Najib, we need a stronger women rights movement and you must listen to them

Again, our Prime Minister has done it when he allegedly stated that  there is "no need for a women's rights movement in Malaysia". He is ignorant of the importance of Malaysia's women rights movement and their many contributions to the promotion of not just women rights but also human rights in Malaysia. Next, he may say that there is no need for human rights movement....worker rights movement...environmental rights movement in Malaysia..

There is "no need for a women's rights movement in Malaysia" as equality has been given from the start, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has claimed.Speaking at the 50th National Women's Day celebration this morning, he said that Malaysia is even more advanced than developed nations in this aspect. - Malaysiakini, 2/10/2012, PM: No need for women's rights movement in M'sia

PM Najib, is there gender equality in Malaysia?  

Yes, there is in some areas but in Malaysia discrimination based on gender is still permissible - and the government has not done enough to end gender-based discrimination despite the fact that Malaysia has also ratified the CEDAW (The United nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women) in 1995. 

It must be acknowledged that it was the efforts of Malaysia's women rights movement that finally moved the Malaysian government, who finally after about 15 years to  acceded to CEDAW on 5 July 1995 with reservation on 3 articles. CEDAW was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 18 December 1979.It took Malaysia another 6 years to  amend the Federal Constitution, and include 'gender' in Article 8(2)...Some Acts were amended as well - but the best option would have been to pass a law incorporating the CEDAW into Malaysian Law. 

It would have been good if our Federal Constitution was amended to include the 'doctrine of incorporation' - which will automatically ensure that all conventions that Malaysia ratifies becomes part of the domestic law in Malaysia. 

Malaysia, however relies on the 'doctrine of transformation', which means that these international obligations like those in CEDAW only becomes part of domestic law if enacted by subsequent domestic laws (or judicial decisions). The piecemeal approach by the Malaysian government of amending this and that law has resulted that there are many areas of Malaysian law that still do not incorporate the principles and obligations in CEDAW.

So, are women still being discriminated against in Malaysia?

YES, they are.

For example, in Malaysian women workers can still be discriminated against by reason of their gender. Employers in the private sector still do discriminate women on the basis of gender, and this happens because the Malaysian government FAILED women workers when they failed to enact/amend necessary laws to ensure an end of discrimination based on gender. In fact, it is still allowed for individual persons, private corporations to discriminate women on the basis of their gender.

When an employers can force women to retire at 50 and men at 55 at the same workplace, this is DISCRIMINATION based on GENDER, and our Malaysian courts said that it is OK. Why? Because the amendment to Art. 8(2) of the Federal Constitution only prevents public authority from discriminating against their employees...not employers in the private sector.

(2) Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender in any law or in the appointment to any office or employment under a public authority or in the administration of any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.

In the recent case of  Noorfadilla Ahmad Saikin V. Chayed Basirun & Ors (Shah Alam High Court, 12 July 2011), here Noorfadilah was an employee of the government....BUT if she was an employee in the private sector, the outcome would not have been the same...

It is also the defendants' submission that based on the Federal Court's decision in the case of Beatrice AT Fernandez v. Sistem Penerbangan Malaysia & Anor [2005] 2 CLJ 713, art. 8 of the Federal Constitution does not apply to a contractual relationship. With due respect, what was held in Beatrice's case (supra) inter alia, is as follows:

To invoke Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, the applicant must show that some law or action of the Executive discriminates against her so as to controvert her rights under the said article. Constitutional law, as a branch of public law, deals with contravention of individual rights by the Legislative or the Executive or its agencies. ...

By virtue of art. 160 of the Federal Constitution, the defendants are definitely public authorities and therefore agents of the Executive. To me, the defendants' act of revoking and withdrawing the Placement Memo because the plaintiff was pregnant constitute a violation of art. 8(2) of the Federal Constitution. It was the contravention of the plaintiff's rights by the defendants as agents of the Executive. As such, the requirement of Beatrice's case has been fulfilled....

