Volume III Saturday

No. 12 11th March, 1967

PA R L I AMENTA RYD E B ATES

i

DEWAN NEGARA (SENATE)

OFFICIAL REPORT

THIRD SESSION OF THE SECOND PARLIAMENTOF MALAYSIA

CONTENTS

EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion) [Col. 13291

ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE (Motion) [Col. 13291

BILLS

The National Language Bill [Col. 13291 [Col. 13681

The Interpretation Bill [Col. 1368]

The Contracts (Malay States) (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1371]

The Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill [Col. 13721

The Hire-Purchase Bill [Col. 13821

The Aboriginal Peoples (Amendment) Bill [Col. 13861

The Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1387]

Pertubohan Berita Nasional Malaysia Bill [Col. 1389]

The Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority (Amendment)Bill [Col. 1391]

The Control of Rent (Amendment) Bill [Col. 13951

MOTIONThe Formation of the Malaysia Group of the Inter-Parlia-

mentary Union [Col. 14181

DI-CHETAK DI-JABATAN CHETAK KERAJAAN

OLEH 001 THEAM HOCK , PENGUASA, IPOH

1968

Harea: $1

MALAYSIA

DEWAN NEGARA (SENATE)Official Report

Vol. III Third Session of the Second Dewan Negara No. 12

Saturday, 11th March, 1967

The Senate met at Ten o'clock a.m.

PRESENT:

The Honourable Mr President, DATO' HAJI ABDUL RAHMAN BIN MOHAMEDYASIN, S.P.M.J., P.I.S., J.P. (Johor).

TUAN A. ARUNASALAM, A.M.N. (Appointed).99TUAN ABDUL SAMAD BIN OSMAN, P.J.K . (Appointed).

TUAN HAJI AHMAD BIN HAJI ABDULLAH, A.M.N. (Penang).

„ TUAN AMALUDDIN BIN DARUS (Kelantan).

„ TUAN AWANG DAUD MATUSIN (Appointed).

„ DATO' DR CHEAH TOON LOK, D.P.M.K., D.M.K., J.M.N., J.P.(Appoipted).

DATO' J. E. S. CRAWFORD, D.P.M.P., J.M.N., J.P., Dato' Kurnia930Indera (Appointed).

TUAN GAN TECK YEOW, J.M.N. (Appointed).

„ TUAN GOH CHEK KIN, P.J.K. (Trengganu).

„ TUAN HOH CHEE CHEONG, A.M.N., J.P. (Pahang).

DATO' LEE FOONG YEE, J.M.N., P.P.T., J.P . (Negri Sembilan).30 vDATO' Y. T. LEE, D.P.M.S., J.M.N., P.J.K., J.P . (Appointed).

„ TUAN LIM HEE HONG, J.M.N., J.P. (Appointed).

„ TUAN LIM Joo KONG, J.P. (Kedah).

TAN SRI HAJI MOHAMED NOAH BIN OMAR, P.M.N., S.P.M.J.,99D.P.M.B., P.I.S., J.P. (Appointed).

TUAN HAJI MOHAMED SAAID BIN HAJI ABU BAKAR (Appointed).99DATO' ATHI NAHAPPAN, D.P.M.S . (Appointed).99

„ NIK HASSAN BIN HAJI NIK YAHYA, J.M.N . (Appointed).

„ TOK PANGKU PANDAK HAMID BIN PUTEH JALI, P.J.K. (Appointed).

TUAN SAIDON BIN KECHUT, A.M.N. (Appointed).

„ DATO' SHEIKH ABU BAKAR BIN YAHYA AL-HAJ, D.P.M.J., P.I.S.,J.P. (Johor).

TAN SRI G. SHELLEY, P.M.N., J.P. (Appointed).

„ TUAN SYED AHMAD BIN SYED MAHMUD SHAHABUDIN, J.M.N.,

S.M.K., J. P. (Kedah)..

1327 11 MARCH 1967 1328

The Honourable TUAN SYED DARUS BIN SYED HASHIM (Perlis).

TAN SRI T. H. TAN, P.M.N. (Appointed).

„ TUAN S. O. K. UBAIDULLA, J.M.N. (Appointed).DATO' WAN IBRAHIM BIN WAN TANJONG, J.M.N., P.J.K., OrangKaya Indera Maharaja Purba Jelai (Pahang).

WAN SULAIMAN BIN WAN TAM, P.J.K. (Appointed).

ABSENT:

The Honourable the Minister without Portfolio, TAN SRI ONG YOKE LIN, P.M.N.(Appointed).

TUAN ABDUL RAHIM BIN ABDUL MANAN, P.J.K. (Negri Sembilan).

„ TUAN ABDUL RAHMAN BIN AHMAD (Perlis).

„ TUAN HAJI AHMAD BIN HAJI ABDUL MANAP, P.P.N. (Melaka).

„ PUAN AISHAH BINTI HAJI ABDUL GHANI (Appointed).

PUAN BIBI AISHA BINTI HAMID DON, A.M.N. (Appointed).

DATO' JOSEPH AUGUSTINE ANGIAN ANDULAG, P.D.K. (Sabah).

DATU TUANKU BUJANG BIN TUANKU HAJI OTHMAN (Sarawak).

TUAN CHAN KEONG HON (Appointed).

„ TUAN CHAN KWONG-HON, J.M.N., S.M.S, J.P. (Selangor).

„ TUAN CHEAH SENG KHIM, J.P. (Penang).

„ TUAN D. S. DORAI RAJ, A.M.N., P.J.K. (Appointed).

„ DATO' Foo SEE Moi, D.P.M.K., J.P. (Appointed).

„ TUAN HONG KIM Sui (Appointed).

„ TUAN C. D. ISMAIL, J.M.N., J.P. (Appointed).

„ TUAN ANDREW JIKA LANDAU (Appointed).

„ TUAN KOH KIM LENG (Melaka).

„ TUAN MOHAMED ADIB BIN OMAR, P.J.K. (Trengganu).

„ DATU PENGIRAN MOHAMED DIGADONG GALPAM, P.D.K. (Sabah)

„ TUAN S. P. S. NATHAN (Appointed).

„ TEMENGGONG OYONG LAWAI JAU (Sarawak).

„ RAJA RASTAM SHAHROME BIN RAJA SAID TAUPHY (Selangor).

„ TUAN WILLIAM TAN (Appointed).

„ DATO' E. E. C. THURAISINGHAM, D.P.M.J., J.P. (Appointed).

„ WAN MUSTAPHA BIN HAJI WAN ALI, S.M.K. (Kelantan).

„ TUAN YAHYA BIN HAJI AHMAD (Perak).

TUAN YEOH KIAN TEIK (Perak).

IN ATTENDENCE :

The Honourable the Minister of Lands and Mines, TUAN ABDUL-RAHMAN BINYA'KUB (Sarawak).

„ the Minister of Agriculture and Co-operatives, TUAN HAJIMOHAMED GHAZALI BIN HAJI JAWI (Ulu Perak).

„ the Minister for Local Government and Housing, TUAN KHAWKAI-BOH, P.J.K. (Ulu Selangor).

1329 11 MARCH 1967 1330

PRAYERS

(Mr President in the Chair)

EXEMPTED BUSINESS(Motion)

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, I beg to move,

That notwithstanding the provisions ofStanding Order 11, the Senate shall notadjourn today until consideration on allGovernment business set out on the OrderPaper for today has been completed.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir, I beg to secondthe motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,That notwithstanding the provisions of

Standing Order 11 , the Senate shall notadjourn today until consideration on allGovernment business set out on the OrderPaper for today has been completed.

ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE(Motion)

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, I beg to move,

That at its rising today the Senate shallstand adjourned sine die.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir, I beg to secondthe motion.

Resolved,

That at its rising today the Senate shallstand adjourned sine die.

BILLS

THE NATIONAL LANGUAGEBILL

Second Reading

Order read for resumption of debateon Question, "That the Bill be nowread a second time" (10th March,1967).

Tuan Saidon bin Kechut: Dato'Yang di-Pertua, saya bangun pada pagiini mengambil kesempatan untokmenyokong Rang Undang2 BahasaKebangsaan yang di-kemukakan dalamDewan ini oleh Yang Amat BerhormatTun Haji Abdul Razak. Saya berasatentu-Jah agak kurang menyenangkankalau dalam perkara yang besar yangdi-perbinchangkan dan di-perdebatkandengan bagitu hangat dalam masa yang

terakhir2 ini daripada semenjak DewanRa'ayat hingga kapada Dewan Negaradan juga banyak pemimpin2 ra`ayatyang mengambil kesempatan mem-binchangkan dan menimbulkan sa-suatu mengenai Rang Undang2 BahasaKebangsaan ini di-luar Dewan sa-kali pun. Jadi saya rasa walau apapun yang di-lemparkan, walau pun apasahaja kata2 nesta yang di-keluarkanoleh pehak2 yang tidak menyetujui,oleh pehak2 yang mengatakan per-tentangan-nya dan tidak mahu mene-rima Rang Undang2 Bahasa Ke-bangsaan ini, bagi hemat saya sendiri,saya dapat memberikan beberapa ke-tegasan di-antara pehak2 yang menen-tang ini ada di-antara-nya gulongan2yang betul2 merasa kechewa di-atasbenar dan betul-nya Rang Undang2Bahasa Kebangsaan ini, memberi kuasadan memberi keputusan yang mu'tamadtentang maksud dan tujuan RangUndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini yangmeliputi keselurohan-nya Perlem-bagaan Fasal 152, ia-itu bahasa ke-bangsaan menjadi bahasa rasmi yangtunggal di-Malaysia ini.

Satu gulongan lagi daripada mereka2yang menentang Rang Undang2 BahasaKebangsaan ini benar2 pula, pada hematsaya, bukan-lah mempunyai tujuan2yang benar dan jujor, tujuan2 ikhlasdan murni, tetapi penentangan danserangan2 yang di-lemparkan kapadaRang Undang2 Bahasa Kebangsaanini ada-lah mempunyai tujuan2 yangtertentu atau pun kata orang2 sekarangini mempunyai tujuan udang di-sa-balek batu. Di-antara dua gulonganyang menentang Rang Undang2Bahasa Kebangsaan ini, pada diri saya,saya sangat menyesali sikap yang di-keluarkan dan di-timbulkan olehorang2 daripada Parti Islam sa-TanahMelayu mulai daripada dalam DewanRa'ayat sa-hingga Dewan Negarasemenjak har.i sa-malam. Saya yang sa-benar-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, padahari ini, saya ingin hendak menyentohbeberapa perkara yang di-timbulkanoleh rakan2 saya daripada PAS di-dalam Dewan ini tetapi tidak bagitusedap rasa-nya saya berchakap padapagi ini kerana kedua2 beliau itu belumlagi nampak-nya hadhir.

1331 11 MARCH 1967

Satu daripada -nya masaalah bagai-mana pintar dan bijak -nya orang2 yangmahu menggunakan kesempatan me-nanggok di -ayer keroh ini memutar-belitkan tiap2 kalimat atau ayat yangterchatit dan tersurat di-dalam RangUndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini,mithal-nya saperti sa-malam kita men-dengar dengan menggunakan satukalimat apa yang di-sebutkan "per-untokan". "Peruntokan" ini tidaksesuai kata mereka di-gunakan di-dalam soal Rang Undang2 BahasaKebangsaan ini hanya ini boleh di-gunakan sa-bagai mithal -nya, "per-untokan" untok kewangan dan lain-'tetapi Rang Undang2 Bahasa Ke-bangsaan ini menunjokkan apabilakalimat "peruntokan" ini di-chatitkanerti-nya ia-lah kelemahan2 daripadapehak UMNO dan daripada pehakKerajaan sendiri yang chuba menyim-pangkan k-eadaan yang sa -benar-nyatujuan2 bahasa kebangsaan bahasarasmi yang tunggal yang akan di-laksanakan.

Menurut pendapat saya untok me-nyatakan tentang kedudokan "per-untokan" yang di-maksudkan di-dalamRang Undang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini,"peruntokan" ini ada -lah menunjok-kan ia -itu menghadkan atau meletak-kan atau menselaraskan dan banyaklagi perkara2 yang dapat di -samakandengan tujuan dan ma`ana-nya "per-untokan" yang di-maksudkan di-dalamkata2 Rang Undang2 Bahasa Ke-bangsaan ini, tetapi barangkali agak-nya oleh sehab pehak yang menentangperkataan " peruntokan" ini ada-lahmengambil perkataan ini dari segisastera maka sa-sunggoh -nya tentu-lahtidak sesuai kerana perkataan2 yangdi-sebutkan di-dalam Rang Undang2ini ia -lah mengikut perkataan2 darisegi Undang2 . Saya sendiri kalauhendak membandingkan tentang per-kataan2 bahasa kebangsaan kita sendiridengan bahasa2 Inggeris tentu -lah kitadapat keadaan2 yang tidak sama dantidak sa-rupa tujuan dan maksud-nya.Saperti mana j ikalau kita dalam bahasakebangsaan mengatakan "angkat",dalam bahasa Inggeris di-junjong pundi-katakan angkat , di-pikul di-bahudi-katakan angkat , di-bimbit di-kata-kan angkat , tetapi kita berlainan sama

1332

sa-kali . Jadi masaalah2 bahasa yangdi-sebutkan dan di-bangkitkan olehAhli Yang Berhormat daripada PASsa-malam sa-sunggoh -nya ini-lah satu2-nya di-antara beberapa chara menge-lirukan perkataan2 dan tujuan2 yangsa-benar-nya di-dalam tujuan maksudRang Undang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan inibagi kepentingan parti dan kepentinganmenanggok di-ayer yang keroh. TuanYang di-Pertua, saya di-dalam soal inibagi membenarkan kenyataan ini marlkita renongkan sadikit bukti2 untokkita berfikir perkara2 yang dapatmenyatakan bagaimana benar danbetul-nya apa yang saya katakan ini,satu daripada perkara2 yang agaktidak menyenangkan saya mendengar-n_ya daripada Ahli Yang Berhormatdaripada PAS ini yang kita tahu orangeyang faham dan tinggi pengetahuan-nya dari segi bahasa.

Sa-malam kita mendengar YangBerhormat Wan Mustapha sendiri me-ngatakan dengan lantang -nya ia-ituorange Ash di-tanah ayer kita ini masehsanggup Ahli Yang Berhormat itumenggunakan panggilan Sakai. Sayarasa kalau ada wakil2 orang2 Ash di-Dewan ini atau pun di- luar-nya yangmendengar maseh ada di -zaman mer-deka ini orang2 yang sanggup me-manggil orang2 Ask itu Sakai, tentu-lahtindakan yang hebat akan di-ambiloleh keturunan suku orang Ash yangada di-tanah ayer kita ini. Kerana,Tuan Yang di-Pertua, banyak per-kataan2, dan tata bahasa yang lebehhalus2 yang dapat di-katakan sa-bagaiadat dan kebudayaan orang2 Melayuyang terpuji dan di-pandang tinggi.Saya minta ma'af sa-belum India men-chapai kemerdekaan -nya, saya rasakapada gulongan orange India kitapanggil dengan perkataan Keling. Sayaminta ma`af ini ada-lah untok per-bandingan, tetapi sa-telah kemerde-kaan India kita tahu benar2 sa-hinggakapada hari ini tidak ada sa-oranglagi pun yang menyebut2 perkataanKeling yang memang di-chiptakanoleh penjajah melainkan kita sebutkanbangsa India. Ini kerana menghormatibangsa India yang telah merdeka tetapikita di-Malaysia ini maseh ada orangeyang mempunyai pengetahuan danpelajaran , mempunyai akhlak dan

1333 11 MARCH 1967

kesupanan yang tinggi konon-nyamaseh lagi memakai istilah2 yangmengkeji dan menghinakan satu gu-longan bangsa yang betul2 ash di-tanah ayer kita ini, ia-itu kaum Ashdan mereka ini di-berikan penghinaanlagi dengan di-katakan Sakai.

Saya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dalamperkara ini sunggoh pun kalau kitahendak mengkaji tentang tanggongjawab Kerajaan Perikatan di-dalammasaalah mementingkan kehidupanra'ayat dan masharakat-nya, kita tahudi-zaman penjajah orang2 yang di-katakan Sakai ini memang di-halaudan di-dudokkan, tempat-nya, di-dalamhutan2 yang besar supaya mereka iniberpechah dengan orang2 yang ada di-sekitar-nya terutama sa-kali denganorang2 Melayu dan ini untok kepen-tingan penjajah. Tetapi alang-kahrahmat dan bahagia-nya KerajaanPerikatan sa-telah menchapai kemer-dekaan ini mengadakan peruntokan2khas dan mengumpulkan orang2 Ashini di-bawa ka-dalam bandar dengandi-berikan segala layanan yang sa-patut-nya dan sewajar-nya sa-bagaisa-orang manusia walau pun dalamgulongan suku apa sa-kali pun. Tetapiini-lah chara2-nya orang2 PAS yangkonon-nya berpelajaran dan bersema-ngat kebangsaan dan ra'ayat. Saya rasajikalau orang PAS ini berkuasabarangkali orang2 Asli ini bukan sahajalari ka-gunong2 tetapi tidak akan men-dapat tempat lagi di-negara kita di-Malaysia ini.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya di-dalamsoal beberapa perkara lagi untok me-ngatakan kebenaran apa yang sayakatakan bahawa saya sangat menye-sali sikap PAS yang memberikantentangan pada keselurohan-nya RangUndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini ia-itudengan tidak ada simpati dan tiadatimbang rasa langsong-erti-nya yangada terchatet di-dalam Rang Undang2Bahasa Kebangsaan ini tidak satu punmatalamat yang menunjokkan ke-jujoran daripada Kerajaan dan dari-pada pemimpin2 UMNO. Saya inginmenyatakan di-sini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ia-itu sa-malam juga kita men-dengar bahawa Wan Mustapha, Ahli

1334

Yang Berhormat di-dalam Dewan ini,telah mengelirukan lagi satu perkataanyang konon-nya di-keluarkan olehYang Teramat Muhia Tunku. Konon-nya siapa yang menentang RangUndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini di-tudoh kominis. Pada hemat saya dansaya menafikan Yang Teramat MuliaTunku tidak pernah mengatakan orangyang menentang Rang Undang2 Ba-hasa Kebangsaan ini is-lah kominis.Apa yang saya tahu, jikalau saya tidaksilap, Tunku menyatakan tunjok2 pe-rasaan yang liar, perbuatan2 kekerasanyang memalukan saperti membakargambar Tunku, membakar surat2khabar dan mengadakan tunjok2 pe-rasaan yang mengeluarkan perkataan2yang kotor2 terhadap pemimpin2 kita.Ini mungkin ada anasir2 kominis yangchuba mengapi2kan supaya orang2yang menunjok perasaan ini bertindakdengan sa-chara liar. Ini satu perkarayang tidak mustahil kerana di-mana2negara pun di-dalam kalangan masha-rakat, memang ada puak2 yang ter-tentu menchari kesempatan, puak2yang ingin menimbulkan sa-suatuuntok kepentingan mereka, puak2 yangingin menjatohkan Keraj aan dan men-jatohkan nama baik Kerajaan dari sa-masa ka-samasa, mengambil kesempa-tan dalam keadaan2 yang boleh me-nimbulkan huru-hara.

Kita tahu, ranchangan2 untok men-jatoh-kah sa-suatu Keraj aan, untokmenjatohkan sa-suatu perkatuan ataupun pertubohan2, bukan-lah bolehdengan sa-chara aman dan damai,tetapi mesti di-timbulkan keadaan2huru-hara. Maka ini-lah yang Tunkukatakan, mungkin ada Tatar belakangatau pun anasir2 yang menyeludupyang berfaham kominis yang inginhendak menimbulkan huru-hara dalamkesempatan bahasa kebangsaan kitaini di-kemukakan di-dalam DewanRa'ayat dan pada masa itu anasir2ini menjalankan segala apa yang di-fikirkan-nya perlu bagi meniupkansemangat mengelirukan tujuan2 danmaksud2 supaya ra`ayat jelata danorang ramai akan dapat menunjokkankebenchian dan menunjokkan sa-suatuperbuatan yang boleh menyusahkanKerajaan dan orang ramai.

13 35 11 MARCH 1967

Masaalah ini terang dan nyata,tidak-lah dengan tujuan apa yang di-katakan oleh Ahli Yang Berhormatsa-malam, siapa menentang RangUndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini ada-lah kominis, tetapi yang sa-betul-nyaia-lah ada-nya anasir2 kominis. Kalau-lah Wan Mutapha sa-malam di-Dewanini menyatakan, dia menchampori,telah pergi ka-Dewan Bahasa dalammasa perjumpaan Barisan BertindakBahasa Kebangsaan dan kalau di-Dewan ini Ahli Yang Berhormat dari-pada PAS ini mengatakan terang2 di-hadapan kita semua, mengelirukanperkataan2 yang terkandong di-dalamRang Undang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini,kita dapat tahu juga apa-kah yangtelah di-chakapkan oleh Yang Ber-hormat itu di-Dewan Bahasa padamasa Barisan Bertindak Bahasa Ke-bangsaan mengadakan perjumpaan.Tidak mungkin-kah Ahli2 PAS dankunchu2-nya berada di-Kolej Islam?Tidak mungkin-kah Ahli2 PAS beradadi-tempat2 lain di-mana orang2 ber-kumpul hendak mengetahul keadaanyang sa-benar-nya Rang Undang2Bahasa Kebangsaan ini? Kalau meng-ikut pendapat dan hemat saya, jikalaudi-dalam Dewan ini Ahli2 Yang Ber-hormat daripada PAS sanggup menge-lirukan, sanggup menimbulkan soal2detail yang tidak bagitu mustahak,tetapi tidak mementingkan soal pokok,maka sa-sunggoh-nya, sa-benar-nya-lahapa yang di-katakan oleh Yang Ter-amat Mulia Tunku, mungkin PAS jugaada-lah satu2-nya anasir kominis yangingin menimbulkan huru-hara daripadasegi Rang Undang2 Bahasa Kebang-saan ini.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya tahu ia-itu siapa-kah yang ada sa-lain daripadaAhli Yang Berhormat kita di-dalamDewan ini yang bagitu mengambilberat tampil ka-hadapan memberikanpendapat dan fikiran yang mengeliru-kan terhadap Rang Undang2 BahasaKebangsaan ini di-dalam perjumpaanramai. Saya tidak mahu menchakapkansiapa-kah di-antara satu2 tokoh-nya.Tetapi lebeh kurang satu dua bulanyang telah lalu di-tempat saya sendiriada satu foram yang di-anjorkan olehmahasiswa University Malaya. Salahsa-orang daripada tokoh PAS yang ada

1336

di-dalam forum itu menyerukan, kalauKAMI dan KAPI di-Indonesiasanggup bangun menentang Kerajaankenapa-kah mahasiswa atau penuntut2,pelajar2 dari University Malaya danlain2 tidak sanggup bangun menentangKerajaan? Ini telah di-keluarkan sa-belum lagi Rang Undang2 Bahasa Ke-bangsaan ini di-kemukakan. Jadi, TuanYang di-Pertua, di-dalam perkara ini,ini-lah yang saya katakan daripadamula tadi amat menyesalkan dan charapenentangan dan serangan yang di-berikan oleh PAS ini tepat apa yangsaya fikirkan ia-itu sa-benar2-nyabukan dengan sebab jujor dan ikhlastetapi kerana kepentingan PAS sendiri.

