Asserting the native privileges — Part II
Yes, there were several criticisms, but those were almost all constructive, and I am grateful for those comments.
The main complaint was that I did not say about the privileges of the natives of Sarawak, in terms of privileges enshrined in the Federal Constitution.
Yes, the omission of the provisions was deliberate: for lack of space.
Today, I have copied out the relevant provisions of the Federal Constitution.
I hope the readers (two from Miri, and four from Sibu) who complained about the 'missing link', would read the provisions of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution, together with provisions of Article 39 of the Sarawak Constitution.
No more missing link!
It was good that some people noticed the omission.
As I am not aware of any amendment to the provisions of Article 153, so we will proceed looking at those provisions without delay.
Here goes!
• The Constitution of Malaysia (as of 31st March 2017)
◦ Article:
153. Reservation of quotas in respect of services, permits, etc., for Malays and natives of any of the states of Sabah and Sarawak.
1) It shall be the responsibility of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the states of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
2) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, but subject to the provisions of Article 40* and of this Article, the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong shall exercise his functions under this Constitution and federal law to safeguard in such manner as may be necessary to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the states of Sabah and Sarawak and to ensure the reservation of such proportion as he may deem reasonable of positions in the public service (other than the public service of a State) and of scholarships, exhibitions and other similar educational or training privileges or special facilities given or accorded by the Federal Government and, when any permit or licence for the operation of any trade or business is required by federal law, then subject to the provisions of that law and this article, of such permits and licences. [*Article 40 states 'Yang di-Pertuan Agong to act on advice'; advice from the Cabinet or of a minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet].
3) The Yang di Pertuan Agong may, in order to ensure in accordance with Clause (2) the reservation to Malays and natives of any of the states of Sabah and Sarawak of positions in the public service and of scholarships, exhibitions and other educational or training privileges or special facilities, give such general directions as may be required for that purpose to any commission to which part X** applies or to any authority charged with responsibility for the grant of such scholarships, exhibitions or other educational or training privileges and the Commission or authority shall duly comply with the directions [**Part X- Article 132 – Public services].
4) In exercising his functions under this constitution and federal law in accordance with Clauses (1) to (3) the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall not deprive any person of any public office held by him or of the continuance of any scholarship, exhibition or other educational or training privileges or special facilities enjoyed by him.
5) This Article does not derogate from the provisions of Article 136 [*** This Article (136) is about impartial treatment of federal employees]. All persons of whatever race in the same grade in the service of the federation shall, subject to the terms and conditions of their employment, be treated impartially.
6) Where by existing federal law a permit or licence is required for the operation of any trade or business, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may exercise his functions under that law in such manner, or give such general directions to any authority charged under that law with the grants of such permits or licences, as may be required to ensure the reservation of such proportion of such permits or licences for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable; and the authority shall duly comply with such directions.
7) Nothing in this Article shall operate to deprive or authorize the deprivation of any person of any right, privilege or licence accrued to or enjoyed or held by him or to authorize a refusal to renew to any person any such permit or licence or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of a person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events.
8) Notwithstanding anything in this constitution, where by any federal law any permit or licence is required for the operation of any trade or business that law may provide for the reservation of a proportion of such permits or licences for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak; but no such law shall for the purpose of ensuring such a reservation: (a) deprive or authorize the deprivation of any person of any right, privilege, permit or licence accrued to or enjoyed or held by him; or (b) authorize a refusal to renew to any person any such permit or licence or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of any person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might in accordance with the other provisions of the law reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events, or prevent any person from transferring together with his business any transferable licence to operate that business any transferable licence to operate that business; or (c) where no permit or licence was previously required for the operation of the trade or business, authorize a refusal to grant a permit or licence to any person for the operation of any trade or business which immediately before the coming into force of the law he had been bona fide carrying on, or authorize a refusal subsequently to renew to any such person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might in accordance with the other provisions of the reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events.(8A) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, where in any University, College and other educational institution providing education after Malaysian Certificate of Education or its equivalent, the number of places offered by the authority responsible for the management of the University, College or such educational institution to candidates for any course of study is less than the number of candidates qualified for such places, it shall be lawful for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong by virtue of this Article to give such directions to the authority as may be required to ensure the reservation of such proportion of such places for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable and the authority shall duly comply with the directions.
9) Nothing in this Article shall empower Parliament to restrict business or trade solely for the purpose of reservation for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak.(9A) In this Article the expression 'natives' in relation to the State of Sabah or Sarawak shall have the meaning assigned to it in Article 161A [Read clauses (6) and (7) of that Article 161A for yourself; it's about the definition of 'native'. Sorry, no space for the provisions in this column for today].
10) The constitution of the State of any Ruler may make provision corresponding (with the necessary modifications) to the provisions of this Article.
Quite a mouthful, isn't it?
Do not let yourself be intimidated by the legal language. Useful for an aspiring MP to learn how to read a document couched in the legal verbosity.
It would be useful for the reader to learn what the rest of Article 153 encompasses, and to compare those provisions with the provisions of Article 39 of the Constitution of Sarawak.
The same question that I would ask of the federal government is similar to what I asked the Sarawak government to specify: the reservation of quotas for each racial group in Malaysia, including the natives of the state of Sarawak.
Don't forget about the natives of Sarawak – thank you.