 Court decision supports discrimination against women - retirement age

The Court of Appeal today(21/3/2012) dismissed an application by female workers claiming gender discrimination in being forced to retire earlier than male colleagues.A three-man bench led by Datuk K. N. Segara upheld a 2010 High Court ruling on the 11-year-old case, which had overturned an initial Industrial Court’s 2008 decision in favour of the eight plastic industry workers. They were forced to retire in June 2001 after the company, Guppy Plastic Industries, enforced a then-new employee handbook rule stipulating a retirement age of 50 for female employees and 55 for male employees. - unfortunately the Judgment is still not available to me, and when it is, I will share it with you.

In short, court decisions seem to indicate that only the Government is barred from discriminating its employees on the basis for gender but it is alright for all other employers, including even Government-linked companies.

Article 11 of CEDAW

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of employment in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, the same rights, in particular:

(a) The right to work as an inalienable right of all human beings;

(b) The right to the same employment opportunities, including the application of the same criteria for selection in matters of employment;

(c) The right to free choice of profession and employment, the right to promotion, job security and all benefits and conditions of service and the right to receive vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeships, advanced vocational training and recurrent training;

(d) The right to equal remuneration, including benefits, and to equal treatment in respect of work of equal value, as well as equality of treatment in the evaluation of the quality of work;

(e) The right to social security, particularly in cases of retirement, unemployment, sickness, invalidity and old age and other incapacity to work, as well as the right to paid leave;

(f) The right to protection of health and to safety in working conditions, including the safeguarding of the function of reproduction.

2. In order to prevent discrimination against women on the grounds of marriage or maternity and to ensure their effective right to work, States Parties shall take appropriate measures:

(a) To prohibit, subject to the imposition of sanctions, dismissal on the grounds of pregnancy or of maternity leave and discrimination in dismissals on the basis of marital status;

(b) To introduce maternity leave with pay or with comparable social benefits without loss of former employment, seniority or social allowances;

(c) To encourage the provision of the necessary supporting social services to enable parents to combine family obligations with work responsibilities and participation in public life, in particular through promoting the establishment and development of a network of child-care facilities;

(d) To provide special protection to women during pregnancy in types of work proved to be harmful to them.

3. Protective legislation relating to matters covered in this article shall be reviewed periodically in the light of scientific and technological knowledge and shall be revised, repealed or extended as necessary.

To name some other laws/policies that do have a tendency discriminate against women directly or indirectly, amongst others, are:-

- the Anti Human Trafficking law in Malaysia that do not provide victims of trafficking any remedies like compensation and damages - this law today provides only temporary protection, which really is a period for the authorities to gather evidence only. Thereafter, local women are sent for 'rehabilitation' and foreign women handed over to Immigration Department to be send back. What about the compensation for these victims from their perpetrators....which may also include wages owed to them as Malaysia defines victims of trafficking as persons exploited and these include workers who are exploited. see also Malaysia's Anti-Trafficking Act will cause injustice to workers...especially migrant workers

- then  we have the recent amendment to the Employment Act with regard to sexual harassment, for here again there is nothing about compensation or damages for the victim. All that the law seem to say is that these victims can end their employment without the giving of notice. Further, inquiry is done generally by a panel set up by the employer. There seem to be not even the ability to lodge the complaint at the labour department, where the matter could be better adjudicated by a third party, i.e. the Labour Department, whereby thereafter parties aggrieved by the decision could appeal to the High Courts and appeal courts if dissatisfied. Many of the victims are women and certainly this law does not aid the victim much at all ...and Najib is saying that we do not need a women rights movement...see also Why 'Sexual Harassment' proposed amendments to Employment Act must be withdrawn and repealed? and JAG :- Employment Act amendments piecemeal and unjust

- How many women in the private sector on fixed-term contracts who got pregnant did get their contracts renewed, and enjoyed the maternity leave rights? Most, if not all, will just not renew these contracts when the women is pregnant - not will they offer employment to women who are pregnant?. Malaysia, rather than protecting worker rights for regular employment until retirement, retrenchment, etc allowed the use of short-term contract employment - which is certainly a form of precarious work, and is also an effective tool of control of workers. Short-term contract employment should be restricted to what is really short term work - not work which is regular in nature and is part of the core operations of the employer.  See also BN government is NOT on the side of workers - Workers also need to reclaim their lost rights ...

