May 13 Incident
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The May 13 Incident is a term for the Sino-Malay race riots in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on May 13, 1969. The riots continued for a substantial period of time, and the government declared a state of national emergency, suspending Parliament until 1971. Officially, 196 people were killed as a result of the riots between May 13 and July 31, although journalists and other observers have given much higher figures.
The government cited the riot as the main cause of its more aggressive affirmative action policies, such as the New Economic Policy (NEP), after 1969.
Contents |
[edit] Causes of the riot
On its formation in 1963, Malaysia suffered from a sharp division of wealth between the Chinese, who were perceived to control a large portion of the Malaysian economy, and the Malays, who were perceived to be more poor and rural. This was the common perception even though the British left all of their conglomerates (mostly plantation sectors) into the hands of the ruling Malays. These already successful companies started by the former colonial masters were the economy of this new born nation which are still going strong till this day.
1964 Race Riots in Singapore were a large contributing factor in the expulsion of that state from Malaysia, and racial tension continued to simmer, with many Malays dissatisfied by their newly independent government's perceived willingness to placate the Chinese at their expense.
Politics in Malaysia at this time was mainly Malay-based, with an emphasis on special privileges for the Malays — other indigenous Malaysians, grouped together collectively with the Malays under the title of "bumiputra" would not be granted a similar standing until after the riots. There had been a recent outburst of Malay passion for ketuanan Melayu — Malay supremacy — after the National Language Act of 1967, which in the opinion of some Malays, had not gone far enough in the act of enshrining Malay as the national language. Heated arguments about the nature of Malay privileges, with the mostly Chinese opposition mounting a "Malaysian Malaysia" campaign had contributed to the separation of Singapore, and inflamed passions on both sides.
The causes of the rioting can be analysed to have the same root as the 1964 Race Riots in Singapore. In addition, Malay leaders who were angry about the election results used the press to attack their opponents, contributing to raising public anger and tension among the Malay and Chinese communities.[citation needed]
[edit] May 1969 riots
In the May 10, 1969 general elections, the ruling Alliance coalition headed by the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) suffered a large setback in the polls. The largely Chinese opposition Democratic Action Party and Gerakan gained in the elections, and secured a police permit for a victory parade through a fixed route in Kuala Lumpur. However, the rowdy procession deviated from its route and headed through the Malay district of Kampung Baru, jeering at the inhabitants. Some Villages shouted to the parade member. The parade member also fight back. Thus, misunderstand appear between the races.). [1] Some demonstrators carried brooms, later alleged to symbolise the sweeping out of the Malays from Kuala Lumpur, while others chanted slogans about the "sinking" of the Alliance boat — the coalition's logo. [2]
While the Gerakan party issued an apology the next day, UMNO announced a counter-procession, which would start from the Selangor Chief Minister Harun bin Idris' home in Jalan Raja Muda. Tunku Abdul Rahman would later call the retaliatory parade "inevitable, as otherwise the party members would be demoralised after the show of strength by the Opposition and the insults that had been thrown at them." [1]
Shortly before the procession began, the gathering crowd was reportedly informed that Malays on their way to the procession had been attacked by Chinese in Setapak, several miles to the north.[citation needed] The angry protestors swiftly wreaked revenge by killing two passing Chinese motorcyclists, and the riot began. During the course of the riots, the loudspeakers of mosques were used to urge the rioters to continue in their actions.
The riot ignited the capital Kuala Lumpur and the surrounding state of Selangor and Negeri Sembilan, but except for minor disturbances in Melaka the rest of the country stayed calm. A nationwide state of emergency and accompanying curfew were declared on May 16, but the curfew was relaxed in most parts of the country for two hours on May 18 and not enforced even in central Kuala Lumpur within a week.
According to police figures, 196 people died [3] , 149 were wounded. 753 cases of arson were logged and 211 vehicles were destroyed or severely damaged. An estimated 6,000 Kuala Lumpur residents — 90% of them Chinese — were made homeless. [3] Various other casualty figures have been given, with one thesis from a UC Berkeley academic putting the total dead at ten times the government figure. [4]
[edit] Conspiracy theories
Immediately following the riot, conspiracy theories about the origin of the riots began swirling. Many Chinese blamed the government, claiming it had intentionally planned the attacks beforehand. To bolster their claims, they cited the fact that the potentially dangerous UMNO rally was allowed to go on, even though the city was on edge after two days of opposition rallies. Although UMNO leaders said none of the armed men bused in to the rally belonged to UMNO, the Chinese countered this by arguing that the violence had not spread from Harun Idris' home, but had risen simultaneously in several different areas. The armed Malays were later taken away in army lorries, but according to witnesses, appeared to be "happily jumping into the lorries as the names of various villages were called out by army personnel". [5]
Despite the imposition of a curfew, the Malay soldiers who were allowed to remain on the streets reportedly burned several more Chinese homes. The government denied it was associated with these soldiers and said their actions were not condoned. [5]
[edit] Repercussions of the riot
Immediately after the riot, the government assumed emergency powers and suspended Parliament, which would only reconvene again in 1971. It also suspended the press and established a National Operations Council. The NOC's report on the riots stated, "The Malays who already felt excluded in the country's economic life, now began to feel a threat to their place in the public services," and implied this was a cause of the violence. [1]
The riot led to the expulsion of Malay nationalist Mahathir Mohamad from UMNO and propelled him to write his seminal work The Malay Dilemma, in which he posited a solution to Malaysia's racial tensions based on aiding the Malays economically through an affirmative action programme.
