As stated by the late Mohd Salleh Abbas (former Lord President of the Federal Court), the Federal Constitution of Malaysia has numerous traditional elements that define its “Malayness”: the sultanate or rulership (Yang di-Pertuan Agong as the supreme head of the federation, the Malay rulers as the heads of all the Malay states), Conference of Rulers, the Islamic religion (Islam is the religion of the federation), the Malay language (national language of the federation) and the Malay privileges.

However, historically and based on my interpretation of the Federal Constitution, I hold a completely different view regarding Mahathir’s claims that Malaysia is a “Malay country”, promoting a multi-ethnic Malaysia is unconstitutional, thereby implying that Malaysia is not a secular state and that the Malays are the original inhabitants of Peninsular Malaysia.

A grain of truth  

Let’s now deal with the question of whether Malaysia is a “Malay country”. Before the spread of British influence, Malaya was arguably a “Malay country”.

In 1835, the Malays constituted 85.9 percent of the population. The Chinese, who were mainly traders, miners, and agriculturists in Kelantan, Kuala Terengganu, Malacca, Johor, and Pahang, formed only 7.7 percent of the population, and the Indians, who were mainly shopkeepers and labourers in the sugar and coffee plantations in Penang and Province Wellesley, formed less than one percent.

It should be noted that the British colonial administrators regarded the Malays as the indigenous people of Peninsular Malaysia or “people of the land”, and signed treaties with Malay sultans.

With the spread of British rule in Malaya beginning in 1874, the Chinese and Indians started immigrating to Malaya in large numbers.

In 1921, the Chinese formed 36 percent of the Malayan population whilst the Indians formed 14 percent. Subsequently, in 1941, Malaya had more Chinese (43 percent) than Malays (41 percent). In 1947, 63.5 percent of the Chinese and 51.6 percent of the Indians respectively were locally born.

Today, our nation is comprised of citizens of various ethnic groups. In Peninsular Malaysia, the Chinese and Indians, whose forebears not only contributed significantly towards nation-building but also sacrificed their lives so that others could live in peace and liberty, form a significant minority.

In the case of East Malaysia, the Kadazan-Dusun form the largest indigenous community in Sabah whilst in Sarawak, the largest indigenous ethnic group is the Iban. There are also numerous other smaller ethnic groups in both states.

Together, they all combine to form a proud nation of people from diverse cultures, religions, and languages who call themselves Malaysians.  

Thus, Mahathir’s assertion that Malaysia is a “Malay country” holds no water.

Multi-culturalism rooted in history

Next, let’s explore whether promoting Malaysia as a multi-ethnic nation is unconstitutional.

Make no mistake about it, Malaysia is truly a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multi-cultural nation for several reasons.

First, in the words of Tunku Abdul Rahman, our wise and far-sighted Bapa Kemerdekaan, the aspiration of our founding fathers was “to build a genuine multiracial and multireligious Malaysia”.

Second, the 1957 Constitution was the result of bargaining and compromises in the interest of national unity, particularly between the Alliance party comprising Umno, MCA, and MIC representing the Malays, Chinese, and Indians respectively.

Indeed, a government publication, ‘Towards National Harmony’ (1971) states explicitly that our Federal Constitution is “a binding agreement solemnly entered into by all races.”

Third, the Federal Constitution reflects the makeup of our nation’s multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. As aptly stated by Joseph M Fernando in his book ‘The Making of the Malayan Constitution’ (2002), the Alliance party’s joint memorandum “reflected a microcosm of the conflicting interests inherent in Malaya’s plural society.”

The Federal Constitution has integrated various communities through the creation of a common nationality or citizenship. The Constitution safeguards the rights of all citizens - regardless of their ethnic background - to participate in the political processes, hold public office, and enjoy fundamental freedoms such as being entitled to equal protection of the law and freedom of religion.

Fourth, Article 153, whilst providing special privileges to the Malays, the Constitution also provides protection of the legitimate interests of other communities.

Fifth and finally, Mahathir’s latest claim clearly contradicts his earlier position.

In his message in conjunction with the Chinese New Year celebration in 2020, Mahathir declared that Malaysians had for decades accepted the fact that Malaysia was a multi-racial country and that they needed to tolerate each other to live in peace and harmony.

He added: “So, we must not let the country be destroyed by racial hatred.”

