Article 153 - To be or not to be

Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia grants the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King of Malaysia) responsibility for safeguarding the rights and privileges of the Malay and other indigenous peoples of Malaysia, collectively referred to as Bumiputra. The article specifies how the federal government may protect the interest of these groups by establishing quotas for entry into the civil service, public scholarships and public education. It is often considered to be part of the social contract, and is commonly cited as a legal defense of ketuanan Melayu — the belief that the Malays are the "masters" (tuan) of Malaysia. - Source: Wikipedia

So, based on the facts above what can we conclude? The article was drafted back in 1957 where at that time, most chinese and Indian population were immigrants. Malay rulers back then questioned the loyalty of chinese and indians. In trying to understand the reality back then, just imagine that you are an owner of a big house with big families. The house was built by your great, great grandfather and was passed down through past generation until now. Even all the things inside the house was either yours or was inherited. But due to some technical reasons, your house was being takeover by a third party. This third party starts to rent out the rooms in the house to people you don't know. Like it or not, you have to accept the people because the house is no longer yours. So, life goes on. You mind your own business, the guest in the house mind theirs. And suddenly, the third party decides to give back the house to you. With all the excitement in the world you accept that decision. Merdeka!! you said. But wait, what about this people that the third party have brought in? They starting to grow in numbers. What do you do? Throw them out? But they have been quite useful in the house. The rent money from them is also a bonus. You can use the money to renovate the house. So, the logical decision is to let them stay. BUT, with a condition. The guest must always acknowledge that the house is yours and not to touch your things. You do your own business and the guest do theirs. And any priviledge to use the television or bathroom must be given to you first as you are the owner of that stuff. It sounds fair right. That is how I view how the article 153 came about. It is the most logical decision to make at that time.

BUT, that's 50 years ago. It has been a long time. The house has become bigger and better than before. Any repairs and renovation in the house is done together with you and your guest. The guest has now become somewhat of a extended family to you. Now, is it fair to treat your guest as a status of a guest eventhough they have been with you through ups and downs for 50 years? You and your family still have the priviledge for the use of television and bathroom eventhough the television and bathroom is now brand new and the cost of buying it is shared among you and the guest? It's been 50 years.. and in my personal view.. there should be a new approach for that relationship. It's been 50 years.. Malaysia should have a new approach on its social contract. Don't you think?