I read with dismay Yap Mun Ching's coverage of my Feb 21 seminar at UKM on the Batek of Pahang. The impression given by the story and the headline was that I had launched an attack on the Islamisation policy. This was not the gist of my discussion. A more appropriate headline would have been "Orang asli worried about environmental degradation."

The Batek shaman, whose message I examined with some detail at the seminar, is concerned over the loss of the forest and concerned that we, the orang bandar (townsfolk) who are in a better position than he to do something, hear what they, the forest people, have to say about degradation and its long-term implications.

In the malaysiakini story, the environmental concerns are written as an afterthought only, in the final paragraphs of the story.

During the question-and-answer session following the seminar, I wasconcerned enough to point out that there is a lack of systematic attempt to consult with the Batek over the running of Taman Negara, most of which overlaps with the traditional Batek territory.

I was not talking about the Islamisation policy per se, although I did mention it as one of the underlying reasons why a gap in communication might exist between the orang asli and authorities.

And the story is littered with errors. One, I am not a UKM researcher; I am associated with an environmental non-governmental organisation. Two, by dismissing the Batek as "spirit worshippers", you give the impression that the Batek do not have a religion of their own.

Three, the Batek are not necessarily "compelled" to convert to Islam; more correctly, the policy "encourages" Islamisation.

Four, the Batek have "rejected" assimilation. They have not rejected assimilation; they reject the idea that they should abandon their way of life. Assimilation is not, or should not be viewed as, an either/or process, where if you're Malaysian you can't be Orang Asli.

Five, the provision of social and health services to Orang Asli like the Batek is not an impossible task that must end just because the people live in the forest. What I meant was that forest-dwelling poses an organisational problem that can be solved, by such things as mobile clinics.

In fact, there is one such service on the Tembeling River; what the Orang Asli need is more systematic provision of such services, with more regular scheduling and pre-announcements of official visits. The Batek would not reject such moves; they would take care to be present at the appropriate time.

Six, the 1987 Master Plan I referred to is the 1987 Taman Negara Master Plan authored by the Department of Wildlife and National Parks, not JHEOA.

I only hope that this story will not worsen the prospects of communication between the Batek and the authorities.

Editors note:

We regret the errors in wrongly identifying Lye Tuck-Po as a UKM researcher and for attributing the 1987 Taman Negara Master Plan to JHEOA. Lye is with the Centre for Environment, Technology, and Development, Malaysia (CETDEM).

However, we did not dismiss the Batek as spirit worshippers. The term was used as a description and not meant to deride Bateks religious beliefs.