Cukup! Enough of the anti-Chinese, Christian sentiments

The status received two kinds of reactions. Firstly, from people who agreed with me. They responded with civil language.

And secondly, from those who did not agree with me. Most of them replied in uncivilised language.

In the past, there have also been incidents where negative sentiments were thrown at other members of our society and other religions, including the Malays and Islam.

All of these cases must not be condoned because they are bad for Malaysia, especially from the perspective of national unity.

As Malaysians, all of us should work and strive together to promote unity, integration, equality and non-discrimination. We must accept all citizens as Malaysians regardless of religion, race, colour, language, culture, descent, place of birth, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, age or disability; and uphold the spirits of the social contract and of the Federal Constitution.

We must also continue enriching the democratisation process, which includes upholding the freedom of speech and expression. But these freedoms should be in accordance with the complexity of our plural society.

If there occur voices or acts of extremism, we must address it quickly, and with boldness and wisdom. Silence is not the answer.

Sometimes, the extreme voice (or action) is no more than a deviant one, by an individual or group. It should be treated accordingly, including, if necessary, taking a just and reasonable action against the individual or group. But, we should not exaggerate it to the extent that it becomes a national issue.

Sometimes, there are individuals or groups that are, in the past, known for their extreme views, but of late have taken more moderate positions. We should encourage and motivate the positive change. Do not revisit old stories.

Sometimes, there are voices that are thought to be extreme, but are difficult to be proven as such. Maybe because they are presented in good language and are well-articulated with concrete arguments.

Or, they are, truly, not an extreme voice. They are in actual fact a moderate or a critical and educated opinion. But, they are alleged to be extreme by certain quarters who are allergic to different views and opinions, and who are not able to differentiate between criticism and condemnation.

But what is of concern is when the voices are truly extreme. More so, if the people behind it seem to be habitual about it, for example, they make a series of negative statements that are supportive of each other.

It warrants more serious concern when the public is given the perception that these people are being spared and given space to operate as such from “upstairs”, for example, through public funding, by leaders coming to officiate at programmes and by a leader’s elegant silence on their views.

Actually, we have reach a stage where we are in dire need of addressing hate speech, i.e., words, phrases or sentences, either oral or written, or acts, that intentionally incite hatred against others, especially on race and religion.

In this context, we have the Sedition Act 1948. But, it is not appropriate.

Because its definition on sedition is too wide, the threshold is too low, and it has too often been misused or used for selective persecution. Hence, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak made a timely call in July 2012 to abolish it.

I am made to understand the government is currently consulting with stakeholders in formulating a new act to replace the Sedition Act. I hope the new act will, among others, address hate speech, i.e., punish racial and religious hatred, while protecting the right to freedom of speech and expression.

But, while waiting for this to be ready, the rakyat want quick, bold and wise action from the leadership on cases such as those involving ISMA and UiTM.

As we urge the government to show leadership, as ordinary citizens, we must join hands in decrying and denouncing in the strongest possible terms such extreme and irresponsible voices and acts.