The Malaysian Governments ban on the non-governmental Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), branding it as a threat to national security has raised a number of issues and concern regarding Indian community residing in Malaysia. Under sections 3 and 5 of the Societies Act 1966, Hindraf was declared unlawful and detrimental to peace, public order, security and the moral values of Malaysia. Albar, the Home Minister accused the Hindraf of exploiting racial issues which caused an uprising against the government and created hatred against the Malays. Hindraf, ban will effect from 15 October 2008. Hindraf came to international attention after it organized a massive rally on 25 November 2007 to protest against the marginalization of the ethnic Indian minority.

The ban on Hindraf has been condemned by the opposition alliance, Pakatan Rakyat, which calls for a fair deal for the minorities in the multi-religious Malaysia in terms of greater opportunities for education and jobs. Sympathetic to the cause of ethnic Indians, Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim wants the equality-agenda articulated in a non-polarizing fashion in multi-religious Malaysia. In another development in the opposition camp, Parti Islam-Se Malaysia (PAS), shedding its Islam-exclusive image, has now offered to mediate between Hindraf and the authorities. However, Samy Vellu the leader of Malaysian Indian Congress, who is a member of the ruling alliance believes that the ban would not lead to any political vacuum on the ethnic scene.

One view in Malaysian political circles is that the ban was precipitated by the conduct of some Hindraf activists, who got involved in scuffles with the security personnel at the time of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawis Eid-related open house programme recently. Five proactive Hindraf leaders namely, P Uthayakumar, V Ganapati Rao, M Manoharn, T Kengadharan, and T Vasanthakumar were served with two-year detention orders last December under the Internal Security Act. Another leader, P Waytha Moorthy, who was abroad at the time his colleagues were detained, remains in self-imposed exile. Only recently, the ten leaders of the banned Hindraf who were arrested outside the Malaysian Prime Ministers Office were released on bail on 26 October 2008.

An alternative view, favoured by the Malaysian government, is that Hindraf is divisively communalist, as different from being merely ethno-centric. Hindraf is often accused of having capitalized on the sentiments aroused when an unauthorized temple was demolished for development purposes last year. Henceforth, the organization led by lawyers and other professionals created an ethnic Indian political agenda of seeking rights on equal terms with those of the other communities. However, Hindraf did not invent racialized communitarian politics or religion based collectivism in Malaysia rather it has been the component of other ethnic parties like the UMNO, PAS, ABIM and so on. It was the politicians, media persons, political analyst which had referred the Hindu temples of Malaysia as Indian temples. And they continue to refer to Malaysians of South Indian origin as Indians.

Malaysias former Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamad, it was alleged had tried to destroy the future of the Indian community by ignoring their welfare. Mahathir was responsible for the plight of Indians in Malaysia, Hindraf national coordinator R Thanenthiran told the Tamil newspaper Makkal Osai. He told The Star newspaper that Hindraf would not have been formed if equal opportunities had been given to ethnic Indians.

It has been alleged that the language used in the Hindraf Memorandum voiced us against them syndrome to galvanize support and to mobilize people on the street on the pretext that the Indian in Malaysia are under threat due to Malay supremacy to radical Islamism. The immediate reason was controversial marriage and divorce between Hindus and Muslims and the destruction of Hindu temples in the country. Claims of ethnic cleansing are however, somewhat exaggerated. The government has allowed Tamil language to be used in Tamil schools and in broadcasting and Hindus have full freedom to practice their religion. In the state of Selangor, there are more Hindu temples than mosques and other religious sites put together.

The institutional and economic factors are also said to be responsible behind the conflict. The total Hindu-Indian population in the state is about one quarter of the total Malay-Muslim population. The Indian community represented 11.5 per cent of the professional and management group in the country, higher than eight per cent of its population. Statistics from the Economic Planning Unit show that in 2007, the poverty rate (household income below RM 750 per month) of the Indian community was 2.5 per cent, the second highest after Bumiputeras at 5.1 per cent. The Chinese accounted for 0.6 per cent. Based on the statistics, the average monthly income of Bumiputeras at RM 3,156 was below the Indians (RM 3,799), others (RM 3,651) and Chinese (RM 4,853).

The Indian diaspora in Malaysia should have the right to raise their demands and voice their democratic rights. The government of Malaysia needs to adopt a more realistic approach based on negotiations rather than conflict and confrontation. The current conflict reflects the fact that development remains a major issue in Malaysia.