LAWYER Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz admits he’s racist and has no problems with it because as far as he’s concerned, so is everyone else.

“Who is not a racist? Everyone is racist. So why do you accuse the Malays of being racists?” he told The Malaysian Insight.

Khairul, who is also vice-president of political party Putra, regularly trolls social media posts that relate to Malay issues at his Twitter account @suakeris.

“If people are angry with what I have written, then my mission is accomplished,” said the 42-year-old.

He was in the news recently for kicking up a fuss, supposedly on behalf of “Malay parents” at a school’s Chinese New Year decorations which he called a veiled attempt at proselytising to Malay-Muslim pupils.

Of greater consequence, however, is his legal challenge against the constitutionality of vernacular schools, which he said boils down to the perception of fairness.

Khairul said he does not question the right of anyone to learn the Chinese or Tamil language, nor does he question funding for vernacular schools.

Instead, he is disturbed that their government funding is now equal with national schools, which use Bahasa Melayu as the medium of instruction.

“Previously, the allocation given to vernacular schools was called ‘bantuan modal’ and was given from a separate account.

“Say, the allocation given for national schools used to come from Account 1 and the allocation given to vernacular schools from Account 3 or something. So, the channels are different.

“But after Pakatan Harapan (PH) took over, they have equalised the allocations and it’s now coming out from the same account. How can that be?”

When asked why this is wrong, Khairul could not really explain, other than to say that taxes are mandatory but the government should only allocate based on law.

Excerpts of the interview:

TMI: Earlier, you said what was already decided in the constitution should not be questioned again. But you are challenging the constitution on the legality of vernacular schools. What do you make of that?

Khairul: The vernacular school issue was not discussed 70 years ago.

TMI: Weren’t they discussed in the Barnes and Razak reports?

Khairul: But that’s not the constitution. Whatever reports before 1957 are considered thrown into the bin.

The constitution is clear. People have misunderstood my challenge on the vernacular schools. I am not challenging their right to study the Chinese or Tamil language. That is their constitutional right. I’m not challenging Article 152 1(b).

I’m challenging Article 152 1(a), which is the main medium of instruction. The main medium of instruction in a public school that gets funding from the federal budget should only be in the Malay language.

The Malay language is not the main medium of instruction in vernacular schools. That’s why I’m raising the question to the courts, can a government body use another language as the main medium?

That’s all I want the courts to answer.

TMI: When did you decide to take up the vernacular school case?

Khairul: During the tabling of Budget 2020 by Lim Guan Eng when he equalised vernacular schools with national schools.

Previously, the allocation given to vernacular was called “bantuan modal” and was given from a separate account. Say, the allocation given for national schools used to come from Account 1 and the allocation given to vernacular schools was from Account 3 or something. So, the channels are different.

But after PH took over, they have equalised the allocations and it’s now coming out from the same account. How can that be?

TMI: Why not?

Khairul: To me, they are not national schools as they are against Article 152 1(a). That’s why I am challenging it in court.

First, I want to get the court to see whether they are of the same level as national schools.

TMI: Taxes are collected from everyone and hence they go to national schools, religious schools and vernacular schools. Since we don’t separate the money that comes in according to races, why should the allocations be different?

Khairul: Paying taxes is your responsibility as a citizen.

The government can only use the money according to constitution and laws and you cannot dispute and say it’s your money. In line with that, government schools are in the Malay language, hence they get the money. The non-government school should get their money from another channel and not from the same account.

TMI: So, you are not disputing that vernacular schools should get funding? Just which account it comes from?

Khairul: Yes. There should be a different system (for allocation) as the schools are different. They cannot get it from the same channel or be treated the same way.

Since you asked, everyone pays taxes. And according to some on social media, Malays are the biggest taxpayers. I don’t know about that. But if we want to fight on that, then we will have many battlefields.

TMI: So, why do you use this as a test case when you say it’s quite pointless to dispute where the money comes in and where it should go?

Khairul: If you all can start battlefields, so can I. I always say don’t do it but if you start, I start. If I don’t start, you start. Until when do we do this? But if you ask me now, I will say till the day I die. Whether I die first or you die first.

TMI: How is this, your legal challenge, helpful to Malaysia as a whole?

Khairul: Unity. One school and one system.

TMI: What do you want to achieve?

Khairul: Unity as with what Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad has suggested, which is to have a Wawasan school to unite everyone. We want racial harmony among the different races. We want the races to know one another and appreciate each other.

To enable this, everyone should learn from young and that’s why schools are very important for unity. That’s why we need one school, one system. This is my main goal. This is not to be anti-any race although I cannot stop you from interpreting the way you want.

