majesty the Queen, contends Waytha, was negligent in duty as it failed to provide a Malayan constitution that met the minimum standard upon its departure from the country. He further contends that our constitution was not consonant with the international standards of human rights that existed in 1957.

5. Waytha characterizes the federal constitution as one where the British failed to appreciate the vulnerable and peculiar position of the Indians who remained in Malaya after Merdeka as well as failed to protect and preserve their rights and interests.

According to the Hindraf lawsuit, the federal constitution is a “compromised” document. The Reid Commission mandated to draft the Malayan constitution had deferred to the recommendations introduced by the working party despite the inequality of citizenship rights due to the amendments where the rights of one racial and religious group surpasses that of other racial or religious groups.

The working party was headed by the British High Commissioner in Malaya but controlled by the Alliance government and the Malay Rulers.

6. The working party caused to be removed, from the final version of the Malayan constitution, certain crucial provisions and recommendations made by the Reid constitutional commission as well as added certain other provisions that defeated the original spirit of draft, says Hindraf.

“What is even more disturbing is that the non-Malays do not have rights but only ‘legitimate interests’ under Article 153 of the constitution,” Waytha notes.

7. Hindraf national adviser, N. Ganesan says the court process is tantamount to taking on the British establishment: “The documentary evidence we have collated is overwhelming. Hindraf has established the reputation of doing the unthinkable, unparalleled in the history of our country. We will do as we say, no matter its difficulty and say only what we intend to do.”

8. According to Hindraf, the London constitutional conference had specified in its terms of reference for the creation of the new Malayan constitution that the rights, welfare and interests the Indian labourers were to be safeguarded.

It was this London conference that provided the mandate for the Reid constitutional commission to formulate the Merdeka constitution.

9. Although the Indians left behind were soon to become permanent settlers, the British had failed to grant them land titles at the advent of Merdeka.

Hindraf accuses the British of “failure to ensure all Hindu temples, crematoriums, graveyards, Tamil schools and community halls that existed on the day of Independence on 31 Aug 1957 were legalized and issued with land titles”.

10. As a result of the British government’s dereliction of duty, the Indians have remained a “permanently colonised community“, alleges Hindraf. Speaking from London to FMT, Waytha points out that it is not only the Indians who have been neglected by the constitution but other ethnic groups too.

“Though the Orang Asli are the original inhabitants in the peninsula, their rights and interests were not represented during the drafting and granting of the Malayan constitution,” Waytha points out. “There is no special provision to protect their position nor is there any recognition of their status as the original inhabitants of Malaya.”

Conclusion

Summing up the lawsuit, Ganesan says, “No amount of falsehoods or belittlement of our actions by these deceitful and selfish detractors [sceptical of our purpose] will stop us from powering ahead. We are driven by our unwavering belief in justice.”

30 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Helen Ang  |  March 27, 2015 at 3:54 am

    Najib may have found an unexpected ally in the DAP which swears that it will defend Article 153 of the federal constitution on the ‘special position’ of the Malays.

    Lim Kit Siang has proposed that his party and the BN parties form a new ‘Save Malaysia’ coalition government.

    Kit Siang’s proffered unity government promises that the DAP will protect the fundamental principles of the constitution as well as defend Article 153, Article 152 (national language) and role of the monarchy – see his press statement issued yesterday.

    Kit Siang’s forked tongue is darting out from both sides of his mouth.

    One of the DAP’s public declarations is its long-held objective with regard to “Penghapusan pembahagian antara ‘bumiputera’ dan ‘bukan bumiputera’ dan pelaksanaan kesaksamaan etnik”, see http://dapmalaysia.org/parti/matlamat/party-polisi/

    And now Kit Siang swears that the DAP will defend the ‘bumiputera’ privileges.

    Do you believe this man who was ISA-ed one-and-a-half years for his role in sparking May 13 and do you trust his slippery chameleon party?

    It’s like how the DAP misled PAS over their support for the Islamic state aspiration but turned around to attack PAS and its president so viciously.

    Reply
    • 2. islam1st  |  March 27, 2015 at 4:39 am

      Umar Mukhtar summed it best Helen, apo nak dikato bila, ‘But what if it is the Ah Bengs who run their show?’

      http://www.malaysia-today.net/hudud-and-being-malaysian/

      Reply
      • 3. Helen Ang  |  March 27, 2015 at 4:49 am

        To put it another way, Kit Siang’s coalition would be the parties and MPs united against hudud. On the opposing side would be the parties and MPs supporting hudud.

        So Malaysia would be polarized into two camps – one anti-Islamic law, and its opponent that is pro-Islamic law.

        Isn’t this what I’ve been saying all along, i.e. Christians (& adherents of other religion) vs. Muslims.

        Reply
        • 4. islam1st  |  March 27, 2015 at 5:02 am

          Yup Helen but Masing had said it out loud and clear that their staying with BN regardless whether UMNO supports Hudud or not. Its part of BN maturity, he says, something MCA and Gerakan needs to learn, I would say.

