The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been gaining international recognition for Malaysia in the Human Rights arena by speaking out against human rights violations of other nations – albeit selectively – it is a stark contrast to what is practised back home by the Home Ministry. A LoyarBurokker in London reports from the anti-ISA protest there.

50 years of the ISA and police brutality were not compelling enough reasons for Malaysians to signal their dismay outside the Malaysian High Commission in London. Some questioned if it was appropriate and chose instead to attend the talk by the Foreign Minister inside the Embassy – throw tough questions at him and have something to eat after. A few offered to come out and intervene if the situation got heated. Others didn’t think it would come to that.

Peaceful demonstration is sometimes a duty and those who thought so were not surprised when Anifah Aman approached them for a civilised dialogue. He was, after all, in charge of Foreign Affairs and diplomacy is his ministry’s expedient course of action.

While Home Affairs and the Royal Malaysian Police deal in domestic violence, Anifah’s ministry speaks out against human rights abuses perpetrated by other governments. Israel was promptly urged not to take drastic and violent action on the unarmed passengers of the Rachel Corrie. Just two weeks ago, Singapore received a plea for clemency for Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian sentenced to death for drug smuggling. It would seem that member states of the United Nations see the Malaysia Foreign Office as an devoted defender of human rights and so, duly got us elected to the UN Human Rights Council again this year.

Disproportianate use of force at peaceful candlelight vigil in Petaling Jaya

As soon as Anifah Aman arrived at the Malaysian High Commission, he walked across the road to an assembly of concerned Malaysian citizens protesting against the police violence and arrests that marred peaceful candlelight vigils in Malaysia to observe the 50th year of the ISA.

Accompanied by aides and reporters from the NST and Malay Mail, the Foreign Minister broke the ice by saying “Hi” to the organiser. He explained the delays behind the parliamentary debates on the amendments to the ISA and iterated that the law would not be repealed. In the dialogue with the concerned citizens, only Anifah Aman spoke without any interjections from the Malaysian Ambassador or anyone from his delegation who crossed the threshold behind their leader. The opening gambit is commendable, the same format should be approved by Hishamuddin Hussein for home use.

Anifah Aman's team return to the Embassy after the dialogue
The Minister turns back to say 'Write to me, OK?'

In an article posted on Aliran, an observer noted :

Following a twenty minute discussion, the demonstrators closed by thanking Anifah for his efforts at open engagement but asked that a clear message be taken back to the Prime Minister and his government; that as Malaysia gains international recognition and prominence on the world stage – this recognition must be for the right reasons.

The Messenger would turn Advocate when he later surprised those waiting inside the Embassy that he would quit if his government were to silence public dissent. Before an audience of 100 people, the Foreign Minister repeated he would guarantee that Malaysians protesting outside would not be arrested, detained or questioned when they return to Malaysia.

Meanwhile, a virtual Abdul Razak Baginda (‘serious academic’, UK-resident, you-know-who) announced on Twitter that he advised the Minister to “make empty promises. mana tau, he actually promised he would quit if BN abused law to stop protests”.

Zaid Ibrahim

Due credit may be given to the Foreign Minister who would follow in the footsteps of Zaid Ibrahim who resigned from his post as Law Minister when the ISA was abused under his watch. It remains to be seen if accountability will be a hard act to follow.

As it was a night where free speech was allowed a wide berth, the dismayed and un-verified Abdul Razak Baginda, can only be cajoled into treating Malaysian policy matters with the same standard of ethics as he employs in his work as a “serious academic .”

The responsibility now lies with the NST and Malay Mail reporters who followed Anifah Aman back into the Embassy. Their dispatches are eagerly-awaited as their objective reporting would be a fitting albeit a small tribute to human rights advocates in and out of Malaysia as well as those who are part-of and not-of the establishment. A departure from the expected editorial standard would only serve as a sobering reminder of censorship and the subscription basis of universal human rights.

LB: See-See is a Malaysian currently living in London. Once a year, she and fellow organisers screen documentaries about Malaysian human rights and political issues under the banner of the Freedom Film Fest of Malaysia. She works as a software architect.