- Malaysia cancels a migrant worker's employment/work pass just because she got pregnant. How she got pregnant has no bearing? See also MEDICAL SCREENING is very wrong & should be STOPPED immediately

- When young women are arrested at night spots - so easily are they highlighted in the media or commented on as being 'prostitutes' (sex workers), and this 'name calling' undermines the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. How many of these women have really gone through a full trial, whereby the court found them guilty of soliciting for sex for money? see also Police and Media must be held accountable for antics at "anti-vice' raid

There certainly are so many BN women MPs and Senators who could be made the Minister of Women Affairs - but our male Prime Minister chooses to hold on to that position himself - it is so patriarchal....and also an indication that this PM really have not much confidence in his own BN women MPs and Senators...I am quite disappointed that the BN women leaders never protested strongly this...

There is certainly a need for a stronger women rights movement in Malaysia, and there is a need for a much stronger struggle for women rights especially in Malaysia where the BN government has failed to ensure that all women enjoy freedom from discrimination by reason of gender...

Malaysian Bar: Landmark decision bodes well for gender equality

---

Press Release

 

Landmark decision bodes well for gender equality

The Malaysian Bar commends Judge Datuk Zaleha Yusof’s enlightened and progressive decision in favour of Noorfadilla Ahmad Saikin in the High Court at Shah Alam yesterday.

In ruling that the Government’s revocation of its offer of employment, on the basis that the plaintiff was pregnant, was unconstitutional, null and void, the Judge upheld the prohibition against gender discrimination that is enshrined in Article 8(2) of the Federal Constitution.  The decision is a significant milestone in our jurisprudence, as the Judge referred to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (“CEDAW”), which Malaysia acceded to on 5 July 1995, and found that CEDAW is binding on Malaysia.

Just over 16 years after Malaysia’s accession to CEDAW, our Judiciary has, at long last, recognised that CEDAW has the force of law in Malaysia, and that gender-based discrimination by a public body is illegal.  Although entirely correct and irrefutable, this viewpoint is ground-breaking and long overdue, as our Judiciary had not previously seen fit to apply the principles of CEDAW – or any other United Nations convention to which Malaysia is a State Party – in its decisions.  

The definition of discrimination against women, as set out in Article 1 of CEDAW, informs our understanding of what constitutes gender discrimination under Article 8(2) of the Federal Constitution.  As such, the Judge found that the behaviour of the defendants was unacceptable, as it constituted discrimination against women by reason of pregnancy, which is prohibited by the provisions of CEDAW.  This interpretation gives meaning to the Government’s obligation under CEDAW, namely, to condemn all forms of discrimination against women and pursue “by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women”.

Given this decision, it is an opportune time to revisit the ruling in the Beatrice Fernandez case, where issues of gender discrimination were also considered.  The duty not to discriminate cannot rest solely with the Government.  If gender discrimination is intolerable, it must be objectionable regardless of whether it is perpetrated by a public authority or a private entity.  

Lim Chee WeePresidentMalaysian Bar
13 July 2011

Conduct unbecoming of a Prime Minister of Malaysia - 'comments about Ambiga and Mat Sabu'

Watching the news on RTM yesterday, I was totally disappointed with the behaviour of Prime Minister Najib. These are my opinions and views based on what I saw and heard on TV yesterday - my own perception of what was said, how it was said and what could have been in Najib's mind when he said it. 

With regard to Bersih, he questioned how come Mat Sabu (Pas Deputy President) was willing to be led by Ambiga (former Bar Council President)?

Was it a sexist remark? Can't a woman not lead? And the fact that Mat Sabu and many others allowed this speaks about the progressiveness and openness of PAS and others - but the comment does not fare well for Najib and BN.

Was it a racist remark? Can a non-Malay a non-Muslim lead? Many Malaysians do not see 'ethnicity' or 'religion' or 'sex' when they choose their leaders - only leadership qualities, personality and capacity matters. Again PAS and others comes out looking good and progressive - and certainly more acceptable to Malaysians as an alternative political party - but not so for Najib and the BN.

