Call on government to explain why it is still not prepared to revoke all its reservations on the Convention On The Elimination Of All Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)

During the debate on the Seventh Malaysia Plan in May this year, I had called on the Minister for National Unity and Social Development, Datin Zaleha Ismail, to institute steps to revoke the reservations which the Malaysian Government made in ratifying the Convention On The Elimination Of All Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and to create conditions for the full implementation of its provisions.

Malaysia acceded to CEDAW on 5th July 1995 with reservations to Articles 2(f), 5(a), 7(b), 9(1) and (2) and five sub-clauses in Article 16.

In her reply, Zaleha Ismail said that the government was reviewing the reservations on CEDAW and I am very disappointed that up to now there has been no news on the developments on this front.

I understand that the government has decided to revoke some of its reservations on CEDAW but not all of them, and the Minister for National Unity and Social Development should explain in Parliament why the government is not prepared to revoke all its reservations to CEDAW.

The Minister should explain whether it is true that the government has decided to persist in its reservations particularly to Articles 5(a) and 7(b) of CEDAW.

Article 5(a) of CEDAW reads:

“State Parties shall take all appropriate measures to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudice and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.”

This Article refers to interpersonal relationships between women and men, and the need to eliminate practices based on ideas of the superiority or inferiority of one sex and sex role stereotyping.

This is also why many women organisations and NGOs had called for gender-sensitive education programmes, and specifically, with reference to the Domestic Violence Act, to the need to focus on gender-sensitising training of the police in handling complaints of domestic violence and abuse under the Domestic Violence Act.

But such gender-sensitive programmes are needed not only in the police force, but in all sectors of Malaysian life, including in the Malaysian Parliament.

I had received complaints, for instance, of such manifestations in Parliamentary debates. One such example was provided by the Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Haji Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz, when winding up the debate on the Prime Minister’s Department during the committee stage of the 1997 budget on 19th November 1996.

Let me quote from the Hansard (p. 144):

“Tuan Pengerusi, Marang juga bangkit pada hari ini berkenaan masalah dimana dia mengatakan itu bahawa hari ini, merayu kepada kita iaitu bahawa apabila berlaku majli yang dihadiri oleh sultan dan raja-raja, dia punya Menteri Besar tidak dijemput - dia terasa dihina. Baru rasa, yang dulu masa kita Barisan Nasional kena lima, enam tahun dulu, dia langsung tidak cakap apa dan kita tidak pernah minta rayuan pertolongan daripada mereka. Kita hadapi masalah ini. Ini parti jantan. Ini bila menghadapi masalah di Kelantan mari ke Kuala Lumpur dalam Dewan Besar minta tolong daripada kita. Ini betina punya parti politik Yang Berhormat.”

I do not want to get involved in the long-running UMNO-PAS tussle, but I am more concerned that Nazri’s language has insulted womenhood as a whole. I am very surprised that there had been no protest or objection from any Barisan Nasional MP in the past two weeks against such remarks which is so gender-insensitive, sexist and even qualify to be termed as that of a “MCP”. Maybe Nazri had trampled on Article 5(a) of CEDAW precisely because he had tkaen heart from the government’s refusal to ratify this Article unconditionally.

Nazri should apologise for such remarks, not to PAS but to the women in general, and the Minister for National Unity and Social Development should strike a blow for the dignity of women, and use Nazri’s incident as the best example why the Government should revoke its reservations to Article 5(a) of CEDAW.

Zaleha should also explain the rationale for the government’s continued reservation to Article 7(b) of CEDAW which requires all states to eliminate discrimination against women in the political and public life of the country and, in particular, to ensure to women, on equal terms with men, the right “to participate in the formulation of government policy and the implementation thereof and to hold public office and perform all public functions at all levels of government.”

Is the Government’s refusal to revoke all reservations to CEDAW the reason why the Minister for National Unity and Social Development has not been able to give any progress report to Parliament on this issue?

(3/12/96)