Saya maseh ingat satu lagi Ahli.Yang Berhormat daripada PAS sa-malam mengatakan, ia-itu Perlem-bagaan ini jangan di-pinda2 denganbagitu mullah dan kita harus mengata-kan dan kita harus menganggap Per-lembagaan ini sa-bagai Quran juga.Saya sendiri sa-bagai sa-orang Islam,saya menyangkal keras dan barang di-jauhkan Allah jangan-lah ada orangIslam hendak menduakan Quran di-dunia ini. Kerana Quran tidak boleti.di-pinda, Quran hanya satu sahaja.Jikalau ada orang' PAS telah kelirudengan kedudokan Quran yang suchiitu, maka tidak hairan-lah bukansahaja Quran telah di-kelirukan dandi-pergunakan untok kepentingan PAS,perkara2 lain juga di-pergunakandengan chara yang keliru yang merekatidak faham keadaan yang sa-benar-nya. Saya harap orang2 PAS tolongbelajar mengenal Quran dengan ertikata yang sa-benar-nya.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya dalamsoal kedudokan bahasa kebangsaan,kita, kalau hendak di-kaji dari segisejarah barangkali orang2 PAS me-nitek beratkan tudohan-nya, kelema-han UMNO dan kelemahan Kera-jaan Perikatan. Kenapa tidak mahubersemangat sa-ratus peratus dan men-jalankan sa-suatu apa yang di-fikirkanuntok kepentingan orang Melayu sa-bagai bumiputra ini dengan keadaanmendadak dan keadaan berani. Sayaingin memberikan pengajian sadikitdari sudut sejarah juga ia-itu kapadasiapa-kah harus kita salahkan. Kerana

1337 11 MARCH 1967 1338

kita tahu penj aj ah yang menj ej akkankaki-nya di-tanah ayer kita, pada masamula2 dahulu daripada semenjak zamanPortugis sampai-lah kapada beberapakalangan penj aj ah yang terkemudiandaripada-nya. Nenek-moyang kitabukan menyerah bulat2. Ini patut Ahli2Yang Berhormat daripada PAS meng-ambil kepastian, nenek-moyang kitatelah mengadakan penentangan yangbagitu hebat. Berjuta2 jiwa wanita danpemuda nenek-moyang kita dahulutelah terkorban kerana mempertahan-kan kedaulatan tanah ayer dan erti-nyakemasokan kuasa penjajah di-tanahayer kita ini telah di-berikan bayaranyang bagitu mahal. Ini satu kebang-gaan dan dengan sebab itu-lah UMNOterchipta pada hari ini kerana me-nyambong perjuangan nenek-moyang,mahu mengembalikan kedaulatan ne-gara sa-bagai bangsa yang merdeka,mahu mengembalikan kedaulatan ba-hasa sa-bagai bahasa yang teragong.

Tetapi dengan sebab malang-nyaKerajaan Melayu di-zaman itu telahkalah, kalah sa-telah berjuang hebat,maka kekuasaan penjajah telah men-jalankan apa sahaja is dapat menguasai,apa sahaja yang ada di-tangan anak2bumiputra yang pada masa itu di-sebut Semenanjong Tanah Melayu.Maka dengan keadaan kekuasaan pen-j aj ah yang telah mengadakan beberapaachara2 yang merugikan anak2 bumi-putra sendiri yang tidak payah hendaksaya sebutkan. Kita sama2 ma'alumsa-bagai bangsa yang terjajah, harusmenerima sahaja menurut apa yangdi-perentahkan oleh kuasa yang me-merentah ia-itu, penjajah pada masaitu. Sampai-lah pada hari ini apabilakita berjuang dalam sa'at kita sekarangini, kita ada-lah bangsa yang baharuhendak membangun, bangsa yangbaharu hendak maju ka-hadapan.Dengan keadaan kita atau dengan sua-sana atau iklim di-negara kita ini yangtidak dapat di-nafikan lain daripadanegara2 lain. Maka dengan keadaanyang ada pada hari ini saya rasa sa-suatu yang di-perjuangkan oleh Kera-jaan Perikatan, oleh pemimpin2 UMNOboleh-lah ra'ayat semua tahu dan dapatmenyatakan, Kerajaan Perikatan danpemimpin2 UMNO yang berjuang padahari ini untok kepentingan negara, men-

j alankan langkah yang sangat bijakyang sesuai dengan keadaan kita sen-diri. Kita tidak mahu di-dalam menujutujuan dan maksud yang baik padamasa sekarang dan pada masa yangakan datang terjadi saperti kata orangtua2, "yang di-kejar tak dapat yang di-kendong berchichiran." Kita tahu kalausa-kira-nya menurut chara2 apa yangdi-kehendaki oleh PAS, erti-nya sa-kaliberjuang tetap berjuang terus, sa-kalikita katakan mesti, mesti juga di-jalankan, rnaka sa-sunggoh-nya PASberjuang dengan tidak mempunyaipedoman. PAS berjuang tidak adatektik perjuangan.

Kalau hendak saya berikan, mithal-nya, di-dalam kedudokan askar2 yangberperang memang ada barangkali sa -belum barisan yang besar di-belakangmaju ka-depan lebeh kurang di-pileh10 orang dahulu tentera2 biasa yang di-anggap berani mati, yang memang di -suroh mati, 10 orang di-suroh ka-depandahulu ia-itu untok supaya musohdapat memandang-nya, dan untok me-ngetahui musoh atau tidak di-tempatyang berhampiran. Maka 10 orang iniakan maju ka-hadapan, kalau sa-kira-nya ada musoh di-hadapan, orang yang10 ini dahulu-lah akan menjadi umpanpeluru. Jadi masaalah kita di-dalamperjuangan kita mesti ada pada masa2nya kita maju ka-hadapan, pada masa2-nya kita harus mundor kabelakang danpada masa2-nya pula kita harus bertahan ini tektik perjuangan. Tetapiperjuangan PAS apa yang saya nam-pak maju2 terus, tidak ada bertahantidak undor kabelakang erti-nya PASakan sampai ajal-nya lebeh lekas daripada orange lain.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, memandang -kan keadaan sejarah yang saya katatadi, maka keadaan yang di-lakukanoleh Kerajaan dan UMNO pada hariini dalam mengemukakan sa-suatudalam Rang Undang2 Bahasa Kebang -saan ini ada-lah chara yang sa-baik2-nya. Kerana sa-lain daripada soalpokok, soal menjadikan bahasa kebangsaan bahasa rasmi yang tunggalyang akan sampai pada sa'at yang di -mestikan nanti, maka sa-lain daripadaitu kita harus fikirkan, bahasa kebang -saan kita ada-lah mempunyal satu

1339 11 MARCH 1967

tujuan yang tertentu ia-itu tujuandengan menggunakan bahasa kebang-saan ini ra'ayat jelata, warganegarayang berbilang bangsa di-tanah ayerkita ini akan bersatu padu. Ini satutujuan yang besar dari segi soal pokokbahasa kebangsaan menjadi bahasarasmi yang tunggal untok perpaduanumat Malaysia seluroh-nya, maka sa-sunggoh-nya tidak-lah akan berjaya sa-suatu yang di-maksudkan, tidak-lahkita akan dapat menjalankan sa-suatudengan chara yang betul2 bertanggongjawab dan aman tenteram melainkandengan keadaan kita lebeh dahuludapat bertimbang rasa, dapat bertolakansor, dapat memahamkan sa-suatuitu menurut tujuan2 dan landasan2 yang.sa-benar-nya bagi pehak saya dalamperjuangan kita menchiptakan ma-sharakat yang adil masharakat yangaman dan ma'mor di-tanah ayer kitaini, kita hendak-lah berlari di.-padangyang kering, kita tidak mahu berlaridi-padang yang lechak. Kalau sa-kira-nya PAS suka memileh keadaan2dengan membuta tuli tidak kira ranjaudan duri, itu terpulang-lah kapadaPAS sendiri dan mereka akan tahuakibah2-nya nanti.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dalam soalapa yang di-katakan oleh serangan2PAS sa-malam dan juga di-dalamDewan Ra'ayat, saya maseh ingat lagisatu chabaran besar yang di-berikanoleh Dato' Mohd. Asri sendiri ia-itumenchabar Perikatan meletakkansemua jawatan2-nya di-dalam DewanRa'ayat dan mengadakan satu pilehanraya ia-itu atas konsep bahasa kebang-saan ini. Saya rasa perkara ini tidakboleh-lah di-diamkan dengan bagitusahaja dan Perikatan atau pun pe-mimpin2 UMNO tidak-lah harus ter-pengaroh, dan akan menurut apasahaja perangkap2 yang di-buat olehPAS.

Menurut himat saya d i -dalam per-kara ini saya ingin-lah menyatakankapada PAS, baharu2 ini di-negeriSelangor di-kawasan Kampong Baharu,baharu sahaja kita selesai mengadakansatu pilehan raya kechil. Saya tahu di-dalam masa hendak mengadakanpilehan raya ini Ibu Pejabat PAS yang:ada di-Kuala Lumpur ini juga sebok

1340

mengadakan perundingan, hendak me-ngadakan chalon bertanding melawanPerikatan dalam pilehan raya KampongBharu. Saya tidak tahu apa sebab-nyaPAS tidak sanggup mengemukakanchalon, belum berjuang sudah mengakukalah. Jadi kalau di-dalam soal me-ngadakan pilehan raya atas konsep2Rang -[Jndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan inihendak chuba pula menchabar Per-ikatan dan UMNO ini, saya rasa tentu-lah agak mengetawakan dan merekaakan rugi sendiri dalam menghadapikenyataan nanti.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-dalam soalserangan2 yang di-lemparkan oleh PASdan orange lain terhadap kapada PartiPerikatan dan juga terhadap kapadaUMNO ia-itu dari segi Rang Undang2Bahasa Kebangsaan ini, satu perkarayang terfikir oleh saya kalau kata YangBerhormat Enche' Amaluddin sa-malam, atas keributan yang berlakudengan saheb Rang Undang2 BahasaKebangsaan ini banyak orange UMNOsudah masok PAS dan berseru banyaklagi orange UMNO akan masok PAS.Saya ingin bertanya akan berjaya-kahchi ta2 PAS ini ?

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dalam soalini saya sendiri pun berasa geli hatikerana sa-panjang yang saya tahu sa-lepas sahaja Yang Berhormat Dato'Mohd. Asri habis tempoh-nya berbin-chang di-dalam Dewan Ra'ayat pada7 haribulan, maka balek-lah Yang Ber-hormat ini ka-Kelantan dan di-Kelan-tan oleh, konon-nya di-sebabkan istelah menentang dengan sa-hebat2-nyaRang Undang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini,dia telah di-beri sambutan oleh orangeKelantan, di-arak bagitu bagini. Tetapisaya berasa agak luchu dan mengetawa-kan, saya bacha di-dalam surat khabarUtusan Melayu, di-sini ada gambarYang Berhormat Dato' Asri KetuaPAS yang besar di-Kelantan is-itusurat khabar 7 haribulan Mach, suratkhabar Utusan Melayu, "Kampongk dua PAS masok UMNO" ia-itu di-Kota Baharu sendiri, di-Kelantan sen-diri ! Kampong yang kedua arti-nyaada kampong yang pertama dalam masatiga empat hari sahaja Rang Undang2ini di-bahathkan dan Yang Berhormatdaripada PAS semua-nya menentang

1341 11 MARCH 1967

tetapi yang betul masok UMNOia-lah orang PAS, kampong-nyasakali. Kalau ada orang2 PAS hendakmenapikan ini, saya tidak tahu-lah.Yang satu lagi 7 haribulan Mach juga,beramai2 keluar masok UMNO di-Kuala Langat-ada gambar pemimpin-nya sa-kali. Ini-lah dia chara putarbelit orang2 PAS yang chuba hendakmenda'ayahkan dan mempengarohira'ayat dan masharakat kita. Kalaudengan chara yang demikian hendakmenggunakan senjata tetapi senjatatumpul, senjata bukan besi baja, sayarasa tidak akan menyampaikan chita2atau maksud2 mereka dan kapadaorang2 yang demikian saya katakan-lah, baik-lah berhati2 dan berpada2dalam mengemukakan sa-suatu untokkepentingan diri dan parti sedangkankita daripada UMNO dan Perikatanada-lah mementingkan soal negara danmasharakat ra'ayat seluroh-nya.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sadikit lagisaya ingin mengatakan ia-itu sayahendak menyentoh tentang soal ke-dudokan pejuang2 bahasa ia-itu me-nyengkap sadikit latar belakang pera-nan yang telah saya lakukan. Sayaboleh-lah menyatakan kapada Dewanini pada mula2 sa-kali Minggu BahasaKebangsaan di-lancharkan, barangkalisiapa sahaja yang lalu lalang di-depanpadang Selangor Kelab berhadapandengan Pejabat Kerajaan negeri Sela-ngor sadikit tahun yang telah lalu, akanmengingatkan satu sejarah bagaimanakedudokan Batu Berjanggut di-depanjam besar itu. Dan soal terchipta-nyaBatu Berjanggut ini ada-lah denganperbuatan saya sendiri pada masa ituyang meluap2 dengan semangat bahasakebangsaan mengepalai pasokan2 yangtertentu seluroh Kuala Lumpur kamisapu chat.

Jadi memandangkan soal ini sayarasa tidak-lah sa-patut-nya kalau adapemuda2 daripada Barisan BertindakBahasa Kebangsaan atau pun daripadapelajar apa gulongan sa-kali pun yangmengatakan mereka ada-lah orang2yang menjadi jagoh dalam perjuanganbahasa yang saya sendiri dan beberapaorang daripada rakan2 saya tidak me-ngambil berat dan tidak mempunyalsemangat dalam soal bahasa kebang-saan ini.

1342

Kita insaf dan sedar dengan meng-gunakan chogan2 kata perjuanganbahasa sahaja sudah chukup, kalauhendak meniupkan api perkauman dansentimen2 yang boleh membakar."Hidup bahasa hidup-lah bangsa","Bahasa menunjokkan bangsa" danberbagai2 lagi chogan kata yang kitatahu amat penting dan mempunyai ke-dudokan yang tegas dari segi taraf danmeruah bangsa Melayu sendiri di-tanahayer-nya di-dalam soal bahasa ini.Chogan kata ini kalau mahu di-tiupkanbenar2, saya berani jamin dalam sa-minggu akan timbul-lah satu pem-berontakan besar. Tetapi ini-lah tang-gong jawab kita bahawa di-dalam soalkita menjalankan peranan2 untokkepentingan negara dan bangsa kitatidak harus menggunakan segala sa-suatu yang menimbulkan hura-hara.Kerana kita mempunya matalamatyang tertentu untok kepentingan amandamai dan kehidupan yang harmonidi-antara seluroh warga negara Malay-sia.

Tetapi PAS menjalankan da`ayah2ini meniupkan sentiment ini walau punmereka menapikan keadaan yang sa-benar-nya. Kita tahu dan kita kenal,ikan di-ayer terkilat sadikit kita tahujantan betina-nya. Bagini-lah keadaan2yang di-lakukan is-itu menchari ke-sempatan menanggok di-ayer keroh yangsaya kata tadi. Dan bagi hemat sayasendiri kalau-lah keadaan2 ini masehberjalan dengan sa-chara berluasa olehkalangan2 yang tertentu terutamaPAS sendiri, saya juga dan saya per-chaya banyak rakan2 saya di-dalamUMNO ini akan sanggup keluar men-jelajah bagi memberikan p'enerangan2yang tegas dan terang, kapada ra'ayatsemua supaya mereka jangan dapatdi-abul oleh kalangan2 yang tertentu.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan sebabitu saya berseru-lah kapada Barisan2Bertindak Bahasa Kebangsaan dan jugakapada siapa sahaja yang chuba hendakmembangunkan huru hara yang telahterpengaroh dengan anasir2 pengasutini dan terkeliru dengan perbuatan2mereka yang tidak bertanggong jawabini; sesat di-hujong jalan balek-lah ka-pangkal jalan. Jangan-lah chuba me-lemparkan kata2 yang tidak bertanggongjawab terhadap pemimpin2 kita,

1343 11 MARCH 1967 1344

pemimpin negara kita yang jujor danbertanggong jawab untok kepenti-ngan negara dan masharakat sa-lamaini. Kita tahu sa-bagaimana yang di-katakan oleh Tunku sendiri, beliautelah memimpin perjuangan ra'ayatnegara ini daripada semenjak sa-belumkemerdekaan dan sa-telah menchapaikemerdekaan, sa-hingga hari ini kitatabu tujuan? dan matalamat2 bangsadan negara kita berjalan dengan lanchardan akan sampai juga kapada tujuandan chita2 itu tetapi kalau kapadapemimpin2 UMNO dan Kerajaan di-tudoh pengkhianat dengan sa-charayang tidak tepat, dengan sa-chara yangtidak membuktikan keadaan yang sa-benar-nya, sunggoh-nya ini ada-lahpenganiayaan dan satu penghinaanyang tidak bertanggong jawab.

Sa-balek-nya saya mengatakankapada mereka-lah yang tidak mahubertanggong jawab di-dalam soal ini,yang tidak mahu memahami keadaanyang sa-benar-nya dan mereka sanggupterpengaroh oleh anasir2 yang men-chari kepentingan diri sendiri, merekabukan sahaja mengkhianati diri-nyasendiri tetapi pengkhianat kapadabahasa kebangsaan dan negara kitayang sa-benar-nya.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, oleh keranaYang Berhormat itu sa-malam ber-pantun nampak-nya dia menghabiskanperkataan-nya, saya pun hendak ber-pantun sadikit dan ini-lah pantun sayapada pagi ini is-itu

Bukan kata sa-barang kata,Kata benar ketinggian budi;

Baik2-lah tuan bermain senjata.Jangan senjata menikam diri.

Sekian, (Tepok).

The Minister of Lands and Mines(Tuan Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub):Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menguchap-kan terima kaseh kerana memberipeluang kapada saya untok menjawabbeberapa tudohan2 khas-nya daripadaAhli2 parti Pembangkang.

Nik Hassan bin Haji Nik Yahya:Rises.

Mr President: Biar-lah dia ber-chakap dahulu sebab dia hendakbelayar ka-Mekah.

Tuan Abdul -Rahman bin Ya'kub:Sava minta ini kerana besok saya akanbertolak ka-tanah suchi dan pagi initerpaksa saya mengemaskan tugas2saga di-Kementerian, bukan-lah sa-lepas ini bererti tuan2 tidak dapat ber-chakap lagi.

Yang Berhormat Wan Mustaphaberkata, ra'ayat di-negeri ini telah tidakbersetuju dengan Rang Undang2 ini di-sokong oleh Senator Amaluddin danj uga Ahli' Parti PAS yang lain di-dalam Dewan Ra'ayat. Menjawab-nyasenang sahaja, kalau ra'ayat erti-nyara'ayat PAS itu kita bersetuju, tetapiPAS tidak mewakili seluroh ra'ayatMalaysia. PAS tidak menerima soko-ngan daripada suku2 bangsa yang bukanketurunan Melayu, dan di-kalanganorang' Melayu pula PAS tidak menuerima sokongan yang besar. Dengan haldemikian apa yang di-katakan olehPAS bahawa ra'ayat negeri ini tidakbersetuju. itu ada-lah tidak betul.

Yang Berhormat Wan Mustaphaberkata dia menentang Bill ini sa-bagaianak Melayu. Ya betul! Dan dalambahathan-nya dia telah menggunakanbahasa kebangsaan. Saya memberitahniah kapada Yang Berhormat itukerana pada kali ini nampak-nyabahasa kebangsaan dia itu telah leNehbaik-telah "polished" daripada bahasakebangsaan yang dahulu di-gunakandi-dalam persidangan Dewan Negaraini atau pun Dewan Ra'ayat ketikabeliau itu menjadi Ahli Dewan Ra'ayatdahulu. Ini sengaja di-buat-nya keranadia tabu, dia terpaksa datang ber-binchang dalam masaalah bahasakebangsaan; kalau dia tidak pandaiberchakap bahasa kebangsaan lebehdaripada Yang Berhormat Senator ANNahappan atau pun lebeh daripadasaya, maka tidak ada erti-nya diahendak buka mulut dalam Dewan ini.

Satu penjelasan yang suka saya beri-kan di-sini, ya'ani bukan Tunku Per-dana Menteri atau Yang Amat Ber-hormat Tun bberkata, semua merekayang menentang Rang Undang2 iniorang kominis, tidak ! Tunku kata adadi-kalangan mereka yang menentangRang Undang2 ini terdiri daripadapehak kominis yang bertujuan sa-mata2

1345 11 MARCH 1967 1346

untok menimbulkan kachau bilau di-dalam negara kita. Kita tahu beberapaorang-orang Melayu telah mengata-kan tidak bersetuju dengan RangUndang2 ini saperti juga Yang Ber-hormat Wan Mustapha sendiri danYang Berhormat Dato' MohamedAsri dan Yang Berhormat SenatorAmaluddin-mereka ini tidak kominis.