“Who doesn’t know Ambiga. She’s the one who threatened Islam. And below her is Mat Sabu,” Najib (picture) told a 20,000-strong crowd, referring to the Bersih chief who once took up a case involving the faith and the new PAS deputy president Mohamed Sabu. 

For one, I do not think she ever threatened Islam or challenged its position in Malaysia. 

As a lawyer and human rights defender, it certainly is the right of every Malaysian to take up issues concerning religious freedom - rather than quietly sit by silently expressing no opinion for fear of being branded. 

Tell us, Najib,  the details of the case that Ambiga took up and  all we see that it was certainly not anti-Islam. For Najib, it seems that anyone that takes up the issue of freedom of religion is anti-Islam. Again, PAS has come out  being more progressive and more Malaysian - more 1Malaysia

We recall one of  the issues on Islam:-

Najib & UMNO (or was it also BN by default) - Only Muslims can use the term 'Allah', 
PAS - Muslims have no exclusive right to the usage of the word 'Allah' - all can use

Some pending issues, still not resolved, (in my opinion)
* When a spouse converts to Islam - what then are the rights of the other spouse? Custody of children? Right to matrimonial property? Alimony?
* When a person converts to Islam - what happens after he passed away? How will his property be distributed, especially with regard his non-Muslim parents, siblings, children, spouse, ___?  Or will all non-Muslim parents, siblings, spouses and children not receive anything because they are non-Muslims?

It is good that this movement is not led by politicians or political parties - but by an independent Malaysian, which is right. This is not Pakatan Rakyat's movement - but a Malaysian peoples' movement - and the government just declared it unlawful, and seem to be also behaving as though the T-shirts are also illegal - or is it 'yellow T-shirts/clothes' that have become illegal.

Before this, the other time a colour was made 'illegal', it was saffron or 'orange' during the HINDRAF action. So, now in Malaysia, wearing yellow is also bad. Red was also a colour that was not OK - as it was associated with the Communist party - but now Najib and BN is using it.

Now, Najib, as Prime Minister of Malaysia - is the Prime Minister of all Malaysians irrespective of gender, ethnicity, religion, political affiliation - and must always be be seen to be truly 1Malaysian and democratic. He must be an advocate of human rights and freedoms. He must never be seen to be a sexist, racist or an extremist of any sort.

One may have expected such remarks from some minor BN politician but certainly not Najib, our Prime Minister. Much more is expected from Najib..

I wonder, if Malaysia was like the US, and people had the right to vote for the Prime Minister whether he will be chosen as the leader of this nation.

His present stance against a movement, which is multi-racial and multi-religious in nature, calling for free and fair elections is certainly disappointing.

Is he against free and fair election? 

As Prime Minister, certainly he is the one in control of the police and their actions - and whatever the police has done and will do will be his own doing. 

Sadly, in Malaysia still there is not enough openess and transparency - and forums for one to express one's view, that is those views different from Najib's and the BN government's. 

Look at RTM (Radio Television Malaysia) and the other mainstream media and television/radio - they do not give others sufficient time and/or space (if any) to express different views.  Maybe, we should just rename RTM to RTBN (Radio Television Barisan Nasional). We should be having more 'debates' like the one between Shabery Cheek and Anwar - maybe an Ambiga-Najib debate.

Parliamentary proceedings in Malaysia is also not broadcasted live to every home in Malaysia. The live from Parliament programme now is a 'joke' where most of the time we have to sit and watch interviews - not the actual proceedings. 

Even in Parliament, MPs are denied the right of free choice - if they are BN, they are prohibited from supporting views of the Opposition. Recent 'minimum wage' Bill also was rushed through the Dewan Rakyat in less than 10 days - with about 4 hours only for debate. People just never got the choice to communicate their views to their MPs or to the government.

That is why...people believe that they have to resort to peaceful assemblies - to show also to the government that their views are not just the views of a few but many. One person can hand over the memo - well, it can happen but then there maybe possibly no (or very little coverage) in the media the government has influence over or the government could easily dismiss it as the view of a few.

