Article 153 1

ARTICLE 153 OF MALAYSIA'S CONSTITUTION AND THE HUMAN RIGHT TO NON-

DISCRIMINATION

Name

Professor

Institution

Course

Date

Article 153 2

Introduction

Malaysia encompasses communities of different ethnic, cultural, and religious

perspectives (Barlow & Loh, 2003, p. 135). The prevailing state of affairs is as a result of the

British colonial social experiments. They happened between the 18th and 20th century during

which a large number of Chinese and Indian laborers were imported to the British Malaya.

This was to enable the contribution of the required labor force in the various plantations and

mines. Prior to the British colonization in Malaysia, the population constituted of majorly the

Malays, non-Malay natives and the Orang Asli as the aboriginal group. This is with Malays

being the population constituting of the majority. However, as a result of the British colonists

importation of foreigners as laborers in massive numbers, the Malay population was

fundamentally altered (Barlow & Loh, 2003, p. 135).

Following the importation of the foreign laborers in larger numbers to Malaysia during

the colonization, the population of the Malaysian community underwent an alteration that saw

the Chinese forming one-third the population and the Indians taking one tenth of the total

population (Barlow & Loh, 2003, p. 136). Malaysia is known presently as one of the multi-

ethnic and multi-religious societies with an underlying objective dictated through the

provisions of the article 153 of the constitution. Malaysia is the globally most recognized

country with a multi-religious and multi-ethnic framework with the provisions of supporting

racism as it is written in the article 153. The Malaysian population constitutes of the Malays

as the majority making up to 50.4% of the total population, Indian 7.1%, the Chinese with

23.7%, and the indigenous population up to 11% (Barlow & Loh, 2003, p. 136).

Article 153 of the constitution has a regulative stipulation on the Malaysian leader

bearing the significant responsibility. This is for the Malays peculiar position safeguard

through the cabinet advice and the indigenous people with the legitimate interest of other

Malaysian communities (Jomo & Wong, 2008, p. 313). In Malaysia, the privileges set in the

Article 153 3

article still remains in force. Article 10 section 4 of the Malaysian constitution permits the

active parliament in making it illegal for any party to question article 153. Under the sedition

act of the constitution, it is illegal to question the article inclusive of the parliament members

with the freedom to discuss any of its provisions without considering the external censure fear

(Jomo & Wong, 2008, p. 313). The constitutional provision of the special rights under the

article 153 provisions has led to strained relations amid the Malaysian key races. During the

year 1969, it contributed to the inter-ethnic violence between the communities of India,

Chinese, and the Malays (Jomo & Wong, 2008, p. 313). The Indian and the Chinese

community resented numerously to the exceptional privileges provided through article 153 on

the Malays. The Malays mostly experienced unhappiness with the facts relating to the

Chinese aspect of control of the Malaysia wealth despite having exceptional status in the

implemented institution (Jomo & Wong, 2008, p. 313).

The situation has managed to give the government an excuse for the justification of

the retention of the emergency powers with the necessity of the provisions. Following the riot

carried out in the year, 1969 led to the development of new economic policies by the

government to impose quota percentage reversed for the Malays (Daniels, 2004, p. 316). This

is within the social, economic and education sector. The argument of the government was that

the economic gap amid the well-off Chinese and the poor Malays caused the riots. The

Malaysian government also claimed that the dominating Chinese community had managed to

give some of the significant constitutional bargains in accepting the exceptional privileges of

Bumiputera during before independence (Daniels, 2004, p. 316). The community of the

Chinese allegedly managed to accept the notion behind the Malay provided exceptional rights.

This was in exchange of citizenship during the era before independence. The Chinese and

Malay elite without the aspect of consultation with some of the corresponding communities

managed to make negotiations of the informal bargains. The Malaysian parliament during the

Article 153 4

year 1971 made a decree with a foundation that prohibited the further questioning of the

exceptional privileges provided in the article 153 for the Malays (Daniels, 2004, p. 316).