          “We will not leave the BN. Certainly we will not entertain the hidden agenda of some people. We will stay in BN as BN is our home and family. Although I may be outspoken and vocal on certain pertinent issues that do not mean we are trying to leave or go against the BN,” he said.

          Read more: http://www.theborneopost.com/2014/12/01/prs-will-ignore-calls-to-leave-bn-says-masing/#ixzz3VWkioWqg

          Even Nancy Shukri from PBB pun tak masuk campur keputusan UMNO but stated that she and her party, and the people of Sarawak won’t vote for it. Dia tak paksa2 UMNO atau melalak macam DAP suruh UMNO make a stand on Hudud.

          UPKO acting president pun bersopan bila komen bab Hudud ni.

          “It is not up to Upko to comment about the Islamic penal code but the party will oppose any form of private member’s bill and to safeguard whatever is in the Malaysia Agreement,” Tangau was quoted as saying in the report. – See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/pass-hudud-violates-malaysia-agreement-says-upko#sthash.fIIclb0O.dpuf

          Tapi bila party kaki judi, kaki gangster, kaki pusat urut, China dolls etc jadi MP semua jadi lintang-pukang. Sikit hari lagi Parlimen kita akan jadi macam Taiwan!

          Reply
  • 5. islam1st  |  March 27, 2015 at 4:49 am

    ‘Though the Orang Asli are the original inhabitants in the peninsula, their rights and interests were not represented during the drafting and granting of the Malayan constitution’

    Bijak bawa masuk Orang Asli masuk sekali sebagai kaum yang tertindas di Malaysia, post British..hahaha bijak-bijak-bijak-dah agak dahhhhhh!

    Saya harap Hindraf menang, lepas ni boleh NGO Melayu dan NGO Muslims bersatu hati untuk usulkan kajian supaya menyaman kerajaan Britain pula. Bila dah menang boleh saman, Portugal, Belanda dan Jepun pula!

    Reply
    • 6. islam1st  |  March 27, 2015 at 5:04 am

      NGO Melayu pasal penjarahan kekayaan, emas, bijih timah, rempah ratus, dsb Semenanjung Tanah Melayu dan penderitaan dan kehilangan nyawa oleh berjuta pribumi Melayu.

      NGO Islam pasal penghapusan secara jahat dan terancang undang-undang Islam dengan pembentukkan Persekutuan yang baru dengan perundangan sekular!

      Reply
    • 7. mulanmalaysia  |  March 27, 2015 at 8:13 am

      Saman juga Jepun yang rosakkan Tanah Melayu dan Borneo.
      Jangan lupa Negeri Cina yang bawa komunis ke sini dan Taiwan yang bawa kacau Kuo Ming Tang ke sini.

      Reply
    • 8. anonymous  |  March 28, 2015 at 7:32 am

      Not a fan of Hindu Rights Action Force.

      The way they went about this, I wonder how long the British would tolerate them.

      I’m not aware of any similar suit towards the Malaysian government and Malay rulers so I suppose they already know that what they are doing in UK simply won’t fly here, attacking the constitution and the Malays it protects. Their detractors deceitful and selfish?

      Well, they bothered to mention Orang Asli being unfairly treated but did they bother to consult their representatives and include them along in the suit?

      Maybe they should follow the example of the Malaysian alliance government back then and work with others instead of against. Perhaps they think battling a huge legal battle serves justice better for their ancestors and their people now.

      Well if they gave up cooperating with Najib that easily I don’t think the British government would have a hard time defeating their suit and forcing them to give up as well.

      The British won’t allow this. If the British allows this one, then who knows how many else would follow?

      Reply
      • 9. Helen Ang  |  March 28, 2015 at 9:30 am

        re: “Not a fan of Hindu Rights Action Force.”

        They’ve been a victim of the press, e.g. like how the alternative media kenakan Hadi Awang and Muhyiddin Yassin.

        As for the mainstream media and its relationship with Hindraf, I’ll give you one example.

        In March 2013, Waytha Moorthy was on a hunger strike to the point he collapsed and had to be rushed to the hospital. Throughout his entire fast, The J-Star did not publish a single report. They blacked out the story totally. Their first coverage of the episode was only when Najib agreed to meet Hindraf reps at Putrajaya.

        Waytha represents a sizeable Indian constituency – the Hindus (as the name of his movement says) and the poor.

        Yet the J-Star did not believe that his hunger strike merited any write-up.

        This attitude reflects the policy of the paper generally and as a whole towards the acute problems faced by the marginalized Indian community – i.e. just ignore and pretend they don’t exist because their problems aren’t pretty, such as gangsterism, broken families (from the breadwinner being in jail), unemployment, urban slums (squatters, no home ownership), lack of education (home environment not conducive for high scholastic achievement), lack of economic opportunities and hence no upward mobility.