* The opinions expressed in this article are the columnist's own and do not reflect the view of the newspaper.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malay Mail
4 hours ago
- Malay Mail
How has ‘world's coolest dictator' Bukele consolidated power?
SAN SALVADOR, Aug 3 — El Salvador has abruptly changed its constitution to remove term limits, paving the way for self-styled 'world's coolest dictator,' Nayib Bukele, to run for an unprecedented third term. So how did the 44-year-old leader secure such sweeping reforms in just hours and with almost no opposition? And how has he achieved such an iron grip on power after just six years in office? Taking an opening When Bukele burst onto the political scene, Salvadorans were already fed up with the traditional parties of the right and left, particularly with their inability to stop poverty and rampant gang violence. 'The gangs extorted everyone. People were already tired and disappointed by previous governments,' explained political analyst Ricardo Navarro. 'That allowed him to win in 2019' with 52 percent of the votes, said Navarro, adding: 'There was exhaustion.' The Mara Salvatrucha and Barrio 18 gangs once controlled an estimated 80 percent of the country, and El Salvador had one of the highest homicide rates in the world. Bukele's security policies, which included jailing tens of thousands of people — often with little in the way of due process — led to a steep drop in murder rates. Some suspect that the young leader, despite his hardline rhetoric, also benefited from a secret pact with some of the gangs. An investigation by the digital newspaper El Faro claimed that in exchange for money and benefits for imprisoned leaders, the gangs reduced violence and rallied votes for him. Master of Congress Bukele faced a hostile legislature when he came to power, so he sent in the army. In 2020, during a debate about a loan to pay for his security policies, he lined the floor of the assembly with armed police and soldiers. It was a theatrical gesture, and an unsubtle warning to lawmakers, according to Celia Medrano, a human rights specialist. 'It was the clearest possible expression of the militarisation of politics,' she said. Opposition Arena Deputy Marcela Villatoro holds a sign that reads 'Democracy died today' during a Congress plenary session in San Salvador July 31, 2025. — AFP pic With the help of a well-oiled media machine, by 2021, Bukele's party won the majority in Congress, enabling him to change judges and prosecutors who opposed him. From then on, everything changed. 'He has eliminated political opposition through a combination of legal manoeuvres, military intimidation, control of the media, and popular policies like gang repression,' according to the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA). State of emergency After a reported 87 murders in one weekend, Bukele imposed a state of emergency in 2022. About 88,000 people accused of being gang members or accomplices were arrested. 'That allowed him to increase popularity and at the same time establish a kind of threat to anyone who criticises or dares to dissent,' Juan Pappier, deputy director of Human Rights Watch, told AFP. The policies were popular, despite widespread allegations of arbitrary detention and hundreds of reported prison deaths. According to a June survey conducted by the opinion institute at Central American University (UCA), 59.7 per cent of Salvadorans believe the state of emergency should continue. But according to Medrano, speaking about popularity in a country where six out of ten Salvadorans express fear of sharing their opinion is a 'fiction.' Ballot box At the height of his popularity, Bukele was re-elected in February 2024 with 85 per cent of the vote, crushing the opposition and achieving near-total dominance over state institutions. Even though reelection was prohibited in the Constitution, judges from the Supreme Court's Constitutional Chamber — appointed by his party — interpreted the law to allow his candidacy. 'This is where years of gradual constitutional manipulation lead to the dismantling of democracy. By capturing institutions, silencing critics, and rewriting the Constitution, he has created an authoritarian electoral system,' WOLA said. Last year, Congress changed the way the Constitution can be reformed so that it could be done quickly, as what happened on Thursday when term limits were lifted without warning. Friends in high places US President Donald Trump's return to power gave Bukele a new boost. 'Bukele is taking several measures now because he knows Trump will not set limits and is fully willing to turn a blind eye to the destruction of Salvadoran democracy,' said Pappier. Bukele's loyalty to the US president was sealed when he kept 252 Venezuelans deported by Washington imprisoned for four months. 'He feels somewhat shielded by his association with the US president,' said Noah Bullock, director of Cristosal, a rights NGO that has been forced to leave the country. Emboldened by his embrace of Trump, Bukele recently detained prominent human rights defenders. Dozens of activists and organisations, such as Cristosal, have had to go into exile. — AFP
The Sun
16 hours ago
- The Sun
US court upholds bar on LA immigration arrests without probable cause
A federal appeals court late on Friday affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring U.S. government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled that the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on peoples' appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and U.S. Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge last month blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on 'apparent race or ethnicity,' speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a 'bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day laborer pick up site, agricultural site, etc.' The Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. 'The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now,' she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, welcomed the ruling in statement: 'This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region.' - Reuters
The Star
19 hours ago
- The Star
US appeals court keeps bar on Los Angeles federal immigration arrests
Law enforcement officers shoot non-lethal munitions, as people march as part of the ongoing protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in Los Angeles, California, U.S. June 11, 2025. REUTERS/Leah Millis/File Photo (Reuters) -A federal appeals court late on Friday affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring U.S. government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled that the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on peoples' appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and U.S. Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge last month blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity," speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day laborer pick up site, agricultural site, etc." The Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, welcomed the ruling in statement: "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region." (Reporting by Chandni Shah in Bengaluru; Editing by William Mallard)