Najib and the BN government can change, and here are some of the things that they could do to make Malaysia more democratic...

What are some of these available options?

1) Allow more space for differing views and opinions to be aired in the radio, TV and mainstream media. In fact, freely give licenses to people to operate radio and TV station, newspapers, etc. [The Opposition is given the permit to have their own publication - but then conditions are imposed, i.e. 'for members' only]

2) Allow permits for public forums & allow the usage of public halls for this. [It is a joke, when we hear that permits are given for political parties to hold dinners - but on condition there be no 'political' speeches]

3) Have public consultations - better still referendums where every Malaysian can express their view and choices.

4) Bring democracy to every level - kampungs, kampung barus, taman, kampung orang asli, local council - let the people participate and choose their own leaders. Stop the practice of 'appointing' - let people choose. And after people have chosen, respect this choice - and not create alternative structures to by-pass peoples' choices.

5) Stop discriminating people who exercised their rights and choose people/parties other than BN. As Prime Minister and Federal government, you should serve all people equally... Promising people development and benefits only if you vote for BN is so undemocratic - after all the money and resources belong to all Malaysians - not the UMNO,...not the BN.

6) Openly broadcast live Parliamentary proceedings fully (not edited)

7) Allow members of Parliament/Senators freedom to vote as per their conscience - not as dictated by the political party.

8)

9)

With the dawn of ASTRO, Malaysians finally got access to other media - not just the 'controlled tailored' RTM - and this has opened the minds of Malaysians, and now many desire true democracy - not a democracy where one only has a choice to vote once every 4-5 years...

Malaysians today, no more 'frogs under a coconut shell' (katak di bawah tempurung), no longer ignorant, no longer 'blindly loyal', no longer happy with just what the PM and government 'hand down' to them - they desire true democracy, human rights, freedoms, equality, justice...  and, if Najib and the current BN government does not get this and believe that the old methods of 'fear tactics', 'keeping people ignorant', 'patronage', etc will still work - they are wrong and outdated and will not survive politically much longer in Malaysia. 

No longer will people fear governments - but, as in every democracy, governments must start to fear the people - and make sure that they do serve the people, or face the risk of being 'kicked out' come next elections.

The myth that was propagated by the BN before, i.e. that no others other than the BN can effectively and efficiently rule and govern Malaysia, went out of the window after GE2008 and DAP, PAS and PKR has shown Malaysians, that given the opportunity, they too can rule and govern. 

The next General Elections would be interesting as it could see people of Malaysia, after 50 over years, giving a chance to other than BN, to rule and govern Malaysia... [And, if and when the Opposition wins, I hope that they will immediately implement the recommendations of BERSIH...]

Is this the real fear of Najib and the BN? Don't worry, this is democracy at work.  It is never up to you - it is always up to the people to decide whether they choose you or some other.

Najib blasts Ambiga, PAS over Bersih rally

July 02, 2011

PASIR PUTIH, July 2 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak lambasted Bersih chief Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan and PAS for the planned July 9 rally, telling people here the Islamist party will do anything to capture Putrajaya.

The electoral reform movement has called for a rally to press for free and fair elections but the Najib administration is taking all measures to stop the demonstration which is a repeat of a 2007 rally that drew some 50,000 people in Kuala Lumpur.

“Who doesn’t know Ambiga. She’s the one who threatened Islam. And below her is Mat Sabu,” Najib (picture) told a 20,000-strong crowd, referring to the Bersih chief who once took up a case involving the faith and the new PAS deputy president Mohamed Sabu. The prime minister is in Kelantan for a day-long visit.

Najib’s remarks were carried by Radio Malaysia news at 1pm. The station also played public service clips against the rally and praising the prime minister as leader of all Malaysians.

Najib said Mohamed was willing to be deputy to Ambiga as a means to get power for PAS, which has ruled Kelantan since 1991.

The PAS No. 2 is no longer in Bersih although the party supports the movement.