        In short, the Hindraf constituency is trapped in a cycle of poverty.

        Compare with the kind of coverage and publicity that the J-Star gives to other events and personalities – church concerts, Hannah Yeoh’s coffee table book launch, Anas Zubedy’s United Colours of Benetton-type programmes, Niki Cheong’s social media activities, etc.

        Hindraf is invisible on the media landscape. The problems that poor Indians face do not get much media attention, if at all. For instance, take this story, http://poskod.my/features/down-and-out-in-dengkil/

        “In 1999, around 400 families from four estates (Prang Besar, Sedgeley, Medengley and Galloway) were moved to these flats in Taman Permata after their estates were acquired for the development of Putrajaya. […]

        “Ramadass said the federal government had given them notice of the land acquisition in 1995.

        “They said they would give us terrace houses, and then gave us these flats to live in. They told us it was only temporary. Asked about the flats, the residents are unanimous in their displeasure. I listen to stories of shaky conditions, of unsteady foundations and wall decay.

        “We live in fear. There are a lot of cracks in the building. And a lot of the residents here are elderly, so we all worried something could happen to them.” Ramadass said.

        “Every time it rains, the place floods. It is very difficult to stay here…”

        – ‘Down and Out in Dengkil’ (poskod.my, 13 Aug 2013)

        Right up to 2013 when the DEWs (Displaced Estate Workers) of Taman Permata, Dengkil staged their protests, they were still living in the unsafe flats with cracks, and that get flooded every time it rains.

        They were evicted from the land that became Putrajaya and were not given the terrace houses they were promised. It was only in July 2014 that the DEWs were given an undertaking by the Selangor government that low-cost houses would be build for them.

        Those 400 Indian families should have been incorporated in the Felda resettlement programmes back in 1999 when they lost their estate jobs but unfortunately Felda is only for Malays, with a few exceptions. So they had to fend for themselves and take on jobs in the factories, as cleaners and in other blue-collar work.

        In one of our one-on-one chats, Uthayakumar told me that among the Indian poor, each person would know of someone – whether a family member, a relative or a friend – who had committed suicide. It might seem an exaggeration or far-fetched to you and me but nonetheless it illustrates the depressing/despairing social milieu in which they live.

        When I was visiting Uthaya in Kajang prison, I noticed that most of the visitors were Indians, meaning that most of the jail inmates were Indians and this is way disproportionate to the Indians (7.3%) in our national population.

        The following is a story of the impact of imprisonment and suicide among the Indian poor, http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Community/2014/03/29/Family-in-dire-straits-Husband-and-wife-with-18-children-trapped-in-poverty/

        Excerpts from the 29 March 2014 J-Star article:

        “K. SARASWATHY Dewi, 39, and her husband S. Vellu, 49, have 18 children and they are facing financial difficulties.

        Of the 18, seven are their biological children while the rest are nieces and nephews they adopted when the children’s fathers died.

        Vellu is a lorry driver while his wife was laid off two months ago as a cook at a private hospital after her nine years of service. The family lives in a rented three-room single storey house in Jalan Templer, Petaling Jaya.

        One of Saraswathy’s younger brothers, K. Chandran, was a contract worker and he died in 2005 while working at a construction site in Sungai Buloh. He left behind five children between the ages of eight and 14. His wife has since remarried and left the children under Saraswathy’s care.

        In 2007, another younger brother of hers, K. Letchumanan, died in prison. Letchumanan’s wife committed suicide in 2008 and they left behind six children between the ages of 12 and 18.”

        Not many people are fans of Hindraf but who will address the problems of the Indian poor? The do-good article above about was helpful in soliciting public donations for the family but it is an ad hoc, one-off approach of applying plaster to the wound.

        The underlying issue is these particular segments of Indians have been left as the neglected and oftentimes invisible underclass – their jobs (from the story above) – lorry driver, cook, construction site labourer, custodial death (“died in prison”), wife committed suicide while the oldest child of the family of 20 works as a nurse.

        More media attention is showered on activists demonstrating to free Anwar and on ‘Freedom of Speech’, civil liberties, human rights, etc rather than on stories like Sarawathy’s above.

        Btw, there are two claimants to the Hindraf name – by Uthaya and Waytha both.

        Persatuan Hindraf Malaysia has got the approval of the Registrar of Societies, and it is Waytha’s.

        Reply
        • 10. I am Dalit how are you?  |  March 28, 2015 at 10:03 am

          [YouTube]

          Great soul Gandhi says:
          “Be the change that you want to see in the world.”

          Reply
        • 11. Helen Ang  |  March 28, 2015 at 10:16 am

          AMEND

          re: “Hindraf is invisible on the media landscape.”

          I meant Hindraf is invisible in The J-Star.

          Among the English media, FMT does give coverage to Hindraf.

          Malaysiakini does also but rather negatively on Waytha. It makes the point of calling Waytha’s outfit “PHM” (Persatuan Hindraf Malaysia) to deny Waytha the Hindraf name and to try and delegitimize his connection with the 2007 street rally movement.

