
Vape bans: A response to R. Paneir Selvam — Hafiz Hassan
The July 2024 decision of the High Court referred to by the learned writer was the decision in the case of Lee Bak Chui & Ors v Kerajaan Negeri Kedah Darul Aman & Ors [2024] 11 MLJ 556
In that case, the applicants were the pool betting agents and aggrieved by the decision of the first respondent, the State Government of Kedah on the decision that the premise licences for the activities of the gambling business would not be renewed in the State of Kedah ('the said decision').
All the applicants then received letters from the respective Municipal Councils stating that it was agreed that the Ministry of Finance to not consider the renewal of gambling licences for the State of Kedah for the year 2023 since the licence fell within the purview of the Ministry of Finance and it was agreed that the Kedah State local authority and police should take strict enforcement action should there be any licence holders still in operation after December 31, 2022.
The applicants were informed of the said decision and were also informed that legal action would be taken if businesses were still carried out on the premises.
In their applications for judicial review of the said decision, the applicants argued before the High Court that the said decision was, among others, illegal and that the respondents had breached the applicants' legitimate expectation as provided under written law — that is, as long as the pool betting agents were licensed under Section 5 of the Pool Betting Act 1967, the applicants would be able to peacefully carry on their trade and business.
The applicants alleged that the respondents had acted more than their authority. Thus the application for judicial review of the said decision.
The learned High Court judge, Mahazan Mat Taib, allowed the application, ruling, among others, that the said decision was contrary to Article 80(1) read with Article 74 and Item 4(l) of the Federal List of the Federal Constitution.
Articles 74, 80(1), Item 4(l) of the Federal List and Item 4 of the State List are reproduced below:
Article 74 — Subject matter of Federal and State laws
(1) Without prejudice to any power to make laws conferred on it by any other Article, Parliament may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the Federal List or the Concurrent List (that is to say, the First or Third List set out in the Ninth Schedule).
(2) Without prejudice to any power to make laws conferred on it by any other Article, the Legislature of a State may make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List (that is to say, the Second List set out in the Ninth Schedule) or the Concurrent List.
(3) The power to make laws conferred by this Article is exercisable subject to any conditions or restrictions imposed with respect to any particular matter by this Constitution.
(4) Where general as well as specific expressions are used in describing any of the matter enumerated in the Lists set out in the Ninth Schedule the generality of the former shall not be taken to be limited by the latter.
Article 80 — Distribution of Executive powers
(1) Subject to the following provisions of this Article the executive authority of the Federation extends to all matters with respect to which Parliament may make laws, and the executive authority of a State to all matters with respect to which the Legislature of that State may make laws.
No smoking and no vaping warning displayed in food store in Puchong. — Picture by Choo Choy May .
Item 4(l) Federal List
Civil and criminal law and procedure and the administration of justice, including — (l) betting and lotteries.
Item 4 State List
Local government outside the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, including — (a) Local administration; municipal corporations; local, town and rural board and other local authorities; local government services, local rates, local government elections; (b) Obnoxious trades and public nuisances in local authority areas.
After setting out the above provisions, the learned judge said:
'An important point to note is that the words 'with respect to' in Article 74 must be interpreted with extensive amplitude. The cardinal rule of interpretation is that the entries in the legislative lists are not to be read in a narrow or restricted sense and that each general word should be held to extend to all ancillary or subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be comprehended in it.
'The widest possible construction, according to the ordinary meaning of the words in the entry, must be put upon them. In construing the words in a constitutional document conferring legislative power the most liberal construction should be put upon the words so that the same may have effect in widest amplitude.
'It is also well settled that the phrase 'with respect to' appearing in Article 74(1) and (2) of the Federal Constitution — the provision conferring legislative power upon the Federal and State Governments respectively — is an expression of wide import. As observed by Latham CJ in Bank of New South Wales v The Commonwealth:
'A power to make laws 'with respect to' a specific subject is as wide a legislative power as can be created. No form of words has been suggested which would give a wider power. The power conferred upon a Parliament by such word ... is wide.'
'Another equally important point to note is that the function of the entries in the Legislative Lists in the Ninth Schedule is not to confer powers of legislation, but merely to demarcate the fields in which legislative bodies operate. As summarized by the Federal Court in Gin Poh Holdings Sdn Bhd (in voluntary liquidation) v The Government of the State of Penang, the principles applicable to the interpretation of entries in the legislative lists as follows:
(a) the entries in the legislative lists do not confer legislative power. Rather, they are broad heads or fields of legislation to demarcate the respective areas in which Parliament and the State Legislature may operate;
(b) the entries must be interpreted liberally with the widest amplitude, and not narrowly or restrictively. Each entry extends to all ancillary and subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be comprehended in it;
(c) the rule of widest construction does not permit an entry to be interpreted so as to include matters with no rational connection to it or to override or render meaningless another entry;
(d) in the event of apparent conflict or overlap between entries, the court should attempt to reconcile the entries by adopting a harmonious construction; and
(e) in interpreting a particular entry, the court should confine its decision to the concrete question arising from the case, without pronouncing a more exhaustive definition than is necessary.
Accordingly, the entries in the Legislative Lists — that is, the Federal List, State List and Concurrent List (List I, List II and List III respectively) — in the Ninth Schedule to the Federal Constitution are not to be read in a narrow or restricted sense and that each general word should be held to extend to all ancillary or subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be comprehended in it.
Moreover, in the event of apparent conflict or overlap between entries, the court should attempt to reconcile the entries by adopting a harmonious construction.
The rule of widest construction does not permit an entry to be interpreted so as to include matters with no rational connection to it or to override or render meaningless another entry.
So, even though the first respondent had the Executive authority on the matter of local authority in relation to the licensing of premises for gambling, the said decision (to cease the renewal of premise licence for gambling) in effect rendered Item 4(l) of the Federal List on betting and lotteries meaningless.
The legislative authority of the State cannot be extended to banning betting and lotteries under the subject matter of licensing of premises for gambling.
Otherwise, it would be including a matter which overrides or render meaningless the entry in Item 4(l) of the Federal List.
Pool betting and lotteries are matters under Item 4(l) of the Federal List and not under the State List.
Therefore, the court was duty bound to interfere, and the application for judicial review ought to be granted on the ground of illegality.
Now, it is humbly submitted that R Paneir Selvam fell into error by seemingly listing vape as a matter under the Federal List only.
It is not.
Vape should be a matter under public health, which is a matter under Item 14 of the Federal List as well as Item 7 of the Concurrent List. It is therefore a matter which the Legislature of a State has power to make laws by reason of Article 74(2) of the Federal Constitution.
In other words, the legislative authority of the State can be extended to the subject matter of licensing of premises to regulate the sale, advertising, and promotion of all smoking products, including e-cigarettes and vapes, with a focus on preventing access by individuals under 18.
This despite the federal law, the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 (Act 852) referred to by the learned writer.
The primary goal of Act 852 is to reduce and prevent the use of tobacco and vape products, particularly among minors, and to safeguard public health and the environment.
The explanatory notes of Act 852 in fact states that the enforcement of the Act is the responsibility of the Ministry of Health with support from local authorities. (Read the comments by Health Minister Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad here)
A short response to R. Paneir Selvam is this: vape bans do not stand on the same legal footing as pool betting and lottery bans.
*This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Free Malaysia Today
5 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Federal leader's insult pushed GRS into unity govt, says Hajiji
GRS chairman Hajiji Noor said many of Sabah's demands were approved by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, whereas previous leaders found difficulty in devolving power to the state. (Bernama pic) PETALING JAYA : A federal leader's disdain for the proposed 'Borneo Bloc' political cooperation led Gabungan Rakyat Sabah into supporting Anwar Ibrahim's formation of the unity government after the 2022 general election, GRS chairman Hajiji Noor said today. Speaking at the annual convention of Parti Gagasan Rakyat Sabah, he said a former federal leader, whom he did not name, had dismissed the idea of Bornean cooperation. 'I was with Masidi Manjun and Jeffrey Kitingan in a meeting with a big leader over there (in Peninsular Malaysia) at the time. The person said they were the masters. He did not like the Borneo Bloc. He did not want us to share our experiences and stories with our neighbouring state of Sarawak,' he said. 'I was shocked by his words. I thought about them for a long time. What did they mean? What was his intent? As I thought about it, I lost heart (tawar hati) in these people,' he said in a video of his speech published on Facebook by Sabah Media. Hajiji said it was after much thought that he finally decided that GRS would support the unity government being formed by Anwar. Since then, he said Anwar's government 'has listened to our voices, and we have been treated well', and reiterated that GRS remained in support of the prime minister. Hajiji said many of Sabah's demands under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 were approved by Anwar, as opposed to previous leaders who found difficulty in devolving power to the state. 'So what are we hoping for? If the unity government is good for our state, why shouldn't we support it?' he said. In March, deputy prime minister Fadillah Yusof said the unity government had successfully resolved nine key claims related to MA63, including power to regulate gas supply in Sabah, the administration of the judiciary in Sabah and Sarawak, and guidelines on land reserved for federal purposes in the two states.


Free Malaysia Today
5 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
People's views not same as those with lust for power, says PM's aide
The 'Turun Anwar' rally on Saturday was described by PAS as representing the people's vote of no confidence in Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. PETALING JAYA : The unity government will listen to all the people, and not just to the voices behind political microphones on rally stages, an aide to the prime minister said today. 'There is a big difference between the people's voice and the political agendas of certain parties who are trying to drag the people into validating their lust for power,' said Shamsul Iskandar Akin, senior political secretary to the prime minister. Shamsul Iskandar Akin. He said the government led by Anwar Ibrahim was built upon an electoral mandate and Perikatan Nasional chairman Muhyiddin Yassin and his coalition partners should return to the electoral arena if they were confident that public sentiment about the government had shifted. 'Not through street rallies, not by inflating crowd numbers, and not by manipulating racial and religious issues to provoke emotions,' he said in a statement, Bernama reported. His statement comes in the wake of the 'Turun Anwar' rally in Kuala Lumpur on Saturday, which police said was attended by an estimated 18,000 people. However, PAS officials claimed that 200,000 people took part. The rally was later described by PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan as a vote of no confidence by the people against Anwar and he urged the prime minister to take heed of the turnout and resign instead of waiting for a confidence motion in the Dewan Rakyat. Shamsul said in a statement that the government respected the people's right to assemble and express opinions, and had ensured that no harsh action was taken, no tear gas fired, and no stages destroyed. 'The people's right to speak is protected. But their voices must not be exploited, and democracy must not be held hostage in the name of vengeance and power struggles,' he said.


Free Malaysia Today
5 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Umno must act on principle even if unpopular, says Zahid
Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi called for party members to take BN's failure to form the government in the past two general elections as a lesson and turning point to rebuild the party's strength. (Bernama pic) RAUB : Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said that in today's challenging political landscape, decisions made by the party are aimed at ensuring the country's stability and future, even if those decisions are unpopular. Explaining the matter when officiating the Raub Umno division delegates' meeting, he emphasised that in any struggle, not all decisions taken will be comfortable, but they must be principled. 'No matter how high our position is in the party or government, we must realise that every post is a trust that must be carried out with full responsibility,' he said. Zahid, who is also Barisan Nasional (BN) chairman and deputy prime minister, said what Umno needs most right now is unity of purpose and a strong fighting spirit, without faltering when tested. He also reminded party members to take Umno and BN's failure to form the government in the past two general elections as a lesson and turning point to rebuild the party's strength. 'We have been tested twice in the general elections… enough of the divisions, quarrels, shooting at each other, and hidden saboteurs within. 'Let us learn from past weaknesses and fix Umno and BN from within. Hopefully, we can be dominant once again,' he said. At a press conference later, Zahid said Umno would look into whether any of its members had participated in the rally held in Kuala Lumpur yesterday. 'Umno is now part of the unity government, and we must strengthen, not undermine, the government that is in place,' he said.