The evolution of Article 153 of the Malaysian constitution

The article 153 came into existence following the aspect of granting the leader, Yang

di-Pertuan Agong, sole responsibility of safeguarding the Malays peculiar position (Verma,

2002, p. 97). This also includes the native who lives in the Sarawak and Sabah with the

related community’s legitimate interests. The article specifies significant ways of carrying out

the activities including the perspective of establishing public scholarship entry quotas, public

education and civil service entry quotas. Article 153 gives the Malays exceptional privileges

and rights since they belong to the Bumiputera group (Verma, 2002, p. 97). The government

in Malaysia through the article also gives preferences to the companies of Bumiputera in the

aspect of awarding out contracts. With the Malay, there are specially subdivided loans

exclusively available. Under the article, some of the companies listed in the Kuala Lampur

Stock exchange give 30 percent of ownership to the Malays (Bindloss & Brash 2008, p. 27).

The special privileges that the article defines also led to the establishment of the Industrial

Coordination Act of the year 1976. This necessitates the non-Malays companies to make an

effort of having 30 percent of the Malay participation. The requirement has the element of

threat of license revocation following cases of non-compliance (Verma, 2002, p. 97).

Article 153 in the Malaysian constitution goes into the Malaysian history books as one

of the contentious articles. The majority of the critics consider it for the creation of the

racialist and unnecessary distinction amid the Malaysians from different backgrounds

ethnically since it has contributed to the implementation of affirmation action policies

(Rosenfeld & Sajo, 2012, p. 1130). These benefit only the group from Bumiputra population

comprising of the majority. Following its draft as one of the temporary articles, its discussion

for repeal is considerable as illegal. Despite of the aspect behind the prohibition on the

Article 153 5

discussion, article 153 has undergone heated debates both publicly and privately amongst the

Malaysians. The principal opposition groups in Malaysia have been in the long run against the

article implementation although the support for it is ostensibly maintained (Rosenfeld & Sajo

2012, p. 1130). The article over the years has been viewable as a sensitive element through

the Malaysians in majority, especially the politicians in the favor of the article or opposing it

at the other end following the racist label. The relative modern identity conceptions in

Malaysia roots back to the conceptions of the British colonial rule of the natives. The social

understandings of the provisions of the article and the introduction of NEP have managed to

implicate the perspective to which power operates under the administration tied to the colonial

legal systems reconstructed during the process of transition (Barlow & Loh 2003, p. 135).

Originally, no reference was made for the other indigenous Malaysians inclusive of

the Orang Asli but following the union of the Malaya with the Sabah, Singapore, and Sarawak

in the year 1963, an amendment of the constitution followed. This provided for the similar

privileges for the other indigenous population of the eastern Malaysia including Sarawak and

the Sabah grouping them under the Bumiputra group. The scope of the article limited through

the article 136 with the provisions that the civil servants in Malaysia face similar treatments

impartially. This is regardless of their races. Clause 5 of the article 153 reaffirms with

specifications in article 136 of the Malaysian constitution (Jomo & Wong, 2008, p. 313).

During the process of implementation, the Reid commission suggested of the provisions being

temporarily revisited in 15 years with a representation of reports to the appropriate legislature

with the parliament as the legislature determining either the retention or reduction of the

quota. Under the provisions of the article, the introduction of the new economic policy led to

the recognition of the Malay population with the introduction of the NEP enabling the

eradication of poverty (Daniels, 2004, p. 316).

Article 153 6

The existence of the substantial political opposition continued to the radical economic

reforms with a design of aiding the Malays. During the 1970s, the creation of the substantial

economic situation reforms was with a major enactment in addressing the imbalance

economically. In the late 1980s and the year 1990s, assenting action implementation followed

to enable the creation of the Malay outstanding class of entrepreneurs. The two diagrams as

shown below is a representation of the article 153 and the summary of the provisions. The

first diagram is an indication of how the article handles cases with outstanding position of the

natives of Sarawak and Sabah and the Malays collectively referred to as Bumiputras

(Rosenfeld & Sajo, 2012, p. 1130).

