我之前发表了一系列文章，试图打开宪法第153条文的潘多拉魔盒，指出其缺陷和遭到滥用之后，第153条文最近再随著内阁宣布保证所有大马教育文凭考试中获得10A或以上成绩的学生，获得大学预科班学额而再度引起热议。
根据首相安华所言：“这一决定确保了所有杰出的SPM学生都能获得高等教育的最佳机会。”
这项措施也是为了“平衡土著固打制度和绩效原则，并造福所有学生”。
“我们所有的孩子，当我如此说时，我指的是马来人、华人、印度人、达雅人、卡达山人，无一例外。”
“如果我们的孩子考到10A以上，或者取得优异的成绩，无一例外，都会被录取。这是政府的保证。”
“因此，种族课题不应再出现”。
许多人认为这项措施是对推动改革第153条文的一种倒退。事实上，教育和国家政策各方面的政策制定和执行中的种族问题，可以说依然犹在。
值得注意的是，首相本人最近也呼吁关注在国际学生能力评估计划（PISA）最新评估中，我们15岁学生的教育评估表现不佳问题。与印尼、泰国和越南相比，马来西亚的得分大幅下降，首相更指出，各造必须摆脱“否认症候群”。
大多数马来西亚人都充分意识到国家教育体系中的歧视、偏见和其他缺陷，尤其自1957年以来，第153条文在经济和社会不同领域中影响最为深远。这一点我们不能否认。
然而，很少马来西亚人意识到宪法中保障少数群体合法利益的平衡条款和确保公平正义的合理比例原则。
因此，土著配额制度的最新发展，是否符合宪法中所提及的“合理比例”和“保护非马来人的合法利益”原则？
由马来西亚纳税人税款中建设起来的教育机构、奖学金、培训或任何其他设施中，保留了九成名额给土著，这并不是一个正当或合理的比例。在新经济政策时期，这也许是合理的。但这一切于1990年结束了。
但如今已是34年后了？那些拒绝认同我们需要迫切改革种族歧视配额的人，可以说犹如童话故里国王新衣里的盛装炫耀国王。
第153条文如何振兴大马
如何实现第153条文下公平公正运作的合理性、透明度和问责的目标，显然不仅需要政界人士的迫切关注，也需要所有希望建立一个更好的马来西亚的利益相关者迫切关注。
除了内阁日前提出的建议外，以下是马来西亚同胞可以在第153条文上提供改进的清单：
● 公共和私营领域屋价折扣和配额
● 公立大学人员配置，包括校长等高阶官员的任命
● 各级招生名额
● 教育机构的预算拨款
● 奖学金授予
● 玛拉土著优惠政策
● 公务员录用及晋升
● 公共部门、官联公司和其他特殊目的政府机构的许可证、招标和合同
希望官联公司、制造商、中小企业、房屋开发商等商业团体，以及因实施不合理和过度优惠政策，而承当重担的公务员领域等利益相关者，也能提出建议。
除了确保经商条件和国家治理保障全体公民的合法利益外，还需要强调的是，第153条文的范围受到第136条文的限制，即要求公务员不分种族，一视同仁。
应对反对力量
一些政治家、政策制定者以及其他作为其主要受益者的社会政治和商业精英成员，可能会反对取消新经济政策的福利和第153条文的过度规定。
不可否认的事实是，那些受益者不仅渴望而且努力确保他们的子孙，能够无限地继续垄断制度化优惠政策的收益。实际上，国家经济遭受数兆令吉的巨大损失财务问题，就源于新经济政策和第153条文支持下授予不透明的分配合约。只要不改革这问题就会不衰。
因此，对于从种族主义和机会主义视角下反对宪法第153条文进行任何审查的反应，不应是沉默、勾结、放弃或无为。
公民、企业、学术界、媒体和其他利害关系人应冷静地呈现基于事实的回应，以及无可争议的影响和结果之数据。
政策改变和改革是需要坚持不懈和毅力去敲开政策制定者和官僚机构的大门。
除了从法律、道德和其他反对任何形式的过度、不合理和剥削性偏好的论点之外，事实和现实是，那一些充满著种族偏差特征的法律条文，是振兴马来西亚的主要绊脚石。
种族偏差的法律越早以种族中立、以需求为基础、以功绩为导向、针对具体地区和区域的政策组合（这应包括优先考虑沙巴和砂拉越的合法权利）所取代，国家就能更快地变得更有弹性和团结。
林德宜《通过宪法第153条文振兴大马》原文：Revitalising Malaysia Through Article 153
Following my recent opinion piece effort to open the pandora’s box on Article 153 and to correct its shortcomings and abuses, the latest Article 153 controversy has blown up following the decision by the Cabinet to guarantee students who score 10As and above in the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia examination a place in matriculation colleges.