Yang Berhormat itu juga berkataloyar2 Melayu 9 orang , semua-nya di-Kuala Lumpur ini, semua-nya menen-tang Rang Undang2 ini, bagitu jugamurid2 Kolej Islam. Mengenai penuntut2Kolej Islam ingin -lah saya menerang-kan ia-itu Kerajaan telah mengambiltindakan yang patut di-ambit untokmenjaga tata -tertib di -dalam Kolej itu.Kita tidak mahu ada-nya di-dalamnegara ini Kolej Islam , Sekolah, Univer-sity di-mana tata -tertib yang telah di-buat untok kepentingan bukan sahajamurid2 sakalian tetapi negara kita, tidakdi-ikuti oleh penuntut2 itu. Penuntut2itu telah di -minta bertemu denganPengetua dan Ahli2 Council -nya yanglain ketika mereka akan mengadakantunjok pe..rasaan , tetapi mereka telahtidak mahu berjumpa dengan Pengetua-nya. Dengan hal demikian Kerajaantidak ada jalan yang lain sa-lain dari-pada menjalankan apa yang patut di-jalankan oleh Kerajaan untok menjagatata -tertib di -dalam Kolej yang tersebut.Kita tidak menentang murid2 mahumengemukakan pandangan merekatetapi segala tentangan itu, segala apayang di-buat hendak -lah di-jalankandengan mengikut peratoran , denganmengikut tata-tertib di-dalam Kolej.Yang Berhormat Senator Amaluddinm^enyeru supaya penuntut2 ini di-beripeluang balek menuntut sa-mula, di-ma'afkan -lah mereka itu. Masaalahini terpulang -lah kapada Kementerianyang berkenaan untok menimbangkanbersama2 dengan Council atau punJawatan-Kuasa yang menjaga Kolej ini.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua , sa-telahpeperangan dunia yang kedua, di-Sarawak telah berlaku beberapa ke-jadian di-dalam sekolah2 China dari-pada tahun 1949 sa-hingga kapadahampir tahun 1960. Berlaku-nya di-sekolah itu ia-lah penuntut2 tidakpatoh kapada tata-tertib sekolah, kalau

mereka benchi kapada guru merekatidak mahu hadhir di-dalam kelas,mereka membuat protest, mogok danlain2. Kerajaan pada masa itu tidakmengawal sekolah2 China, akibat-nyabeberapa tahun kemudian kita nampakdi-belakang penuntut2 ini penganut2komi.nis pejuang2 kominis, telahmenggunakan pelajar2. Sa-telah berlaku-nya kejadian ini baharu-lah Kerajaannegeri Sarawak membuat Undang2untok mengawal semua sekolah2 yangada di-dalam negeri Sarawak.

Tugas yang pertama bagi penuntut2di-mana negara sahaja, sama ada di-Malaysia, di-Indonesia atau punt2mpat2 lain ia-lah untok menchariilmu supaya di-masa yang akan datangmereka boleh menggunakan ilmu ituuntok kepentingan bukan sahaja dirimereka sendiri atau pun keluargamereka sendiri tetapi juga untok negara.Jikalau penuntut2 banyak sangat meng-gunakan masa mereka itu menchamporidi-dalam politik dengan sa-chara lang-song, maka masa yang patut di-gunakanuntok belajar itu akan hilang dan akanrugi-lah. Tidak siapa pun yang mene-gah dan Kerajaan tidak menegahmereka ini membinchangkan masaalahpolitik dengan sa-chara ilmiah, tidaksiapa yang menchegah tetapi hendak-lah tata-tertib di-dalam kolej, dalamsekolah dan Universiti itu di-ikuti.

Mengenai peguam2 di-KualaLumpur-9 orang mereka yang menen-tang, saya ada menerima salinanrayuan mereka ini kapada Kerajaan,tidak tahu sama ada original-nya dalambahasa Inggeris atau pun dalam bahasakebangsaan, tetapi yang saya terimayang telah di-serahkan kapada sayasendiri oleh sa-orang daripada rakansaya sa-orang peguam juga ia-lah di-dalam bahasa Inggeris-enam muka.Saya telah membacha memorandum inilima kali semenjak saya terima. Sayatidak dapati di-dalam memorandumini bahawa peguam2 yang 9 orang itumenentang dasar Rang Undang2 ini(Tepok), mereka tidak menentangdasar ini. Yang Berhormat SenatorWan Mustapha selalu salah membachabuku undang2 (Ketawa), sama jugasaperti. dia salah membacha Memoran-dum.

1347 11 MARCH 1967

Point yang pertama yang di-buatoleh peguam2 ini is-lah chara untokmenentukan bahasa kebangsaan men-jadi bahasa rasmi yang tunggal. Katamereka ini, jangan-lah menggunakanRang Undang2 saperti ini kerana inisenang boleh di-pinda, boleh di-mansokhkan dengan suara yang ramaitidak menggunakan suara 2/3. Merekamahu supaya Perlembagaan itu sendiri,Article atau pun Fasal 152 di-ubah dandi-masokkan di-dalam Fasal 152 iniapa yang terkandong di-dalam RangUndang2 ini kechuali beberapa pindaan.Dalam bahasa Inggeris-nya merekaberkata sa-lain daripada Clause 3,muka 5,

"We would suggest that the amendmentsto Article 152 be on the following lines:

(i) That the existing Clause (2) ofArticle 152 be replaced ey Clause5 of the Bill, except that the provisoto the Bill should be omitted".

Sharat yang di-nyatakan di-sini"Proviso to the Bill, Clause 5" ia-lahmengenal penggunaan bahasa ke-bangsaan di-negeri Sarawak dan Sabah.Di-sini peguam2 ini nampak-nya silap;agak-nya mereka tidak sempat sapertiyang telah di-akui di-dalam memoran-dum ini membacha Inter-GovernmentalCommittee Report atau pun MalaysiaAgreement, yang mnenyebabkan sharatini di-masokkan ka-dalam Fasal 5Rang Undang2 ini ya'ani sa-lama 10tahun sa-telah Malaysia di-tubohkan,bahasa rasmi walau apa pun yangberlaku di-sini dalam tahun 1967,bahasa kebangsaan tidak akan menjadibahasa rasmi di-Sarawak dan di-Sabah.Sa-telah 10 tahun jika di-benarkan olehMajlis Undangan Negeri di-Sarawakdan di-Sabah baharu-lah bahasa ke-bangsaan itu boleh di-gunakan men-jadikan bahasa rasmi di-Sarawak. Jadiyang di-kehendaki oleh peguam2 initidak dapat kita laksanakan.

Yang kedua point yang di-buat-nya

"That Clause (3) of Article 152 be replacedby provisions similar to those contained inClause 4 of the Bill, save that it is Parlia-ment which shall by law authorise everypurpose for which the English language maycontinue to be used".

Peguam ini tidak berkata merekamenentang Clause 4 di-dalam Bill iniyang membenarkan Yang di-PertuanAgong, memberi kuasa kapada Yangdi-Pertuan Agong supaya membenar-

1348

kan dalam beherapa lapangan bahasaInggeris di-gunakan sa-bagai bahasarasmi. Peguam ini tidak menentang-nya, yang di-kehendaki oleh peguamini di-masokkan di-dalam Perlembagaandan jika di-buat demikian biar-lahParlimen menentukan dalam manalapangan bahasa Inggeris boleh di-gunakan menjadi bahasa rasmi.

Yang ketiga kata-nya :"That Clause (4) and Clause (5) of Article

152 be replaced by Clauses 6 and 7 of theBill".

Jadi kalau kita tengok ada 8 Clausedalam Bill ini. Clause 1 mereka ber-setuju, Clause 2 mereka setuju, Clause3 ada reservation, Clause 4 merekasetuju, Clause 5 mereka setuju, Clause6 mereka setuju, Clause 7 mereka setujudan Clause 8 pun mereka setuju. Apalagi yang lain yang tidak di-persetujuloleh peguam itn? (Tepok). Jadi rakansaya, Yang Berhormat Senator WanMustapha sa-kali lagi telah salahmembacha memorandum ini sapertibiasa. Saya kata dia sengaja, fasalselalu sangat dalam Dewan ini diasalah membacha undang2 itu.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, jadi erti-nya,pada dasar-nya, kesimpulan-nyapeguam2 kita di-Kuala Lumpur bersea uju dengan dasar Rang Undang2 ini.Mereka tahu bahawa tujuan Kerajaansaperti yang di-sebut dalam RangUndang2 ini ia-lah untok mengurang -kan penggunaan bahasa Inggeris.Masaalah bahasa lain tidak timbul dandi-bawah Article 152 dalam masaalahpenggunaan bahasa kebangsaan men -jadi bahasa rasmi tidak timbul sa-laindaripada bahasa Inggeris. Jadi merekasedar juga Yang Teramat Mulia Tunkutelah memberi penerangan jelas ya'anitujuan Kerajaan memang-lah untokmenjadikan bahasa kebangsaan bahasarasmi yang tunggal.

Memorandum ini juga berkata "Inconnection with Clause 8 of the Bill,we are not certain if the existing pro--visions as contained in the Bill areworkable". Ini mengenai bahasa di-dalam mahkamah, memorandum initelah di-hantar sa-belum pindaan kitabuat. Sekarang dengan ada-nya pin-daan, maka saya rasa apa yang di-sebutkan dalam memorandum ini telahkita terima "The permitting of the use

1349 11 MARCH 1967 1350

of the Malay Language ," kata memo-randum ini lagi , "partly and the Englishlanguage partly in the Courts willmost certainly result in the records ofthe Courts being unintelligible." Jadibagitu -lah faham peguam2 kita di-sini.

Mengenal kemahuan mereka ituL

supaya Parlimen yang menentukanmana satu lapangan bahasa Inggeris iniboleh di-gunakan . Ini faham masing2.Kerajaan berpendapat lebeh senang di-laksanakan jikalau perkara ini di-serahkan kapada Yang di-PertuanAgong ya'ani di-serahkan kapadaKerajaan . Kerana jikalau berbangkitketika Parlimen tidak bersidang satuperkara yang menghendaki tindakanyang segera , apa yang boleh kita buatIni chuma masaalah pelaksanaan bukanmasaalah dasar . Parlimen chuma ber-sidang membinchangkan masaalahdasar yang luas bukan masaalah tiap2butir chara Kerajaan melaksanakandasar itu . Dan juga bukan-lah berartibahawa Clause 4 ini akan menyekatkansa-siapa jua pun mengetahul di-dalamlapangan mana bahasa Inggeris akandi-benar di-gunakan , oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong atau pun oleh Kerajaankita.

Mengenai Clause 3 , peguam2 iniberkata "In the light of the aboveconsideration,"-mereka ini telah me-nyentoh Reid Commission 's ReportArticle 17Q we find Clause 3 of theNational Language Bill, unaccept-able." Mereka tidak berkata Clause 3of the Bill is ultra vires Article 152of the Constitution , saperti yang di-katakan oleh Yang Berhormat SenatorWan Mustapha . Tidak, peguam2 tidakberkata bagitu . 9 peguam Melayu tidakberkata Clause 3 of the Bill is ultravires Article 152 of the Constitution.Chuma mereka kata "unacceptable"lain bahasa-nya.

Sa-malam apabila saya tanya rakansaya Yang Berhormat itu, sama adadia akan menyokong Clause 3 ini,jikalau masa ada di-tentukan dalampenggunaan terjemahan daripada Ba-hasa rasmi kapada bahasa2 yang lain,jawab Yang Berhormat itu dia menyo-kong sekarang juga pun. Saya sengajatidak mahu menjawab lagi. Jadi ter-paksa-lah saya menyimpan modal

untok berbahath buat jawapan sayapagi ini. Ini berarti bahawa Yang Ber-hormat itu sendiri mengaku Clause 3itu tidak bertentangan dengan Article152 dalam Rang Undang2 Perlem-bagaan kita (Tepok). Kerana apa,jikalau saperti kata Yang Berhormatitu pada awal -nya, Clause 3 berten-tangan atau tidak sah, kerana berten-tangan dengan Article 152. Denganmemasokkan masa menghadkan peng-gunaan penterjemahan tidak akanmengesahkan Clause 3 itu daripadasegi undang2 . Jadi sa-kali lagi kitanampak dia ini salah bacha undang2atau pun tidak mengerti sangat,sunggoh pun dia telah belajar Latin,barangkali Inggeris -nya kurang di-pelajari-nya , jadi, itu-lah dia tidakbagitu mengetahul daripada segita'arif Article 152. Jadi ini membukti-kan kapada kita bahawa di-dalam hatikechil-nya sendiri dia perchaya Clause3 ini tidak bertentangan dengan Article152.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua , Clause 3 ataupun Fasal 3 dalam Rang Undang2 inibukan bererti bahawa tiap2 surat rasmiakan di-terjemahkan kapada bahasalain untok pengetahuan umum. Itunampak daripada hujah2 Ahli2 YangBerhormat daripada Parti Pembang-kang-mereka khuatir bahawa dari-pada 1 haribulan September , 1967 ini,sakalian daripada surat2 daripada Ke-rajaan akan di-terjemahkan kapadabahasa lain tidak , tidak bagitu. Inichuma satu Clause memberi kuasakapada Kerajaan Pusat , memberi kuasakapada Kerajaan Negeri supaya jikaKerajaan memikirkan patut , boleh-lahKerajaan menterjemahkan surat2 rasmika-dalam bahasa yang lain. Masa tidakdapat kita hadkan dalam RangUndang2 ini, kerana mithal -nya se-karang kita ada sa -orang pelawat dari-pada negara sahabat kita, daripadaGerman, President daripada Germany.Ada programme lawatan itu , tidakkankita hendak buboh programme inisemua dalam bahasa kebangsaan, apa-lah hal pegawai2 yang mengikuti Pre-sident ini, mereka tidak tahu bahasakebangsaan, tidak-lah patut di-dalamkeadaan yang demikian kita menter-jemahkan bahasa rasmi ini kapadabahasa yang boleh di-mengertikan oleh

1351 11 MARCH 1967 1352

tetamu kita ? Kalau kita menerima sa-orang tetamu daripada negeri Russia,kalau kita menerima sa-orang tetamudaripada negeri Arab , apa yang akankita buat kapada programme, chumadalam bahasa kebangsaan sahaja?Tentu orang yang mempunyai fikiranyang wajar berkata , kenapa programmeini tidak kita terjemahkan kapadabahasa yang boleh di-mengerti olehpegawai2-nya. Tetapi tetamu kapadanegeri kita ini bukan -nya akan datangdalam masa 10 tahun , lima tahun inisahaj a 50 tahun , 60 tahun yang akandatang, harus akan ada lagi, tentuakan ada lagi . Jadi bagaimana -kah kitaakan menghadkan masa penggunaanterjemahan ini oleh Kerajaan, tentutidak dapat.

Yang Berhormat wakil daripadaBachok dalam Dewan Ra'ayat berkatadalam perbahathan Perbelanjaan Tam-bahan-Perbekalan Tambahan , kenapaKerajaan dalam masa konfrantasi tidakmenghantar risalah2 ka-negeri Arabdalam bahasa Arab , tetapi beberapahari sa-belum itu Yang Berhormat itukata terjemahan ini tidak bagus semuadalam bahasa kebangsaan ; dua harikemudan , kenapa Kerajaan tidak buatrisalah dalam bahasa Arab supayaorang Arab boleh mengerti dalammasaalah konfrantasi. Ini lagi satubukti yang menunjokkan bagaimanapenting -nya ada Clause 3 di-dalamRang Undang2 kita supaya Kerajaanboleh menterjemahkan surat2 rasmikapada mana satu bahasa yang lainyang di-fikirkan patut , bukan - lah tu-j uan Clause 3 akan menaikkan tarafterjemahan dalam mana2 bahasakapada taraf semi-official saperti yangtelah di-nyatakan oleh rakan sayaYang Berhormat Wan Mustapha padahari kelmarin.

Saya sangat dukachita apabila men-dengar Yang Berhormat Wan Mus-tapha berkata pada pagi kelmarinmenyentoh perasaan hati kechil sayasadikit , Ah! kalau terjemahan ini akandi-gunakan , boleh -lah di -terjemahkankapada bahasa Sakai . Sa-olah2 AhliYang Berhormat itu mempunyai fikiranbahawa orang2 Sakai ini bagitu rendahsangat dalam negara kita , pada halYang Berhormat2 PAS sendiri dalam

Dewan Ra`ayat berkata , jangan-lahmemandang rendah kapada orang2 Ashini, tetapi saya rasa apa yang ada di-belakang fikiran Yang Berhormat WanMustapha pada pagi kelmarin memikir-kan mereka ini bagtu rendah, makajangan-lah bahasa rasmi ini di-ter-jemahkan kapada bahasa Sakai ataupun bahasa ' orang Ash yang lain.

Yang Berhormat itu berkata kalauRang Undang 2 ini berjalan kuat-kuasa100 tahun lagi bahasa Melayu tidakboleh menjadi bahasa rasmi yangtunggal. Ini tawarikh sahaja akan me-nentukan, tetapi daripada 1 haribulanSeptember tahun ini , kita akan nampakdi-dalam Jabatan2 Kerajaan kekuranganpenggunaan bahasa Inggeris. Beliaujuga telah menudoh bahawa 10 tahunkita telah merdeka-hampir 10 tahun,tetapi bahasa kebangsaan maseh lagibelum di -gunakan di-dalam beberapaJabatan2 Kerajaan , sebab -nya, hujahbeliau , ia-lah Kerajaan tidak tegas di-dalam pendirian Kerajaan untok me-laksanakan penggunaan bahasa ke-bangsaan menjadi bahasa rasmi yangtunggal.

Pendapat saya lain. Pendapat sayakerana pegawai ini dalam masa 10tahun yang lepas berfikir , "tidak apakita ada lagi 10 tahun, kita ada lagi10 tahun esok tidak pakai bahasakebangsaan pun tidak apa, gunakanbahasa Inggeris dahulu." Jadi postponedaripada satu masa ka-satu masa--tunggu sampai kapada sekarang tengok:La Ila Ha Illallah sudah sampai ham-pir 10 tahun aku belum lagi pandaibahasa kebangsaan. Ini membuktikandalam pendapat saya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua ,-harus saya salah-ini pen-dapat masin .g2; jikalau kfta tentukanmasa bagi Clause 4 yang membenar-kan penggunaan bahasa Inggeris, makadi-kalangan pegawai ini kelak akanberfikir lagi ada lagi masa jangan susah10 tahun lagi kita boleh pakai, se-karang tidak perlu pakai dahulu. Kalaukita tidak hadkan masa maka pegawai2itu akan kita perentahkan akan kitaarahkan-belajar -lah bahasa kebang-saan , gunakan-lah bahasa kebangsaansa-bagai bahasa rasmi , sa-olah2 esok-nya Kerajaan akan menghapuskan

1353 11 MARCH 1967 1354

penggunaan bahasa Inggeris . Ini ke-baikan dia Clause 4 ini dengan tidakmenentukan masa. Ini dia kebaikanyang besar sa-kali Clause 4 ini.

. Saya rasa pegawai2 Kerajaan kitayang ada sekarang banyak telah men-chuba menggunakan bahasa kebang-saan, kechuali dalam masaalah per-kara2 technical saperti Yang BerhormatSenator Abdul Samad bin Osman ter-paksa berchakap dalam bahasa Ing-geris, kata Yang Berhormat itu keranaperkara2 yang akan di-binchangkan ituis-lah menyentoh masaalkah technical,dia belum dapat lag t perkataan2 dalambahasa kebangsaan yang boleh menter-jemahkan perkataan2 bahasa Inggerisdengan tepat-nya.

Yang Berhormat Senator Wan Mus-tapha j uga telah menyentoh recommen-dation daripada Reid CommissionPerkara 170 yang kata beliau-"Do notrecommend any other language shouldbecome an official language ." Kera-jaan sekarang menentang recommenda-tion ini . Ini budak2 pun boleh jawab.Recommendation itu telah di -terimamasok dalam Perlembagaan ; itu-lahhasil-nya Perkara 152. Kerajaan seka-rang tidak berdaya-upaya untok meng-ubah Perkara 152 kechuali denganpersetujuan Parlimen . Jadi dalammasaalah ini , Tuan Yang di-Pertua,masaalah Clause 3 ini , yang menjadicontroversy yang bagitu banyak, ( salahf aham yang bagitu banyak) satu charasahaja untok menyelesaikan sama adaKerajaan betul atau pun tidak betuldaripada segi undang2 -nya. Saya chabarorang PAS membawa ka-dalam Mah-kamah untok memberi keputusan samaada Clause 3 ini ultra vices Perkara152 Perlembagaan kita. Jika merekatidak berbuat demikian bererti merekachuma berchakap untok kepentinganpolitik sahaja , untok mengharu2kanfikiran orang2 Melayu di-negeri ini,menakut2kan orang Melayu di-negeriini, supaya dapat -lah konon-nya tadi,dengan senjata ini, orang boleh keluarberamai2 masok PAS_, tetapi sa-balek-nya dalam beberapa bulan ini orangPAS ramai keluar masok UMNO.

Yang Berhormat Senator Amaluddintelah memberi kupasan , kata beliau,yang panjang lebar mengenal Rang

Undang2 ini. Saperti biasa , berchakaptiga jam lima belas minis atau pundua jam, yang boleh kita chakap dalammasa lima belas minit sahaja-isi-nyatidak ada , penoh dengan bunga sahaja.Jadi saya rasa banyak masa telah ter-buang.

Dia telah menegor terjemahan di-kepala Rang Undang2 ini. Kata YangBerhormat itu, dalam bahasa Inggeris-nya, Rang Undang2 ini berbunyi "AnAct to provide for the use of the natio-nal language ," tetapi dalam bahasa ke-bangsaan -nya," Suatu Act bagi meng-adakan peruntokan berkenaan denganpenggunaan bahasa kebangsaan." Jaditerjemahan ini tidak tepat. Ini lagi satupoint yang besar di -sabelah Kerajaandalam Clause2 Bill ini . Kerana bahasaivic,iayu aalam segi penggunaan Un-dang- andai-kata , kata yang Berhor-mat itu betul-saya tidak mengatakandia betul-bahasa kita lagi muda di-dalam segi undang2-Yang BerhormatWan Mustapha sendiri ketahui , dahuludi-negeri England menggunakan Latin,menggunakan bahasa Pranchis, beber-apa tahun baharu bahasa Inggeris di-gunakan sa-bagai bahasa mahkamah.Kita tidak boleh berkata mereka itumempunyai perasaan nationalist tipissahaja, tidak saperti kita tebal, kuat.Mereka mempunyal perasaan nationa-list (perasaan kebangsaan) saperti kitajuga,

Jadi , kita sedar , bahawa di-tingkatini belum lagi sampai masa -nya bahasakebangsaan bahasa rasmi kita, bolehmenggantikan 100% bahasa Inggeristidak boleh . Saya tidak mahu mem-bahathkan fikiran tentang hal samaada terjemahan ini betul atau puntidak, kerana Yang Berhormat itubukan sa-orang peguam . Jika dia hen-dak mengerti perkataan2 dalam undang2ini, terpaksa -lah dia belajar dahulupergi Inns of Court atau pun pergiUniversity baharu-lah seronok kitaberbahath saperti Yang BerhormatSenator Wan Mustapha.

