Human rights groups for and against decision on ICERD

Participants of an anti-ICERD rally in Kuala Lumpur on Nov 4, 2018 - Bernama

PETALING JAYA: The government’s decision not to ratify the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) has sparked starkly different reactions – from regret to support – among human rights organisations.

The National Human Rights Society (Hakam) said while it regretted the decision, what was even more pressing was the unrest created by various parties on the planned ratification of ICERD and how the issue “has been exploited to generate fear and divisiveness in the country”.

On Friday, the Prime Minister’s Office issued a brief statement to announce its decision and affirm the government’s commitment to the Federal Constitution.

Hakam said the precautionary stance by the government should be a temporary measure, and urged it to continue to engage stakeholders to dispel the misconceptions about ICERD.

“The government should reconsider ratification again in the future,” it said yesterday.

The society was also against calls for Foreign Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah to resign, saying he has done an admirable job in advocating for Malaysia to ratify an important international human rights treaty.

Hakam’s sentiments were echoed by Komas (Komunikasi Masyarakat), which said: “After promising the people and international audiences at the United Nations General Assembly and the recent Universal Periodic Review to create a Malaysia that is inclusive, moderate and respected globally, the Pakatan Harapan government has fallen to the call of ICERD dissidents.

“The accession to ICERD is in line with the spirit and fundamental principles enshrined in the Malaysia Federal Constitution.”

The statement by Komas was endorsed by 18 other organisations and societies such as Suara Rakyat Malaysia, Sisters in Islam, Society for the Promotion of Human Rights as well as the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall.

The Centre for Human Rights Research and Advocacy (Centhra), meanwhile, congratulated the administration for its “independence and sensitivity to the unique Malaysian reality”.

“We believe that non-ratification represents a wise preservation of Malaysian sovereignty, and an insightful understanding of the prevailing socio-political realities in our country,” it said in a statement.

Centhra questioned if Malaysians’ interpretation of Malaysia Baru was such that the country must adhere to legal obligations outlined by foreign nations, rather than the laws adopted in accordance with the specific needs and circumstances of the Malaysian society.