The modern conceptions of an identity in the present-day Malaysia roots, in the

colonial conceptions of the British, attached to article 153 prior to independence of Malaysia

in the year 1957 (Menon 2008, p. 98). The article reflects on the social understanding of the

indigenous and immigrants implications in the way in which power is operational under the

colonial administration of the British rule. This also includes the reconstruction of the legal

system in the course of transitions for the British rule to the postcolonial rule still embracing

the provision of the article. The Malaysian legal system present structures still encompassing

the provisions of the article 153 falls under the culmination of the amendments, changes and

the developments of the provisions. Under the provisions of the colonial administration, the

manners, religions, and customs of the local inhabitants were under the consideration of the

law's development with legal recognition given to the selective customary practices (Menon

2008 p. 98).

During the NOC governance period, the NEP underwent an implementation aimed at

the eradication of poverty. This is irrespective of the race though the expansion of the

economic pie to enable the Chinese community carves up the economy not undergoing a

reduction in the absolute terms (Rosenfeld & Sajo, 2012, p. 1130). The aim of the

Article 153 7

implementation was to enable the Malays population access the 30 percent economy equity

share, as opposed to a 4 percent held during the 1970s. The NEP under consideration as a

derivative of the article 153 was viewed to be in line with the wording of article 153 (Daniels,

2004, p. 316). With an additional affirmative action, during the tenure of Mahathir as the

prime minister, following the expiry of the NEP saw the replacement by the NDP. This was

with the aspect of creating the relative Malay classes of entrepreneurs with business tycoons.

The policies under the administration mandated for the publicly listed companies to set aside

30 percent of the major equity to the Bumiputra. This also included the discounts set aside for

the real estate and automobile purchases with an amount set aside for substantial housing

projects for the Bumiputra. In practice, the majority of the privileges provided by the article

153 went to the Malays with the majority of the non-Malay Bumiputra including Orang Asli

or the aboriginal people (Daniels, 2004, p. 316).

The social, economic, and political necessity of Article 153 and the NEP

The article 153 enabled the aspect of economic development with the perspective of

ethnic integration of the Malaysian population especially the Malay with the Bumiputra

community in Malaysia (Barlow, 2001, p. 108). The economic aspect reflects on the diverse

mix of the Malaysian population having a relatively short historical root. The provisions of

the article contributed to the development of a dual economy in Malaysia to the emergence of

the communal ideology left by the British rule. This segmented the Malaysian society for the

economic progress along occupational, ethnic, and geographical lines. The use of the article

153 in Malaysia as provided in the constitution has enabled the creation of the new economic

policy with the aspect of enhancing national unity (Barlow, 2001, p. 108). The policies as

promulgated for the achievement of the unifying goal of every community in Malaysia seems

to be ensuring that the significant national unity aspect is unrealisable than ever. This is due to

Article 153 8

the few genuinely non-ethnic or multi-ethnic developed institutions in different spheres of the

Malaysian life (Barlow, 2001, p. 108).

The article has also managed to undermine social perspective of the Malaysia society

development. The Malays in majority still has been in the long run regarding the Indians and

the Chinese as some of the threatening elements insisting on the perspective of an official

ethnic discrimination as necessary (Barlow, 2001, p. 109). This is meant for the reduction of

historical inequalities with ethnic relations. The majority of the Indians, Chinese and other

non-Malays regard the policies under the provision of the article 153 as the convenient

disguise for the masterpiece at the second-class non-Malays citizens’ expense. The Malaysian

economic prosperity with the relative claim that every ethnic group in the region is unhappy

relating to the status quo experiences the justification of the policies (Barlow, 2001, p. 109).

The racial tensions that existed beneath the Malaysia society thin semblance of racial

harmony undermined the social development aspect (Nathan & Kamali, 2006, p. 374).

According to the Malays, the article 153 and the NEP provisions have been significant to their

benefits with the society experiencing more polarization. The provisions of the article 153 in

the constitution have contributed to the significant development of the Malays social situation

in exchange for the political rights to the other communities including Indians and the

Chinese through the offer of citizenship status (Nathan & Kamali, 2006, p. 374). The

distinctive rights provisions meant for the Malays have managed to provide the impetus for

successful participation in the industry and commerce. The NEP and article 153 are of

necessity in relation to the major developments of the Malays. This is through the privileges

concerning the significant absence of the Indians and the Chinese (Nathan & Kamali, 2006, p.

