THE former Inspector General of Police Tun Mohammed Hanif Omar and Datuk Dr Hasan Mad, who is secretary-general of the Malay Consultative Council (MPM), claimed that I am ignorant for pre-judging about vernacular schools in the country.
Hanif by the way, is the advisor of MPM. He is an interested party in calling for the abolition of the vernacular schools.
The high court is in the midst of hearing a case initiated by three Malay organisations calling for the abolition of the Chinese and Tamil vernacular schools.
They said that I am ignorant of the vernacular schools and why there is a need to do away with them.
Since the case against the vernacular schools is being heard in the court of law, any statement on the issue might be regarded as sub judice.
Moreover, the case against the vernacular schools is rationalised on grounds that students without the benefit of having Malay as the medium of instruction might lose out in getting good jobs as compared with those students who attend national schools with Malay as the medium of instruction.
Such an argument makes no sense as students from vernacular schools are found to be proficient in Malay, English and their mother-tongue.
Both Haniff and Hasan are not neutral parties when comes to the subject of vernacular schools.
They are a party to the case that calls for abolition of the vernacular schools.
Calling for the abolition of the vernacular school not necessarily endows both of them with knowledge and understanding of these schools and why they are detrimental to students.
Accept diversity
Hanif and Hasan might think that they are clever by giving a rational and logical answer as to why vernacular schools have to be done away with.
Thus by talking of the long term interests of the students in vernacular schools, they are trying to give the impression of neutrality or that of being well-wishers of students in these schools.
I don’t think that the leopard has changed its spots. It is just that those initiating the case with their advisors are camouflaging their racism and hatred for the vernacular schools by adopting a benign posture.
They have accused me of being ignorant of the vernacular schools. Maybe in their haste to attack, they forgot to mention where I went wrong on the issue.
If I am ignorant of these schools and why they exist, what about these two eminent personalities?
Are they super-smart so much so that they have all the information at their fingertips? It is not that they are stupid but simply refuse to acknowledge the diversity of our education system.
The case against the vernacular schools is a case against the Constitution of the country – the supreme law of the land that gives inalienable rights to different ethnic communities inclusive of their educational system.
Surely, the former IGP who cannot restrain himself from attacking others should know the Constitution. If not, he shouldn’t have been the former IGP.
I have given my reasons earlier as to why I defended the vernacular system of education. It is not disjointed from the national system but integrated. Their popularity need not be elaborated.
Their argument of me bringing up a matter that was being heard in the court as sub judice is untenable.
By the same token, Hanif and Hasan are equally guilty of sub judice by criticising me for bringing up the matter of vernacular schools. – Nov 29, 2021
Ramasamy Palanisamy is the state assemblyman for Perai and the Deputy Chief Minister II of Penang.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.