Related Internet Links:

23 replies on “Anifah Aman makes London the new and improved Bolehland”

  1. for the brobdingnagian survey, but I’m captivated the new Zune, and desire this, as healed as the reviews several opposite fill soul typewritten, give aid you if it’s the ripe prime for you.

  2. @ Jerry Chin – You say:

    "It DOESN’T mean if one is BORN in MALAYSIA, one is automatically GRANTED EQUAL RIGHTS as others."

    Euh – why not? Just because the law says so? (It's unclear if this is your opinion, or if you are just stating how things are in Malaysia today)

    Ultimately all our ancestors came from Africa. How many generations back do you have to go. (Can Baba Nonya claim to be Bumiputra?)

    The Hindus were here before the Buddhists, who in turn were here long before the Muslims.

    The 'lain-lain,' orang asli were here before the Malays.

    Following your 'logic' they should be entitled to more rights than the Malays (clearly this is not the case).

    Satu Negara (One Land) Satu Bangsar (One People). How can it be Satu Bangsar when some have rights or privileges others do not? More like Satu Lagi Bangsar (One more People).

    I recently spoke with a young Chinese-Malaysian back in Bolehland on a term break from studying in Australia. He found it difficult to accept that in Australia he should have the same rights and privileges as any other person living there.

    Seems like he was so brain-washed by the 'Malaysian System' that he expected, and in fact even wanted, to be treated as a second class citizen.

    Jerry, no offense, (as I say it is unclear whether these are you opinions) but I suspect you are suffering from the same form of brainwashing.

    This is your country – our country, and we should all enjoy the same rights and privileges regardless of colour or language or what we choose to eat or not eat. The day that this happens (admittedly unlikely to be in our lifetimes)there will be a lot less reason for 'racial disputes.'

  3. To quote from a website on how to write an essay:

    "9. Writing an Essay All in Capital Letters:


    Looks like someone needs to go back to English class. But that's understandable, since he's been spending a large amount of his time diligently mastering the Cantonese dialect.

  4. @Ahusni

    I beg to differ. Human rights is universal, whether you are from Bolehland, or US, or Papua New Guinea. The UDHR outlines the right we should enjoy as an individual. There may be more to that, but certainly no less than that list.

  5. It amazes me that there are morons that fight to remove their own basic human rights. They are truly idiotic for they cherish not their freedom of speech, their freedom of association, their right to a fair trial, their freedom of religion, their right to liberty, their right to life, and their right to security of person. But morons as they are we would still fight for their basic human rights because morons as they are, they are still human albeit a moronic one.

  6. Ahusni, there is a clear distinction between the UK government and the UK civil society. it was not the 'English' or British civil society who went to war with Iraq, it was Tony Blair. His actions were not endorsed by the millions who marched on British streets to protest against the invasion. Universality of Human Rights is a contested topic – but why wouldnt we want the basics like 1) right to a fair trial 2) freedom from torture and 3) freedom of speech ?

    Please share with us what Malaysian Human Rights should be. Thank you.

  7. What do you guys know about human rights? If you are an Indian go ask Indian Prime Minster.. if you are a Chinese, go ask China's President..

  8. I agree with LM Chong. "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." – Voltaire

    Now lets see if the minister would uphold his words.

  9. What is being called as HUMAN RIGHTS is being defined differently in different culture, country or religion. Malaysia has no need to confirm to English people version of human rights, or the Chinese version of human rights. We mould our own system and our KPI is not the West. We need not lick white man balls like the people who asked for the abolishment of ISA atc.. Even the English distorted human rights by joining USA in invading other people's country etc.. See See cannot see.. she just turned a blind eye on that..

  10. Hi Jerry and Farouk,

    I ought to defend your liberty of expression. I shall rebuke those who ask you to shut up.

    Coz i genuinely believe even a moron has liberty to write.

  11. Either Jerry is a Chinese with has BN backing him up or he is an impostor. Did not read the facts correcly, just bent on PR- bashing!