374).

The success of article 153 and NEP in achieving social-economic equality in Malaysia

Article 153 9

Article 153 of Malaysia acknowledges the concern of modern Malaysia, which

comprises of communities, which are of different cultural, ethnic, and religious background

(Demery et al 2002, p. 20). The article states need to safeguard the rights and privileges of

Malays and indigenous people from the Sarawak and Sabah states. Inequality in Malaysia was

due to the British labor imported from China and India between 18th and 20th century to work

in plantations and mines. Prior to colonization, majority of the Malaysian population

comprised of Malays, as far as labor importation was a concern, there was an alteration in

Malaysia population (Demery et al 2002, p. 20). Chinese and Indians constituted a large

number of the population and had social-political advantages over the native Malays, which

led to a large number of racial segregation cases. However, being multicultural, multiethnic,

and multi-religious state, Malaysia adopted the art of including racism in article 153 of its

constitution (Demery et al 2002, p. 20).

Malaysian new economic policy, launched by the Malaysian government in the year

1971, was an ambitious but contentious socio-economic reformation affirmative action, which

was race-based. Consequently, the policy addressed two main objectives of imbalance in the

economy and restoration of national unity through reduction of economic disparities among

the country various ethnicities. The policies importance was that 30 percent of Malaysia

corporate equity be shared among the Bumiputra (Demery et al 2002, p. 20). Furthermore,

the affirmative action involves the introduction of measures capable of raising participation of

economically disadvantaged members of the society in employment, education, and areas

formally underrepresented (Menon 2008, p. 98). Moreover, among the new economic plan

goals, there is involvement in restructuring of the economy to do away with community

identification with a certain economic function. Additionally, the plan highlighted the need

for wealth redistribution to increase economic growth. The growth then would allow the

Article 153 10

economic growth of the Bumiputra over the shares of the Chinese and Indian population

(Menon 2008, p. 98).

Article 153 stresses on the educational aspect of the minority ethnic group, which

comprises of bumiputra in the expense of non-bumiputra (Menon 2008, p. 98). The article

specifies the need for the Malaysian government to protect the interest of Malays and

indigenous people of Malaysia. It can do so through establishment of entry point quota into

public universities, entry into civil service, and public scholarship as these represented social

contract. Since independence, the Malay ruling class viewed education as an aspect

favourable for producing greater social equality, and the bumiputra educational opportunities

were increasing to enable them achieve better educational records like the non-bumiputra.

Moreover, the constitution under the policy of exceptional privileges, highlights the need for

the bumiputra with credentials to get well-paid jobs in the expanding economy. In addition,

under social disparities, most natives occupied rural settlements unlike the minority Chinese

and Indians who occupied the cities in Malaysia (Menon 2008, p. 98). Most of students from

rural areas got state and federal scholarships to universities, and job opportunities in the city

for the purpose of proper distribution of the bumiputra in the country. These measures

undertaken by article 153 of the constitution seemed to reduce social equality in Malaysia as

the minority ethnic groups received opportunities to be at par with the majority groups. On the

contrary, scholarships to study in local universities and abroad for Malays were mandatory for

them to enjoy the opportunities that come with education (Menon 2008, p. 102).

Abdullah and Pedersen (2003, p. 44) in their study of Malays showed that the

majority Malays focused on agricultural activities, in the village as Chinese dominated

commerce in the cities while educated Indians worked in professional jobs such as lawyers.

The constitution through article 153 was quick to cut this social disparity and replace it with

social equality among races. This led to the formation new economic plan of 1971 that

Article 153 11

addressed the issue of economic disparities among the majority and minority groups and

accomplished its mandate in the year 1986. The policy was to increase income and

employment opportunities to the minority groups and restructure Malaysian society through

the elimination and identification of an economic group with an economic function (Abdullah

and Pedersen 2003, p. 45). In detail, the plan was successively according to 1980 census

involving population in peninsular Malaysia, and population and housing census of 1991 in

Malaysia. The survey founded that at the end of new economic policy, it at least managed to

cut occupation segregation in all ethnic groups (Abdullah and Pedersen 2003, p. 45).