Furthermore, one of the objectives of Vision 2020 which was formulated by Mahathir during his first stint as prime minister (1981-2003) was to create a united Malaysian nation made up of one Bangsa Malaysia.

M’sia meant to be secular

Meanwhile, Mahathir’s accusation that the present administration is bent on turning Malaysia into a secular state has no basis at all because our nation was meant to be, and still is, a secular state.

Historically, Malcolm MacDonald, the commissioner-general for Southeast Asia, stated explicitly in a speech on April 27, 1948, that all the Malayan races featured in plans for Malaya’s self-government.

Subsequently, the Alliance Party in its 1956 memorandum to the Reid Commission, which was entrusted with drafting the Constitution for the Federation of Malaya, reiterated the fact that observance of Islam as the religion of the State of Malaya “shall not imply that the state is not a secular state”.

This position was made clearer by the Alliance leaders who gave assurances to the Colonial Office during a London Conference in May 1957 that they “had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy and that Malaya would be a secular state”.

The fact that our nation is a secular state was also affirmed by the Supreme Court (now Federal Court) in “Che Omar bin Che Soh v Public Prosecutor” in 1988.

It ruled that Article 3 did not make Malaysia an Islamic state but merely provided for a ritualistic and ceremonial role.

Moreover, as reiterated by RH Hickling in his book ‘Essays in Malaysian Law’ (1991), “there are echoes” of secularism in the Federal Constitution. For example, Article 11 states that every person has the right to profess and practise his religion whilst Article 12 stipulates that every religious group has the right to establish and maintain institutions for the education of children in its own religion.

To top it all, in the words of Ambiga Sreenevasan, a prominent Malaysian lawyer and human rights advocate, “The Civil Courts set up under the Constitution dispense secular justice on a daily basis to all the citizens of this country. Secular law governs contracts, commerce, international relations and trade, and every aspect of the lives of a citizen. Islamic law governs specific matters set out in the Federal Constitution in relation to persons professing Islam.”

Malays were immigrants too

Finally, Mahathir needs to be reminded that the earliest or original people of Peninsular Malaysia are the Orang Asli, more specifically the Negritos who probably descended from the toolmakers of the Mesolithic cultural period beginning about 10,000 years ago.

This fact was acknowledged by Abdul Rahman, the then secretary to the Johor ruler (Sultan Abu Bakar) as follows: “The aborigines were the possessors of the soil before we [the Malays] came to the peninsula.”

The Malays who arrived later supplanted the Orang Asli and kept to the river valleys and coastal areas, while the Orang Asli, who feared being captured as slaves, relocated to the hills and forests.

Interestingly, the 1931 Census Report states that the “Malays are, in fact, merely immigrants of generally longer standing than the other migrant races represented in the peninsula ...”.

Furthermore, according to the 1947 Census Report, about 26 percent of the Malays in Peninsular Malaysia were immigrants from Sumatra, Jawa, and other islands of what is currently Indonesia.

Summing up, based upon the nation’s historical evolution, the vision of its founding fathers, and the Federal Constitution which defined how our nation should be governed upon gaining its independence, Malaysia is a secular and multi-ethnic nation, albeit with a distinctive Malay character.

Our political leaders should rightfully work towards cementing our nation’s intricate and diverse social fabric instead of tearing it apart by distorting history, exploiting the politics of fear, and fanning racial sentiments.

In this regard, I am reminded of Tunku Abdul Rahman’s caution pertaining to efforts by certain quarters to transform Malaysia into an Islamic state.

During a visit to the Sekolah Rendah Kebangsaan Tunku Putra, Baling in October 1987, Tunku criticised some “younger” Malaysians who know nothing about the nation’s past and were promoting racial chauvinism.

He told reporters: “Some of them want an Islamic state and want Islamic laws for all Malaysians. Things like these will tear the people apart and aggravate racial polarisation.”

I hope and pray that this article of mine is a timely reminder to all politicians to act responsibly and promote national unity by honouring the pledges made by the founding fathers of our nation who then represented Peninsular Malaysia’s three largest ethnic groups.

I know the same - or even stronger - multi-ethnic spirit prevails among the political leaders in East Malaysia.

As citizens, Malaysia belongs to both Malays and non-Malays alike. Let us focus on building a democratic, inclusive, and secular nation with the necessary affirmative action to uplift the socio-economic position of the Malays and other indigenous groups, whilst safeguarding the legitimate interests of every other ethnic group.