According to PMX
“This decision ensures that all top SPM students have the best opportunities to pursue higher education.”
This initiative was also for “ensuring the bumiputra quota system and principle of meritocracy are maintained for the benefit of all students”.
"All of our children, when I say children, I mean Malay, Chinese, Indian, Dayak, Kadazan and all without exception.”
"If our children scored 10As and above or obtained excellent results, without any exception, they will get a place. This is an assurance from the government.”
"As such, the issue of race should no longer arise".
This so-called initiative is seen by many as a step backward in the reform needed in the application of Article 153. In fact, the issue of race in policy making and implementation in education and elsewhere in national policies can be said to be far from over.
It is noteworthy that PMX himself has recently called attention to the educational underperformance of our 15 year olds in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) latest assessment. Malaysia recorded the biggest drop in scoring compared to Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam - a position that PMX has decried as a situation that “we can’t be in denial”.
Most Malaysians are fully aware of the discrimination, bias and other shortcomings in the nation's education system where Article 153 has been most in force among the different sectors of economy and society since 1957. We should also not be in denial about this.
Few Malaysians are aware of the balancing provisions to safeguard the legitimate interests of the minority communities and the reasonable proportion principle built into the Constitution to ensure fairness and justice.
Does this latest development in the bumiputra quota system successfully meet the “reasonable proportion” and “protection of the legitimate interests of the non-Malays” principles enshrined, unchanged and intact in the Constitution?
90 percent of places reserved exclusively for Bumiputera in educational establishments, scholarships, training or any other facilities funded by Malaysian taxpayers is NOT a reasonable or rational proportion. It may have been justified perhaps during the NEP period. That ended in 1990.
But today, 34 years later? Those in denial of the urgency of reform to racially skewed quotas can be said to be like the emperor parading around in his finery.
How Article 153 Can Revitalise Malaysia
How the objectives of reasonableness, transparency and accountability in the fair and just operationalization of Article 153 can be achieved clearly requires the urgent attention not only of politicians but also all stake players and stakeholders wanting a better Malaysia.
Here is a short list to which fellow Malaysians can provide enhancements in the application of Article 153 in addition to what has been proposed by the Cabinet:
● Public and private sector housing price discounts and quotas
● Public university staffing positions including the appointment of senior officials such as Vice Chancellors
● Student admission quotas at all levels
● Budgetary allocation to education institutions
● Scholarship awards
● Mara ethnic preference policies
● Civil service intake and promotion to higher levels
● Licences, tenders and contracts in public sector, government-linked companies and other special-purpose government agencies
Hopefully suggestions will also be forthcoming from stake players, such as GLCs, manufacturers, small and medium enterprises, housing developers and other business groups in addition to the various sectors of the civil service that have borne the burden in implementing unreasonable and excessive preference requirements.
Besides guaranteeing that the conditions for doing business and the nation’s governance will protect the legitimate interests of all citizens, it is important to emphasise that the scope of Article 153 is limited by Article 136, which requires that civil servants be treated impartially regardless of race.
Dealing with Opposition to Article 153 Reform
Objections to dismantling NEP benefits and Article 153 excesses can be expected from some politicians, policymakers from the civil service, and other members of the socio-political and business elite who have been its principal beneficiaries.
It is an undeniable fact that those that have benefited not only desire but will work to ensure that their children and grandchildren can continue, ad infinitum, to monopolise the gains from institutionalised preference policies. Huge losses, in trillions of ringgit, to the nation’s economy and
finances have stemmed from the non transparent allocations in contracts awarded under the aegis of the NEP and Article 153. They will continue unabated without correction.
The response to ethnocentric and opportunistic driven opposition to any review of Article 153 should not be silence, collaboration, resignation or impotence.
It should be the calm presentation of fact-based feedback, and data on the indisputable impact and outcomes by citizens, businesses, academia, the media and other stakeholders.
What is needed for policy change and reform calls for perseverance and stamina in knocking the closed doors of policymakers and the bureaucracy.
Quite apart from the legal, moral and other arguments against excessive, unjustifiable and exploitative preference of any kind, the truth and reality is that its unchanged ethnic character is the main stumbling block to a revitalised Malaysia.
The sooner it is replaced by a race-neutral, needs-based, merit-oriented and area and region-specific policy mix (this should include the prioritisation of Sabah and Sarawak legitimate rights) the quicker the nation can become more resilient and united as it faces a more daunting future.