The implementation of the policy required each worker to receive salaries above his

poverty level, and the other policy saw the need to distribute income equally between races in

any economic sector (Shuid and Mohd, 2001, p. 45). The overall strategy was for the

government to expand the public sector to enhance and accommodate quota employees in

which Malays were to held key job positions. According to Menon (2008, p. 90), under the

private sector, Malays received privileges to business opportunities and share ownership.

Furthermore, the central government developed agricultural lands and residential provided by

modern technologies, free consultancy, and financial assistance, besides that, there was an

introduction of crop diversification to minority group farmers. In rural settlements, there was

an increase in social-economical class as the government provided social services such as

health, education, electricity supplies, and water. Additionally, in reaction to the policy, the

government encouraged the rural to urban migration of labor force for the minority to take up

jobs in industries and companies in the cities. The migration was a motivation from the new

housing policy that required at least, 15 percent price discount for Malays, where they got a

30 percent allocation.

The increased foreign investment in Malaysia facilitated the effort of the government

to expanding employment opportunities, economic expansion, and transfer of technology to

Article 153 12

the Malays population (Abdullah and Pedersen 2003, p. 45). Until 1994, the status of the

Malays was at par with Malaysia economic growth, led to the hypothesis of FDI during the

new economic plan. The policy of giving employment preferences increased the Malay labor

force by 46 percent compared to 40 percent of Indians, and 34 percent of Chinese during 1970

to 1980. However, the policy attempt to increase bumiputra’s share in corporate assets and

reduce non-bumiputra shares failed to succeed. In the wage and salary perception, Indians and

Chinese received the highest wage rate compared to Malays from the year 1970 to 1990.

Additionally, differences in employment status across the ethnicity remained dormant. Even

though the policy reduced the social-economical gap between the ethnicity, it received

criticism for reducing Indians, Chinese, and foreigners to second-class citizens by allowing

the dominance of Malays. In spite of the downfalls of the new economic policy, lives of

bumiputra increased by 40 percent and wealth distribution improved relatively (Shuid and

Mohd 2001, p. 85).

Malaysia’s violation of both international and Syariah human right principles through

the adoption of Article 153 and the New Economic Policy

The international human rights principles give every citizen the right to fair justice,

equal treatment and consideration, without discrimination of color, race, gender, and religion,

physical or social status. Similarly, all other laws of any land form primarily on this basis.

Article 153 of Malaysian constitution, gives Yang di-Pertuan Agong, also referred to as the

king of Malaysia, immense powers to exercise authority over this law. It contravenes these

principles. People have to understand that syariah law bases its jurisdiction on Islamic

legislation. When there is a society comprising of different religious background, the

oversight authority should be impartial. There must be a clear distinction between civil and

religious laws (Hassan 2004, p. 67).

Article 153 13

Civil law deals with general social values, not specifically touching on personal and

family concepts. In Malaysia, there exist both the civil and syariah courts. Civil courts

sometimes exercise jurisdiction over the Islamic courts. However, massive powers have been

given to the syariah courts to run over the administration of Islamic laws, according to article

121 (1A) of the constitution of Malaysia. According to part, one of article 153, which gives

sole responsibility to the Malaysian leader, Yang di-Pertuan Agong for specified positions

safeguard, clearly gives the Malays a first priority, and the Sabah and Sarawak community,

over the rest of the natives of the other states. Similarly, the same phenomenon applies to the

second and the third part of this article. Although part four of this article guarantees fair

treatment to all people, the mention of communities deprives other people and minorities of

Malaysia this right. Many states where the executive authority has overall mandate to

determine the running of public affairs cannot be termed democratic (Hassan 2004, p. 67).

Under this article, the New Economic Policy gave the Malays the opportunity to

enjoy economic gains by forty percent, yet foreigners and the Chinese were holding the rest.

