FMT:
Recurring dress code kerfuffle getting tiresome
The government should address frequent complaints about members of the public being turned away at government departments because of their attire.
It’s getting very, very tiresome. This business about the length of skirts and shorts at government departments, hospitals and police stations has gone on long enough.
I fail to understand why it cannot be resolved despite the dressing down and suggestions that members of public and many politicians have given those enforcing dress codes in government premises.
All it needs is clear and definitive instructions from the chief secretary to the government.
I didn’t want to write about this but the latest in a string of complaints against the moral police at government departments has forced me to do so.
Khor Hooi Chin, 41, of Pantai Remis, claimed she was barred from entering the Companies Commission of Malaysia building in Ipoh on March 10 by an employee because her dress ended slightly above the knees. She was told it did not comply with dress code guidelines.
She said her attire was not provocative and that what she wore was considered office wear. According to reports Khor went to a mall to buy a longer skirt just to gain entry into the building.
This happened less than three days after a woman visitor to the Tengku Ampuan Afzan Hospital in Pahang was denied entry because she was wearing a pair of shorts that apparently did not cover her knees. I watched the video that went viral on March 7 and didn’t find anything indecent about her dressing.
Pahang health director Dr Nor Azimi Yunus explained on March 8 that it was likely a “misunderstanding” due to the security guard’s uncertainty about the dress code required to enter the hospital.
In February, a 21-year-old woman claimed she was denied treatment at the Kampar Hospital in Perak because she was wearing shorts. She was told by a medical officer to change to a pair of long pants before being allowed entry into the emergency room.
Subsequently, on Feb 15, health minister Dr Zaliha Mustafa said all patients, regardless of race, religion or dressing should have access to medical treatment.
That, of course, was the right thing to do.
Hospitals and clinics were built to treat people and save lives. It should not matter what anyone wears when she comes for treatment. The priority is to treat the patient. The advice can come later, if at all.
On Feb 15, according to reports, a 60-year-old woman was barred from using the elevator at the Pasir Gudang City Council to renew her business permit on the second floor because the security guard felt her dress was “too short” and that it must reach her feet to be considered “long enough”.
The woman was known to Pasir Gudang MCA division chief Tan Tuan Peng who took to Facebook to ask: “Is there a problem with the dress? Or is there a problem with the government?”
Good question.
A month earlier, a woman who had gone to the Kajang police headquarters to lodge a report on a road accident claimed she was denied entry because she was dressed “inappropriately”.
It was not exactly an intelligent thing to do, as netizens loudly pointed out. It is the duty of policemen to accept reports from people regardless of their attire. Police should concentrate on reducing the crime rate, not on the attire of members of the public.
Last October, Malaysians took to social media to slam Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia’s dress code guideline for its 50th convocation ceremony. Even the saree and cheongsam, traditional attire of ethnic Chinese and Indian women, were listed in the prohibited category.
In May 2022, lawyer Norman Fernandez was quoted in The Star as saying that a security guard stopped his wife from entry at the Wisma Persekutuan complex in Johor Bahru because he deemed her attire “provocative and indecent”.
“My wife was wearing a long-sleeved dress that ended around 7cm below her knees, with closed-toed shoes, yet the male security guard told her ‘Pakaian awak menjolok mata dan tidak sopan’ (your attire is provocative and indecent).”
His wife called him and he went to investigate. “The guard also insisted that non-Muslims should wear clothes that ended at the ankles or wear trousers at the very least. We found this quite bizarre as his job is to man the guard post, not assess people’s attire.”
In the 2018 general election, a voter in the Bagan federal constituency was initially prevented by an Election Commission officer from voting because he wore a pair of short pants. However, following an argument, he was allowed in.
In 2017, Women’s Aid Organisation assistant treasurer Meera Samanther was stopped from entering Parliament grounds by security personnel because they felt her dress was “indecent”.
Meera, a lawyer, said she had worn the same knee-length black dress to court and that it had never been an issue. She was surprised that the dress was deemed “inappropriate” for Parliament.
Some may remember that in June 2015, a woman who went to a Road Transport Department office was handed a sarong to cover her legs. In another case, a woman who wanted to enter the Selayang Municipal Council premises was given a sarong to wear over her skirt by security guards.
In November 2015, it was reported that a boy who was injured was denied treatment at two Klinik 1Malaysia and the Kulai Hospital simply because those on duty felt the length of his mother’s shorts was “inappropriate”.
In fact, after several incidents in 2015, the dress code became a heated topic in the Dewan Rakyat, with Kulai MP Teo Nie Ching urging the health ministry to instruct hospitals and clinics to provide treatment regardless of the attire worn by patients and family members.
It prompted then minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Azalina Othman Said to say that government frontline staff would be told not to deny entry to members of the public even if they were not “appropriately dressed”.
Following another incident, also in 2015, the then urban wellbeing, housing and local government minister Abdul Rahman Dahlan said local authorities should advise people to be decently dressed but not deny them entry.
Yet, we have instances of taxpayers being turned away at various government departments for being dressed “inappropriately.” Apparently civil servants, especially security personnel, are not listening to ministers.
Let me state clearly that I believe we should be decently dressed. I believe too that one should dress appropriately in accordance with the place or occasion.
If someone is dressed indecently, he or she should be dealt with according to the law. But wearing a short skirt is no crime; wearing shorts to a government department is no crime; wearing the traditional dress of Malaysian communities at functions is no crime.
In all, or almost all, cases that have arisen, the clothes worn were not indecent. If the people involved had been indecently dressed, they would have been arrested. They were also not a source of public disturbance. The only disturbance would have occurred in the minds of some petty individuals.
In fact, the clothes in question are what most ordinary Malaysians wear in their daily lives.
What can be done to prevent a recurrence of such incidents?
First, this is Malaysia. We have a multiracial, multireligious population practising various cultures. We also belief in democracy, the rule of law and the individual rights of citizens. Everyone, especially those in authority and security guards, must take cognisance of this and not force their own views or beliefs on others.
Second, existing guidelines need to be reviewed, with the involvement of civil society, and made clearer so that enforcers do not misunderstand them. And there must be uniformity in the guidelines so that members of the public are not caught off guard.
Third, it must be made clear to civil servants and enforcers that the dress code is not a law and therefore they cannot deny service to the public simply based on their attire. There should be flexibility in its implementation.
Fourth, members of the public should be made more aware of the dress guidelines.
I hope the government will deal with this matter soonest possible so that civil servants, and especially security guards, can get on with productive work instead of scrutinising the attire of those who walk in.
No comments:
Post a Comment