I wasn’t aware that yesterday Pak Haji Nik Aziz, the Kelantan MB, had urged the Malay Rulers to explain ‘ketuanan Melayu’ to the people because he’s annoyed with some individuals whom he claimed as “bold enough to question ‘ketuanan Melayu’”.
That was until I read Pak Haji Nik Aziz' regrettable words in Malaysiakini, which also reported his fellow Kelantanese Zaid Ibrahim, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, advising that “all quarters must abide by the provisions in the Federal Constitution as they covered all aspects, including the rights of the Malays and other races in this country, adding that if they all demand for rights outside the constitution, it may cause tension and friction.”
I am not sure whether Pak Haji Nik Aziz had meant ‘Malay supremacy’ or as Prof Shamsul Amri Baharudin of UKM's Institute of Ethnic Studies (Kita) had attempted to spin it, ‘Malay sovereignty’.
But from his tone (eg. "… individual bold enough to question ‘ketuanan Melayu’") I would say Pak Haji Nik Aziz would be from the former traditional school which believe in ‘Malay supremacy’. In fact he went on to warn that if the Malay Rulers continue to be silent on this issue, the super (or should it be 'supreme'?) position of the Malays would continue to be questioned by people with an agenda.
But as reader Amor Patriae had said in his letter Social Contract Myth and Scholars' Respond: A Rejoinder, even Prof Shamsul, whom he averred as the engineer behind the new ethnic studies module (following the uproar from the earlier UPM ethnic module), needs to be challenged on that ‘sovereignty’ (instead of ‘supremacy’) assertion, because the professor many 'glaring statements' of ‘social contract’ in the module cast a completely different hue.
I posted in The Ham and Bull of 'Ketuanan Melayu', quoting Profs Azmi Sharom and James Chin, that the concept of 'Malay supremacy' has been a fallacy created by a former deputy minister, Abdullah Ahmad. Abdullah Ahmad's argument flowed on to the so-called 'social contract' that non-Malays, in return for their citizenship, have to acknowledge that the Malays are politically supreme and cannot be challenged, ever.
Prof James Chin said UMNO (and now also PAS in the person of Nik Aziz), in insisting on upholding this non-existent ‘social contract’ of racial supremacy (created by Abdullah Ahmad), have basically implied what the Crown Prince of Kelantan said openly - that non-Malays can never be considered equal citizens nor ask for equality as citizens – that's right, they can never be and won't be accepted as equal citizens to Malays.
It’s a damn shame that Pak Haji Nik Aziz as Kelantan's MB, instead of counselling the young prince on his correct royal duties to all his subjects, has instead added fuel to the flame.
It’s seems that in the final analysis, even for a man like Pak Haji Nik Aziz who has always been preaching about the fairness and compassion of Islam, Islamic fairness must give way to the worst form of Malay nationalism - and I am being very kind in ascribing that as '...the worst form of Malay nationalism' because the real sinister objective of 'ketuanan Melayu' is about exploiting that so-called nationalism for the actual 'feathering of some people's personal beds'.
Whatever, Nik Aziz wants ‘ketuanan Melayu’ to be upheld, and royalty to preach the word.
I wonder whether Pak Haji Nik Aziz realizes that he is actually supporting (directly or indirectly) the continuation of the unfairness and injustice that I posted in Social contract - a vigorously implemented 'fantasy'.
Related: All types of racism