    BTW, Farouk, wee-wee is also see-see in English!

  12. Hahaha… Jerry is so fake. Caught you buddy, you really need to learn how to lie better, it's like a school-quality essay. Really Mr Chin or whoever you are, you are insulting us by thinking that with that half-arsed comment you can convince us you are Jerry Chin and those statement are anything real. Maybe that the problem with your kind of people Jerry, you can't convince us like that with that level of mentality. Need to grow up another 100 years.


    Topic: RACIAL DISPUTES (Past, Present & Future)

    I’m a CHINESE & perhaps the very few CHINESE in MALAYSIA of whom would DARE to write such a topic. However, my intention is NOT to “PROVOCATE” but I’m only writing based on my PERSONAL VIEW standing on a NEUTRAL position. Here we go….

    1) RACIAL DISPUTE is a SENSITIVE & DEADLY thing. It’s similar to CANCER. You can NEVER get RID of it.

    2) RACIAL DISPUTE had always been a problem of the PAST & it’s still a problem of the present. I foresee it will continue to be a PROBLEM till the end of time.

    3) RACE & RELIGION are issues NOBODY could COMPROMISE on. Not even the MALAYS, CHINESE, INDIANS or lain-lain.

    4) We CANNOT expect the MALAYS to compromise their RACE & RELIGION for other ethnic groups & we certainly CANNOT expect the ‘Non-Malays’ to compromise their RACE & RELIGION for the MALAYS.

    5) The CHINESE, INDIANS & lain-lain ought to be FAIR in their DEMANDS for RACIAL EQUALITY. These ethnic group MUST NOT forget their ANCESTORS came from another country to settle down in this land called MALAYA & now MALAYSIA. It DOESN’T mean if one is BORN in MALAYSIA, one is automatically GRANTED EQUAL RIGHTS as others. People from these ethnic groups MUST trace back their HISTORY before they even STARTING to make any REQUESTS or DEMANDS.

    6) The MALAYS ought to be FAIR. Although the existence of MALAY RULERS are evident in MALAYSIA, it doesn’t mean the MALAYS can TAKE ADVANTAGE of other ethnic groups in the country. The MALAYS must learn to RESPECT others so that others will give them the EQUAL RESPECT in-return.

    7) RACIAL DISPUTES was NEVER hotly DEBATED before 2008. This is because MALAYSIANS are PEACEFUL people who RESPECT each other despite differences in RACE & RELIGION.

    8) OPPOSITION PARTIES especially DAP (Democratic Action Party) is the CULPRIT who started the BALL ROLLING with such RACIAL DISPUTES & CONTROVERSIES.

    9) DAP since 2004 had been using RACIAL DISPUTE topics as their PROPAGANDA in their ‘ceramahs’ & campaigns. DAP conveniently uses words such as CHINESE RIGHTS, NON-MALAYS RIGHTS, ABOLISHMENT OF MALAY RIGHTS & PRIVILEGES as their MAIN TOOL to confuse the CHINESE, INDIANS & lain-lain.

    10) In another words, DAP instigates RACIAL ISSUES to champion their political objectives. This can be graded as “NATIONAL THREAT”.

    11) This could well be the reason why TONY PUA from DAP received a LOVE LETTER with a LIVE BULLET in it. TONY PUA had STUPIDLY pushed one step further than he should. TONY tried playing the role of a CHINESE CHAMPION but only to MELLOW DOWN & HIDE in FEAR upon receiving the said LETTER (It’s evident to see Tony seldom blog & speak so often since the receipt of the said BULLET)

    12) “ANTI ISA” campaign had been very AGGRESSIVE of late & most of these “ANTI ISA” Illegal Street Parades are organized by DAP & GANG (Pakatan Rakyat).

    13) Young LAWYERS too are joining the fray in ILLEGAL STREET DEMONSTRATIONS. This is due to Economy Slowdown & most of these young LAWYERS are OUT OF JOBS upon spending so much time & money just to get their LAW DEGREES. These young LAWYERS then take their FRUSTRATIONS & ANGER to the streets by FOOLISHLY walking hand-in-hand with Pakatan Rakyat in Candlelight Vigils & other silly events.

    14) The main OBJECTIVE of Pakatan Rakyat towards abolishing “ISA” is NOT for ‘the rakyat’ sake. It’s for PAKATAN RAKYAT’s own sake.

    15) Pakatan Rakyat are WELL AWARE they are playing with the FIRE of ‘NATIONAL THREAT’ & the BEST way is to have ISA ABOLISHED so that PAKATAN RAKYAT can pursue their MISSION further by ABUSING “RACIAL DISPUTE” topics to gain political mileage.

    16) ISA must NEVER be ABOLISHED. It will come in HANDY one fine day when Pakatan Rakyat goes beyond the boundary.

    17) Even if Pakatan Rakyat managed to CONQUER Putrajaya one fine day (unlikely though), the problems of RACIAL DISPUTE will still be around & will NEVER subside.

    18) The problems of RACIAL DISPUTE can NEVER be solved as long as the ROOT of the problem is NOT addressed. Sadly, NOBODY seems to have a CLUE where, what & how to get RID of this ROOT.

    If one were to stand on the NEUTRAL side, one will bound to AGREE with what I’ve written.

    Thanks for ya time!!!

  14. This Anifah fuck man is a a umboono ass licker.During Sleepy Head Regime he was made a deputy minister.This fucker critisize sleepy head.After Najis take the pee m throne , this ass hole were appoited full minister. These ass then start to lick najis balls and attack DSAI.

    Yea, write to him.Than he can use the paper to clean his bump after hi shit in his pants after the GE 13.

  15. Farouk, we are a real nut! Your head is just like the head of a undang galah. If you can't think properly, the best thing you can do is to keep quiet. You are just showing your own stupidity! I think there are plenty of people like you in our country who are empowered to run our country. No wonder we are going backwards! It is the mistake of the rayat to have empowered those people. Throw them away come the next GE.

  16. "Oh Goodness gracious!!!"

    It simple AMAZES me to see there are actually so many SEE-SEE supporter here!!!

    Are they supporting SEE-SEE becos' they simply support SHIT-SHIT??? (In Cantonese, SEE-SEE means SHIT-SHIT)


    Are they supporting SEE-SEE becos' they simply support being a'SISSY'???

  17. Farouk Ismail reminded me of a quote by Woodrow Wilson:"I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speech was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking."

  18. With all the ongoing abuses,big time corruptions and suspect judiciary decisions .The satay seller,the roti canai seller or the bak kut teh seller can comment on political issues.

    Whatever comments doesn't mean that you have to agree you are most welcome to counter these comments,you do not need to resort to personal insult Mr Fark Rock

  19. Farouk if you just have to resort to personal insult rather than addressing the issue with a sound argument like any adult it just reflect how shallow and how child like your mind is.

    Ms Fatima.. well said.

    Ms See See, well written and keep it up…

  20. Farouk Ismail is an example of a crazy Malaysian with myopic view of life. What he wrote reflects his mentality and incapacity to have an intellectual discourse.

    I wonder if his immaturity reflects the consciousness of the rest of the nation.,,total opposite of what we are striving for in Malaysia.

    Farouk..Are you defined just by your name?

    Truth will prevail. It needs no proof nor defence. It is whether we accept it or not.. It takes a few See See, Petra etc to enlighten the rest of the nation.

    Keep up the good work See See

  21. SEE-SEE is a SOFTWARE ARCHITECT??? Since when can we rely on SOFTWARE SLUTS to comment about political issues???

    SEE-SEE is a MALAYSIAN living in LONDON??? I think this BITCH is a REJECT punya BARANG. Her family or her MUST have committed some BIG TIME CRIME in Malaysia & thus now they had fleed to London to seek asylum. Macam RAJA PENGECUT PETRA, hor???

    SEE-SEE??? What kind of name is that??? SEE-SEE means "SHIT-SHIT" in Cantonese, while it also means "SISSY" as for softies.

    Her NAME tells the whole story (let alone her stories)

Comments are closed.