          Reply
      • 12. Helen Ang  |  March 28, 2015 at 9:58 am

        re: “The way they went about this, I wonder how long the British would tolerate them. I’m not aware of any similar suit towards the Malaysian government and Malay rulers so I suppose they already know that what they are doing in UK simply won’t fly here, attacking the constitution and the Malays it protects. Their detractors deceitful and selfish?”

        Countries do pay reparations. Germany paid reparations to Israel.

        This is interesting:

        “In 1999, in response to the filing of numerous class action lawsuits in American courts, the German government and German industry agreed to compensate Jews and non-Jews specifically for slave and forced labor they performed for German industry during the war. Among the German industries that came under the lawsuits were Deutsche Bank AG, Siemens, BMW, Volkswagen, and Opel.” See, https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/reparations.html

        Also read this, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/uk-compensate-kenya-mau-mau-torture

        As to why Hindraf is suing the British crown and not the Malay rulers or Malaysian government, I’d look at it like how the black Africans were taken to the American Deep South to work in the cotton fields albeit the blacks were slave labour while in the Indians in Malaya were indentured labour.

        In both cases however, the massa/sahib tuan were capitalist whites who gained immense profits on the back of black/Indian labour.

        re: “attacking the constitution and the Malays it protects”

        The Malays have to be constitutionally protected because the British introduced alien races (Indians and Chinese) here en masse.

        If the British had not brought in the Indians and allowed the mass immigration of Chinese, then Malaya would not have needed anything like Article 153. So perhaps the Malays should also sue the British for changing the demography of the peninsula beyond recognition.

        re: “Their detractors deceitful and selfish?”

        One example. Lim Kit Siang’s Gelang Patang Declaration made to the Indians during his GE13 campaign was a rip-off of the Hindraf Blueprint which was the basis of the MoU that Waytha signed with Tengku Adnan (on behalf of the BN).

        Campaigning in the last election, DAP and PKR also tried to launch Indraf, which was clearly a facsimile. Below is a photo of the ‘Indraf’ launch.

        null

        Open letter by Waytha about what Pakatan did to them

        https://helenang.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/pakatans-hitlerite-blackshirt-tactics-hindraf/

        Reply
        • 13. islam1st  |  March 29, 2015 at 2:04 am

          ‘So perhaps the Malays should also sue the British for changing the demography of the peninsula beyond recognition.’

          Absolutely!

          Reply
      • 14. Helen Ang  |  March 28, 2015 at 10:59 am

        Dear Anon,

        I’m not nitpicking on your comment by giving such detailed responses. But since you provided the opening, I’m taking the opportunity to present the Hindraf side of the story.

        re: “Well, they bothered to mention Orang Asli being unfairly treated but did they bother to consult their representatives and include them along in the suit?”

        Hindraf cannot have a joint suit with the Orang Asli because the issues are different. The Indians were imported into Malaya by the British from the sub-continent which was then under British rule. The Orang Asli are the aboriginals here.

        Nonetheless, Hindraf is in contact with some Orang Asli representatives with regard to areas of mutual concern.

        re: “Maybe they should follow the example of the Malaysian alliance government back then and work with others instead of against.”

        (1) Do you think anyone can work with the leader of the Pakatan pack (the DAP)? Look at what DAP is doing to their own partner PAS. And secondly, PSM had tried to work with Pakatan. Then PSM screamed that they were backstabbed.

        NST — ‘Nasir: Pakatan betrayed our party
        Malaysiakini –‘Pakatan backstabbed us, says PSM chief
        FMT — ‘PR rapped for “back stabbing” PSM

        (2) They tried working with BN but Najib did not keep up his end of the bargain. Najib can promise bulan dan bintang but has he delivered on the billions he pledged to the Bumiputera Economic Empowerment Programme either (never mind Hindraf)?

        re: “Perhaps they think battling a huge legal battle serves justice better for their ancestors and their people now.”

        Their ‘prayers’ (legal jargon) heard in court will help clarify the workings of the colonial economy which was essentially the white men remorselessly exploiting the dark-skinned peoples and making Britain a very rich empire.

        In another sense, the Malays have been a victim too. If the British had not brought in the Indians and allowed the mass immigration of the Chinese, Malaysia would today be a largely homogenous Muslim society and there will be no need for the ‘Boikot Barangan Cina DAP’ campaign.

        re: “Well if they gave up cooperating with Najib that easily I don’t think the British government would have a hard time defeating their suit and forcing them to give up as well.”

        (1) They’ve stuck with the lawsuit since 2007 and not given up despite all the brickbats and derision.

        (2) “Cooperating with Najib” … maybe Najib prefers to work with the Jho Low-type in 1MDB kind of ventures? The government has still not answered Tun’s query as to the PetroSaudi RM700 million.

        re: “The British won’t allow this. If the British allows this one, then who knows how many else would follow?”

        It’ll open a can of worms. Since Britain had an empire stretching across half the world, think about the endless possibilities and how many other dark-skinned peoples too might want to call the white former colonialists to account.

        Not bad, eh, for a ragtag outfit like Hindraf to nip at the heels of the Queen of Britannia Rules the Waves.

        Reply
        • 15. Helen Ang  |  March 28, 2015 at 11:03 am

          TO ADD

          re: “has he delivered on the billions he pledged to the Bumiputera Economic Empowerment Programme either (never mind Hindraf)?”

          I heard that Proton was promised annual R&D funding but the Najib administration had not made good last year’s grant.

          Reply
        • 16. anonymous  |  March 28, 2015 at 2:55 pm

          I don’t mind, IMO your response is good, well written with many points, facts and sources, unlike anything I ever write, you also definitely empathize with the dilemma and struggle of the people they represent. If anything I should thank you and I did go read though those links. You also know them HINDRAF people personally while I don’t. Don’t ask about the Indians I know, at least the criminal ones you saw are behind bars.

          The problem is, while his action right now is making a suit against the British, the suit itself attacks the constitution of Malaysia. The protections in it for the Malays, which you said is in because the British action introduced alien races en masse, they HINDRAF deem it racist, discriminatory and they blame the past alliance government and Malay rulers for it. They choose to represent their forefathers and the Chinese forefathers as British citizens who lost a lot when the Malays pushed for independence and formation of the country. Their antagonism towards Malays and Muslims is showing too much, and I’m not surprised if they welcome other non Malays and non Muslims to form similar suits and condemn the constitution that favors Malays. The suit wouldn’t have Malaysia’s government backing, it won’t end up favorably for them like it did for the Israeli Jews. That and Mau Mau also involves incarceration, torture, and killing which makes their case more forcing. I think the similar Malaysian case would be the Batang Kali incident. I don’t know how that end up.

          It’s a good thing that they and Najib once sat together and agreed on an MOU. Turned into a bad thing when Najib failed to follow through, and from what we now know, that’s not the only problematic thing with Najib. I’m sure this they HINDRAF would remember, take to heart, and make sure that BN will lose their votes next election.

          Funny thing, when I said about their detractors Pakatan never even crossed my mind.Still, even if Pakatan has also wronged them I’m sure they would focus more on hurting BN instead. After all, it was not Pakatan that ruled the country since independence. They probably view MIC like the Chinese view MCA now. Pakatan does not merit any thought in discussing this problem. They probably already know they still gain even when they ignore, reject and abuse HINDRAF.

          Reply
          • 17. Helen Ang  |  March 28, 2015 at 4:20 pm

            re: “The problem is, while his action right now is making a suit against the British, the suit itself attacks the constitution of Malaysia.”

            Yes, it explicitly questions Article 153. The claimants will probably point out that nowhere else in the world is there such a Race provision, except Israel.

            (However, nowhere else in the world is there a 30% minority like the Dapsters + evangelistas either.)

            re: “The protections in it for the Malays, which you said is in because the British action introduced alien races en masse, they HINDRAF deem it racist, discriminatory and they blame the past alliance government and Malay rulers for it.”

            You’re correct in your reading of it.

            From their end of the telescope, that is how the Malay ‘special position’ is viewed.

            The Reid Commission had recommended that the ‘special position’ be in force for only 15 years, after which it should be reviewed. The working party overrode the RC’s recommendation and the time cap was dropped altogether.

            re: “They choose to represent their forefathers and the Chinese forefathers as British citizens who lost a lot when the Malays pushed for independence and formation of the country.”

            I’m not sure about the particulars pertaining to Indians but I do recall how some Penangites were under the impression that they were British Overseas Citizens. Waytha is arguing that Britain has failed to fulfill its obligations and duty to its subjects in the colonies.

            Some Chinese in Penang and Malacca were against the Federation of Malaya but they forget that apapun, sireh akan pulang ke gagang juga, just like how Hong Kong had to eventually be returned to China.

            re: “Their antagonism towards Malays and Muslims is showing too much”

            I would advise that if Hindraf had to pick a side, they should choose to align themselves with the Malays and the Muslims. However after the Najib-clueless fiasco, I doubt that they can be convinced of this again.

            re: “and I’m not surprised if they welcome other non Malays and non Muslims to form similar suits and condemn the constitution that favors Malays”

            The international norm is that you cannot discriminate according to race. A total of 177 parties have signed the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

            re: “The suit wouldn’t have Malaysia’s government backing, it won’t end up favorably for them like it did for the Israeli Jews.”

            Not sure how far they will be able to go in court. But to get a hearing – and perhaps with it, international press coverage – is already a significant breakthrough. This comes at a time when Malaysia is getting bad press abroad for the Anwar sodomy verdict and currently for the sedition crackdown and pre-emptive arrests (today Mat Sabu, Rafizi and Tian Chua).

            re: “That and Mau Mau also involves incarceration, torture, and killing which makes their case more forcing. I think the similar Malaysian case would be the Batang Kali incident.”

