Peace accord gone to the dogs?
After persistently fighting for 20 years to return home, Chin Peng finally saw first ray of dawn when the former inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Noor openly backed his request as a legitimate right provided for in the Hatyai Peace Accord signed on Dec 2, 1989 between CPM and the Malaysian government.
After persistently fighting for 20 years to return home, Chin Peng finally saw first ray of dawn when the former inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Noor openly backed his request as a legitimate right provided for in the Hatyai Peace Accord signed on Dec 2, 1989 between CPM and the Malaysian government.
The ex-police chief, who was the key negotiator representing the Malaysian government, in his exclusive interview in Malaysiakini, spoke up "strictly by the spirit of the agreement" in defence of Chin Peng's right to return home. 
He stressed that the agreement covers all levels of CPM members from the bottom-most to the highest-most, i.e. Chin Peng if you consider him as the highest leader in the CPM hierarchy.
He unequivocally pointed out that the terms allowed those born in then Malaya to return home if they chose to, provided they indicate their choice within 12 months from the date of signing the peace accord.
In fact, a vast majority of the ex-CPM members (more than 300) were allowed to return home and settle down all over the country. They were accepted as law abiding citizens by their countrymen, struggling for survival and contributing in their own ways to serve the people and country.
For those who decided to stay permanently in Thailand, they would still be allowed to come back any time on a social visit, but not to settle down for good in this country.
Why enter an agreement?
Rahim cited the case of Abdullah CD, the chairperson of ex-CPM and his wife Suriani who had been allowed to enter the country on a social visit pass, and even granted an audience by the Perak Sultan.
As a matter of fact, many other ex-CPM Malay leaders, including Musa Ahmad, Samsiah Fakeh and Rashid Maidin have also been allowed to return home to settle down or for family visits and tours.
Of course no such condition as to provide documents to prove they were born in Malaya were imposed on them like in Chin Peng's case, and no apology whatsoever was needed.
It is unbelievable that a conditional apology from Chin Peng as a gesture of goodwill was arrogantly rejected by Umno leaders.
If Chin Peng is unforgivable, why then did the Malaysian government deem it fit to enter into a peace treaty with him to end the insurgency 20 years ago?
If the Malaysian government had observed the terms and spirit of the peace accord like CPM and the Thai government did, and if Chin Peng was not made prey to racial sentiments fanned by certain racist media, Chin Peng's dream to return home and pay respects to his ancestors should have come true long ago without any problem, like hundreds of his comrades and other CPM leaders.
Rahim has rightly pointed out that in any war or armed conflict, there must be casualties. If you say the army, police personnel and civilians suffered the most, CPM would say the same.
Dr M's stance regrettable
Precisely, in what could well be his final public speech at the 20th anniversary celebration of the signing of the Hatyai Peace Accord in Hatyai, Southern Thailand, Chin Peng made a plea to all parties concerned to let go of old animosities in the spirit of understanding and forgiveness.
He sincerely reminded the government not to tarnish the peace accord by barring him from returning home. He even observed a minute's silence for those who died in the insurgency from all parties concerned.
To government leaders and former security personnel who object vehemently to Chin Peng's return, Rahim advised them not to be emotional, but should understand their obligation to the peace accord aimed to settle the insurrection in an amicable manner.
However, it is most regrettable that former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was the man behind the peace accord has now adopted a non-committal attitude towards the controversy.
He said he will agree with what is decided by the people.
But in the first place, it is undeniable that the government had signed the peace accord with CPM on behalf of the people and turned enemies into friends 20 years ago.
Two decades after the signing of the accord, Mahathir is still talking about the need to clarify to the people the existence of such an agreement, as if the people are still unaware of it. After all, who is to blame for this dismal state of affairs?
Obviously, what is at stake now is not merely an old man's dream or right, but the terms and spirit of the peace accord, and the principle of the rule of law in our country.
Just imagine if the number one man of CPM is blatantly and persistently victimised under the peace accord, who can deny that the agreement has indeed gone to the dogs?
LEE BAN CHEN is a former ISA detainee and an educationist. He has been our columnist since 2000.