Yang Berhormat Senator Amaluddinjuga berkata, Rang Undang2 ini tidakdi-binchangkan dalam MeshuaratAgong UMNO. Ketua2 UMNO di-jemput datang hadzir di-Dewan TunkuAbdul Rahman bukan untok di-bawa

1355 11 MARCH 1967 1356

berunding sama ada menerima RangUndang2 ini atau pun tidak, tetapiuntok memberi penerangan sahaja,memberi directive sahaja, sama ada di-terima atau tidak di-terima, merekaterpaksa juga terima bersetuju denganpemimpin2 UMNO. Ya, itu betul-Rang Undang2 ini tidak di-timbangkandi-dalarn Perhimpunan Agong UMNOkerana tidak perlu. Kerana MajlisKerja Tertinggi UMNO, keranaJema'ah2 Menteri yakin berpendapat,bahawa Rang Undang' ini melaksana-kan kehendak UMNO yang telah ter-chipta di-dalam Perlembagaan kita.Masaalah dasar-nya telah putus, masa-alah p%rlaksanaan-nya sahaja. Masa-alah dasar-nya telah di-selesaikandalam tahun 1957 apabila perbahathanyang hebat telah berlaku di-dalamFederal Legislative Council pada 10Jun tahun 1957. Saya dua hari inibacha ini-uchapan2 Yang TeramatMulia Tunku, uchapan2 Ahli` YangBerhormat yang lain mengenal perbin-changan Perlembagaan untok Perseku-tuan Tanah Melayu-dua tiga kali.

Jadi bukan-lah bererti bahawa tiap2Rang Undang' itu akan kita bawa ka-pada Perhimpunan Agong UMNOtidak. Tidak ada satu Rang ` Undang2pun kita buat saperti itu. Ketika Singa-pura hendak berpisah daripada Malay-sia, Rang Undang2 itu tidak di-binchangkan di-dalam PerhimpunanAgong UMNO. Kerana kita di-dalamUMNO, tiap2 Perhimpunan Agong,kita memberi mandat kapada ketua,sa-telah dasar yang Was itu di-selesai-kan-saperti juga Parlimen. Merekayang telah hadzir di-Dewan Tunkumendengar penerangan daripada YangAmat Berhormat Tun dan Menteri'yang lain di-situ, di-beri peluang dengansa-luas2-nya untok bertanya, untokmengeluarkan segala2 fikiran, untoksama ada menentang atau pun menyo-kong Rang Undang2 ini. Kesemua-nya,apabila mereka keluar daripada Dewan,sa-telah mendengar penerangan, sa-telah perbahathan berlaku, merekabersetuju bahawa Rang Undang2 inibetul dalam segi perlaksanaan bahasakebangsaan untok menjadi bahasaraa smi .

Di-sini saya suka menyatakandi-Dato' Keramat, pada hari Ahad 5hb,

ada satu usul di-kemukakan olehchawangan Dato' Keramat-saya men-jadi ahli UMNO chawangan Dato'Keramat Yang Berhormat SenatorSardon menjadi pengerusi dalam Cha-wangan itu. Satu usul meminta Kera-jaan supaya menentukan had bila manaterjemahan boleh di-gunakan, had di-dalam Clause 4 dalam Bill ini, ketikamana bahasa Inggeris itu tidak bolehdi-gunakan lagi sa-bagai bahasa rasmi.Satu persatu telah bangun mengemuka -kan segala fikiran masing2, saya sen-diri memberi penjelasan saperti pagi inijuga. Akhir-nya usul itu telah di-tarekbalek, kerana mereka nampak lojik2di-belakang Clause 3, di-belakangClause 4 di-dalam Rang Undang ini.

Jadi, dasar-nya daripada Yang Ber-hormat pehak Parti Pembangkang,bahawa orang2 UMNO ini chuma di-tutup mulut sahaja-terima apa kataketua, itu tidak betul sama sa-kali. J i kaada satu parti di-dalam Malaysia yangboleh di-katakan 100% mengamalkandemokrasi, parti itu ia-lah UMNO danPerikatan, bukan PAS.

Kalangan orang yang salah fahamtentang maksud Rang Undang2 ini telahmelemparkan tudohan2 terhadap YangTeramat Mulia Tunku dan juga kapadaTun. Tudohan itu anehhsa-kali nampak-nya. Dalam fahaman saya, sengajauntok memechah-belahkan di-kalanganMenteri sendiri. Tudohan itu di-lempar-kan kapada Tunku, di-lemparkan ka-pada Yang Berhormat Enche' Khir, di-lemparkan kapada Yang BerhormatEnche' Senu ketiga2-nya dari Kedah.Apa hal Menteri yang lain-saya, YangBerhormat Dato' Sardon, Yang Ber-hormat Captain Hamid Khan yangbukan daripada Kedah? Saperti kataYang Berhormat Tun Dr Ismail,"Cabinet sa-bulat suara-kita berdirisatu, kita akan runtoh sa-bagai satubadan Juma'ah Menteri, tidak akanbercherai-berai di-dalam masaalahpenggunaan bahasa kebangsaan ini.''

Mereka menudoh bahawa Tunkutidak chinta kapada bahasa Melayu,tidak chinta kapada orang Melayu-menjual sahaja, compromise sahaja-bila orang China minta, orang Indiaminta, tekan sadikit, beri. Ini tudohan

1357 11 MARCH 1967 1358

daripada beberapa orang di-kalanganorang Melayu . Daripada kalanganpehak Pembangkang yang bukanMelayu pula-mereka berkata , sapertiSeenivasagam brothers , berlainan-Tunku , Tun, Perikatan menekanmereka yang bukan Melayu.

Kita lihat dalam Utusan Melayu 9hbMach , 1967 , Dato ' S. P. Seenivasagamberkata pada 8hb Mach , 1967, "Pe-mimpin PPP Ra'ayat Malaya, Dato'S. P. Seenivasagam sa-malam telahmenyatakan tentangan -nya terhadapRang Undang2 Bahasa Kebangsaanyang pada pendapat -nya hanya untokkepentingan orang2 Melayu sahaja."Jadi kalau kedua pehak Pembangkangyang extreme , super extreme, Malayracialist dengan super extreme, multi-lingualist berpendapat bagitu, selamat-lah negara kita . Kerana erti -nya apayang kita buat itu betul (Ketawa)-betul-lah yang kita buat itu . Kalau-lahmereka ini puji , kena-lah kita jagasadikit . Kalau mereka ini menghambor-kan segala tudohan2 saperti ini, shukorAlhamdullillah, betul -lah jalan kita ini.Jikalau puji daripada PPP, puji puladaripada PAS, kita kena kaji sa-mulasama ada Rang Undang2 ini baik ataupun tidak.

Pada 10hb Julai 1957, Tuan Yangdi-Pertua , mengenai bahasa kebangsaan,Tunku telah berkata bagini , saya inihendak mengingatkan Senator Tan SriT. H. Tan supaya dia ada-lah sedap2sadikit, jangan -lah di-lupakan apa yangtelah di-binchangkan dahulu itu. KataYang Teramat Mulia Tunku pada Muka2863 l0hb Julai 1957 (Hansard)

"I turn now to the question of the NationalLanguage. The recommendation of the Com-mission with regard to the use of Chineseand Indian languages in either House ofParliament , or the Legislative Assembly ofa State has as you know , not been accepted.It would be most difficult to operate theClause proposed by the Commission, butin any event , it is very important that ourpeople should converse with one anotherin one common language and there can beno doubt that the common language mustultimately be the National Language-theMalay Language."

Ini perdirian Perikatan menerusiYang Teramat Mulia Tunku dalamtahun 1957, perdirian ini maseh lagisekarang , ini-lah yang kita akan lak-

sanakan sekarang . Apa yang Tunkukata, apa yang Perikatan kata semuapada 10hb Julai 1957 . Kalau2 pehakdaripada macham PPP yang menyokongPerlembagaan dahulu sekarang meng-ubah sikap -nya, pehak PAS lupa-inidia berkata Tunku

"There can be no doubt that the commonlanguage must ultimately be the MalayLanguage."

Saya harap seluroh ra'ayat Malaysiatidak akan lupa kapada perkataanTunku itu.

Dalam masaalah perbinchangan RangUndang2 Bahasa Kebangsaan ini,masaalah ekonomi , masaalah pelajaranMelayu , masaalah apa semua telahtimbul . Melayu terikat , China yangnaik, ada pula China berkata, culturemereka tertekan orang Melayu pulayang naik , bermacham2 tudohan yangbiasa kita dengar di -dalam negara kitaini, tetapi semua mereka yang melem-parkan tudohan2 ini tidak ada mem-buktikan kapada negara , tidak adamengemukakan satu shor yang bolehdi-terima oleh negara , bagaimana charakita di-dalam Malaysia yang mem-punyai suku2 bangsa daripada beberapaketurunan boleh menjagakan keten-teraman, boleh menjagakan keamanan,boleh menjagakan keharmonian, sambilitu boleeh memberi kapada ra'ayatsakalian apa yang patut di-beri olehKerajaan kema'amoran . Tidak adasatu Parti yang lain sama ada PASitu atau pun ini-tidak ada PAS dengankekurangan wang , dengan kesusahanitu dan kesusahan ini tidak dapat mem-bayar gaji beberapa bulan kapada pe-gawai2 Kerajaan Negeri, PAS sa-takatini di-mana satu kertas mengenal polisiPAS tentang penyakit ekonomi orangMelayu mithal -nya yang mereka telahkatakan bertahun2 di-dalam DewanNegara , di-mana dia satu bukti-satublue print yang boleh di-agongkan lebehelok, lebeh kemas daripada apa yangdi-jalankan oleh Parti Perikatan se-karang ini tidak ada.

PPP makin merosot, Labour Partymakin merosot, semua-nya makinmerosot . Perikatan dengan jalan seder-hana-tidak extreme kiri, tidak extremekanan sa-makin sa-hari sa-makinsubor.

1359 11 MARCH 1967

Di-dalam masaalah ekonomi ini elokki 'M balek sa-mula. Ini perkara yangbiasa kita dengar apa yang di-katakanoleh Yang Berhormat Tuan Tan SiewSin pada 10hb Julai 1957 di-dalamperbinchangan Perlernbagaan ini j ugaterhadap kedudokan orang Melayu--

"An economically depressed Malay com-munity in a prosperous Malaya will notmean a peaceful Malaya. An economicallydepressed Malay community will never beable to achieve the desired degree of co-operation with the substantially more pros-perous non-Malay communities. It is, there-fore, to the long-term interest of all of usto support any measures which will enableour Malay brethren to improve theireconomic status."

Di-dalam masaalah bahasa kebang-saan, Yang Berhormat Tuan Tan SiewSin telah memberi perdirian yang togas,MCA menyokong 100 % perlaksanaanbahasa kebangsaan menjadi bahasarasmi yang tunggal, banyak lagiuchapan' ketua2 pemimpin Party danyang lain= dalam tahun 1957--tuan'sakalian tentu mengetahul di-dalammperkara itu daripada saya yang baharusahaja masok di-dalam Dewan in].

Masaalah yang kechil yang d i -tinmbulkan oleh Senator Amaluddin,mina satu yang sah di-antara dua Rare,Undang2 in]--dalam bahasa kebang-saan atau pun di-dalam bahasalnnggeris ? Saya minta dia bachaArticle 152 Fasal 3 di-dalam Perlem-bagaan kita. Dia mengatakan sakalianRang Undang2 sekarang ini yang sah-.zya is - lah di-dalam bahasa Inggerisbukan di-dalam bahasa kebangsaan.

Satu sahaja lagi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, mengenai masaalah yang di-timbaulkan oleh Yang BerhormatSenator Abdul Samad, siapa yang telahber. kata GCE tidak di.-gunakan atauboLeh di-terima untok masok di-dalarnUniversity Malaya. Jadi. ini tidak bagitubetul, sa-betul-nya GCE pelaiaran-nya(subject) itu ada bermacham2 per;ngkat. ada dia ordinary level, ada diaadvanced level. Kalau unit-nya chukupsaperti yang di-kehendaki oleh Univer-sity kelulusan GCE itu boleh di-terimadi-mana2 University di-dalam Common-wealth ini, di-negara luar daripadaCommonwealth tidak-lah saga tahu.Jadi jikalau sa-orang itu lulus GCEdengan tiga mata pelajaran sahaja

1360

dengan Inggeris, bahasa kebangsaandan geography tentu-lah Universityitu tidak akan menerima sa-orang muriduntok belajar ilmu Mathematic (kira2)atau pun Ilmu Science. Jadi jangan-lahsalah faham di-dalam masaalah ini,jadi sa-benar-nya ini tidak ada ber-kaitan dengan perbinchangan bahasakebangsaan.

Masaalah Clause 8 yang telah di-bangkitkan oleh Yang BerhormatSenator Abdul Samad telah saya terang-kan pada hari kelmarin is-itu pindaantelah di-buat di-dalam Dewan Ra'ayatkapada Clause 8 ini. Untok mengelak-kan salah faham tentang hal ULusanMelayu march kapada Yang BerhormatSenator Abdul Samad Osman, sa-benar-nya pada hari kelmarin ketika sayaminuet kopi dengan Yang Berhormatitu, saga katakan, "Nampak-nya dalamPersidangan Dewan ini Enche' inimeenggunakan bahasa inggeris 800/,",bahasa kebangsaan 20 ;<, sahaja, nantiUtusan Melavu marah-lah". Sa-betul-nya ini di-buat dengan sa-chara ber-gur au sahaja, jadi saya tidak sedar diahendak r tengambil perkara itu bagituserious rnembangkitkan perkara itu di-dalam Dewan kelmarin. Bagus-lah jugamempunyaI akibat yang elok supayadi-mesa yang akan datang dia akanmenggunakan bahasa kebangsaan lebehbanyak lagi daripada bahasa Inggeris.

Jadi itu-lah sahaja jawapan2 yangdapat saya beri kapada uchapan2 YangBerhormat daripada Parti PAS dalamperkara ini: tidak ada perkara yangbaharu; sa-benar-nya semua-nya telahkita dengar daripada Dewan Ra`ayat,sekarang ka-dalam Dewan Negara.Kesimpulan-nya mereka itu tidak-lahmempunyai sebab2 yang sa-benar-nyamenentang Rang Undr.ng2 Bahasa ke-bangsaan. Saya rasa. daripada segichara perbahathan mengenal RangUndang2 ini, dalam Second Reading(Bachaan Kali Kedua) mereka yangbersetuju pada dasar-nya, bukan padabutir2-nya tentu-lah menyokong RangUndang2 ini. Jadi dasar-nya itu sapertidi-nyatakan oleh Kerajaan, itu mesti-lah di-terima. Jadi kita telah menerang-kan dasar Rang Undang2 ini is-iahuntok menjadikan bahasa kebangsaanbahasa rasmi yang tunggal. Parti PAS

1361 11 MARCH 1967

menentang Rang Undang2 ini padadasar-nya, bererti Parti PAS menentangperlaksanaan bahasa kebangsaan men-jadi bahasa rasmi yang tunggal. Ini-lahkesimpulan-nya daripada segi perbaha-than (Applause). Jikalau mereka me-nentang Clause 3 itu boleh di-tentangdi-dalam Committee stage bagitu jugaClause 4, bagitu juga yang lain jikalaumereka mahu pindaan. Tetapi merekamenentang ketika perbinchangan dasar,dan dasar Rang Undang2 ini melak-sanakan bahasa kebangsaan untokmenjadi bahasa rasmi yang tunggal.PAS menentang dasar ini bererti PAStidak mahu bahasa kebangsaan men-jadi bahasa rasmi yang tunggal. Terimakaseh, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

Tan Nik Hassan bin Haji NikYahya: Dato' Yang di-Pertua, sayabe_,s ,,ma2 dengan rakan2 saya suka ber-chakap dalam masaalah Rang Undang2bagi melaksanakan bahasa kebangsaandan bahasa rasmi yang tunggal di-dalam nege-i kita ini. Saya sokongdasa dan Rang Undang2 ini keranadalam dasar dan butir2 yang di-atorkandi-dalam Rang Undang2 itu sangat-lahtegas dan tepat dengan maksud dankehendak bagi men j adakan bahasaMelayu bahasa kebangsaan yang tung-gal dan rasmi di-dalam negara kitaini. Saya sokong kerana chara per-laksanaan yang di-susun dalam RangUndang2 itu ada-lah satu chara yangsangat baik, satu chara yang sangatchermat dan tegas yang boleh men-jayakan kehendak dan chita2 bagimenjadikan bahasa kebangsaan itubahasa rasmi yang tunggal.

Saya sokong kerana dengan chara yangada dalam Rang Undang2 ini ada-lahsatu chara yang baik, yang sederhana,yang kalau kita bawa kapada pepatahMelayu berkata, kaiau hendak tarekrambut daripada tepong maka tepong-nya tidak rosak dan rambut-nya tidakputus. Banyak ahli2 bahasa suka meng-gunakan pepatah2 bahasa, tetapi padaper.laksanaan-nya mereka tidak mahumenerimakan chara pepatah itu me-ngeluarkan. Saya perchaya, hasil dari-pada timbul-nya Rang Undang2 inidalam Dewan Ra'ayat dan DewanNegara ini ia-lah dengan kerana keju-joran dan keikhlasan Tunku PerdanaMenteri kita dan dengan kerana per-

1362

paduan yang erat di-kalangan pemim-pin2 Perikatan yang mana dapatmenyatukan segala fahaman dan dapatmenjalankan kehendak dan chita2 inidengan baik, dengan mempunyaipengertian yang jujor di-antara satusama lain. Kalau-lah tidak dengankerana kejujoran dan perpaduanpemimpin2 Perikatan ini maka sayaperchaya j auh. lagi daripada akantimbul-nya Undang2 untok kita hendakmelaksanakan dasar menjadikan bahasakebangsaan itu bahasa rasmi yangtunggal dan sa-chepat mungkin.

Saya suka hendak mengingatkankapada Dewan ini bagaimana sejarahperjalanan negara kita, bagaimanasejarah pergolakan yang berlaku di-dalam negara kita ini semenjak sa-belum merdeka sa-hingga-lah pada hariini. Saya maseh ingat lagi sa-belumMerdeka lagi, apa sahaja yang di-perbuat oleh Perikatan maka PartiPAS ini sentiasa-lah menentang kita.Tetapi pada akhir-nya mereka terimasegala perbuatan, segala perkembangan,segala perubahan itu dengan tidakmahu mengakui kenyataan2 itu.

Saya suka mengingatkan kapadaDewan ini bagaimana pada mula-nyaPerikatan pada masa itu sa-masa belummerdeka, kita tuntut supaya di-adakanpilehan raya dan kita bertolak ansorbagaimana Tunku bertolak ansordengan Kerajaan British untok meng-adakan pilehan raga supaya menjaditapak perjuangan untok mendapatkankemerdekaan. Pada masa itu pemimpin2PAS mmenentang tolak ansor itu denganberbagai2 perkataan, menyatakan initidak dapat memberi kejayaan kapadakita untok mendapatkan kemerdekaan.Tetapi apabila mari pilehan raya,pemimpin2 PAS itu sendiri bertandingmenjadi ahli dalam pilehan raya itu,masok bertanding dudok dalam DewanUndangan pada masa itu yang manabelum lagi merdeka yang di-tentangkerana kata-nya Tunku bertolak an-sordengan British. Kemudian apabila kitatuntut kemerdekaan pemimpin2 PASitu juga mencherchakan pimpinanTunku dan Perikatan, menyatakankemerdekaan kita ini kemerdekaansa-paroh masak. Mereka tidak mahumenyokong kemerdekaan itu kata-nyasa-paroh masak.

1363 11 MARCH 1967

Tetapi apabila negara kita merdeka,mereka bersama menerima ne'matkemerdekaan itu dan mereka masehtidak mahu lagi menerima kenyataan2itu. Apabila kita sudah merdeka kitamenggubal Perlembagaan bagi negarayang merdeka itu, Parti PAS mem-bangkang , menentang Perlembagaanitu. Saya ingat lagi dalam pilehan rayamereka berkata mereka mahu bakarkanPeriernbagaan itu. Mereka kata Per-lembagaan ini tidak sesuai dengannegara kita ini. Mereka kata jikalaukita menang dalam pilehan raya me-reka akan membakar Perlembagaani to--Perlembagaan yang ada ini.Tetapi lepas itu mereka menerimakankenyataan itu dengan tidak mahumenyebut di-atas kebenaran perkem-bangan yang timbul dalam negara kitaini. ^lni-lah dapat kita lihat apa yangberlaku , apa yang di -lakukan olehPerik.atan , oleh Kerajaan Pusat, bagimenjalankan untok kemajuan negarakita, untok perlaksanaan dasar negarakite ini sentiasa-lah di-tentang olehParti2 Pembangkang ini. Tetapi padasa`at akhir - nya mereka dengan tidakmenyedari telah menerima , telah me-nelan balek tentangan dan perkataanyang mereka keluarkan itu.

Hari ini mereka herkeras2 menyata-kan Rang Undang2 ini berlawanandengan Perlembagaan, Rang Undang2ini haram , kata wan Mustapha. Jadidi-mana perkataan mereka yangdahulu -nva yang mengatakan Perlem-bagaan ini patut di-bakar, Perlem-bagaan ini tidak patut di-gunakan,Perlembagaan ini tidak harus di-pakaikerana tidak baik dan sa -bagai-nya.Hari ini mereka hendak mempertahan-kan isi2 dalam Perlembagaan inidengan menyatakan Rang Undang2ini Pula yang haram dan sa-bagai-nya.Ini perkara yang di -keluarkan olehpennimpin2 politik yang sa-mata2 mahuberchakap.

