Table Of ContentTamils and the
Haunting of Justice
History and Recognition
in Malaysia’s Plantations
Andrew C. Willford
With the collaboration of S. Nagarajan
University of Hawai‘i Press
Honolulu
© 2014 University of Hawai‘i Press
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
19 18 17 16 15 14 6 5 4 3 2 1
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Willford, Andrew C. (Andrew Clinton), author.
Tamils and the haunting of justice : history and recognition in Malaysia’s
plantations / Andrew C. Willford ; with the collaboration of S. Nagarajan.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
±²B³ 978-0-8248-3894-2 (cloth : alk. paper)
1. Tamil (Indic people)—Land tenure—Malaysia. 2. Tamil (Indic
people)—Relocation—Malaysia. 3. Plantation workers—Relocation—
Malaysia. 4. Tamil (Indic people)—Government policy—Malaysia.
5. Plantation workers—Government policy—Malaysia. I. Nagarajan, S.,
contributor. II. Title.
D²595.2.´36µ55 2014
305.894'8110595—dc23 2014005770
University of Hawai‘i Press books are printed on acid-free paper
and meet the guidelines for permanence and durability of the
Council on Library Resources.
¶esigned by Integrated Composition Systems, Spokane, Washington
Printed by Sheridan ·ooks, Inc.
For Rabin and Anisha
Contents
Preface ix
Acknowledgments xiii
Abbreviations xvii
1 Introduction 1
2 An Emergent ·etrayal:
Tamils and the ¶evelopment of Selangor’s Plantations 20
3 Plantation Fragments 39
4 Tapping Memories: Plantations Are Not a Workplace 79
5 Interruptions, Insurrections, Strategies 119
6 °e Locus of God’s Power:
°e Faith of Spirit and Its Incomprehensible Shattering 137
7 Ethnic Riots and Other Myths 161
8 Flats 192
9 °e Law’s ·etrayal 211
10 Hindraf and the Haunting of Justice 236
Notes 277
·ibliography 293
Index 305
Preface
A Note on Collaboration and Method
°is research was conducted in collaboration with and through the aid of
¶r. S. Nagarajan. “Naga” was with me for almost all the encounters de-
scribed in this book. °us I use the term “we” throughout to describe various
encounters, observations, and events. I learned a lot from him over the years
of this fieldwork collaboration. °at said, the representations, language,
interpretations, and theoretical interventions presented here are my own,
with the exception of the opening vignette, which we coauthored in part.
My own thinking and writing throughout, however, have been influenced
by his detailed knowledge of the Tamil community in Malaysia. While this
is very much a work of collaboration, Naga surely bears no responsibility for
writing style (or lack thereof), errors, misrepresentations, mistranslations, or
any analytic or theoretical misdirections this work may have taken. It is my
hope that scholars of the Malaysian Tamil community (and of Malaysia more
broadly) will read Naga’s own work carefully. I hope what I am doing here
is complementary to his more detailed socioeconomic research on the same
community.
On this point, and distinct from Naga’s work—though there are impor-
tant things to say about political economy and history or socioeconomic
conditions—this is an ethnographic and interpretive account. Several impor-
tant, detailed studies have been done on the former, to which I am most
indebted (e.g., Stenson 1980; Nagarajan 2004; Jomo 1986; Selvakumaran 1994;
P. Ramasamy 1994). I am not trying to present an objective account of Tamil
social or economic reality. Rather the aim here is to present, to the best of
my ability, Malaysian Tamil understandings of their predicament. °is does
ix
x Preface
not mean that these understandings are uniform or fully explicable within a
cultural logic or a presumed rationality. Rather, some “understandings” subsist
at the edge of reason, where desire, hope, anxiety, and fear reign. ·y that
measure, what is said about the intentions of others, particularly Malays, is
not to be misunderstood as factual or objective. Rather, I am trying to capture
a dynamic in which the implications over a perceived injustice have possible,
and perhaps necessary, ramifications for the nation-state of Malaysia.
In terms of method, Naga and I traveled to numerous plantations through-
out Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, Putrajaya, and Kuala Lumpur. We ended up
focusing on Selangor, but even then there were numerous estates facing dif-
ferent stages of displacement and eviction. We consciously decided that it
would be useful, too, to compare outcomes for displaced estate workers living
relatively closer and farther from alternative employment. In addition to es-
tates, we ended up spending a considerable amount of time in urban villages
(kampungs), otherwise known as squatter areas, particularly in the Petaling
Jaya Selatan, or the now infamous “Kampung Medan” area. We also visited
newly transplanted residents in low-cost flats in several sites. In all the sites
we visited, rather than conducting formal tape-recorded interviews, we tried
to establish a more informal conversational rapport with residents. Sometimes
we had referrals from lawyers, activists, and kin, which made our entry that
much easier in the sometimes suspicious estate or squatter communities. To
widen our scope, we would take walks in housing lines, sit in public areas
such as temples and tea/coffee stalls, and generally strike up conversations
with anyone who would speak with us. As we consciously wanted to observe
a larger pattern of displacement and compensation processes and outcomes,
we ended up sacrificing some ethnographic depth for greater breadth. °at
is, we ended up visiting numerous sites, only some of them repeatedly, but
did not focus on a few key individuals or events, as is often the case in eth-
nographic writing. °erefore, in building a case for a larger pattern, I hope
the reader will not mind the sometimes abrupt shifting of site or the sense of
echo or recurrence, and will not miss the richness of narrative that emerges
in individual life histories or the “deep play” of particular community dynam-
ics. Where there is great value in the latter approach, and much of that can
still be done in the communities studied here, I hope the reader understands
the intent behind a desire for comparative breadth. °e effect of numerous
stories, I hope, will be as effective in convincing readers of a wave of collective
sentiment as more individualistic or biographical approaches might. °at said,
we will meet some remarkable individuals in the pages that follow. It is to
their spirit and resilience that this book is dedicated with gratitude.
In terms of language usage, interviews within the plantations were con-
ducted primarily in Tamil, though some individuals did speak some English
Preface xi
and/or a smattering of Malay. Middle-class Indians tended to converse with
us or myself primarily in English. Rather than use formal Tamil translitera-
tion here, I have attempted to use spellings that were common in Malaysia.
°us, Taipucan became °aipusam, for instance. Naga often assisted me with
translations after our fieldwork encounters, or after I had written up my ac-
count, to assess the accuracy of statements and their translations. While my
Tamil usage was functional, it could not grasp the subtleties in inflection and
tone that Naga was able to perceive. °us, in many instances I would have
missed subtle and important meanings without his help. Lastly, we made a
conscious effort to focus primarily on the nonofficial accounts and interpre-
tations of everyday actors, rather than highlighting public documents, court
cases, corporate representations, political speeches, declarations, etc. While
there were some exceptions here and there, we felt it important to give voice
to those (subaltern) voices most silenced, yet, as we hope to show, simmering
with political restlessness.
Pseudonyms were used for most people quoted in this book with the excep-
tion of public figures or when media sources that were cited already identified
the speakers by name.