            You’re correct. Batang Kali is the parallel.

            re: “It’s a good thing that they and Najib once sat together and agreed on an MOU. Turned into a bad thing when Najib failed to follow through, and from what we now know, that’s not the only problematic thing with Najib.”

            I wonder what Najib promised PAS over the hudud matter and whether he will follow through. Mahfuz Omar was very unhappy in Parliament the other day. It appears that PAS had harboured certain expectations (e.g. usul akan dibawa ke Majlis Raja-Raja) tapi Umno buat tak tahu jer.

            re: “I’m sure this they HINDRAF would remember, take to heart, and make sure that BN will lose their votes next election.”

            Through his own doing, Najib is bleeding votes. e.g. he risks alienating the Christian Dayaks over Umno’s support for hudud in the Kelantan DUN.

            Playing the gambit, BN gains for the present because PAS and DAP are fighting each other. But in the aftermath, what if PAS feels that Umno pulled a fast one on them? Najib has used hudud as a political bargaining chip – it’s a dangerous game.

            re: “Funny thing, when I said about their detractors Pakatan never even crossed my mind. Still, even if Pakatan has also wronged them I’m sure they would focus more on hurting BN instead.”

            You’re right.

            re: “After all, it was not Pakatan that ruled the country since independence. They probably view MIC like the Chinese view MCA now.”

            Right again.

            re: “Pakatan does not merit any thought in discussing this problem. They probably already know they still gain even when they ignore, reject and abuse HINDRAF.”

            In my opinion, Waytha made the correct choice in 2013 to link up with BN. Unfortunately Najib did not keep his promise.

            Now between BN and Pakatan, gajah sama gajah berjuang, pelanduk mati di tengah.

            Taking a cue from the 1960s civil rights movement in the US, the blacks got their equal rights when they managed to convince enough whites to support their cause. Similarly, it is the mainstream Malays that Hindraf must convince in enough numbers.

            It’s pointless in terms of effectiveness to convince even up to 90 percent of the Indians (katakan lah) because at the end of the day, 90% out of 7.3% Indians in the whole Malaysian population is still not a game changer.

            The trouble with Hindraf is that they’re too insular and inward-looking. They have not been able to adapt to getting things done the Malay way (battling bureaucratic red tape, civil service inertia) by taking a circuitous route to reach the same desired destination.

            Secondly, they’ve not gauged the extent of lingering suspicion and hostility from the pro-establishment people against the Hindraf brand name and making allowances for it, i.e. understanding that it takes time and patience to win over the Malay mind and heart.

            You said their antagonism towards Malays and Muslims is showing too much. Waytha managed to quell that temporarily when they believed that he could deliver the goods by being in government.

            Waytha took a leap of faith (in Najib) because the sentiments of the Indians had been/are pretty much like that of the Chinese – blame Umno, Umno is racist, etc, etc.

            Tun reportedly holds Najib responsible for the deteriorating race relations. Najib’s failure to honour the Hindraf MoU would rank an ‘F’ in the PM’s report card.

            I personally still choose BN over Pakatan. But I’m afraid that under Najib’s weak leadership, BN is losing everyone else. BN has thoroughly lost the Chinese. It’s losing more and more of the Indians. It’s now losing the mainline Christians to the fringe evangelistas.

            We’ll end up as I’ve been forecasting:

            – Malays vs Chinese + the rest
            – Muslims vs Christians + the rest

            Reply
            • 18. amir yusof  |  March 31, 2015 at 9:12 pm

              menakutkan ,tetapi anda 101% tepat .

              Reply
  • 19. calvinsankaran  |  March 27, 2015 at 9:19 am

    LKS’ statements are getting increasing bizarre and ridiculous by day. Why would BN & Najib come out their stance hudud or why should Najib resign over hudud? His idea of new govt makes no sense at all. Why should Malaysia get a new govt? Just because DAP and PAS’ lovers quarrel? For a party that has “democracy” in its name, LKS’ suggestion is hardly democratic.

    I think he’s trying to divert the issue since DAP doesn’t want the Chinese and Christians to blame them for hudud. The ironic thing is that DAP always claimed to have defended the Christians and their religion from the UMNO/BN but now they have delivered them to the lions.

    Why should LKS so focused on a new govt when he should be cutting ties with PAS. This shows that even at this critical times, DAP’s main priority is to hold on to power. Basically what he’s saying is that we don’t want PAS but at the same time we want to hold on to the seats and the state govts we have won in GE via the Pakatan platform.

    This shows that DAP’s main priority is political power and not the interests of those who voted for them. They needed to remember that a lot of PAS supporters also voted for DAP and not just vice versa.

    Reply
    • 20. Mulan of Malaysia  |  March 27, 2015 at 12:09 pm

      What is Kerajaan Save Malaysia? Save from who?