This policy silently deprives the other marginalized communities of economic development

space. Part six of article 153 gives the Malaysian leader, Yang di-Pertuan Agong, powers to

determine the issue of permits and licenses, a fundamental exercise that can base on ethnic

consideration. It further directs compliance with the relevant authorities. The powers of the

king are excessive. People have to differentiate between a democratic society where the

running of state affairs is a collective business, overseen by numerous checks and balances,

unlike a unilateral state where the running of all state affairs is subject to one command.

People must understand that we interpret the law in different ways, sometimes giving a

different version of opinion sometimes making another sense (Lee 2010, p. 20).

This can give an authority absolute power that people could misuse. Article 153

attracts many views on the nature of its content as it specifically gives priority of positions

Article 153 14

and privilege to the Malays, the Sabah, and Sarawak, all referred to as the Bumiputra. It

deprives the minorities of an equitable share of state resources. Its policies are sidelining and

discriminatory. The law suites certain communities at a time, but with the unification of

various communities, there is no reviewing of these laws in moderation to apply to all. They

end up breaching the principles of human rights. Article 153 gives powers and authority to a

central governing point, in this case, the Malaysian leader's office misused by some leaders to

undermine other communities (lee 2010, p. 33).

The social, economic, and cultural policies of the New Economic Policy have been in

place ever since 1971. It is evident that this policy favors the Bumiputra-Malaysians and

discriminates against the Indian Malaysians and Chinese-Malaysians. Malaysia has long been

a model of successful, multi-racial and rapidly developing country worth of emulation. Many

individuals considered such policies as the New Economic Policy successful in the creation of

harmonious and prosperous multi-ethnic society, as well as, in the reduction of poverty among

the Bumiputra population. However, the policies have so far failed and have led to the

violation of the Syariah and international human right principles through aspects such as

discrimination (Yusuf & Kaoru 2009, p. 10).

The New Economic policy, which is partly, an extension of article 153’s fourth unique

position pledged to ascertain that the Malay speaking people controlled, owned and managed

30% of the corporate economy. It also aimed at ensuring that there is the eradication of

poverty irrespective of creed, and race, along with the elimination of identification with the

place of residence, as well as, economic function. Under the first prong, article 153, on the

other hand, sets aside a reasonable proportion meant for the Malay-speaking people in the

natives of Sarawak and Sabah along with peninsular Malaysia. This is through the special

positions in four key areas including government scholarships, intake in the civil service

sector, and intake in the higher learning institutions that training and government privileges

Article 153 15

own. The other area is business opportunities from the government. Under the second prong,

article 153 pledges on the legal interests for the non-Malay people (Murphy 2009, p. 5).

The affirmative action policies of Malaysia are unfair and inefficient. The current

predicaments that the country face issue a warning regarding the long-term social and

economic costs, for adopting a racially based redistributive policies, and affirmative action for

multi-ethnic communities. Even though termination of the New Economic Policy occurred in

1990 and under its place, a New Development Policy launched, there is still evidence of the

New Economic Policy, along with the race-based policies in Malaysia today. This policy is

solely behind the persistent corruption and the steady stream, which led to the Indian and

Chinese Malaysians leaving their homes permanently (Murphy 2009, p. 5).

(i) The New Economic Policy and the Malaysian race riots

On May 13 1965, the Malay mobs streamed into the areas that the Chinese dominated

in Kuala Lumpur brandishing daggers and swords. They began killing residents, burning and

looting properties. The Chinese and other Indian Malaysians heard the news and armed with

guns; they retaliated against the Malay villages. Various people died over a number of weeks

of intermittent rioting. People became homeless vehicles burned, and there were also cases of

arson. The election that took place in 1970, as well as, the subsequent rioting occurred within

the heated political and national debate regarding the roles that the indigenous Malays played

in the culture, society, and the economy. The May riots took place immediately Malaysia was

emerging as a new country with half of its population divided within the racial lines and

poverty. In the midst of the race riots, Pan Malaysian Islamic Party demanded that the

Bumiputra receive more rights while the Democratic Action Party that the Chinese dominated

pushed the ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ idea along with the dilution of unique privileges that the

Bumiputra received under the constitution. The country had 4.3 million Malays, 1 million

Indians, and 3.4 million Chinese (Yusof & Deepak 2008, p. 30).