Dato' Yang di-Pertua, kelmarin kitadengar loyar wan berchakap dalamDewan ini , saya terperaniat keranasaga sangka dia tidak datang meshuaratkerana m.embinchangkan dasar danRang Undang2 ini. Tetapi dia datangdan apakala dia datang saya ingat diamenyokong -lah Rang Undang2 ini,rupa - nya dia bangkang . Dia bangkangitu bukan hasrat daripada perasaan

1364

dan hati-nya. Dia bangkang itu dengankerana surohan, dengan kerana pe-rentahan, dengan kerana arahan dari-pada parti-nya supaya membangkangRang Undang° ini. Tetapi kalau hasratdan perasaan diri-nya, saga perchaya,dia-lah loyar yang pertama sa-kali yangmenerimakan Rang Undang2 inidengan sa-penoh hati. Kerana kalausa-kira-nya dia menolak Rang UndangIini, kalau Kera j aan tidak mengadakanRang Undang' ini terutama-nya dalamfasal nnengenal Mahkamah, penggunaanbahasa di-Mahkamah, maka WanMustapha-lah orang yang mula2 sa-kaliterpaksa tutupkan office loyar dia.Kerana dia tidak boleh hendak ber-chakap dalam bahasa kebangsaandalam apa, perbicharaan mahkamahsa-bagai sa-orang loyar. Saya tabu.saya kenal dan saya tahu-lah hal-nya.In] kenyataan, tetapi dengan keranapaksaan. dengan kerana tekanan,dengan kerana arahan parti-n.ya ter-paksa berchakap, lepas berchakapangkat beg keluar daripada Dewan inibalek terus. Fasal apa? Hati kechil-nya tidak dapat menerimakan apayang di-arahkan oleh PAS.

Dato' Yang di-Pertua, Enche'Amaluddin saudara kita berchakappanjang bagaimana kata Menteri tali,berliku2, berpusing2 dan berbunga2,tetapi saya tidak dapat menerima satupun kenyataan yang menunjokkanboleh menjadi. hujjah yang dapat bolehdi-terimakan, yang boleh menunjokkanada baik-nya atau pun tidak baik-nyaRang Undang- itu.

Mr President: Itu Yang PerhormatEnche' Saidon telah mengulas tadi,tidak payah-iah di-ulang lagi.

Nik Hassan bin Haji Nik Yahya:Jadi saga rasa, Dato Yang di-Pertua,dalam melaksanakan dasar bahasakebangsaan ini menjadikan bahasarasmi, chary Kerajaan menyusun danmelaksana-nya ada-lah sangat teratorkerana pada mula-nya kita masokkandalam Perlembagaan fasal2 untokmenjadikan tapak dan asas supayabahasa kebangsaan atau pun bahasaMelayu menjadi bahasa kebangsaanrasmi tunggal dalam negeri ini. Apa-bila kita masokkan dalam Perlem-bagaan menjadikan asas maka sa-lepasitu Kerajaan memberi arahan2 supaya

1365 11 MARCH 1967 1366

tiap2 jabatan Kerajaan menggunakanbahasa kebangsaan sa-berapa banyakyang dapat. Jadi kemudian daripadaitu Kerajaan menubohkan DewanBahasa dan Pustaka , mengkayakanbahasa kebangsaan , membanyakkanbuku2, menjalankan segala ikhtiarsupaya dapat mengembangkan bahasakebangsaan ini.

Jadi saya nampak dua chabang yangdi-usahakan oleh Kerajaan itu sudah-lah chukup dengan chara bersunggoh2kerana dalam chabangan pentadbiran,Kerajaan telah memberi arahan2 chumadalam chabang ra'ayat bagi negeri kitaini patut-lah di-besarkan lagi umpama-nya kempen bahasa kebangsaan,kempen penggunaan bahasa kebangsaandalam kalangan ra'ayat jelata mestidi-besarkan lagi. Dewan Bahasa danPustaka hendak-lah di-alatkan denganchukup dengan pakar2 bahasa dengansegala kewangan-nya supaya dapatDewan Bahasa dan Pustaka itu men-jalankan tugas -nya dengan masa yangsa-habis sengkat . Saya tidak tahuberapa banyak pakar bahasa yang adadi-dalam Dewan Bahasa hari ini, sayatidak tahu berapa orang-kah ahliyang boleh menterjemahkan Undang2umpama-nya, yang boleh menterj-emah-kan buku2 sains dan lain2 yang adadalam Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka hariin'.

Judi saya nampak , apa yang bagimasa depan ini hendak-lah Kerajaan,bagaimana jaminan yang di-beri olehTun dan Tunku, maka Dewan Bahasadan Pustaka mesti-lah di -beri ke-utamaan yang istimewa untok per-untokan wang kakitangan -nya dan di-baikkan scheme2 gaji-nya, di-beri ke-mudahan2-nya, di-beri segala apa yangdi-fikirkan mustahak supaya dapatpelaksanaan bahasa kebangsaan iniberjalan dengan lanchar . Sebab dalamRang Undang2 ini tidak ada lagimenetapkan masa dan tempoh bagai-mana, bila-kah masa kita akan had-kan penggunaan dalam mahkamahumpama-nya.

Judi , kalau boleh , saya rasa DewanBahasa dan Pustaka ini di-beri ke-lengkapan yang chukup dan di-adakansatu hubongan yang rapat denganJabatan Undang2 , umpama-nya, supayadapat mengadakan pakar2 menter-

jemahkan Undang2 itu dengan sa-berapa chepat yang boleh . Biar-lahkalau sa-kira-nya perkataan itu kitaterpaksa menggunakan iperkataanInggeris umpama-nya, gunakan terusjangan chuba hendak rekakan denganperkataan2 yang baharu , sebab apabilakita rekakan perkataan yang baharumaka perkataan2 itu terpaksa sa-lepasdi-reka itu di-gunakan . Reka-merekaperkataan ini satu masaalah , tetapihendak di -pergunakan perkataan itudi-kalangan ra'ayat, di-kalangan Un-dang2 , di-kalangan pejabat , ini semuamasaalah yang lain. Jadi kalau sa-kira-nya kita mahu chepat jangan banyakmereka perkataan, terjemahkan Un-dang2 masokkan mana perkataan yangboleh di-gunakan dan kira -nya tidakada perkataan maka gunakan -lah per-kataan yang ada itu dengan sa-charalangsong atau pun dengan di-tambahsadikit sa-banyak biar merupakan per-kataan itu ada-lah ma'ana-nya yangsama dengan apa yang di-kehendakidalam bahasa Inggeris itu. Ini telahdi-buat oleh Kerajaan Indonesia padamasa dahulu dan pada masa ini Kera-jaan Indonesia kita dapat tahu banyakbuku2, banyak Undang2, semua-nyaitu di-terjemahkan dan di-ambilkandaripada bahasa2 B.elanda itu di-jadi-kan bahasa Indonesia. Jadi kalau kitahendak chepat , kita hendak menjalan-kan gerakan kita itu dengan sa-charachepat maka jangan banyak chubahendak merekakan banyak sangat per-kataan2 baharu yang mana mengeliru-kan orang ramai dan menyusahkankita menjalankan-nya.

Jadi saya nampak dua tanggongjawab yang besar bagi Kerajaan ia-ituyang pertama melengkapkan DewanBahasa dan Pustaka , yang kedua mem-beri semangat kapada ra'ayat supayamenghormati bahasa kebangsaan.Banyak orang2 kita ini kalau sa-kira-nya orang bukan Melavu berchakapbahasa kebangsaan-bahasa Melayuumpama -nya, kalau tidak betul diaorang selalu ketawa, suka dan sa -bagai-nya. Ini melemahkan perasaan orangbukan Melayu untok menggunakanbahasa kebangsaan . Hendak-lah kitaberikan kehormatan , hendak-lah beri-kan ajar dengan chara hormat. Jadisaya rasa kalau sa-kira-nya di-kalanganra`ayat , di-kalangan Ketua2 Pejabat

1367 11 MARCH 1967

mahu gunakan bahasa kebangsaan padabila2 masa juga mereka sekarangsudah boleh menggunakan. Jadi ini-lahsaya sokong Rang Undang4 ini.

Dato' Yang di-Pertua, saga sangat-lah dukachita mendengarkan Dato'Mohamed Asri, Menteri Besar Kelan-tan, berchakap dalam Dewan Ra'ayat,menchercha, menchela Tunku PerdanaMent ri kita. Saya sutra hendak terang-kan di-sini, orang Kelantan tentu-lahterasa malu dengan perkata an- yangdi-keluarkan oleh Menteri B'esar-nyadaripada negeri Kelantan itu, rasamalu kerana orang Kelantan tidak-lahsa-bagitu kasar dan tab`iat-nya tidak-lah bagitu hodoh sa-bagaimana yangdi-gambarkan oleh uchapan yang di-buat oleh Dato' Mohamed Asri dala.naDewan Ra'ayat. Saya rasa orangKelantan ada tertib, ada bahasa, adabudi, ada kemelayuan-nya itu lebehbanyak daripada acre geri2 yang lain.Jadi kaiau sa-kira-nya perkataanohercha yang di-keluarkan oleh Date;'Mohamed Asri d-.- ,'.am Dewan Ra`ayatpada T ti nku Perdana Menteri, sa-orangpemimp in yang bagitu b!esar yang patakite -nemberi image yang b i lk kapadasei uroh dunia i _u kalau kita cherchabagairnana yan di-herchakan olehDato' Mohamed Asri, midi satu perkaraya .: san.saa.s. nie S illl k a^. n, bukan nia/

Ana g_u : ,un s-'aya saha.j a teta p i ra`aya;Kelantan main kerana Dato' MohamedAsri itu bukan W %'akil Ra 'ayat PasirPute`)^ sahaja, die Menteri Besar,Kelantan, Menteri Be =ar ma`ana-nyadia nmenmegang ketua ba^gi satu Ker,a jaanyang ra`-yat di-belakang-nya.. .las:i-ra`ayaL Kelantan rasa malu d nga }perkataa- ` van(-, kotor, yang liar, per•-katan2 yang lid a.k sopan, tidak mem-punyai both peker t i yang di-hebohkajdal am C wan Ka`ayat itu. Jadi say-rasa orang Kelantan tidak boleti mene-ri r_°a perkataan rte.. wa au pun say ,

; tidak menjadi Ahli mewakili ra`ayaKelantan tetapi saya tahu isi danperasaan balk orang Kelantan terhadapTu nku dan lain' pemirnpin Perikatan.

Itu.l-lah sahaja, Dato' Yang di-Pertua,bagi saya m ngambil bahagian bersamadalam membinchangkan Rang Undang2yang mana pada saya ini-lah sangatbaik dan memuaskan. Sekian sahaja,terima kaseh.

1368

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time.

Mr President : Meshuarat ini. di-tempohkan sa-lama 10 minit.

Mee tin ^ suspended at 11.55 am.

Sitting resumed at 12.05 p.m.

(Mr President in the Chair)

THE NATIONAL LANGUAGEBILL

Committee StageThe Bill committed to a Committeeof the whole House.

House immediately resolved itselfinto a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr President in the Chair)

cruses I to 8 inclusiveC° orderedstand part of the Bill.

tO

Preamble ordered to stand part of theBill.

Bill reported without amendment :read the third time and passed.

THE IN TERPRETATION BILL

Se „_ 5n d Reading

Tao Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Si;-, I beg to hove that a Bill intituled,"a.n Act to make provision for the^ r r

o i fa` w

r i tten laws,interr p etation of certain w ri tten laws,fo r shortening the language used there-in, for matters relating to wri tten. lawseenerally and for other like purposes,,be now read a second time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir, I beg to secondthe motion.

Ta- Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, the purpose of this Bill, Sir, is toreplace the Interpretation and GeneralClauses Ordinance, 1948. The Bill doesnot seek to change the law in principle,but great changes of detail have beenmade necessary by consti tut ionaldevelopment since 1948.

The primary purpose of inter preta-tion laws is to shorten the languageused in Statutes by providing defini-tions of commonly used expressions.In addition, there is need to specify

1369 11 MARCH 1967 1370

various matters relating to written laws,statutory powers and duties and similarmatters. If this were not done, thesematters would have to be provided forspecifically in every separate Act ofParliament, which would lead to agreat increase in unnecessary verbiage.

The Bill is divided into five Parts.Part I is preliminary. Part II containsthe definitions which are probablythe most important parts of the Bill.Part III provides for matters relatingto Acts of Parliament and subsidiarylegislation, such as the method of publi-cation and the effect of repeal. PartIV deals with statutory powers andappointments, and Part V deals with anumber of matters which could notconveniently be fitted into anotherPart.

In Part II, Clause 3 is the mostimportant Clause. It contains a sub-stantial number of definitions, includingdefinitions of East Malaysia and WestMalaysia. Clauses 4 to 12, althoughthey do not for the most part containdirect definitions are, in a sense, defini-tion Clauses because they ascribe mean-ing to various expressions when theyoccur in an Act of Parliament. As anexample, Clauses 10 to 11 explain whatis meant when a reference is made totime or distance.

Part III deals with various mattersaffecting Acts of Parliament and sub-sidiary legislations. It is necessary tospecify the effect of Schedules, themethod of citation and publication, andsimilar methods. There are, of course,already provided for in the existingOrdinance. This Part merely adapts theexisting provision to existing condi-tions.

Part IV is an important Part becauseActs of Parliament frequently conferexecutive powers on Ministers andofficials, and it is essential that theextent of any such powers should beexactly known. This part, like PartIII, substantially reproduces the corres-ponding provisions of the existingOrdinance, although a great deal ofchange of detail has been necessary.

Part V also does no more that adaptand bring up-to-date the existing law.

It contains a number of important pro-visions, such as Clause 62, whichpermits minor deviations from forms,and Clause 63 which protects the rightsof His Majesty the Yang di-PertuanAgong and His Majesty's Government.

If the Bill becomes law, the presentintentions is to bring it into forceafter the end of the present session ofParliament. It will, therefore, not affectany Acts passed during the presentsession, but only those passed when itis in force. The Bill is not intended toaffect the interpretation of the Consti-tution. The Constitution itself providesfor its own interpretation; nor will theBill affect State laws s. The existingOrdinance does apply to State laws aswell as to Federal laws. That was asuitable arrangement in 1948 but it isscarcely practicable now. The Billseeks to repeal the existing Ordinanceonly in so far as it is a Federal law.The existing Ordinance will remainin force in so far as it is a Federallaw. The existing Ordinance willremain in force in so far as it is a Statelaw. It is hoped that with the agreementof the State Governments it will bepossible to apply the Bill to States withmodifications. This could be done byusing the machinery provided byArticle 76 (1) (b) of the Federal Con-stitution.

This is rather a technical lawyer'sBill. Nevertheless, it is an essentialpart of our machinery of Government.

Mr Chairman : Any Member wishesto speak please?

Dato' Dr Cheah Toon Lok: Mr Pre-sident, Sir, as a matter of clarification,I want to know whether "MerdekaDay" is synonymous with "MalaysiaDay". The term "Malaysia Day" is notincluded, and every time we have gotto celebrate "Malaysia Day". Is thereany interpretation about this? It is notincluded in this Interpretation Bill.May I seek a clarification on thismatter?

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: I would like tohazard an answer to this question. MrPresident, Sir, I do not think "MerdekaDay" is celebrated any longer. Wecelebrate "Malaysia Day" nowadays.

1371 11 MARCH 1967

Dato ' Dr Cheah Toon Lok : It is notstated here "Malaysia Day". It says"Merdeka Day" which means 31stAugust, 1957. Every time we celebrate"Malaysia Day". Why is it not in theinterpretation?

Tan Sri T . H. Tan : This point willbe noted for reply directly to thequestioner, Sir.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second timeand committed to a Committee of thewhole House.

House immediately resolved itself in-to a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr President in the Chair)Clauses I to 12-Dato ' Sheikh Abu Bakar bin Yahya:

Mr President, Sir, 1 would like to askfor a small clarification from theMinister concerned. However, as I seethe Minister is not here, I think I hadbetter refrain from asking (Laura; hter).It is no use as there is nobody toanswer.

Clauses I to 12 inclusive ordered tostand part of the Bill.

Clauses 13 to 65 inclusive ordered tostand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment:read the third time and passed.

THE CONTRACTS (MALAYSTATES) (AMENDMENT) BILL

Sec and Rearing

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled,,.,.an Act to amend The ContractsMalay States) Ordinance, 1950" be

read a second time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Mr President, Sir,I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, this Bill seeks to amend Section 29of the Contracts (Malay States) Ordi-nance, 1950, which provides (exceptwith respect to the two exceptionscontained therein) that every agreement,by which any party thereto is restricted

1372

absolutely from enforcing his rightsunder or in respect of any contract, bythe usual legal proceedings in theordinary tribunals or which limits thetime within which he may thus enforcehis rights, is void to the extent.

It is proposed to include a newclause in future agreements entered intobetween the Government and scholarsreceiving Government scholarships,bursaries and other awards prohibitingscholars front taking part in politics.Consequently a clause in every suchagreement will be necessary so that thediscretion exercised by the Governmentin such matters shall be final and con-clusive and shall not be questioned byany Court. Such a provision will con-flict with the express condition ofsection 29 of the Contracts (MalayStates) Ordinance, 1950, as it nowstands. It is therefore, necessary tomake a third exception to that sectionwhich is the subject matter of thisamendment Bill.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second timeand committed to a Committee of thewhole House.

House immediately resolved itself in-to a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Comm ittee.

(Mr President in the Chair)

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to standpart of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment :read the third time and pass :--d.

THE ROAD TRAFFIC(AMENDMENT) BILL

Second Reading

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled"an Act to amend the Road TrafficOrdinance , 1958,.be read a secondtime.

Dato ' Y. T. Lee: Mr President, Sir,I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, the purpose of the amendment tothe above Ordinance is to improve the

1373 11 MARCH 1967 1374

working of the Ordinance generally andalso to regularise certain existing pro-visions. The main features of the Billare as follows:

Clause 2 deals with the amendmentof sections 14, 16 and 21 of the Ordi-nance . In view of the fact that Singa-pore is now a foreign country, it isconsidered that certain provisions of theOrdinance relating to the recognitionof Singapore motor vehicle licences andtrade licences and enforcement actionson licences of Singapore registeredvehicles used for unlawful purposes inthe States of Malaya should be re-pealed . Therefore , amendment tosections 14, 16 and 21 of the Ordi-nance is necessary . It is to be notedthat with effect from 1st February,1967, Singapore registered vehicles ontemporary visits to any part of WestMalaysia will be required to apply forpasses to be issued under the pro-visions of the Motor Vehicles (Inter-national Circulation ) Rules, 1967.

Clause 3 of the Bill is to removeanomaly , which has arisen followingthe decision to raise licence fees onprivate passenger diesel propelledvehicles above those payable on taxicabs or hire cars by the deletion, fromsection 22 (2) of the Ordinance of thewords "if the fee chargeable in respectof licence for a motor vehicle used forsuch other purposes is higher than thefee chargeable in respect of licenceheld by such person " appearing there-in. Unless this anomaly is removed noenforcement action can be taken againsthigh-powered private passenger ve-hicles used illegally as taxi cabs orhired cars.

Clause 4 of the Bill concerns anamendment relating to section 70 of theOrdinance . It is felt that this section,as it stands, is inadequate for the pur-pose of recovering expenses incurredon removal and detention of un-authorised structures from roads. TheBill makes additional provision where-by the Minister for Works , Posts andTelecommunications , or the appro-priate authority as the case may be,may recover such expenses by the dis-posal of such structures removed anddetained under section 70 . The power

of disposal also extends to the disposalof any perishable goods removed withsuch structures.

Clause 5 deals with the amendmentto section 76 (1), that is, redefining theexpression "authorised insurers". As aresult of an inquiry by a Committeechaired by the Insurance Commissionerfor Malaysia into certain aspects ofthird party personal injury insurance,a Motor Insurance Bureau has beenformed by agreement between the In-surance Association and the Ministerof Transport. This will remove a longstanding grievance since third partymotor insurance was made compulsoryas few judgements in favour of the in-jured persons were unsatisfied, becauseof the absence of or ineffective insu-rance. The agreement will give effectto the principle for securing compen-sation to third party victims of roadaccidents, where otherwise the victimswould be deprived of compensation bythe absence of insurance or ineffectiveinsurance. The agreement provides thatif damages are awarded for death, forbodily injury, arising from the use ofmotor vehicles in circumstances, wherethe liability is required to be coveredby insurance under the Road TrafficOrdinance, and such damages or anypart of this remained unpaid twentyeight days after the judgement becomesenforceable, the Bureau will pay theunrecovered amount to the person inwhose favour the judgement has beengiven. Although the liability of theBureau will not extend to compen-sation of any injured on the road bya vehicle, where the owner or thedriver cannot be traced, it will, how-ever consider such cases in certain cir-cumstances to make ex gratia payments.The entire cost of administration of theBureau will be borne by authorisedinsurers from the premium collectedfor motor insurance in other words, theGovernment is not spending any moneyfor this set-up. Therefore, an amend-ment to section 76 (1) of the RoadTraffic Ordinance is necessary for thepurpose of redefining the expression"authorised insurers" which meansa person lawfully carrying on motorvehicle insurance business in the Statesof Malaya who is a member of the

1375 11 MARCH 1967 1376

Motor Insurers ' Bureau . This is toensure that all companies underwritingmotor vehicle insurance business con-tribute to the Bureau.

Dato' Athi Nahappan : Dato' Yangdi-Pertua, sambil saya menyokongRang Undang, ini, saya suka-lah me-narek perhatian Kerajaan saya nam-pak sekarang di-sini Menteri Yang Ber-hormat tidak ada d i-sini, dan saya punragu-iah boleh-kah ata.u tidak jawapanyang sesuai boleh di-beri atas perkara2yang saya suka mengeshorkan padamasa sekarang ini.

Sava suka-iah menyentoh atas duaatau tg ga perkara. Yang pertama is -lahberkenaan dengan Fasal yang keempat,sa-bagamana yang di-katak.an tadioleh Yang Berhormat Senator T. H.Tan, i ni-iah satu Fasal untok meme-noh satu kekurangan yang d i-adakanpad-a- masa sekaran` in , Kekuranganitu ca- L: '_h Kerajaa.n tidak boleti dapatba=ek ped^belanjaail m anakala. Kerajaann elalui pegawai2 p*ndah satu structureatau situ rangka rurnah atau benda.•'yang di-dirikan oleh sa-suatu orangdengan chara khas.