      In fact we should open a Gagasan Selamatkan Malaysia dari DAP, PKR dan Moderates.

      Siapa yang buat provokasi terbanyak? Protes terbanyak? Unjustified new reports?

      The so called non moderates are the least kacau ones (PAS only retailiate after tons of provocation). Protes Bersih, Kangkung, GST blablabla

      Reply
  • 21. islam1st  |  March 29, 2015 at 2:21 am

    I wonder what Najib promised PAS over the hudud matter and whether he will follow through. Mahfuz Omar was very unhappy in Parliament the other day. It appears that PAS had harboured certain expectations (e.g. usul akan dibawa ke Majlis Raja-Raja) tapi Umno buat tak tahu jer.

    tak lah helen, itu Mahfuz saja nak sabotaj hubungan baik UMNO and PAS post Hudud Kelantan for the benefit of PASMA while giving the middle finger to ‘the perpaduan ummah’. Fullstop. Sebab tu yang meroyan macam kera kena belacan tu!

    Bab Majlis Raja-Raja tu saja sabotaj geng2 anti Hudud, Muslim dan bukan Muslim. Harap lesen TMI lepas ni kena tarik!

    TMI saja nak buat berita daripada non issue – Mahfuz nampak peluang untuk burukkan UMNO yang still not making any official stand on Hudud. Tapi takkan tak faham2 lagi..kerjasama Putrajaya dengan Kelantan tu…saja buat kecoh!

    Reply
  • 22. islam1st  |  March 29, 2015 at 2:25 am

    ‘Similarly, it is the mainstream Malays that Hindraf must convince in enough numbers.’

    Not gonna happen when you starts your campaign with fitnah ethnic cleansing!

    Reply
    • 23. Helen Ang  |  March 29, 2015 at 2:56 am

      He used the word within quote marks.

      If we were to say that the colour-blind Firsters want to ‘ethnic cleanse’ or Clorox the races – in the context of their mantra “There are no Malays, no Indians too and zero Chinese (all Malaysians)”, you wouldn’t seriously think that any bloodshed was being imputed, would you?

      Reply
  • 24. grkumar  |  March 29, 2015 at 6:09 am

    There are some legal causes of action identified in the above article but they are far and few. I hope that they are pleaded in a better way in the actual pleadings before the High Court in London. The Reid Commission was in discussion with the leadership of each of the three racial communities that made up Malaya then and that included the Indians (not just Tamils). The fact that representatives of the Indian communities failed to put their case forward to extract those rights, protections and privileges to the Commission or to safeguard the interests of the Indians cannot be attributed to the fault or negligence of the British. That’s one point.

    The Orang Asli are Malays. As the forests were cleared and townships built to accommodate a growing Malaya/ Malaysia they were forced out gradually over the centuries into the open urban sprawl of where the now find themselves on the fringes. The rest of them remained inland in the remaining forest cover continuing to live in their traditional ways of subsistence lifestyles.

    There is no “Orang Asli” (a convenient ally and) a convenient term for the jungle people of the original Malay that the opposition has adopted of late. Mind you many of us and our own lifestyles and existence, industrialization to support us and our growing numbers have all contributed to their displacement from the jungle (forest) lifestyles. They did not sprout form the ground, they too are the result of migration from other places like Java, Cambodia and other neighbouring nations.

    Back to this action against the British government, we ought to stick to the facts and plead them properly rather than have them placed in a Tamil movie script before a court that deals with cold facts and the law.

    We all need to contribute to this and need to be allowed to contribute to it rather than have it placed in the hands of glory hunters.

    What has to be clearly pleaded in unambiguous terms is the fact that Britain owed (Indians in Malaya in this case) a duty of care. That duty of care has to be identified and particularised against prevailing law and internationally accepted and acknowledged laws and norms of that time (retrospectivity is given no credence in law) with clear examples of Britain applying those laws to themselves and their white citizens in particular(because under their laws we were all equally her majesties subjects and citizens) as against the Indians to who it was applied in a discriminatory and harmful way.

    And the pleadings have to show that the negligence is established by the evidence and that detriment was caused and that the negligence was the negligence of the British which was owed to the Indians in Malaya and the negligence resulted in their current plight complained of and that the remedy pleaded is applicable, deserving and supported by law.

    Reply
  • 25. grkumar  |  March 29, 2015 at 6:20 am

    Last paragraph error, it should have read instead of what I have written:

    And the pleadings must show that the British owned the Indians a duty of care at the time and that they breached that duty of care by being negligent.

    That the negligence pleaded is established and attributable to the British and that detriment was caused to the Indians in this case as a result of that negligence.

    The pleadings must also show a connection between the detriment caused to the Indians by the negligence either in a direct or indirect way (the latter being a little more difficult depending on how far removed it is).

    It must also show in the prayer for relief that the relief is justified in these circumstances, it is appropriate and it is fair and reasonable perhaps also reflecting the justiciability in making the relief (damages) exemplary.