Article 153 16

Race, as well as, dividing economic and political power along the racial lines resulted

in the building up of potentially explosive and controversial issues. This explains that the

reasons behind the 1969 race riots, were not only an essential period in the history of the

country, but also a fundamental justification, as well as, the driving force behind the

implementation of the racial affirmation principles in the 1971’s New Economic Policy. This

implementation occurred exactly two years after the riots. It was evident that the race riots

took place because of socioeconomic racial divisions that was in the country. The Malaysians

leaders should have responded to this through trying to move Malaysia away from policies

and ideologies, which entrenched and gave emphasis to racial differences. Instead, the UMNO

leaders preferred to pursue national stability by giving privileges and distinct status to placate

the Malays (Yusof & Deepak 2008, p. 28).

(ii) New Economic Policy and education

Part of the New Economic Policy achievement was to alienate poverty and restructure

its objectives through offering preferential treatment to the students of Malay. This was in

terms of enrollment and scholarships. However, the New Economic Policy failed to achieve

this due to two key problems; outcome and quality. This is since, over the past 40 years, the

award of enrollment and scholarships in Malaysia primarily bases on race as opposed to merit.

Overall, the students of Malaysia score lower marks compared to their Indian and Chinese

counterparts. In order for them to access universities, the entry point assessment and point

qualifications standards have to lower to suit the students of Malaysia (Jomo 2004 p. 3).

Similarly, the rise of the Malays well connected economic elites befitted disproportionately

from the affirmative action policy. Studies show that 5% of the Malays in terms of wealth,

received university scholarships. In addition, there has been a rise in the combined amount

that the Malay dominated tertiary institutions receive, as well as in other Educational Support

Article 153 17

Programs mainly in terms of Malay scholarships. This is clearly racism in education

institutions, which is against the international and Syariah’s human rights (Jomo 2004, p. 4).

The table below shows the public funds that the Malay dominated Universities, along

with, Bumiputra scholarships and grants have received over the years. It is evident that the

funds keep increasing over the years in these universities unlike in the other non-Malay

dominated institutions.

Fifth Malaysia Plan 1986-1990 RM$2.97 billion

Sixth Malaysia plan 1990-1995 RM$4.23 billion

Eighth Malaysia Plan 2001-2005 RM$22.21 billion

Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010 RM$27.34 billion

(iii) The New Economic Policy and Unity

National unity has remained distant in Malaysia even after almost three decades of

independence. The policies such as the New Economic Policy that aim at achieving the goal

of national unity, along with National cultural policy appear to be the driving forces behind

the non-achievement of national unity. There has been the development of non-ethnic

institutions in various spheres of life. Since the 1970, a number of institutions have reinforced

cultural segregation in practice. Individuals remind students, teachers, and families at all

levels of schooling of their separate religious and ethnic destinies (Jomo 2004 p. 15). Ethnic

ghettos arise easily in supposedly incorporated institutions. Extremely few people often

manage to rise above their ethnicity. Many of the individuals, on the other hand, become

conscious and their experiences, ethnic considerations, and centrality embitter them. This

Article 153 18

leads to the segregation of the Malaysian cultural life that such ethnic cultures revivals and

religion like the Islamic resurgence reinforce (Jomo 2004, p. 19).

Conclusion

Article 153 is part of the continuation of the previous laws left by the British

for the protection of the main indigenous people. This is particularly from an overwhelming

situation through the Indian workers and Chinese immigration into Malaysia. The article’s

first clause has the provision for the government to take action in accordance with the article

provision. The article significantly drafted was with the main purpose of addressing an

economic imbalance thirteen years following the Malaysian constitution drafting. This is

since the Bumiputra as the largest racial segment with about 65 percent of the population in

Malaysia had a precarious economic position with a control of 4 percent of the economy. The

rest of the economy was under the control of foreign interests and the Chinese. A number of

Malaysians still consider the non-Malaysians as a threat and aliens and insist on official ethnic

prejudice as desirable and essential in the reduction of historical inter-ethnic inequities.

Through the article 153, there has been a reduction of poverty in urban areas through the

expansion of employment opportunities according to job specifications and other sectors.

