According to newspaper reports of May 9, all vacant places under the bumiputra 55 percent quota have been filled and the 55 to 45 quota remains in force.

Fine, that takes care of the earlier issue of having unfilled places under the bumiputra quota that are not released to the deserving non-bumiputra top scorers.

It however does not address the national issue raised by Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad that the country faces the problem of 'brain drain' when non-bumiputra high achievers leave for foreign universities and remain to work in their host countries thereafter.

Other than the tentative proposal to open Universiti Teknologi Mara to non-bumiputras, how does the government propose to arrest this 'drain' on brain and foreign exchange caused by the quota system?

How does the country confront the challenges of a knowledge-based globalised world economy under the prevailing circumstances?

More specifically, what does MCA, Gerakan and MIC propose to do to ameliorate the plight of their respective constituencies?

What is the Barisan Alternatif's stand on these issues (and I don't mean just DAP, but the Malay-based parties of PAS, Keadilan and PRM's positions as well)?

On this non-bumiputras' predicament, where do we go from here? It will be interesting to know.

Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) member Prof Hamdan Adnan was quoted by news report to have said that the quota system should be retained because it was part of the government's affirmative action in restructuring society and "the culture of pursuing knowledge among bumiputras is still in its infancy and thus should be given a little more time".

The question of quota and the affirmative policies that it serves is a political rather than a human rights issue: so why does Suhakam or its members have anything to say on this?

From a human rights standpoint, education is a right. Under Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit."

Whilst one can support affirmative policies to encourage education of bumiputras, the education of non-bumiputras should not be discouraged. The pursuit of the quota system should not be at the expense of deprivation to this group, especially the high achievers, and if it does, it will be inconsistent with the letter and spirit of Article 26 that Suhakam, of all bodies, should uphold.

It is with disconcerting surprise that I note the stand of the Suhakam member. The affirmative policies are no more entrenched by our Federal Constitution than (say) preventive detention and Internal Security Act, both of which are government policies and law, though both may be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Declaration of Human Rights.

From the perspective of human rights, and not politics, why then does Suhakam declare opposition against the ISA and preventive detention and yet support the implementation of the quota that deprives even the top achievers of the non-bumiputra group from access to local tertiary institutions? Can Suhakam explain such a stance?