Bersih, comprising 62 groups, has vowed to continue with the rally although police has said it will not issue permits.

The government has also issued a special sermon for Friday prayers yesterday to criticise the rally apart from state-run media castigating the protest without specific reference to Bersih or the rally date.

Deputy Inspector-General of Police Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar said yesterday there would be no more room for discussions, and warned the organisers — Bersih, Perkasa and Umno Youth — to be prepared to be arrested if they did not abort their respective rallies.

Bersih has asked the police to suggest different routes and directions for the three groups on July 9 to ensure that its rally goes off without a hitch.

Among others, the group is demanding that the government ensure a clean and fair general election, reforms in the postal voting system and an extended campaign period of at least 21 days.

The first rally, also organised by Bersih, was held in 2007 and saw some 50,000 people take to the capital’s streets. The gathering eventually descended into chaos when the police deployed tear gas and water cannons on demonstrators. - Malaysian Insider, 2/7/2011, Najib blasts Ambiga, PAS over Bersih rally

 

Arresting 47 Chinese tourists for being in an entertainment outlet is just not right...

Seriously, I wonder this is all just discrimination against young women tourists from Asian countries - usually China. Would the authorities have similarly acted against European, American and/or Australian women in pubs/entertainment outlets? I doubt it...

As reported, they are here on a social visit pass... so, they are here legally. What wrong did they do? Is sitting down, talking and socializing with men at an entertainment outlet a crime in Malaysia? I do not think so... Were they caught selling sexual services....or maybe receiving money for sexual services..? I do not think so...  Is it wrong for men to buy women drinks....or for women to allow men to buy them drinks? I do not think so...

The report say that they were arrested "...for abusing their social visit passes and immoral activities...", and I wonder how they did it? Immoral activities - well, this must be something against the law, not according to the moral standards of some officers... Maybe, what they did wrong was go out drinking and chatting with men wearing 'revealing' clothes - was that the 'immoral activities' we are talking about? 

Now, the girls get arrested...and most likely their 'social visit' passes may then expire - and then they become 'undocumented migrants' - and the police will claim that they just cannot be released, and they will then be sent to the Immigration Department to be deported back to their countries of origins...

What if you were a young girl visiting Malaysia, and you get arrested and detained for something like this - would you want to stay and fight to prove your innocence in a strange country, not your own, or just want to get back home... most do just want to escape - and authorities continue to do similar wrong to many foreign women especially from Asia (and eastern Europe). What about the owners of the establishment..the so-called employers of these GROs .... do they get prosecuted... Well, this report says that " the entertainment outlet was raided early this year and several times the previous year...." but alas while these young women get victimized, the outlets stay open - something is so wrong.

The Immigration Department arrested 47 mainland Chinese women in a raid on an entertainment outlet in Jalan Jones in Georgetown, Penang early today.

Its director, Abdul Qadir Siddiq Ahmad said the manager of the outlet and a Burmese national male were also arrested in the 'Ops Sayang' raid.

"The women, who worked as guest relations officers (GROs), were entertaining their clients, who were ushering in the Christmas, when the immigration and MACC officers closed in," he told a news conference here today.

Seven immigration officers and 19 Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers took part in the raid from 12.45am to 4am.

Abdul Qadir said the GROs in their 20s were detained for abusing their social visit passes and immoral activities while the 28-year-old manager would be investigated under Section 55B of the Immigration Act 1959/63 for harbouring illegal foreign workers.

Penang MACC director Latifah Md Yatim said the entertainment outlet was raided early this year and several times the previous year.

She said the raid was the results of public information and intelligence since several weeks ago and the MACC was investigating whether corrupt practices were involved in the operation of the outlet.

- Bernama - Malaysiakini, 25/12/2010, No X'mas cheers for 47 'China dolls'

Malaysiakini also does wrong to these women, when they in their title calls them 'china dolls' ....is this not derogatory? Even, if Bernama used this title, Malaysiakini should have been better and more respectful of women - and a better title should have been used. I do not think many Chinese women would like to be called a 'china doll'. What does it really mean? Do you like to be called an Indian doll, a Malay doll, etc...