We want a single system so that the country will be better and more harmonious.

TMI: Are you concerned that this case gives you a bad rap?

Khairul: That’s because you are only reading the opinions and comments that are bad about me. There are many who support me, too.

I can tell you that I have more than 100 civil societies with me. I’ve gained a lot of support with this case.

TMI: Your critics have called you a racist over your vernacular school case and your letter complaining about the Chinese New Year decorations in a school in Puchong. Are you a racist?

Khairul: Yes. It all depends on what your understanding of the word racist itself. To me, racist means defending your own race, including defending the culture and beliefs and language. So, when you defend these things, it means you are a racist. Is that wrong?

The word is always used in the wrong context and used to accuse someone of something. Are there Chinese or Indians who don’t defend their own race?

Malays are racists. Chinese are racists. Indians are racists. Ibans are racists, too. Who is not a racist? Everyone is racist. So, why do you accuse the Malays of being racists?

So, when you ask “are you racist?”, I would say, “I am racist. So what? You are racist too. Why can you be a racist but I can’t?”

But it’s okay that you are racist as I’m racist, as long as I respect you, you have to respect me. When you don’t respect me, why do I have to respect you?

We fight la and then we see who wins. We fight la.

TMI: What are your core beliefs?

Khairul: I believe in the rule of law, federal constitution and our background history on the formation of this country.

Laws cannot be seen on their own. The laws must be seen in the context of why they were enacted, and what happened then to cause Parliament to pass those laws.

The problem we have now is people are reading the laws but ignoring the circumstances and history.

Like freedom of expression, people only think of the American or Australian context but there are many restrictions here and there are reasons for these restrictions. There is a whole lot of history behind them.

Like Islam is the religion of the federation. Why Islam when there are many other religions in the country? There must be a reason for this and people need to know it so that they can appreciate the constitution. When they know, they won’t challenge or question this article.

The constitution has already been settled from a religious perspective. Islam is the religion of the federation but other religions may be practiced in the country. It is settled already.

The Malay language is the national language and should be used in official matters as stated in Article 152 of the federal constitution. Same with the special privileges for Malays or the rights of Sabah and Sarawak. It’s all settled 63 years ago.

The problem is after 63 years, when liberal thinking has started to dig these settled issues from the grave and want to dissect these matters. They want to ask “Is it true that our forefathers want Malay to be the national language?”.

Why do we want to revisit these issues and discuss them again? Who is asking them to discuss these issues? They must know that when they try to revisit these issues, there will be resistance from their counterparts.

So, if they want to reopen these issues, let’s do it together. I’m fed up because when I don’t react, my counterpart’s argument becomes dominant. I need to rebut.

TMI: What is your idea of a perfect Malaysia from a race and religious perspective?

Khairul: The perfect Malaysia is one that respects, understands and cares about the sensitivities of every race in the country. So, like now I see only the Malays who are told to respect, understand and accept other races.

I have been hearing this since my primary days.

But after a while I see that only the Malays are told to accept the non-Malays. I have never heard of Chinese telling Chinese to accept that this is Malaysia and Islam is the official religion and don’t disturb Islam.

I have never heard the Chinese or the Indians say that the Malay language is the national language and that we need to learn it as well.

I can’t remember when but one time there were patients who were seeking treatment in a hospital in Muar (Johor) but could not communicate with the medical staff as they could not speak Malay. But instead of helping them learn Malay, MCA or Gerakan conducted Mandarin and Cantonese classes for the nurses and doctors in the hospital.

How can this be?

A harmonious Malaysia is when a Chinese community leader tells their community not to disturb others and we won’t disturb them. It’s as simple as that and we will be harmonious.

But for Malays, even the Friday sermons are controlled. They are told to talk about unity in line with the government policy.

Challenge against vernacular schools

Khairul first filed his challenge at the Federal Court in November 2019. The case was dismissed as the apex court wanted the matter to begin at the high court.

He filed a fresh challenge in the high court in December last year, naming the education minister and the Malaysian government as respondents.

Khairul is alleging that parts of the Education Act on vernacular schools are invalid and inconsistent with Article 152 of the federal constitution.

The sections of the Education Act he is contesting touch on the use of Bahasa Melayu as the national language and as the main medium of instruction in all educational institutions. However, the act also allows for national-type (vernacular) schools to be granted exemption by the minister.

The act also requires that Bahasa Melayu is taught as a compulsory subject if it is not the main medium of instruction.

Article 152 of the constitution, meanwhile, allows the use of languages other than BM in teaching or learning, except for official purposes. – January 18, 2020.