Fasa 4 ini me,mberi kuasa kapadaYang Berhorrnat Menteri untok men-

ataujualkaif ata u i e e'ongkan barang2benda- yan T d°-kenakan dark jalanra ya, atau t:irnpanan jalan raya dankerudian dapat ba'_ek perbe'anjaan

l benda itu. ini-iah seta fasalmengen ayang sesuai tetap i dalam. definition,structure ada-lah di-katakan beberapabarang' atau benda-' ada-lah satu ke-raguan yang timbal di-sini------- ini dalamFasal 7 yang di-adakan sekarang dansub-section () ada menyebut kalauada -f ah d i-dirikan sate structure, atauscat up satu structure dalam Section 70pada masa sekarang ini: "A structurethat is erected or set up." Kalau kitakatakan dalam bahasa kebangsaanerected` tidak boieh di-terjernahkan"di-dirikan." tetapi "set up" juga ber-ma`ana "dirikan" atau "letakkan" me-nurut Wilkinson Dictionary, "letak"ada d-katakan dalam buku ini setdown bukan set up. Set up dirikan,set down letakkan (Ketawa). Ini satumasaalah ada timbul. Kalau sa-saoranglepas kereta-nya di-satu tempat akibatitu menjadi satu halangan lalu-lintas

(obstruction) dan kemudian Kemen-terian melalu l pegawai hendak pindah-kan motor car itu, boleh-kah bendaitu di-jualkan di-bawah Fasal ini''Saya fikir letakkan sa-buah keretabukan-lah berma`ana set up kereta itu,barangkali simpan kereta itu sahaja,atau lepas kereta itu sahaja. Fasal apadefinition in i ada sadikit luas, definitionkata structure includes berrna`ana Al l

structure termasok bukan structure ber-ma`ana atau dalam bahasa Inggerisstructure means. Kalau saperti itudefinition itu terhad tidak boieh di-luaskan atau di-lanjutkan. Definitiondi-bawah i ndang' ini ada-lah defi-nitlon yang lugs. Bo)eh-kah ini ber-erti sa- h uah kereta di-letakkan di -j alanraya, atau simpanan jalan raya dankalau dia n-enibuatkan satu halangank a.pada traffic' yang lalu- 'intas, bo'eh-kah Kerajaan niengambil kereta itudan nenjua lkan kereta itu denganlelong dan boleh-kah mengarnbil baeksemua perbe'anjaan2 yang d i- kenakan?Ini -lah situ soalan dan saya harap-la.h.kalau Yang Berhormat Menteri ada d-sini d.a pun sa-orang peguam jugabo eh member'd i-1 pun tidak ada d,7-sing dan sayanampak juga. di -s ni ada pegawai=kanan sahaja di-sirsi, tetapi saya hara,dapat penje=asan.

Perkar yang kedua is-lah berkenaanden gan Fasa i 5. l n i-lah satu Fasal yangsangat baik. di-sini d -beri kebajikankapada mangsa2 yang diri sendiri atau1aki2 atau ister atau anak' yang dapatkemaiangan alas ja an raya. Ada-iahbeberapa sehah yang t idak memberiwang gan t i r ur^ din selalu InsuranceCompan-es iii; l uhari, sebab untok me-ngelakkan sanggupan-nya dan sebab itusaya dapat tabu beberapa mangsa5kemalangan atas j alan raya tidak boiehdapat ganti rugi. Itu pun satu keadaanyang sesuai dan tidak beberapa lamadahulu Maha Hakim Besar di-negerikta, Lord President Thompson adamengat.akan, "ada-iah kalau die,mangsa2 tidak botch dapat wang gantirugi mengikut Kehakiman Undang2atau Legal Justice, di-bawah LegalJustice, beberapa mangsa2 tidak bolehdapat wang ganti rugi". Tetapi diamemberi fikiran-lah keadaan saperti initidak sesuai mesti-lah mangsa', isteri-',

1377 11 MARCH 1967 1378

anak2 dapat satu bantuan dari Kera-j aan-kah , atau dari lain2 pertubohandan kata Lord President itu, "mengikutf alsapah , atau mengikut perinsip Ke-hakiman Masharakat atau Social Jus-tlce, kita ada memberi satu bantuankapada mangsa2."

Dan mengikut fikiran itu saya fikirini f asal ada di-masokkan dalam RangUndang2 ini, saya pun dengan suka-chita-nya mengalu2kan Fasal ini dansaya pun tidak dapat tahu sekarangmacham mana , atau bagaimana MotorInsurance Bureau ini boleh di-jalankansa-bagai satu pertubohan undang2 ataustatutory body dan apa -kah peratoran2-nya. Ini-lah butir2 saya suka dapattahu, saya pun ada berchakap denganYang Berhormat Menteri yang ber-kenaan sa-malam dan saya sekarangtdak dapat tahu dengan jelas-nya charauntok mengenakan Motor InsuranceBureau ini. Kalau boleh beri sadikitpenjeasan yang lebeh saya suka-lahmendapat tahu butir2 dan perinsip di-bawah bantuan boleh-lah di-beri ka-pada mangsa2.

Yang ket ga is- lah berkenaan denganFasal 6 dan sekarang ini dalam sekshenatau Fasal 79 ada beberapa sebab di-bawah mana sa-suatu insuran kompeniboleh mengelakkan kesanggupan-nyauntok membayar ganti rugi , atau ber-kenaan dengan bahaya pehak yang ke-tiga, atau dalam Bahasa Inggeris ThirdParty Risk. Ini bahaya pehak yang ke-tiga ada-fah boleh di-elakkan di-bawahsebab2 yang di-sebutkan dalam Sekshen79.

Sekarang ini sebab2 itu di-lanjutkandengan tiga sebab lebeh . Yang pertamais-lah berkenaan dengan minumankeras , atau intoxicating liquor. Dankata fasal ini, kalau sa-suatu pemanduatau derebar memandukan kereta diadan terlibat dalam suatu kemalanganbahawa pengaroh minuman kerasini insurance atau ubat, minuman kerasatau ubat-drug , ini insurance companyboleh-lah mengelakkan kesanggupandan tanggong j awab-nya berkenaandengan bahaya pehak yang ketiga atauThird Party Risk.

Ini-lah satu perkara yang sangat me-narek hati , oleh sebab beberapa orang

dalam masharakat yang modern danjuga saya fikir Ahli2 Yang Berhormatini j uga , kadang2 saya j uga minumminuman keras . Kita mengambil baha-gian beberapa jamuan2 dan kalau satumalam saya pergi ka-rumah sahabatsaya dan mengambil bahagian dalamsa-suatu jamuan dan minum satu ataudua gelas whisky apa-kah akan terj adidaripada itu? Ada-kah satu doktorsini juga Yang Berhormat , kalau sayaminum satu dua gelas whisky akibat-nya itu is-lah whisky masok dalambadan saya dan juga alcohol dalamwhisky itu masok atau mengalir dalamdarah saya. Kalau-lah alcohol itu me-ngalir dalam darah saya, darah ituboleh-lah menunjokkan alcohol, danmasa itu saya balek rumah dan bukandengan sebab saya , atau salah saya,atau nasib tak baik, itu orang lainrani dan langgar kereta saya. Dandaripada keterangan kejadian itu tidakboleh menentukan siapa -kah pada masaitu salah atau tidak salah dan masok-lah mata2 dan kemudian dia ambilkedua2 orang ini pergi ka-police stationdan dia pun shak hati ada-kah orangini saya mithal-nya ada minum dankalau dia mahu pereksa saya dalamhospital dan darah saya pun diakena pereksa dan darah itu menunjok-kan alcohol dalam darah saya, boleh-kah di-katakan saya di-bawah pe-ngaroh intoxicating liquor, atau minumkeras? Apa-kah ukoran pengaroh?Apa-kah ukoran pengaroh? What is theyard-stick of influence ? Kalau darahmenunjokkan sadikit alcohol pun ada-kah menjadi pengaroh minuman keras ?Ini-lah satu keadaan yang tidak bolehdi-tentukan barangkali, fasal ini kalausaya minum banyak dan saya tidakboleti control saya punya kereta, itusalah saya. Itu bukan sahaj a pengarohitu mabok. Ada-lah berbedza antaramabok dan pengaroh. Influence per-kataan lain. Mabok perkataan lain.Kalau saya sudah mabok dan sayamemandu kereta saya, kalau saya me-langgar orang lain, itu saya tidak bolehcontrol kereta saya . Itu keterangan yangterang2 tdak boleh berlawan. Tetapibiasa-nya semua orang minum satuatau dua gelas tape malam dan nasibsaya tidak baik dan saya terlibat dalam

1379 11 MARCH 1967 1380

satu kemalangan dan darah saya me­nunjokkan sadikit alcohol dalam darah saya, boleh-kah itu mentafsirkan sa­bagai pengaroh minuman keras?

Ini-lah satu perkara saya bimbang sadikit oleh sebab kadang2 insuran kompeni dengan menggunakan sharat ini boleh menumpang untok mengelak­kan kesanggupan-nya dengan senang sahaja. Kalau bagitu Third Party Risk atau bahaya pehak yang ketiga boleh di-elakkan dan kemudian mangsa2 itu tidak boleh dapat-lah wang ganti rugi melalui mahkamah dan apa-kah dia boleh dapat, barangkali di-bawah Motor Insurance Bureau sahaja-lah. Tetapi apa yang boleh di-sangka dari­pada Motor Insurance Bureau, ini macham suatu bantuan sahaja-lah, satu derma sahaja. Tidak boleh dapat ganti rugi, compensation atau damages; tidak boleh di-ukorkan sa-kadar injury atau luka2 yang di-kenakan. Ini-lah suatu perkara yang saya suka me­nyebutkan pada masa ini dan saya harap-lah Yang Berhormat Menteri yang tak ada, yang kosong kerusi itu, saya harap-lah chuba sa-siapa pun jawab sadikit. Terima kaseh.

Dato' Dr Cheah Toon Lok: Mr Pre­sident, Sir, it has been stated that a notice should be served under Clause 4 (2) for the removal of a structure and for a specific time. I do not think it refers to a car, because before you could give notice you have got to go to the office, come back, and by that time the car would have been removed. So, it does not mean a car at all because it requires a specific time for that.

Regarding Clause 6 (b) (i), which deals with driving under the influence of liquor, intoxicating drinks, I think this section should not be put down, because before, under such third party risks, insurance companies did pay their victims who were under the influence of drinks, and so on, because it could not be proved in court that the man was under the influence of drinks, and to prove this scientifically and medically is very difficult, because if the liver of a person is damaged and if he takes a little bit of liquor, it shows

in the blood-stream-there is no ab­sorption. But if the liver is not damaged, it functions well, and you take a little, in two hours it is out. So you cannot test the blood unless you have a sort of practical test by asking him to walk on a line to see whether he could keep on a straight line or not. So, I think it is very difficult to prove a person to be under the influence of liquor from a sc:entific point of view. Unless there is a definition for the term "under the influence of intoxicating liquor" it is very difficult for the magistrate to convict a person because no doctors or scientists will be able to testify the degree of intoxication.

Dato' J. E. S. Crawford: Mr Pre­sident, Sir, I listened with interest. Clause 6, as far as I can read it, Sir, is to widen the avoidance of risks. Otherwise, at present the insurance companies can say that they would not pay third party because the insured had taken liquor, etc., etc. With this Clause, Sir, they now have to pay. They cannot avoid third party by claiming these three restrictions that are men­tioned in Clause 6. That is how I read it, Sir.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President, Sir, the Honourable Senator Dato' Athi Nahappan has raised a number of legal technicalities, which I have no doubt the Ministry concerned will take note of and reply to him directly. How­ever, I would like to say here that the Insurance Bureau as contemplated in this legislation is no doubt in its for­mative stage and full details will be released in due course of time. It is sufficient here to say that the creat:on of this Bureau is really a great step forward for the Alliance Government who takes great interest to protect the poor victims of road accidents, who have had for so many years, because of legal technicalities, or certain legal defects, not only no legal right to claim damages but even for mere compensa­tion or ex gratia payments. This scheme which we are introducing is believed to be the first of its kind in South-East Asia and it will produce something that will protect the interests of poor victims and their next-of-kin to get whatever

1381 11 MARCH 1967 1382

compensation that this Bureau will con­sider reasonable and try to help the next-of-kin of victims in road accidents. I might say that I should have ex­plained the other clauses of the Bill in my opening remarks.

I would like to draw the attention of the House to Clause 6 of the Bill, which was the subject of various ques­tions by the Honourable Senator Athi Nahappan. Clause 6 of the Bill deals with the amendment to Section 79 of the Ordinance to widen the scope of the avoidance of restrictions in a motor third party risk policy. The number of restrictive conditions contained in Section 79 of the Ordinance has aslo been extended so that the insurers will be required to pay a claim in those circumstances to third party victims but will have the right to recover from the owner or driver of the vehicles. Clause 7 of the Bill makes certain consequential amendments to Sections 21, 45, 48 and 57 of the Ordinance as a result of the repeal of the provisions mentioned in paragraph 2. They are to repeal provisions relating to the follow­ing matters: enforcement action on Singapore trade licences; facilities for motor vehicle drivers to produce cer­tificate of insurance in Singapore; and facilities for the licensing of motor vehicles brought from Singapore. The term "the Colony" has been substituted by the term "Republic of Singapore" as Singapore is now an independent, foreign country. The existing defects in the provisions of the Road Traffic Ordinance, 1958, will be remedied by the provisions made thereto in the Bill.

I have now a few notes in reply to Dato' Athi Nahappan. He questions what is the real meaning of the word "structure". The word structure as envisaged in Section 70 of the Road Traffic Ordinance appears to exclude objects which have not been erected or set up and therefore does not in­clude a vehicle, as was rightly pointed out by Dato' Dr Cheah Toon Lok. I am also here to say that Motor Insurers Bureau is not a statutory board. It is a voluntary association of insurers which has entered into an agreement with the Minister of Transport to pro-

vide for payment of compensation where such compensation is due in accordance with the agreement. Before an insurance company can avoid liabi­lity under Clause 6 (b) (i), the person insured must be in fact influenced by intoxicating liquor or drug. It is up to the Court to make this finding. This provision is also at present in the United Kingdom legislation.

Mr President, Sir, I am further to say that the purpose of the Motor In­surers Bureau is to pay compensation to third party victims, where such victims are denied compensation by the absence of insurance or of ineffec­tive insurance. As in the United King­dom and Eire areas, the Bureau is a separate legal entity registered under the Companies Act being limited by guarantee and not having a share capital. Control of the Bureau will be by a Council probably of seven mem­bers representing the insurance com­panies which are members.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr President in the Chair)

Clauses 1 to 7 inclusive ordered to

stand part of the Bill. Schedule reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.

Sitting suspended at 1.00 p.m.

Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m. (Mr President in the Chair)

BILLS THE HIRE-PURCHASE BILL

Second Reading

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to regulate the form and contents of hire.-purchase agreements and the rights and du!ies of parties to such agreements" be read a second time.

1383 11 MARCH 1967 1384

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Mr President, Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President, Sir, hire-purchase has developed in this country from a convenient form of instalment credit for durable goods into a multi-million dollar business. Hire-purchase may be broadly defined as a service which allows one party to obtain possession of an article belonging to another party in exchange for a deposit. Provided that the hirer mainta:ns a series of payments known as instalments, the owner cannot regain the article. At the end of the pre­determined period, the hirer may claim possession of the article, if the agreed sum has not been met.

Hire-purchase has contributed in no small measure to the growth of retail trade and to the standard of living of the population by making available such goods as motor vehicles, radios. refrigerators, sewing machines and other domestic appliances to families. At present there are no adequate pro­vis:ons in the law in Malaysia to regulate hire-purchase agreements. For example, no provision is made to safe­guard the interest of the hirers against the owners who take away articles on which many instalments have been paid by the hirers just because the hirers were unable to meet instalments at the proper time due to one reason or another. This Bill, however, sets out the rights of hirers which are called the "statutory rights" of hirers. For example, it is a statutory right of the hirer within 14 days after request is made to the effect to be furnished by the owner with a copy of the memo­randum or note of the agreement and a statement signed by the owner or his agents showing such particulars of the amount paid, the amount due or payable under the agreement. Failure w"thout reasonable cause to comply with this provision renders the agree­ment unenforceable by the owner as against the hirer, the right to recover the goods from the hirer or any con­tract of guarantee relating to the agreement. Furthermore, if such a default on the part of the owner were to continue for a period of one month, the Bill provides that the owner shall

be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $200.

In the case of repossession, the Bill provides that the owner shall not repossess the goods until the expiration of 21 days after the serving of a written notice on the hirer by the owner. Within 14 days of repossession, the owner is required to serve on the hirer and his guarantors a notice detailing the amount which the hirer has to pay, in order that the agreement could be reinstated or finalised. The Bill also expressly provides for the assignment of the right, title and inte­rest of hirers under the hire-purchase agreements and also the assignment by operation of law. On the other hand, the owner is not entirely left out from the protection as provided by the pro­visions of this Bill. For example, unlike any other legislation, the right of the owner is protected in this Bill in the case of termination by the hirer. In such a case, the Bill provides that the owner would be entitled to recover from the hirer the amount, if any, required to be paid in those circum­stances under the agreement or the amount, if any, that the owner would have been entitled to recover if he had taken possession of the goods at the date of termination of the hiring whichever is the less.

In view of this and other short­comings, it is felt that hire-purchase should be regulated not so much as an instrument of economic manage­ment, as in other countries, but mainly as a · measure of protection for hire­purchases against unscrupulous owners. The Bill, therefore, seeks to enact pro­visions to regulate and control the forms and contents of hire ~purchase agreements, to spell out in the law the rights and duties of parties to such agreements, and to define and prescribe the liabilities of pei:sons, including guarantors, and third parties generally, who are affected by any transactions covered by the provisions of this Bill.

As a law to cover hire-purchase agreements, this Bill has the benefit of derivations (wherever applicable) from existing provisions in the United King­dom and Australian Hire-Purchase

1385 11 MARCH 1967

legislations and it also implements mostof the recommendations (whateverapplicable) of the Molony Report(1962) of the United Kingdom. Forexample, the Bill provides a statutoryright of the hirer to complete thepurchase of the goods, the subjectmatter of the agreement, on or beforethe day specified for that purpose bygiving notice in writing to the owner ofhis intention to do so, and by payingor tendering the net balance due. Thisis one of the features of the MolonyReport.

Mr President, Sir, it will be recalledthat the Hire-Purchase Act, 1966,which was introduced in the DewanRa'ayat at its June Session, 1966, waswithdrawn at the beginning of thisSession of the Dewan Ra'ayat. This isbecause after the introduction of theHire-Purchase Bill in the June Sessionof the Dewan Ra'ayat, the Ministerinvited the public and other interestedparties to forward their views, observa-tions and recommendations with regardto the provisions as contained in theHire-Purchase Bill of 1966..

In the light of the numerous repre-sentations made by interested parties,a Committee has reviewed the provi-sions as contained in that Bill and hasfound it desirable that certain sectionsof the Bill would have to be amendedwhile new sections and sub-sectionswould have to be incorporated in orderto extend the applicability of the Billto the whole of the Federation ofMalaysia as well as to extend the pro-visions of the Bill to cover a widerrange of durable consumer goods whichare popularly bought on hire-purchaseby people from both the higher and thelower income groups as well as bythe people in the rural and the urbanareas. The effectiveness of the Bill isthereby also enhanced. All the amend-ments which are considered necessaryto the Hire-Purchase Bill of 1966 arenow incorporated in this new Bill.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second timeand committed to : a Committee of thewhole House.

House immediately resolved itself in-to a Committee on the Bill.

1386

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr (Deputy) President in the Chair)

Clauses 1 to 46 inclusive ordered tostand part of the Bill.

First Schedule to Sixth Schedule in-clusive ordered to- stand part of theBill.

Bill reported without amendment :read the third time and passed.

THE ABORIGINAL PEOPLES(AMENDMENT) BILL

Second Reading

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled"an Act to amend the AboriginalPeoples Ordinance, 1954", be read asecond time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Mr President, Sir,I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, the Aboriginal Peoples Ordinance,1954 was promulgated before MerdekaDay. Since then the subject relatingto the welfare of the aborigines hasbeen included in the Federal List ofthe Ninth Schedule to the Federal Con.stitution. Therefore, since then theadministration and welfare of theaborigines have been the responsibilityof the Federal Government.

This Bill seeks. primarily to bringthe said Ordinance into accord withthe Federal Constitution. In this Billprovisions in the Ordinance relating tothe appointments of officers admi-nistering the Ordinance and theirfunctions are amended so as not toconflict with the Constitution. TheCommissioner is, under this Bill, theauthority responsible for the generaladministration, welfare and advance-ment of the aborigines. The power insection 14 relating to the exclusion ofpersons from aboriginal areas andaboriginal reserves hitherto expresslyexercised by the Ruler in Council isamended by this Bill to be exercisableby the Minister.

Where there is doubt as to whetherany person is an aborigine, the ques-tion shall be decided by the Minister.

Question put, and agreed to.

1387 I1 MARCH 1967 1388

Bill accordingly read a second timeand committed to a Committee of thewhole House.

House immediately resolved itself in-to a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr (Deputy) President in the Chair)

Clauses 1 to 10 inclusive ordered tostand part of the Bill.

First and Second Schedules orderedto stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment:read the third time and passed.

THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURECODE (AMENDMENT) BILL

Second Reading

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled"an Act to amend the Criminal Pro-cedure Code" be read, a second time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Mr President, Sir,I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, this Bill was referred to a SelectCommittee of the Dewan Ra'ayat onthe 20th June, 1966, and the report ofthat Select Committee was presented tothe Dewan Ra'ayat on the 18thFebruary this year. The amendmentsto the Bill recommended by the SelectCommittee are contained in the sche-dule annexed to the Report.

The Dewan Ra'ayat adopted theReport in its entirety and passed theBill on the 4th March, 1967, withamendments recommended by theSelect Committee. The Bill in itsoriginal form, when it was introducedin the Dewan Ra'ayat, containedprovisions for restricting trial by juryin Penang and Malacca to capitalcases as in the nine other States ofWest Malaysia, instead of having trialby jury in all criminal cases in theHigh Court as in Penang and Malaccaat present, and for the abolition ofspecial juries in Penang and Malacca.The Select Committee made no recom-mendations on this issue, except thatit should be left to a full parliamentarydebate. However, on the second

reading of the Dewan Ra'ayat, theHonourable Minister of Home Affairsand Minister of Justice proposed thatthis question should be deferred forfuller consideration and the House inCommittee agreed that the provisionsrelating to trial by jury, Clauses 29 (2)and 30 should be deleted from the Bill.The effect of this would be to leavematters as they are at present, that isto say :

(1) Trial by jury in all criminalcases in Penang and Malacca, butin capital cases only in the othernine States;

(2) The retention of special juristsconsisting of persons with highereducational qualifications inPenang and Malacca; there is noprovision for special juries inthe other nine States.

It is hoped that this Senate will endorsethe decision of the Dewan Ra'ayat onthis question. This is one of paramountpublic importance and beset by manyadministrative and practical difficulties.There is much statistical research tobe done before the Government will bein a position to offer what it believesto be the best concrete proposals toParliament. A number of alternativeswere urged before the Select Committeeand the Government considers that afuller opportunity should be allowedfor members of the public to maketheir views known.

The only other controversial issue inthe Bill is the question of preliminaryenquiries by magistrates in criminalcases to be tried by the High Court.The Bill in its original form proposedto abolish preliminary enquiriesaltogether. The Select Committeerecommended that they should not beabolished but that a shorter form, astreamlined form of enquiries shouldbe introduced in cases where theaccused is presented by counsel.

Clauses 9 and 28 of the Bill relatingto the States Code and SettlementsCode were amended accordingly by theDewan Ra'ayat in Committee. All theother provisions of the Bill, as amended.will be procedural and technicalmatters which are not considered tobe controversial.

1389 11 MARCH 1967

Question put, and agreed to.Bill accordingly read a second time

and committed to a Committee of thewhole House.

House immediately resolved itself^:i o a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.(Mr (Deputy) President in the Chair)

Clauses 1 to 44 inclusive orderedto stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment;read the third time and passed.

PERTUBOHAN BERITANASIONAL MALAYSIA BILL

Second Reading

Tan Sri T . H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled"an Act to establish and incorporatethe Pertubohan Berita National Malay-sia or in English the Malaysian NationalNews Agency and to make provisionfor the management and supervisionthereof and other matters connectedtherewith" be read a second time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Mr President, Sir,I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T . H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, this Bill seeks to establish and in-corporate a body to be known as thePertubohan Berita National Malaysiareferred to in the Bill as "BERNAMA"for the purpose of collecting anddistributing news and news materialsand features to subscribers in and out-side the Federation. Such a body isconsidered desirable in keeping withother developed countries and, in thecontext of Malaysia today, would alsobe of paramount importance, for inthe performance of its functions it canhelp to foster regional and inter-national co-operation between nationsand also to project a faithful image ofMalaysia.

The objects of BERNAMA are setout in Clause 4 of the Bill. The powersnecessary to carry out its functionsand objects are set out in Clause 3.BERNAMA will be administered andmanaged by a Board consisting ofmembers specified in Clause 5 (2). Themanner of appointment of the membersof the Board is set out in paragraphs(3), (4), (5) and (6) of Clause 5 and in

1390

Part I of the Schedule to the Bill. TheBoard shall have power to appoint anexecutive officer and other employeesvide Clause 9. The powers of theexecutive officer are those specified inClause 10 and also any other powerthat may be delegated to him by theBoard under Clause 15. The Boardshall also have power to receivecontributions , grants, etc. and toborrow money and to invest the assetsof BERNAMA in accordance withClauses 11, 12 and 13. The otherpowers of the Board in this Bill arethe normal powers usually conferredfor the administration of a bodycorporate vide Clauses 14 and 15.

The income of BERNAMA shallconsists of subscription , contributions,grants and endowments , etc., that maybe made to or in favour of it . However,the income of BERNAMA shall beapplied solely towards the promotionof the objects of BERNAMA andthis Bill stipulates that no portion ofthe income of BERNAMA shall bepaid or transferred by way of dividend,bonus, or otherwise , to any otherperson.

The subscribers to BERNAMA shallbe those newspapers operating in theFederation and other persons, organisa-tions and subscribers as may beapproved by the Board . It is envisagedthat BERNAMA shall enter intoarrangements with each of the sub-scribers.

The operation of BERNAMA shallbe based on principles as expressed inthe UNESCO definition of a "newsagency" and the Declaration of theUnited Nations Conference on Freedomof Information of 1948, subject onlyto the provisions of our Federal Con-stitution. To guide BERNAMA in itsoperations a Supervisory Council willbe established under this Bill consistingof eminent members as set out inClauses 6 and 7. The provisions ofPart II of the Schedule shall haveeffect on members of the SupervisoryCouncil.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time,and committed to a Committee of thewhole House.

1391 11 MARCH 1967 1392

House immediately resolved itself section 3 (1) of the Act, as the existing into a Committee on the Bill. provisions tend to limit the operations

Bill considered in Committee. (Mr (Deputy) President in the Chair) Clauses I to 24 inclusive ordered

to stand part of the Bill. Schedule ordered to stand part of

the Bill. Preamble ordered to stand part of

the Bill. Bill reported without amendment:

read the second times and passed.

THE FEDERAL AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AUTHORITY

(AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the Federal Agri­cultural Marketing Authority Act, 1965", be read a second time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir. I beg to second the motion.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President, Sir, the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority has been established under the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority Act of 1965. Since its establishment, the Authority has proposed a number of marketing schemes and in the experience gained in planning such schemes the Authority encountered certain difficulties.

This Bill primarily seeks to make provision to confer additional powers to the Authority. Clause 2 is mainly intended to enable the marketing schemes to be prescribed generally or in a defined area and to enhance the punishment for contraventions of any provisions of a marketing scheme.

Clause 4 makes provision for the Fund of the Authority to be on lines similar to those of the Majlis Amanah Ra'ayat and other statutory bodies.

Clause 6 relates to powers of enforcement.

Clause 7 merely seeks to re-define that definition of "agricultural produce" to include such other produce as may be prescribed by the Yang di-Pertuan

. Agong hl1t to exclude pineapple and rubber. The Clause also seeks to amend

of the Authority.

The amendment to paragraph 3 of the Schedule provides for approval by the Minister of the terms and condi­tions of service officers appointed by the Authority as in other similar statutory authorities. The other amend­ments are generally consequential so as to give better effect tc the working of the Authority.

Nik Hassan bin Haji Nik Yahya: Dato' Yang di-Pertua, dafam me­nyokong Rang Undang2 Pindaan FAMA ini saya suka berchakap dengan sa-chara rengkas mengeluarkan be­berapa pandangan saya di-atas per­jalanan FAMA ini. Sunggoh pun Menteri Pertanian dan Sharikat Kerja­sama tidak ada dalam Dewan ini, tetapi saya rasa pegawai2 di-belakang­nya akan mengambil ingatan di-atas apa yang di-suarakan di-dalam Dewan ini.

Dato' Yang di-Pertua, saya me­nyokong Rang Undang2 ini kerana ini barangkali ia-lah pindaan2 yang di­kehendaki oleh perbadanan ini supaya ia dapat mengelolakan urusan pe­kerjaan-nya dengan berkuasa penoh supaya dapat badan itu menjalankan segala tugas-nya mengikut apa yang ada di-dalam tujuan Undang2 itu. Saya ada dengar berbagai2 perfara timbul sa­telah kita tub::.•hkan perbadanan FAMA ini. Timbul perselisehan, keraguan, kechurigaan di-antara FAMA dengan beberapa pehak daripada gulongan orang2 tengah. Sunggoh pun jaminan2

telah di-beri oleh Menteri2 yang ber­kenaan tetapi keraguan dan kechuri­gaan itu maseh timbul di-kalangan orang2 tengah yang ada di-beberapa tempat yang mana FAMA akan men­jalankan ranchangan sa-bagai per­mulaan-nya.

Saya di-sini suka menyerukan kapada perbadanan FAMA ini dan kapada mereka yang bertanggong javrnb dalam perbadanan ini supaya berdiri tegak menjalankan tugas dengan chara mengikut atoran supaya dapat perbadanan ini memberi hasil yang memuaskan. Dan saya suka serukan kapada orang2 . tengah yang mana

1393 11 MARCH 1967 1394

mungkin terlibat dengan perjalanan FAMA ini supaya bersabar dan mem­beri segala sokongan dan bantuan serta kerjasama kapada perbadanan ini supaya tidak timbul masaalah per­selisehan di-antara perbadanan ini dengan mereka yang di-katakan orang2 tengah itu. ·

Patut-lah di-fahamkan ia-itu per­badanan ini sa-mata2 bertujuan untok memberi pertolongan, untok meng­angkat taraf hidup petani2 yang ada di-serata cherok negara ini yang miskin yang mahu kapada pertolongan Kera­jaan dan mahu kapada pemasaran yang lebeh baik kapada hasil tani mereka. Perbadanan FAMA ini timbul daripada chadangan yang di-kemuka­kan beberapa masa dahulu dalam satu Kongres Bumiputera yang di-adakan di-Kuala Lumpur ini. Hasil daripada Kongres yang besar itu-lah maka per­badanan FAMA ini di-tubohkan untok memberi pertolongan pemasaran kapada ahli2 tani kita yang ada dalam negara kita ini yang menjadi tulang belakang kapada Kerajaan dan negara kita ini. Kalau sa-kira-nya perjalanan FAMA ini tidak di-beri galakan, tidak di-beri sokongan, tidak di-beri kerja­sama yang pench, mungkin perjalanan FAMA ini akan gagal di-tengah jalan. Maka tidak siapa yang boleh di-beri tanggong jawab itu, tidak siapa yang akan meletakkan tanggong jawab ke­gagalan itu melainkan mereka yang bertanggong jawab menjalankan FAMA itu dan orang2 tengah yang chuba, atau pun yang maseh keraguan di-dalam perjalanan FAMA ini. Kalan sa­kira-nya pegawai2 FAMA ini dapat berjalan dengan lanchar, dengan baik mengikut peratoran dan kuat kuasa yang di-berikan kapada-nya itu dan kira-nya kerjasama di-beri oleh orang2 tengah, oleh kaum tani, oleh mereka yang berkenaan maka sudah tentu ranchangan dan perjalanan FAMA ini akan dapat berjalan dengan lanchar dan baik.

Satu masaalah yang saya suka mem­beri pandangan kapada perbadanan ini ia-lah manakala FAMA ini di-tuboh­kan saya dengar pakar2 yang berkenaan dengan pertanian dan pemasaran telah di-panggil untok berkhidmat dala:m perbadanan ini. Boleh jadi pakitr2 ini

telah datang, atau pun akan datang memberi khidmat-nya kapada per­badanan ini. Tetapi, pada saya pakar2

ini jangan-lah sangat di-ambit dengan banyak-nya, kerana pakar2 luar negeri ini apabila mereka datang ka-negara kita ini sunggoh pun mereka mem­punyai pemikiran yang luas, mem­punyai pengalaman dan ilmu penge­tahuan yang tinggi, tetap\ mereka kurang mengerti di-atas kedudokan ra'ayat, kedudokan negara kita, kedu­dokan apa yang berlaku di-sekeliling kita yang mana terpaksa mereka ini mempelajari sa-belum dapat memberi­kan khidmat-nya. Ada baik-nya kita belanjakan wang perbadanan ini di-atas mereka anak negeri kita di-sini sendiri untok menjalankan kerja-nya yang mana mereka telah mengenali kaurn tani-nya sendiri, rnengenali perangai dan kedudokan kampong-nya sendiri. Chuma mernadai-lah rnereka2 ini di­hantar untok di-lateh, untok di-beri kursus2 berkenaan dengan kerja2 yang hendak di-jalankan itu. Kalau sa-kira­nya perbadanan yang sa-urnpama ini membelanjakan wang yang besar ka­pada gaji dan kakitangan pakar2, maka saya rasa ini tidak banyak memberi keuntongan kapada perbadanan ini. Kita ada orang2 muda kita, kita ada anak2 kita yang kelulusan tinggi dalarn universiti2 yang rnana mereka ini boleh di-hantar ka-mana negeri untok di­lateh, untok di-ajar, untok di-beri kursus mengenai pemasaran dan sa­bagai-nya dan balek mereka ini akan dapat berkhidmat dengan sa-penoh-nya dengan perasaan bentlr2 kaseh mesra kapada kaum tani yang ada dalam negara kita ini.

Jadi, pada saya utarnakan-lah anak negeri dan beri-lah latehan yang sa­penoh-nya kapada rnereka dan jalan­kan-lah urusan kita ini dengan sa-chara yang benar2 supaya dapat memberi kejayaan yang besar kapada usaha Kerajaan dalam mengangkat taraf hidup ra'ayat di-karnpong itu. Sakian, terirna kaseh.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan: Mr President, Sir, thanks are due to the Honourable Senator for his support . to this Bill, _and many points which he has raised have been noted for the attention of the Minister concerne,d.

1395 11 MA~(:.fl ~9{>7 139(>

l. myself, Sir, wo\lld like to, take this opport~wty of. Sl!.Y~~,' a few woajs ·w suppo,rt of this B.111: I fee~ t~~t tpe Government should allay certam rrus­g~vings whfob had came to' my 'i:ioti~~­All are agreed that th,e farmer deserves the fullest reward · for· his· labours. Equally deserving is the case. i;>f the fisherma~.

There is, however, a fear that FAMA particufarly under amend­ment to Cl;mse 7, may well develop into a purchasing and marketing agency run with public funds to compete with middlemen and retailers, who are trying to earn an honest living in a country of free enterprise. The oppor­tunities should be taken as soon as possible to allay this fear.

One question that arises, is when should FAMA come into operation? I say it will be when prices fall below the levels set by the Government as in the case of padi, or when prices do not give a fair return to their agricultural produces. I say, in these cases only and not otherwise.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a second

time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. ·

House resolved itself into a Commi­ttee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee. (Mr (Deputy) President in the Chair)

Clauses I to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment reaj the third time and passed.

THE CONTROL OF RENT (AM~NDMENT) ·~ILL

Secon.d Read~n~ Tan Sri T. H. T,n: Mr President,

Sir, I beg to µJove that a Bill intitulep "an Act to ~menp the Control of :\lent Act, 1966" be re!\4 ~ second time.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir, I beg to second the m()Hon.

Tbe Mht~!ilr for L9cJI qR11~~t and lJqJJSiAK (Tq~ ]Ql~w J(~~~~o-): Mr President; Sir. this HAuse will r~~U that when I moved tq~ CP.Dlr~l of Rent Act during t\le Jqne &e&~iqn of

P<\fliaµient last yeai;, I assui:ed tbe Hou~e f\lat t ·wo.uld not ·he.sitate ·fo effect <\tnei;idµients to. the ;\ct,' if evet I found it justified and "necessary. ·Since t.Qe1,1. repre&entations have been, made to me t~at. the factors that sb.ould, be taken into consideratfon fo det'ennlning the "fair rent" as set out in ·Section 6 of the Control of Rent Act, 1966 is by itself insufficient to enable the land­lord and the tenant to come to an early agreement on "fair rent".

Honourable Members of this House, no doubt, · are aware of the hue and cry of the public . through the press and the confusion that has ensued in the absence of a ceiling on tl~e "fair rent". It has also been reported that in the absence of such a ceiling on · the "fair rent" landlords and chief tenants are demanding exhorbltant rents from tenants and sub-tenants of both dwelling houses and business premises. The Government, having regard to the fact that the absence of a· ceiling on "fair rent" can be abu~ed by unscrupulous and opportunistic landlords, has there­fore decided that the Contr-01 of Rent Act should be amended to include a provisiop limiting · ~e "fair rent" that can be charged. .

Accordingly, Clause (2) (a) of the original draft Bill presented to the Dewan Ra'ayat sought to amend Section 5 (2) of the Control of Rent Act so to include a proviso that the amount of "fair rent" per mensem d any controlled premises should not exceed one-twelfth of the annual value of the premises . as valued by the focal authorities to levy assessment rates, or the amount of the rent per inensem of the controlled premises immediately before the commencement of ·this Act together with an increase of 200 per centum.

Hcwever, during the Cpmmittee St<igi: of th~ qebate o~ the ]3ill in the Dewan Ra'ayat a formal amendment was proposed and agreed to that the 200 per cent as app~aring in the draft Bill shQuld be amended tQ r~d 100 per cent. In passing, I might add that the amenqment was moved with the agreement of the G.overnmept. Just to illu.stiate how this a~endmel)t applie&, should the annuiil value of a hmw~ l>i:

1397 11 MARCH 1967

$1,200 per year and the existing cont-rolled rent of the house just before 1stJanuary, 1967 was $70, the landlordwill only be allowed to charge, if thecircumstances justify, a maximum of$100 per month as the increased rentalbeing one-twelfth of the annual value,and not $140 per month being anincrease of 100 per cent. of the existingrental.

The most important part of Clause2 (a) is the phrase "whichever is thelesser". I must make it clear that thismerely imposes a ceiling to anyincreases but does not automaticallyentitle the landlords to charge themaximum permissible without takinginto consideration the factors set outin Section 6, that is to say;

(i) the location of the controlledpremises in question;

(ii) the aee and character of thecontrolled premises;

(iii) the state of repair of the cont-rolled premises;

(iv) the type of the controlledpremises, that is, whether thepremises is business or domesticpremises; and

(v) any improvements made to thecontrolled premises by the tenantwhere such improvement wasmade with the written consentof the landlord.

The annual value here is as defined inthe Town Boards Enactment and theMunicipal Ordinance. For ease ofreference the relevant section reads asfollows :

"Annual value means the estimated grossannual rent at which the holding mightreasonably be expected to let from yearto year, the landlord paying the expensesof repair, insurance, maintenance and up-keep and all public rates and taxes".

I would. like to draw attention to thatpart of the definition which clearlystates that the landlord is obliged topay the expenses of repair, insurance,maintenance or upkeep and all publicrates and taxes, and, therefore, if theseobligations have not been met by thelandlord, this is in itself a mitigatingfactor preventing the landlord fromimposing the maximum increase.

Clause 1 of the Bill provides thatthis amending Act shall be deemed to

1398

have come into force with retrospectiveeffect from 1st January, 1967. This willenable any tenants who have beensubjected to undue pressure fromunreasonable landlords to effect adjust-ments to whatever arrangements theymight have entered into.

The opportunity is also being taken,on the advice of the Attorney-General'sChambers, to amend Section 7 (1) ofthe Act, which, as it stands, requireslandlords to take action to increasethe "fair rent" within one month ofthe commencement of the Act. Theamendment proposed at Clause 2 (b)of the draft Bill will enable landlordsand tenants to commence negotiationswith a view to arriving at a "fair rent"any time after the commencement ofthe Act and not restricted to withinthe first month of the commencementof the Act.

Nik Hassan bin Haji Nik Yahya:Kato' Yang di-Pertua, saya ada per-tanyaan yang rengkas sahaja. Tetapi,sa-belum daripada itu saya suka-lahmemberi pandangan sadikit kapadaKeraj aan is-itu apabila satu2 masaKerajaan hendak menukarkan satu2undang2 dengan satu undang2 yang lain,saya minta-lah supaya undang2 yangsedia itu jangan-lah di-hapuskan se-mentara undang2 yang baharu belumsiap di-buat. Sebab dalam Undang2Sewa Rumah ini pada ingatan saya,apabila Kerajaan menghapuskan, mem-batalkan, atau pun memberi kuasakapada Kerajaan Negeri membatalkanperj alanan Undang2 Sewa Rumah ini,sudah timbul kelam kabut di-kalanganpenyewa2 dan tuan2 rumah yang manatuan2 rumah telah menaikkan sewadengan tidak menghiraukan keadaankedudokan perniagaan, orang yangmenyewa rumah itu sa-hingga menibul-kan kesusahan yang besar, pergadohandi-antara tuan rumah dengan si-pe-nyewa rumah.

Saya tunjok chontoh macham adasa-buah kedai di-Kelantan yang biasa-nya di-sewa dengan $100 tuan rumahtuntut supaya di-naikkan sewa itu sa-hingga $300 dan apabila timbulmasaalah undang2 di-bawa di-mah-kamah, mahkamah tidak boleh hendakmemutuskan dengan kerana undang2

1399 11 MARCH 1967 1400

tidak ada, kerana undang2 itu telah pun di-batalkan dan terpaksa-lah men­jadi pertanyaan yang mana pergadohan yang tidak ada tempat untok menye­lesaikan-nya.

Dan apa yang saya hendak bertanya ia-lah ada orang yang menyewa rumah, atau pun menyewa gudang ini dengan tekanan daripada tuan punya gudang itu menuntut sewa yang lebeh dan mengikut-nya ada loyar2 yang me­nasehatkan supaya di-bayar bagi sementara menunggukan undang2 ini timbul. Jadi, sewa yang di-bayar itu ia-lah sewa sa-berapa banyak yang di­tuntut oleh tuan kedai itu. Jadi, apa­bila telah di-bayarkan sewa itu, sekarang undang2 baharu timbul. Mengikut undang2 ini ada sharat2-nya, ada had-nya untok di-naikkan sewa itu. Apa akan terjadi kalau tuan2 yang menyewakan rumah itu yang sewa-nya telah di-bayar mengikut nasehat2 pada segi undang-nya dengan tidak kira berapa peratus pada masa itu telah di-bayar sewa itu? Boleh-kah tidak crang yang menyewa itu merojokkan balek perkara hal sewa rumah itu kapada mahkamah, atau pun kapada mana2 pehak untok menurunkan balek sewa-nya itu supaya sesuai dengan undang2 yang ada ini? Kira-nya boleh ada-kah perkara ini kena di-bawa kapada mahkamah atau pun bagai­mana chara penyelesaian-nya itu.

Itu-lah pertanyaan saya sa-chara rengkas, sebab perkara ini banyak berlaku dalam masa tidak ada undang2

itu sewa yang bagitu tinggi di-bayar dan tidak ada mahkamah hendak menentukan yang mana betul dan yang mana tidak betul. Dan sekarang bila undang2 ini sudah lulus, boleh-kah mahkamah menarek balek segala kes2

itu, atau pun perkara2 yang di-adukan itu untok di-selesaikan dengan ber­pandu kapada undang2 ini, walau pun sewa itu telah di-bayar dalam masa undang2 ini tidak ada. Saya harap Menteri yang berkenaan faham maksud saya dalam keterangan berkenaan dengan soalan saya itu.

Tuan Lim Hee Hong: Dato' President, Sir, I rise to support this Bill in principle. Why I say "in prin­ciple" is because there are a few points

on which I would like to be enlightened by the Minister concerned later.

Before I proceed, with your per­mission, Mr President, Sir, I would like to read a few lines of the speech which I made at a meeting about two years ago at the Rent Control Committee. This meeting took place on the 13th of April, 1965 at 10.00 a.m. and was presided over by Dato' Athi Nahappan (Chairman). I quote what I said:

"The Honourable Mr Lim Hee Hong was of the opinion that an increase ......... "-we were talking on the subject of fair rental-" " ....... of even 100% over the present control would still cause hardship. He felt that a 60% increase would be reasonable.