Tunku Abdul Rahman resigned as Prime Minister in the ensuing UMNO power struggle, the new perceived 'Malay-ultra' dominated government swiftly moving to placate Malays with the Malaysian New Economic Policy (NEP), enshrining affirmative action policies for the bumiputra (Malays and other indigenous Malaysians). Many of Malaysia's draconian press laws, originally targeting racial incitement, also date from this period. The Constitution (Amendment) Act 1971 named Articles 152, 153, and 181, and also Part III of the Constitution as specially protected, permitting Parliament to pass legislation that would limit dissent with regard to these provisions pertaining to the social contract. (The social contract is essentially a quid pro quo agreement between the Malay and non-Malay citizens of Malaysia; in return for granting the non-Malays citizenship at independence, symbols of Malay authority such as the Malay monarchy became national symbols, and the Malays were granted special economic privileges.) With this new power, Parliament then amended the Sedition Act accordingly. The new restrictions also applied to Members of Parliament, overruling Parliamentary immunity; at the same time, Article 159, which governs Constitutional amendments, was amended to entrench the "sensitive" Constitutional provisions; in addition to the consent of Parliament, any changes to the "sensitive" portions of the Constitution would now have to pass the Conference of Rulers, a body comprising the monarchs of the Malay states. At the same time, the Internal Security Act, which permits detention without trial, was also amended to stress "intercommunal harmony".[6]
Despite the opposition of the DAP and PPP, the Alliance government passed the amendments, having maintained the necessary two-thirds Parliamentary majority.[6] In Britain, the laws were condemned, with The Times of London stating they would "preserve as immutable the feudal system dominating Malay society" by "giving this archaic body of petty constitutional monarchs incredible blocking power"; the move was cast as hypocritical, given that Deputy Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak had spoke of "the full realization that important matters must no longer be swept under the carpet..."[7]
The Rukunegara, the de facto Malaysian pledge of allegiance, is another reaction to the riot. The pledge was introduced on August 31, 1970 as a way to foster unity among Malaysians.
[edit] Legacy
The state of emergency that was declared shortly after the incident has never been lifted, an action that has been cited by academic lawyers as a reason for diminished civil rights in the country due to the legislative powers granted to the executive during a state of emergency.[8]
[edit] Political references
Malaysian politicians have often cited the May 13 incident when warning of the potential consequences of racial rhetoric. In the 1990 general election and 1999 general election, May 13 was cited in Barisan Nasional campaign advertisements and in speeches by government politicians. Such usage of the incident in political discourse has been criticised; the Tunku stated: "For the PM (Dr Mahathir Mohamad) to repeat the story of the May 13 as a warning of what would have happened if the government had not taken appropriate action is like telling ghost stories to our children to prevent them from being naughty… The tale should not be repeated because it shows us to be politically immature…"[citation needed]
In 2004, during the UMNO general assembly Badruddin Amiruldin , the current deputy permanent chairman, waved a book on May 13 during his speech and stated "No other race has the right to question our privileges, our religion and our leader". He also stated that doing so would be similar to "stirring up a hornet's nest".
The next day, Dr Pirdaus Ismail of the UMNO Youth was quoted as saying "Badruddin did not pose the question to all Chinese in the country ... Those who are with us, who hold the same understanding as we do, were not our target. In defending Malay rights, we direct our voice at those who question them."
Deputy Internal Security Minister Noh Omar dismissed the remarks as a lesson in history and said that Badruddin was merely reminding the younger generation of the blot on the nation's history.
[edit] Aftermath
Although no other similar riots have appeared after the incident, the racism sentiment is still among some Malaysian. Until now, racism is still among the most controversial issues in Malaysia.
[edit] See also
[edit] Notes and references
- ^ a b c Hwang, In-Won (2003). Personalized Politics: The Malaysian State under Mahathir, p. 78. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. ISBN 981-230-185-2.
- ^ Al-Mukmin, Hatta (2005). "Keranamu UMNO", p. 104. Abadi Publishing House. ISBN 983-2215-00-5.
- ^ a b Hwang, p. 72.
- ^ Hwang, p. 88.
- ^ a b Emery, Fred (June 6, 1969). "The nightmare that lingers on in Malaysia", p. 11. The Times.
- ^ a b Khoo, Boo Teik (1995). Paradoxes of Mahathirism, pp. 104–106. Oxford University Press. ISBN 967-65-3094-8.
- ^ Emery, Fred (Nov. 8, 1969). "Malaysia unity call against a background of fear", p. 7. The Times.
- ^ Wu, Min Aun & Hickling, R. H. (2003). Hickling's Malaysian Public Law, p. 34. Petaling Jaya: Pearson Malaysia. ISBN 983-74-2518-0.
[edit] Other references
- "Guan Eng: National unity and racial threats don’t gel". (Oct. 6, 2004). Malaysiakini.
- Leon Comber, "13 May 1969, A Survey of Sino-Malay Relations",Heinemann Asia Ltd., Kuala Lumpur, 1981, Kamarudin, Raja Petra (June 13, 2005). "Silver lining in a dark cloud: May 13 was not all bad news". Malaysia Today.
- "Marina Yusof's 'Seditious' Act". Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005.
- Rahman, Tunku Abdul (1969). "May 13 - Before and After". Retrieved Oct. 29, 2005.
"The Death of a Democracy" by John Slimming. Book written by an Observer/UK journalist, who was in Kuala Lumpur at the time.
[edit] External links
- Kakiseni's review of Dato Jin Shamsuddin’s Kota Idaman 13 Sempadan play in 2004.