    More important that the matter is not thrown out for want of proper pleadings or cause of action, an alternative to the main cause and facts must be pleaded.

    Reply
  • 26. grkumar  |  April 1, 2015 at 7:04 am

    Whilst there were residual problems with the British departure and decolonization of Malaya then, the Chinese in a worse off position than the Indians (no China to return to if it got worse) prospered. Malays too were subjected to British maladministration one must remember not just the Tamils.

    What is not recognized by Waytha Murthi and his fellow claimants is that they have yet to establish a class of persons against whom the ‘negligence’ of the British administration affected to warrant the relief they seek in damages.

    The pre condition for such a class action in Britain requires an identifiable class (opt in and opt out) who agree to be bound by the courts decision. That also includes a punitive decision by the court who find the claim to be without merit. In such a situation they will make a punitive costs order against the claimants and they are all bound. Often in such cases they are exemplary costs orders.

    The difficulty for Waytha is his idea of the constitution. It is no different to the interpretations of Ambiga or the rest of the Malaysian bar and its opposition cronies. They all believe it to be a piece of legislation (Waytha’s own words on his website) which it is not. In fact although the pre amble to the constitution says “it is the supreme law of the Federation of Malaysia” the constitution is no law. It is in fact a set of rules that bind laws and governns and sets out the rules of interaction of the various arms of government and its subjects.

    Leaving that argument aside for the moment, one must bear in mind the time thats come to pass since independence and this action. It would be unfair to all involved for the passage of time, what time does to any remaining witnesses other than for their own individual tales of woe.

    Britain would argue in turn that we claimed to be ready for independence and granted it to us in as orderly a manner as it could afford to to taking into consideration its own interests it was then entitled to protect, whilst also balancing the practical needs of the other two races which was not an insignificant consideration to have against a minority of mainly labourers supported in their roles by an entrenched class and caste system which amongst Indians over rode any legal or constitutional considerations.

    Whilst the Chinese and Malays gradually picked themselves up by the bootstraps and went forward, the Indians as fractious and divided as they were were being exploited under the constitution by Indians who ran the public service then till at least the late 60’s for which Britain could not be held responsible.

    Moreover Indians were represented at all levels in the conferences that preceded the creation of the Malayan constitution. In fact Indians dominated the legal profession and not simply the public service. I could write volumes on this issue but this is not the place for it.

    Waythat Murthi is not focusing on a proper strategy other than a pantomime in which he and a small coetrie within his group play the role of martyrs and heroes. He eschews proper legal and strategic advise and does not have the interests of all Indians or Malaysians in this matter.

    he British government are tolerant and will in the interests of justice give him a hearing. Imran Khan the lawyer is a man who is driven by public interest litigation and thats good. However if the pleadings Waytha and his mates drew up in 2007 or 2008 in this matter is whats before the High Court of the UK without radical amendment to it. God Save not just the Queen but all of us as well.

    That set of pleadings was embarrassing, lacked particularisation, did not disclose a proper cause of action and the relief sought was disproportionate to the allegations of negligence pleaded. Waytha is an emotional and sensation driven politician. Unless he alters his strategy in both his mind and his writings he is doing us all an injustice.

    If the constitution is racist it is racist against us all. If it is unjust it is unjust against us all and not the Tamils alone. He fails to identify the class of people who are the potential beneficiaries of this action and how they are determined or qualified to be in this class.

    Reply
    • 27. I am Dalit how are you?  |  April 1, 2015 at 1:44 pm

      Mahatma Gandhi said:

      A ‘No’ uttered from the deepest conviction is better than a ‘Yes’ uttered merely to please, or worse, to avoid trouble.”

      Reply
      • 28. grkumar  |  April 1, 2015 at 4:49 pm

        I am simply me. I was born me and I will die me.

        Reply
    • 29. islam1st  |  April 3, 2015 at 2:44 am

      ‘Waythat Murthi is not focusing on a proper strategy other than a pantomime in which he and a small coetrie within his group play the role of martyrs and heroes.’

      Absolutely. Too much Kollywood movies, I might add.

      Reply
  • 30. grkumar  |  April 2, 2015 at 1:55 pm

    As we had forecast, they had their application struck out for the reasons given, they being that Waytha and his men inspite of advise to the contrary chose the wrong defendant, failed to particularise their causes of action, did not raise a proper cause of action that would have been discernible and identifiable by an impartial court, and their pleadings were embarrassing and short of evidence. The pleadings and application lacked focus or direction.

    This is another example of Hindraf under its current leadership of a family abusing the trust placed in them by those they refer to as “the most vulnerable” and a cynical exercise of squandering golden opportunities to better their communities.

    The Tamils of Malaysia whether they be Ambiga Sreenivasan or Waytha Murthi need to stand behind the MIC leader. Better the devil they know than the fools they do not know.

    Reply

Dijemput memberi komen anda

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


%d bloggers like this: