Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
Author Message
Reply with quote
The article, headed Ethnic Discrimination, was posted before a letter was received from the Ministry of Defence on 30th September, 2009. This MOD Letter is shown in our Forum under Heading ‘Letters we Have Written’. It says -

1. The rules do not apply to crown servants who are foreign nationals.
There is nothing in the rules that even mentions foreign nationals but the MOD say ‘the rules were not intended’ to apply to foreign nationals.

2. A foreign national who becomes a British citizen has the right to wear the PJM withdrawn.
How are they going to enforce this? Perhaps they will have to add a further question to the British Nationality form asking those who are applying for British nationality ‘have you been awarded the Pingat Jasa Malaysia’. Perhaps, of course, this will only be asked of Nepalese citizens who served in the Brigade of Gurkhas and add to the discrimination of veterans who are eligible for the PJM.

3. A retired crown servant ‘under these rules’ is treated as if he is still serving.
If we are still treated as serving crown servants then we are entitled to retirement pay, compensation etc. I would suggest everyone contacts their MP on this decision.

This confirms the opinion stated in the Ethnic Discrimination article that British private citizens are being punished by not being permitted to wear the PJM because they are British.

Those who served in Crown Service (the forces) but were not British citizens were, they say, subject to the medal rules whilst serving but on retiring (leaving) Crown Service they were no longer classed as Crown Servants BUT British citizens are deemed to be Crown Servants for the rest of their lives and subject to the medal rules and are classed as still serving.

British civilians and relatives of deceased eligible for the PJM who are not covered by the rules are in fact told they cannot wear the PJM. The same applies to the double medal rule which does not apply to some British citizens eligible for the PJM because they received no other medal for their service, yet they refuse to give permission for them to wear the PJM. And of course, a British citizen who served in the Malaysian police, has been refused permission to wear the PJM because he was a Crown Servant when in fact he was not.

The legal definition of a Crown Servant is - CROWN SERVANT - any person in the employ of the Crown (this does not include Police Officers and local government employees). A Dictionary of Law 5th. Edition 2002-3.

One British veteran of Malaysia who is eligible for the PJM served in the UK police for 8 years after his demob from the army. He went on to serve in an overseas police force for 4 years, again for 3 years in the UK police, and then to an overseas position not connected with the British government, for another 14 years. So for 29 years after serving in the British army he was definitely not a Crown servant but now that he resides in the UK the Crown servant titled has been renewed retrospectively and bestowed upon him again because some pen pusher in the civil service cannot differentiate between fact and fiction.

Throughout the Commonwealth British citizens are being put into a separate group by the British civil service and treated much differently from the rest of the Commonwealth veterans. They are being singled out for special treatment, why? Because they are British! No, it has got nothing to do with the rules or the status of the PJM. These rules were made void when the PJM was given permission by Her Majesty the Queen to wear it alongside other British medals during the Malaysian 50th. Anniversary celebrations in Malaysia in 2007 and in 1968 as declared in the London Gazette.

Our present Foreign Secretary is reported in the press as having made a statement supporting the demonstrators in Iran expressing their democratic rights and he is reported as saying ‘I call on the Iranian government to respect the human rights of its own citizens’. Yet he is denying human rights to his own British citizens by prohibiting them from wearing an honourable medal because of in-house and non-statutory rules compiled by an unelected Honours and Decorations Committee. So where is your respect Mr. Milliband for the human rights of your own citizens and why should you interfere with other countries when you are responsible for breaches of human rights in your own country? Our liberty and freedom to wear a medal is being denied to us by rules that do not apply to us in any shape or form.

Democracy and transparent government is denied specifically to British citizens whilst the Foreign Secretary has the audacity to preach to the leaders of other countries that they should observe the democratic rights of their citizens.

The press also reported that our Prime Minister has expressed support for a Burmese dissident, yet when asked in parliament if he would support his own veterans, he replied he would look into it and it appears that, years later, he is still ‘looking into it’.

We fought in the mosquito infested jungles and filthy swamps of Malaysia and Borneo alongside our Commonwealth brothers in arms yet, we British, are being punished because of false, petty non-statutory rules inflicted by unelected civil servants.

There is nothing foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.

View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum