Local Government: Malaysia

A brief History on Malaysia Local Government. Malaysia has inherited the British form of Local Government model during its colonial period. Penang and Malacca, under the direct British rule during the colonial period had an early exposure of such system and turn out to be the oldest local government in Malaysia. Penang and Malacca was an urban state under the direct rule of the colonial British administration. Due to its urban characteristic, the Local Government establishment was ideal and works tremendously well in terms of managing the urban society. Only both of these states had rural councils.

Started out for its function to provide basic utility service to an area, such as drainage and electricity, it soon evolves from time to time to meet the needs of the people. The settlements outside the municipal boundaries were administered through rural boards, similar in operation to the town boards, but having corporate status under the Municipal Ordinance, and responsibility for rural administration. While they were in some respects comparable to British rural district councils, their members were appointed, predominantly government servants, and were financially integrated with the settlement Governments. The overall structure of local authorities was complex, the coverage incomplete, and the form varied. (Morris 1980: 12 – 13)

As compared to the colonial period when local government in Malaysia was looked upon as an agency primarily associated with tasks such as garbage collection and street cleaning, it is now viewed as a “catalyst” for development and, as the late Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak pointed out, “a tier of government operation deploying its resources towards achieving national economic and social objectives.”

The system and history of Local Government had gone through very complex chronological changes. Paul Tennant in his article “The Decline of Elective Local Government in Malaysia” viewed Malaysia local electoral development in five stages:

Below are some of the important events in the history of local government in Malaysia: 1801 – The first elements of Local Government were established in Penang with the appointment of a Committee of Assessors. 1857 – A more solid Local Government was established in Penang and Malacca. The Local Government status of power was confirmed by Straits Settlement Municipal Ordinance 133/1913. 1893 – Ipoh City Council was established. 1897 - Seremban Municipal Council was established in 1897 as the Health Board providing only basic amenities to the Seremban dwellers. After the Second World War, Seremban grew rapidly and the Health Board was replaced by the Seremban Town Board until 1965 1907 – Sanitary Board was form in Kelantan. By the year 1914, Kota Bharu, Tumpat and Pasir Mas was under the authority of the Sanitary Board. 1910 – Johor Bharu Town Board was established. 1929 – Local Government Act was established by the British in Malaya. 1931 – Local Government in Jesselton, Sandakan, Tawau and Labuan was formed. It was then known as Sanitary Boards. 1938 – Municipal Enactment was formed and Kota Bahru Town Board was established. 1948 – Local Authorities Ordinance 1948 was formed under the British rule in Sarawak.

1950 – Local Government Election Ordinance 1950 that entrusted the local councils to organize elections for the office of the councilors—the people that governs local area. 1952 – The Local Government Ordinance 1952 was established, which empowered local residents to establish local councils in their area wherever necessary. 1957 – Independence for Malaya. All Local Government control was given to the State Government to be administered. 1965 – The Malaysian Royal Commission was formed to investigate the Local Government system. It was decided that all Local Government Elections to be abolished on 2nd March 1965. 1971 – The Royal Commission on Remuneration and Conditions of Service in Local Authorities and Statutory Authorities, more conveniently described a the Harun Commission, was eventually appointed on June 10, 1971 and submitted its report on local authorities in December 1972 1972 – By July, all local government elections had been entirely abolished in Malaysia. 1973 – A temporary provision of the Local Government Act was implemented. 1976 – The Local Government Act was finalized. The Local Government Act, 1976 empowers state governments to integrate old local authorities and, thus, create a new local authority large enough to make it an effective unit from both the administrative and financial perspective. What is a Local Government? Although not much official definition had been derived to associate the meaning of Local Government, many scholars and researchers in the field of political science had been trying to form a theory which hopes to sustain and define the system of local government. One author in particular gave a basic definition and an interesting way to look at it. William Hampton looks into the linguistic lexicons of the word ‘local government’ and from there he elaborates the nature of local government in his book ‘Local Government and Urban Politics’. The word ‘Local’ implies an area consecrated by long history and tradition, an environment that construct our spatial-awareness. And it is from such awareness that build the socio-economic

knowledge of the local government which then is able to scale the need of its locality by providing public services. While for the word ‘government’, it indicates that the local government is the ‘creature’ of the parliament, created with the characteristic and framework of the ruling government – be it the state or the federal government. Although its authorities are much lesser than the State and Federal government, it still retains a stronger meaning than the word ‘administration’ because local authorities are expected to develop policies appropriate to their localities within the framework of national legislation. Local Government in Malaysia. The Local government is part of the three tier government structure – the federal government, the state government and the local government. According to Tennant (1973:348), Local government in Malaysia is essentially an urban phenomenon, which comes to say that the existence and functions of local government should be seen as an essential system of administration to govern modern and diverse urban setting society. Historical evidence had shown that the establishment of the local government is basically to provide the necessities for the tax payers.

To put in bluntly, Local Government has the

responsibility for numerous services related to housing, water supply, waste management, taxation, land assessment, and other matters (Chin Abdullah, 2008:1). Ministry of Housing and Local Government holds responsibility over the Local Government in all states with the help of National Council for Local Government. By the year 1965, Malaysia has 5 types of local authorities:

The responsibilities of a local government in Malaysia are basically: •

City planning

•

Licensing and Control

•

City beautification

•

Health services

•

Cleanliness

•

Controlling contagious disease

•

Construction and Regulating road system

•

Managing traffic system and Public Transportation

•

Regulating drainage system

•

Providing and maintaining Public amenities.

(REHDA – presented by Ng Seing Liong on the matter of “Effective Service Delivery: Expectations of the Private Sector for Good Governance”.) The local government should be seen as a ground of grass roots bureaucracy, a place where citizens takes an active participation in ensuring good governance. According to a ministerial report, Local Government’s aim is “self-government through the medium popularly elected councils with a large measure of freedom of action and financial independence” (Ministry of Technology, Research, and Local Government, n.d.:2) Local Government. n.d. Local government. Mimeo.

Malaysia, Ministry of Technology, Research, and

This statement comes to prove that the existence system

of local government is a symbolic structure which indicates the trust of the federal government to the citizens by giving them the freedom to self-govern. By allowing the local government to be run solely by its citizens, it will not only edify the understanding of Local Government by the nation’s grass roots but able to reflect the democratic characteristic that Malaysia has been holding on. John Stuart Mill “Justifies Local Government as political education.. as such it is the prime element in democracy, and has an intrinsic value regardless of the functions it may carry out. (Hill 1974:23) Why was the Local Government Election suspended? Firstly the 1959 general election, in which the Alliance polled no more than 51% of the Votes, showed that pre-independence popularity could not be presumed. Secondly, the suppression by the surviving Communist in Malaya and threats by the Sukarno government in Indonesia which led to the infamous ‘Confrontation’ causes insecurity for the ruling party. Thirdly, Opposition parties being very critical towards the ruling government’s decisions on national policies was pressured tremendously. They (oppositions) successfully challenged its control in Kelantan and Terengganu. Furthermore, the opposition party held a very dominant influence in several local authorities. Hence, the government has no choice but to act in favor to regain firm control of the grassroots administration. The Malaysian Royal Commission was formed to justify the government’s decision to abolish the Local Elections.

Tennant (1973) has examined various factors in the abolition of local authorities. They are: 1.) Political Party Factor 2.) The racial Factor 3.) The factor of local corruption 4.) The outlook and position of state officials Tennant concluded that “the existence of corruption and inefficiency within the elective councils paved the way for state officials to eliminate the nuisance of independent local decision makers, and to expand the sphere of state influence by abolishing the major elective local governments.” (1973:365) In the words of the late Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak “We have considered… the subject of local authorities, local councils, and we have watched the development of local government in this country over the years, and we have found that most of them, nearly all of them, have not worked well a all and many have been taken over by the State Governments”. -

Decentralization for National and Local Government. 1962. P. 89.

By doing so, the government had tarnished its record as well as taking away the democratic rights of the citizens. Such act had invited many local and foreign criticisms about the government’s decision in abolishing local elections. Strauch stated, “Local Government in Malaysia is hardly true independent self-government in the sense once envisioned. Bodies once intended to be elected are now tied instead to the appointive civil service bureaucracy, sharing many responsibilities with it and frequently subordinate to it”. (Strauch 1981:130)

Posted in the Straits Times of 2nd March 1965, restoration of Local Government Election will only proceed when “the very moment peace is declared and the emergency regulations are withdrawn.” However, there were a consideration and urge by the people and the opposition party to revive the Local Government Election later. Nahappan Report proposed to restructure and revive the local government to meet the interests of the people. On top of that, a proper restructuring of the Local Government may reinforce national unity as well as creating a democratic space at a local level. Unfortunately, the Nahappan Report was brushed aside as how M. Veera Pandiyan describe in her “Along the Watchtower” column of The Star (Saturday, March 29, 2008):

“Sadly, the Government did not accept the detailed proposals of the Nahappan Report when it was submitted in January 1969. Instead, an alternate panel of seven senior government officials was set up to re-examine it. But with the 1969 general election and the May 13 riots, the country soon came under another declaration of Emergency. The committee only began its work in July and completed its findings in January 1971. To their merit, the majority of those in the panel adopted most of the recommendations in the Nahappan Report and ruled in favour of elections. However, one from the Development Administrative Unit (DAU) and another from the Town and Country Planning Department, held contradictory views. In its own memorandum, the DAU claimed that local government elections would lead to over-democratised over-government and that such a system would also make it easier for elites to dominate over the have-nots, suggesting that in the wake of May 13, it may be against national interest to reintroduce elections at the present time. The government subsequently did away with local government elections.” The Opposition’s promises before March 8 Political Tsunami – Local Government Election R. Nadeswaran, a popular columnist for TheSun’s Citizen Nades wrote an article about the unfulfilling promises by the newly elected state government of Pakatan Rakyat. One of their promises was to revive the The Local Government Election; “Having campaigned and pushed for election of councillors for a long, long time, such views may be wishful thinking, but it’s not going to happen. No government – PR or BN – is going to opt for elected representation in local councils.” Nades describe the title of Local Councillors are like rewards to those who help them (Pakatan Rakyat) to win the General Election. And due to that; “…the people became the victims of the inter and intra-party squabbles and people’s representation had to be compromised to make way for the interests of politicians and their parties.”

Nades then pointed out that the state could call for local government elections without amending the federal constitution as suggested by Derek Fernandez. Derek John Fernandez, a lawyer specializing in planning and local government law and who is also a fervent commenter on the issue of local government elections and a PJ Councilor himself stated in his article “Why political appointees will end up as a corrupting influence on local authorities” (a second part article in the Sun newspaper) suggested Edward Lee’s proposal: “Edward Lee, the state assemblyman for Bukit Gasing in Selangor, had publicly proposed the 888 formula which seems to have received good support from the ratepayers. This means that about one-third of councilors should be from the ranges of NGOs, residents associations (RA), community leaders or local business leaders in the area; one-third professionals from various relevant professions and one-third qualified political appointees. There is much merit in this proposal and in order to implement this proposal, the following method may be considered: » All candidates must strictly meet the criteria of S10 of the Local Government Act 1976. » All candidates must submit to the office of the Mentri Besar a detailed CV with supporting statutory declaration that the contents of the CV are true and accurate and that the candidate is not a bankrupt or convicted criminal or facing any action that could substantially affect his/her ability to carry out his/her function as a councillor. » The councillors shall be well balanced and the 888 proposal appears to be a fair interim measure. » The councillors should all ideally be ordinary residents in the area or at the very least a majority should be. For the professionals who would serve as councillors, the professional bodies can nominate the proposed candidates who have met the criteria. For the political appointees the relevant political parties can propose (of course all these candidates must meet the criteria of the S10 of the Local Government Act 1976 and the ordinary resident in the area of the local authority). » For the NGOs, RAs and others, an independent panel can interview the candidates and make recommendations. The panel should ideally be made up of outstanding persons preferably from

another state. Alternatively the recommended candidates can be questioned by the public in public forums conducted by the state government and their suitability established. » The resumes of all candidates and their statutory declarations should be made public in the local authority website. In the event information is false then the councillor should be removed.”

Wong Chin Huat a Lecturer from the School of Arts and Social Sciences at Monash University Sunway Campus presented a paper on the positivity and the possibility of reviving the Local election at the “Local Council Reforms”Forum organised by the Centre for Public Policy Studies and Malaysia Think Tank London at the Royal Lake Club, Sunday 27 July 2008. In his conclusion, he stated: •that the restoration of local elections constitutes an important step forward in reviving democracy, improving the standard of governance, and checking the scourge of corruption, excesses and mismanagement presently plaguing the urban population in Malaysia; Similar with the statement by Derek Fernandez, he also believes that the State Government has the authority to restore Local Elections: •that the restoration of local elections lies clearly within the jurisdiction of the state government, as provided for by the Article 113(4) and Item4, List II, Schedule 9 in the Federal Constitution. State governments, especially the Pakatan Rakyat ones which have made election promises on reviving local elections, should take immediate steps to formulate state laws to such effect; The importance of nurturing the grassroots about clean, free, fair and representative may foster understanding and cooperation to improve the democratic process: •that at the same time, the Federal Government should initiate consultation with the general public and hold negotiations with the state governments to formulate a comprehensive plan to have local elections that are clean, free, fair and representative.

CONCLUSION The importance of Local Government Election The significance of a Local Government Election is massively justifiable as it is a system which accommodates and totally reliable to the local residents. Gerry Stoker states that ‘The Local Government and democracy is especially attractive because it involves a decentralization of power and the opportunity to use local knowledge to meet local needs. (Prachett & Wilson 1996:188) It is logically better and effective in determining the needs of the people as well as a very assuring thing by the local towards the elected councilor. In addition to that, as Colin Rallings,Michael Temple & Michael Thrasher

state in their essay “Participation in Local

Elections” state that ‘Without voters who could identify and recognize the community of interest in the new administrative boundaries the idea of local democracy would be a sham.’ (Prachett & Wilson 1996:62) By having a Local Election, transparency is assured. In contrast with a appointed local councilor, the appointed may be deem to so many negative speculations. Opposition party and also the people cannot help but be skeptical in the appointed councilor. Therefore, Local Election promises openness and diminishes corruptions.

Gerry Stoker on the openness of Local

Governance: The crucial value of good governance is that the system is open, has low barriers to the expression of dissent and limits the disadvantages of the poorly organized and resourced. (Prachett & Wilson 1996:195) Last but not least, a local election gives the local voters an upper and important hand in ensuring the urban development and maintenance without any heavy responsibility or repercussion. Even if there’s any, the local voters can change the councilor in the next local election. As how Anne Phillips also stated; The great advantage of representative democracy is that elections put the voters on a potential footing, for they make no excessive demands on the citizens’ energy time. (Prachett & Wilson 1996:28)

Democracy and Electoral System is Malaysia’s Administration Foundation. On February 1952, the first election was held in Kuala Lumpur which marked the first step towards Malaysia’s independence and Nation-building process. That important and historical event confirms Malaysia’s establishment on a firm foundation of a democratic process since from the very beginning. It comes to prove that Democracy and the electoral process are inseparatable element in Malaysia. In support of this, Anne Philips suggests that: I have suggested that the case for local democracy depends heavily on its role in extending and enhancing democracy, and that this is the cornerstone on which to erect arguments for local democracy. (Prachett & Wilson 1996:27) Therefore in all areas of political authoritization which bears a certain degree of responsibility and power towards the masses should be elected by the people and not appointed. It should at least start at the lowest of the three tier government structure which is seen as the foundation of the Nation.

Bibliography 1. Norris, M. W. 1980. Local Government in Peninsular Malaysia. Great Britain. Gower Publishing Company Ltd. 2. Hampton, W. 1987. Local Government and Urban Politics. Singapore. Longman Inc. 3. Pratchett, L. (ed) & Wilson, D. (ed). 1996. Local Democracy and Local Government. Hong Kong. Macmillan Press Ltd. 4. Rogers, M. L. 1992. Local Politics in Rural Malaysia: Patterns of Change in Sungai Raya. USA. Westview Press.