A comparative study of minority rights and their protection in Malaysia and India

Abstract

This study delves into the protection of minority rights in India and Malaysia by examining the effectiveness of their constitutional and legal frameworks, the impact of sociocultural incompatibility on minority insecurity, and the role of elite political attitudes in the non-institutionalization of minority rights. This research leverages Will Kymlicka's discourse on minority rights in democratic nations by employing the Comparative Qualitative Analysis (CQA) technique. The research examines a range of rights that include acknowledging minority groups, protecting their lives and possessions, ensuring justice and fair legal processes, supporting religious practices, and advocating the preservation and use of native languages. The research also suggests that the treatment of a nation's vulnerable groups mirrors its greatness. The findings indicate that despite both nations grappling with the efficacy of their constitutional rights, Malaysia offers comparatively better protection to minorities than India, as evidenced by the fewer problematic cases and being better at socioeconomic and political index. Likewise, individuals causing societal issues in Malaysia are dealt with more rigorously, whereas in India, those associated with influential socio-political groups often enjoy protection and impunity. The surge in majoritarian politics is observed in both nations, albeit manifested differently—with Malaysia's being safeguarded by Article 153 and its social contract and India's being fueled by myths propagated by extreme groups against Muslims, contradicting its constitutional ethos. The study underscores both nations’ needs to reassess their policies and address injustices in light of evolving domestic and international scenarios to ensure peace and prosperity.