‘Empowered in the Australian way’: Voice makes waves in multicultural Australia

When Sawathey Ek learnt about the Indigenous Voice to parliament, he saw the shape of something he had often struggled to explain to others in Sydney’s Cambodian diaspora. A possibility pulled into view.

Ek’s ethnic background is Khmer Krom, whose ancestral lands south of the Mekong were annexed from Cambodia and colonised by Vietnam over several centuries. Among Khmer, Cambodia’s majority ethnic group, their position is unique. Marginalised in Vietnam, yet unprotected by Cambodia, their ethnic identity is at odds with their political reality.

Phina Srey Camilleri, Srey Yoeng and Sawathey Ek, who are Khmer Krom, are considering a boycott of the Khmer association if their cultural group is not recognised in the association’s constitutionCredit: Brook Mitchell

But Ek, who migrated to Australia as a 14-year-old, saw in the Voice a framework for the Khmer Krom to be recognised by the diaspora’s representative group, Khmer Community in NSW. It could add three words to its constitution, committing to represent Khmer “and Khmer Krom”.

“A Voice to parliament is part of the national agenda,” Ek said. “We want to make sure that Khmer Krom people are empowered in the Australian way.”

Ek’s push for constitutional recognition raises questions about how the Indigenous Voice to parliament is understood and perceived in multicultural communities.

The Indigenous Voice to parliament is proposed as an advisory body, made up of Indigenous people, to advise the government on issues that affect Indigenous people. Its establishment would be written into the Australian Constitution, which requires a referendum to be changed.

Market research by JWS Research suggests that culturally and linguistically diverse groups are slightly more supportive of the Voice than the general population (55 per cent with 51 per cent), but they are less likely to recall being exposed to information about it and a significantly smaller proportion than the overall population (34 per cent compared with 47 per cent) say they are “extremely likely” to vote at the referendum. Voting in referendums is compulsory for enrolled voters.

JWS Research principal John Scales said researchers for the “Yes” and “No” side had told him that multicultural groups were not motivated to support the Voice by righting historical wrongs or the burden of historical guilt in the same way that some white Australians were, and many did not support one group being singled out for constitutional recognition.

SydWest Multicultural Services chief executive Elfa Moraitakis said to the extent that generalisations could be drawn, the Voice was not a pressing issue for many migrants because they faced urgent challenges such as putting food on the table.

“The problems they are facing are their priority and I also get a sense that people don’t understand what this is all about,” Moraitakis said. “They understand, respect and appreciate the original custodians of the country but they don’t know what they are voting for. Is it just symbolic? What is it? I’ve heard a couple of conversations from people that, we shouldn’t single out one community and if we do that, why not migrants?”

Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition director Thomas Mayo said the “Yes” campaign had translated the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which gave Indigenous consensus for the Voice, into 60 different languages and that it would do further work to raise awareness in migrant groups. The symbolism behind the Voice that had been embraced by multicultural groups was important as well as the practical aims of the proposal, he said.

“Recognition can be a scale from weak to strong,” Mayo said. “Symbolic recognition is on the weaker end of the scale and treaty and a Voice are on the stronger end of the scale.”

Many religious groups have come out in support of the Voice. The National Imams Council of Australia declared its support for the Voice on Wednesday.

Imam Wesam Charkawi said the council’s position was informed by its deep engagement with the indigenous community over a long period of time, and went beyond symbolism.

“The Muslim community support the Indigenous people, engage with them, they respect them and they acknowledge them as the people who have occupied these lands for more than 60 millennia, so there’s a beautiful connection between the Indigenous people of Australia and the Muslim community,” Charkawi said.

Like many in the Cambodian diaspora, Ek’s perception of politics at a community and national level is filtered through his experience of oppressive regimes. As a lawyer, he encourages community groups to resolve their differences through mediation, and he is dismayed when they turn to litigation.

He also wants clauses inserted into the constitution of the Khmer Community in NSW that require transparency and accountability in the leadership, and that limit recourse to the courts to resolve conflict.

The Cambodian community in NSW has a history of legal disputes. The Khmer Community of NSW sued a member who tried to run against the incumbent president in 2015. A year later, the Cambodian Buddhist Society of NSW blew up over revelations that the assistant abbot at Wat Khemarangsaram – a supposedly celibate monk – was in a sexual relationship with a young woman.

The affair led to a schism between the assistant abbot and the abbot, who both backed different candidates for president of the society at the 2016 elections. The assistant abbot’s man won, but the NSW Supreme Court would hear of multiple electoral irregularities, including individuals stuffing fistfuls of ballot papers into the box.

“The makeshift nature of the society’s constitution and records has opened the door for the warring factions to make competing claims about their entitlement to govern the society,” Justice John Sackar said, ruling that neither party had a legitimate claim to the presidency. He ordered a receiver be appointed to overhaul the constitution.

The Vietnamese and Laos community groups have also wrestled with internal conflict that occasionally strays into the court system. The current conflict in the Khmer Community of NSW has prompted two Khmer Krom musicians, Phina Srey Camilleri and Srey Yoeng, to plan a boycott of the cultural events where they have long been an entertainment stalwart until the change is made.

“I’m very sad that I have to do that,” Camilleri said. “I’m sad that I have to leave my own community.”

Khmer Community of NSW leaders have told Ek that if the Khmer Krom were specifically named in the constitution, other sub-groups would also ask to be recognised, and it was not appropriate for one group to be privileged above the others.

Michael Michel, who sits on the Khmer Community of NSW advisory group, said the constitution already recognised all Khmer and this had been unanimously accepted by the members in 2019.

“Anyone who identifies as Khmer for whatever reason, including people like me who are Khmer by marriage, the membership is open for them to join,” Michel said.

“It’s very broad and open and inclusive. If Sawathey wants to change the constitution he needs to become a member.”

But Ek said the Khmer Community of NSW had been granted government land for the purposes of representing the whole community, not just members. The dispute was really about inclusivity and engaging with the community, in accordance with “core Australian principles”, he said.

“In my early days I used to wonder, why is there war? Now it’s all in front of me. Personal egos lead to recalcitrant leadership, and one person can’t accept something and the court has to decide it. In Cambodia, a group of us would run into the jungle and form an army.”

The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.

Most Viewed in National

From our partners

Source: Read Full Article