Besides that, the government encouraged the growth of entrepreneurship sector among the

Malay people to present them as an entrepreneurial population in the economy.

The earlier emergence of some of the shared cultural elements in Malaysia has

undergone the aspect of overtaking through the Western non-sensitive cultural hegemony

relayed through the state-controlled mass media. Through the provisions of the article 153,

cultural segregation has undergone relative reinforcement in practice through an assortment of

religious revivals. This is since the year 1970s with every level of practices constantly

Article 153 19

reminded of some of the separate religious and ethnic destinies. The Malays in convincing

numbers have become acutely conscious of the provisions and embittered through their

experience with the centrality of the ethnic considerations. The Malaysian cultural life

indicates of the relative segregation it has undergone, reinforced through the specified

religious and ethnic cultural revivals inclusive of the Islamic resurgence. The adoption of the

article and the introduction of NEP have also enabled the recognition of the identity of the

ingenious communities in the postcolonial Malaysian society. The policies and the provisions

of the article that divides the groups enable an efficient control that influences the relations

amid the culturally and linguistically distinct communities.

References

Abdullah and Paul Pedersen. 2003, “Understanding Multicultural Malaysia.” Pearson

Malaysia, pp. 44

Allison Murphy, 2009, ‘Affirmative Action in a Deeply Divided Society: Lessons for South

Africa from Malaysia’s Successful Redistribution Policies,’ paper presented at the

Article 153 20

annual meeting of the American Political Science Association (Washington DC: 25

May 2009).

Barlow, C. 2001, ‘Modern Malaysia in the global economy: political and social change into

the 21st century.’ Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar.

Barlow, C., & Loh, F. K.-W. 2003, ‘Malaysian economics and politics in the new century.’

Northhampton, MA, Edward Elgar Pub.

Bindloss, J., & Brash, C. 2008, ‘Kuala Lumpur, Melaka & Penang.’ Footscray, Vic, Lonely

Planet.

Daniels, T. P. 2004, ‘Building cultural nationalism in Malaysia: identity, representation, and

citizenship.’ New York, Routledge.

Demery, D., Demery, L., & Morrisson, C. 2002, ‘Adjustment and equity in Malaysia.’ Paris,

Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development.

Hassan, A. A. G. 2004, ‘Growth, structural change, and regional inequality in Malaysia:

Asan Ali Golam Hassan.’ Aldershot, Ashgate.

Jomo K. S., & Wong, S. N. 2008, ‘Law, institutions, and Malaysian economic development.’

Singapore, NUS Press.

Kwame Sundaram Jomo, 2004. ‘The New Economic Policy and Interethnic Relations in

Malaysia,’ UNRISD Identities, Conflict and Cohesion Programme Paper Number 7

(September 2004).

Lee, J. C. H. 2010. Islamization and activism in Malaysia. Singapore, Institute of Southeast

Asian Studies

Article 153 21

Menon, 2001, “Macroeconomics Management Amid Ethnic Diversity: Fifth Year of

Malaysian Experience.” Asian Development Bank Institute Discussion Paper, No 102,

April 2008

Nathan, K. S., & Kamali, M. H. 2006, ‘Islam in Southeast Asia: political, social and strategic

challenges for the 21st century.’ Singapore, ISEAS.

Rosenfeld, M., & Sajo, A. 2012, ‘The Oxford handbook of comparative constitutional law.’

Oxford, U.K., Oxford University Press.

Shahid Yusuf and Kaoru Nabeshima, 2009. Tiger Economies Under Threat: A Comparative

Analysis of Malaysia’s Industrial Prospects and Policy Options (Washington, DC:

The World Bank, 2009).

Shuid and Mohd, 2001, “Malaysian Studies.” Longman, pp 85

Verma, V. 2002, ‘Malaysia: state and civil society in transition.’ Boulder, Colo, Lynne

Rienner.

Zainal Aznam Yusof and Deepak Bhattasali, 2008, ‘Economic Growth and Development in

Malaysia: Policy Making and Leadership,’ Working Paper No. 27 (Washington, DC:

The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / World Bank, 2008), 28.