He argued that the landlords of pre­war houses would have by now recovered the total cost of the construction of the houses through rentals. He suggested that the annual value being not ......... " I repeat "annual value" and I will deal with it later-......... and that a flat increase of approximately 50% to 60% over the present control of rental should be made."

I would just like to say this to Honour­able Members of this House: I am in agreement with this Bill, or, this Bill is almost in line with what I said about two years ago.

Sir, so far, I think the opinion in the whole country is against the land­lords; everyone is throwing brickbats against them including myself-so far. But I think today I have got to say a few words to give them some relief: it is not against the interests of the tenants. I think the complicaticn aris·es between the landlords and the Local Councils and, in particular, the Council of the Federal Capital of Kuala Lumpur. Sir, I think probably many people are not aware that in the capital city of Kuala Lumpur, the rent-controlled houses were revalued in the year 1959 by a firm of experts from London by the name of Messrs. Gerald Ev·e & Company, at the cost of ratepayers' mcney of over a million dollars, and the revaluation was completed round about the year 1962. During this period, about 30,000 houses were revalued out of which, as far as I can remember, about 10% or more than 2,000 persons had sent in their objections for unfairness of the revalua­tion saying that they were too high. This House will remember that probably half of them had never

---·

,,:. ,, -J

~ . ..;

1401 11 MARCH 1967 1402

attempted to fight the case. whereas th~ o~her half did appear but their ob1ections were overruled; and, if I remember rightly, about half a dozen. or not more than ten cases. went to the High Court.

Sir. the position in Kuala Lumpur is so different. Take. for example, a rent-controlled premises in the central area of Kuala Lumpur-I emphasise the words "central area" -at Jalan Petaling, occupied by Mr "A", whose statutory-controlled market rental before the revaluation was $200 per month. After this revaluation the same premises were valued up to $1,000 per month-that means an increase of 400%. thus making a total of $12,000 a year. But the funny part is that this increase does not go to the landlord. but it merely goes into the pocket of the Federal Capital, because the Federal Capital thinks that all these years the chief tenants had enjoyed cheap rentals at the expense of the Council and that, therefore, the Council should introduce this revaluation. So. the landlord pays his part of the assess­ment-I hope I have made myself clear and that the Minister can follow me closely--on this $200 per month. Say, for example, at the rate of 16%. he has now been paying $32 a month or $384 a year but, with this increase of 400% he has to pay $800 a month. The landlord pays this sum, but he is allowed to collect it back from the tenant and if the tenant does not pay it, he has the right to eject his tenant. So, the position is so peculiar. The landlord actually gets a month:y rental of $200 and pays his assessment at 16% on it; and then at the same time he also pays the additional assessment of $800 and collects it back from the tenant. So. in this case, I want to know from the Min:ster concerned on what basis are we go:ng to base this 100% increase proposed in this Bill. Is it to be based on the original statutory rental or on the increased rental? If it is on the increased rental. I think it will be very unfair to the owner. because he gets only $200 and he pays the increased rental for the tenant and collects it back from him. As it is now, taking the house I mentioned

just now, for instance, he collects $200 a month-that means $2,400 a year­and on top of that also collects another 16% on $9,600 a year from the tenants and that comes to $1,536. So, in all. he collects a total of $3,936 a year.

Now, when this Bill comes into force-I probably do not know how he assesses it, it may be based on the original statutory control rental---'-he gets a substantial rate of $2,400 a year, I assume that he will get another $2,400 making $4,800. So, in future. probably he gets $4,800. Out of this he is subject to 16% assessment which I think it must be as a whole; there­fore, up till now he is getting $3,936 a year with assessment collected and he pays the whole lot to the Government, to the Council, and then in future he gets $4,800; so the difference of $4,800 less $3,936 he gets $864 that is equivalent to 36% and not 100%. So, I like the Minister to enlighten me, and I hope I have made myself clear. If the Minister cannot follow me closely, I am prepared to see him at any time in his office and explain matters to him with his experts, and as I do not know, I also would like to know whether the Minister has seen his Valuation Depart­ment, or his expert on this matter before making any decision. I do not like to take too much time and if the Minister likes to see me at any time, I am prepared and glad to see him.

One more matter that I would like to talk on is about this rent control in principle. Sir, I think Honourable Members of this House know that in the past, when rent control was in existence, every year we get a letter from the Government addressed either to · Local Authorities or to State Governments asking whether they want to renew or to abolish rent control every year. Sir, the last one we received was in 1965, or thereabout, from the Government, and that letter is a mea­sure directing Kuala Lumpur, the Federal capital, to abolish rent control which both Members of the Board res:sted. I wou:d resubm:t here in support of what I said at a meeting held on Friday, 7th August, 1964, at 10.00 a.m.; and I quote now what Mr H. S. Ong, now Justice Ong, High

1403 11 MARCH 1967 1404

Court Judge, Penang, said he repre-sented the Attorney-General at theCommittee. Mr H. S. Ong informedthe Committee that the Governmenthad made a decision that the time hadcome now to repeal the Rent ControlOrdinance, no matter how long a timewas given for the introduction of thenew legislation, there would also behard case. He felt that tenants should,in the space of time available beforethe actual introduction of the new Billmake their arrangements. Since therewas no necessity for rent control, hefelt that it was not fair on the land-lords for rent control to continue, andthat as far as the newly built dwe'linghouse: are concerned, there was nocomplaint. I would also read the termsof reference to the Rent Control Com-mittee.

Kato' President and HonourableMembers of this House, I am not try-ing to cry over spilt milk. I think it isright that being a Member of the Com-mittee I should make the position clear.The term of reference to the Com-mittee, the Rent Control Committee,was that in the light of the Govern-ment's decision to discontinue the pro-vision of the Rent Control Ordinance,1956, the Committee should make acomprehensive study as to the possib'eadverse effect of the sudden abolitionof rent control in the States of Malayawith particular reference to the statusand position of Kuala Lumpur as thecapital of Malaysia, to make recom-mendations to the Government as towhat alternative legislative measuresare necessary to protect the interest ofboth landlords and tenants. So, theCommittee carried out its work butapparently after long deliberations andmany meetings, we could not come toany agreement about fair rental orceding rental. Finally, we agreed to thetribunal system and after about 18months or so, if I remember correctly,the Report was sent to the Governmentand which was accepted; and about theincrement I think you all know thatrent tribunals have been appointed inevery town of the country to see aboutimplementing the report of the Com-mittee. I am not grumbling but if theGovernment wants to settle, to have

a political settlement, it should havebeen done before but not to wastepublic money and time to appoint aCommittee. I hope cases like thesewill not be repeated in future. Whatis past is past, but I think I shouldbring this to the light of the Honour-able Members of this House. I have noaxe to grind, I am not grumbling, andI think I should bring it to the noticeof the Members of this House. All ofa sudden overnight in the DewanRa`ayat an announcement was madeand the whole thing was scrapped.

Before, I conclude, I hope to getthe assurance of the Minister concernedthat he will look into this matter--what I put up just now and seewhether he should or should not reviseall these additional increase of 1000 ,to 60% which will cause hardships, Ithink, to the property owner. I thinkthis high valuation, an increase of1000%, should be withdrawn.

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : 1000)?

Tuan Lim Hee Hong: 400%, I amsorry, I mean $1,000 I am sorry. Ithank that only refers to the centralarea but not outside. So, I will behappy if the Minister can give an assu-rance that he will do this and on mypart I will be willing to co-operate anddo what I can. Thank you very much,Sir.

Tuan S. 0. K. Ubaidulla : Dato' Pre-sident, Sir, speaking in this augustHouse, when the original Rent Control(1966) Bill was introduced in June lastyear, I pointed out that one of themajor flaws of the Bill was not fixinga ceiling for a fair rent. The HonourableMinister for Local Government andHousing disagreed with me, and wasof the opinion that it would be verydifficult to wr=te into the law. Sir, nowI am glad, as a result of a great up-roar in the country and direct repre-sentation by the Parliamentarians ofthe Alliance Government, the Govern-ment has fixed a ceiling for the fairrent. Sir, this is well done and donequickly too. This clearly shows howmuch the Alliance Government is closeto the people and quick to carry outtheir wishes.

~.

'.>~

1405 1l :MAR.cit 1967 140~

Iii this regahi, I wobid tilce to pa}' my hi_ghest tribute i:o the Hbifourabie Minister for Local Govehuneht and llousing. The Honourable Miiijster was ill and, even neglecting his illnes$, he went all the way to attend Cabiilet meetings and later Parliament meetings. and I am glad he is here today present personally. (Appl'ause) Sir, this is a very big sacrifice he is doing at the etpense of his health . wbich requites a complete rest. I would like to pay a very high tribute and I ain sure I \\ould not want any of the Members here to ask for a ceiling for that.

•.

Sir; an amendment to the Bill was brought before the House of Repre­sentatives.

The amendment fixed a ceiling of 200 per cent or one-twelfth of the annual value whichever is lesser. I am most happy to see that this ceiling has been again amended to read as 100 . per cent. Sir, the 200 per cent ceiling would have been worse than not fixing a ceiling at all; such high ceiling would have resulted in a very sudden rise from the level of existing rents. Such sudden and steep rise would have become unbearable to many of the tenants and they would have been put out of business.

Sir, it is not true in all cases to say that the landlords of controlled premises are hard hit by low rentS. I would like to make publicly known some of the very private and secret dealings that have been going on in this country. Some of the landlords have received lump sums as compensation, which \\·as sometimes called tea nibney, fot offering tenancy of their coi:ttrolled premises. Every time the tenancy changed hands, again, the landlords tlsed to receive lump sums of money. I would not know how many landlqrils wete not guilty of such a crime. When both sides agreed, money was ex.changed and nobody knew about it. Rent controlled premises were repafred, renovated and maintained by the tenant's. and the iandlords had not &J>ent a red cent for their un~eep. The present annual value of the .. rent controlled premises is mainiy due to the care and upkeep of the tenahts for

which they ifad too often td shell out nidney.

Sir. pretnises . that are aged, more than 30 years ai1d over. ha~ more than once earned their capital value, and this is amply borne out by the minutes which my Honol:trable friend . Senator Lim Hee Hong read out; where he has said that old premises have earned their capital. Some expert's, inclm;ling my Honourable friend, Seriat'or Lim Hee Hong, believe that such aged buildings do not by arty means deserve more than 60 per cent to 70 per certt from thefr existing rental. ·

Sir, the Govemmerit should consider the very vital fact that the tenant population, who would suffer as a result of the enforcement of the Rent Act of 1966 is 90 per cent of the population and the landlords are only 10 per cent, or less. One of the main reasons for rent control all over the world was to safeguard the large tenant population in every country. In the larger interest of a large section of the people. many countries have not even now dared to de-control rent and some of those who have hastily de-controlled have re-controlled again. This should in a way console the feeling of the Honourable Minister. if he is being accused of having rushed the Bill. Many countries experimented on this. They. too, with a fair sense of doing justice to landlords and tenants, went to the extent of de-controlling premises, but they, in the light of experience from representations made to them and from the exploitation that was evidenced. had found it necessary to re-control again. So, what has happened in our country is not a thing that should surprise anybody.

Sir, Municipal valuations of proper­ties in many cases has become obsolete and unrealistic. Jriipohance of centres of towris has beeri shifting and changing within the last ten years, but Municipal valuation has still be'eri based oh old concepts of street importance. Matty of the tenants; who had rio opportunity of knowirtg the Municipal valuation, ~re questioning how; when the rents have sky-rocketed as a result of the n~m-existence of a. ceiling, the propriety of the Municipal valuation; Indeed;

1407 11 MARCH 1967 1408

without that knowledge and with the indolence of the landlords, some of the houses have been fixed with a valuation that cannot be justified and can only be called arbritrary. The last Kuala Lumpur valuation was taken in the year 1963/64 when properties were at the peak of value. Now, if you look at the market value these valuations are again obsolete.

Sir, Municipal valuations of proper­ties in Kuala Lumpur were raised very high by the Municipal Valuer with the sole aim of reaping higher assessment. This is not the case with other towns of Malaysia. In Ipoh, they have even refused to raise the valuation. It stands as a very glaring comparison-and Penang also. Sir, a town that is run efficiently need not raise the valuation very often and very high. The practice of relating maximum rents to rating values is wrong. This would be like putting the cart before the horse. On the contrary, rental values should determine rating values. Finally, such system should be uniform and correct in rating values.

Sir, the other day, I was present in the Lower House in the visitors' gallery and I was once again very happy to hear the Honourable Minister for Local Government and Housing giving sumptuous clarification and assurances to the Members of the Lower House and through them to the people of the country that in the light of experience more amendments would be brought to the Bill, and especiall}' he stressed that he has received representations on compensation which he is looking into and he would not delay this amendment for the sake of those subsequent amendments. I would like to add to the representations that have been already made that a compensation of two to four years' rent for tenants for vacating premises written into the law is very inadequate. The compensation should be awarded on the basis that what tenants would lose in properties and goodwill and what the landlords would gain and the ceiling should be raised, so that this consideration can be within that ceiling. and I suggest. Sir, that there are cases that would merit to eight

years of rental to compensate them. There are cases where even ten years would not be enough for them in that the property is worth only $50,000 but the improvement that have been done are sometimes worth even $75,000. So, I would request the Honourable Minister to give the same kind and keen consideration that he has been giving to this Bill and would like him to bring in the necessary amendment in respect of compensation at a sub­sequent meeting of the Parliament. Thank you very much.

Wan Sulaiman bin Wan Tam: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya chuma hendak meminta penjelasan sahaja. Mithal-nya "A" itu ada sa-buah rumah, yang di­sewakan kapada "B" dengan per­setujuan kedua2 pehak sa-banyak $100 sa-bulan. Kemudian sa-lepas sa-bulan lama-nya Majlis Bandaran semak sa­mula basil pintu dan di-pernaikkan hasil pintu rumah yang tersebut. Ada­kah sewa rumah itu boleh di-pernaik­kan juga?

Tuan Khaw Kai-Bob: Mr President. Sir, before I deal with the individual points, I would like to thank the Members of this House for supporting this Bill.

I would like to take up the various points raised by the Honourable Sena­tor Nik Hassan first. I am afraid that what he has quoted in this House is only unique in the case of Kelantan. Perhaps, the Honourable Member him­self is not aware of the fact that the Kelantan State only, which I think as far back as 1962 or 1963, on its own bat completely abolished the rent control, without first tl;lking any acfon whatsoever, unlike what we have done in this case, to bring about some measure of safeguard for the tenant. In fact, when I visited Kelantan in 1964, I was shocked to learn that the PMIP Government in Kelaptan just by a stroke of the pen completely abolished rent control in that State, as a result of which there was a tremendous amount of confusion in Kata Bharu town especially, and I have had a lot of letters from the people, the tenants in the big towns in Kelantan com­plaining of their hardship, and I know in one case the rent was increased

'· .

1409 11 MARCH 1967 1410

from something like $300 to $1,200;and as I said, this only happened inKelantan when the Kelantan StateGovernment took upon itself to com-pletely abolish rent control, as a resultof which the cases quoted by theHonourable Senator happened. I thinkthis only happened in Kelantan andnot elsewhere in Western Malaysia;and in fact it was as a result of thisexperience and the knowledge of whatconfusion ensued, as a result of thisunilateral action taken by the KelantanPMIP Government, that taught me mysubsequent lesson of how to deal withthis matter, when the first proposal wasmade to bring about some form ofrevised control of rent ordinance orAct in this country, which was referredto by the Honourable Senator Lim HeeHong, when he quoted the proceedingsregarding certain statements made byMr H. S. Ong then in the Attorney-General's Chamber. Although the pro-posal was made to go into this, Ithink I should correct the impression.that the Federal Government intendedto do away with the rent control com-p^etely as in the case of Kelantan. Ithink the Honourable Senator LimHee Hong by quoting this extract isa bit out of context. I think the ideaof that being discussed was that theGovernment threw this proposal outfor views and, in fact, as a result ofthrowing out this proposal, sub-sequently the Athi Nahappan Com-mittee came into being, and in fact itmay not be known generally that atone time as a result of this suggestionthere was some misunderstanding, asa result of which some States in factmistook it as a complete de-control,and subsequently as a result of furtherdirections going out from my Ministrythis possibility of a sudden de-controlwas stopped and the Rent ControlOrdinances prevailing at that time werefurther renewed for another year toenable the Athi Nahappan Committeeto deliberate and collect views to for-mulate some kind of proposal, inorder to deal with this whole questionof gradual stages of de-control of rentin this country. As I said just now, itwas as a result of what I learnt inKelantan and the hardship caused in

Kelantan that I put forward to theGovernment the necessity of having acommittee to go into this matter andsubsequently for a proper Bill to be in-troduced in this House for introducinggradual stages of de-control. So, I amafraid what has been referred by theHonourable Senator Nik Hassan isonly unique to Kelantan, and I amglad to say that this Control of RentAct, 1966, has now brought forwardcertain safeguards and protection evennow to the people in Kelantan, becauseSection 1 of this new Act stipulatesthat the Act shall apply to all the Statesin the Federation of Malaya. So, there-fore, I think the Alliance Governmenthas done a good thing in bringingabout certain safeguards which are nowapplicable in the State of Kelantandespite the fact that Kelantan did awaywith this rent control, I think eitherin 1962 or 1963, I cannot recollectquite exactly the year, of the suddenabolition of rent control in the Kelan-tan State. Therefore, the statementmade by the Honourable Senator thatwe have abolished the law beforeallowing the new law to come intoeffect does not apply to this particularAct. I think he is only referring towhat happened in Kelantan.

Now, furthermore, Sir, the Honour-able Senator raised a further questionof what happened to rents paid on theadvice of lawyer since the implementa-tion of this Act, that is from the 1stJanuary, 1967, or whether the tenantshave to now revert this matter to court.I think the provisions of this amendingAct are very clear. The provisions in-clude a clause to the effect of makingthis retrospective from the 1st January,1967; in other words, whatever thearrangements or agreements come tobetween the landlord and the tenantafter the 1st January, 1967, and if thearrangements are such as to go againstthe present amendment, that is eitherthe 1/12th of the annual value, or100%, whichever is the lesser of thetwo, obviously such arrangements oragreements will have to be readjusted,because it is a cardinal principle of thelaw of Contract that no one can con-tract outside the law. Therefore, what-ever arrangements or agreements you

1411 11 MARCH 1967

have come into will be null and voidas far as that part which is against theamendment is concerned , and I thinkit will have to be readjusted . Now, asto exact procedure there , again, thishas not been generally understood andin fact has been brought out again inthe Lower House this cumbersomeprocedure under the new Rent Act.In fact , it is not so . It is for the veryreason that we wanted to simplify theprocedure of all the actions under thisRent Act that we have resorted tothis simple reference to Rent Officer,to Tribunal , and Appeal Board andthese are not Courts; these are verysimple hearings in camera , unless theTribunal or the Appeal Board choosesto open the hearings to the public,otherwise it is in camera and, in fact,the tenant and landlord can bothappear before the Board and the Tri-bunal without any legal representationIt is a simple procedure and also nottime consuming , unlike the proceedingsunder the old Rent Control Ordinanceswhen you have to refer every case toCourt; and as you know we have along waiting list of court cases andalso to incur expense , long delay intime as well as expenditure involved incourt proceedings, and because of thatwe have this very simple procedureunder the present Act. Therefore, forcases now referred by the HonourableSenator Nik Hassan , it is for the tenantor landlord to go before the RentOfficer, if they have already reachedcertain agreements and such agree-ments are against the amendments nowand try to come to some readjustmentand change the whole position again.There is no necessity of going to court;or possibly, if the tenant is literateenough to be able to determine, andhe is prepared to pay the maximum ofcourse , then he can work out whatis the 1 /12th of the annual value or100%, whichever is the lesser of thetwo and then decide if that comes upto, say , about $120 and the agreementhe reached previously with the land-lord is $150, all he needs to do forthe next month is to pay $120; or, ifhe feels because the landlord is notpaying all the maintenance or upkeep,and I have quoted you the definition of

1412

the word annual value , and he is doingsome of the maintenance of the pre-mises, and therefore he is taking oversome of the burden of the landlord,obviously the landlord cannot get theabsolute maximum under the amend-ment . I have stated just now in myintroduction address that this amend-ment does not mean I want to stressthis again, this amendment does notmean that the landlord can, in fact,get 1 /12th of the annual value or100%, whichever is the lesser. Thisdoes not mean that the landlord willget it but that is the maximum he canget. If the tenant can produce miti-gating factors, such as the factorsquoted in Section 6 plus the definitionI quoted to you, that the landlord mustundertake maintenance , repairs, insu-rance rates and taxes and this andthat, if the tenant has been paying ormeeting some of the obligations of thelandlord, obviously those are the miti-gating factors , which the tenant canproduce before the Rent Officer orTribunal and say , "Look here I cannotpay you the maximum, because I bearsome of the burden"; so, that is roughlythe position of the tenant under theamendment . I hope that has dealt withall the points raised by the HonourableSenator Nik Hassan.

Now with regard to a number ofpoints raised by the Honourable Se-nator Lim Hee Hong , I have alreadystated that what has been quoted maybe misunderstood , that it was theintention of the Government to com-pletely de-control by the stroke of thepen, it was not so ; and the referencequoted merely referred to the generalintention of the Government and ofcourse , before the Government couldact on it, it is the duty of the Govern-ment to put out feelers to variousauthorities , including of course theFederal Capital on which board theHonourable Senator was at one timea member , so that we could have theviews of the Advisory Board of theFederal Capital , and it was in thatcontext that this was thrown to theBoard for their views to be submittedto the Ministry.

With regard to the question of re-valuation , I agree that the Federal

1413 11 MARCH 1967

Capital is the only major town in whichthere has been a thorough revaluationduring the recent years, and this hasnot happened in the other towns andcites in the Federation of Malaya.Now, that has something to do withanother point raised by another Sena-tor, I think , speaking about some formof uniformity in valuation . Now, I candisclose to this -House that , in fact, amove has been made some two yearsago for some form of uniformity in thevaluation of property in this country,and action is on foot to have a CentralRating Authority, or Central ValuationAuthority, in the Treasury and we aremerely waiting for our qualified Valuersto be made available , some of whomhave gone overseas for training, andas soon as the necessary staff is avail-able, there will be a general valuationin this country on a uniform pattern,so that every town or city will havethe same standard of valuation as inKuala Lumpur . Now I do not wantanyone to be unduly worried about it,because revaluation does not meanautomatic increase in assessment. Ithink that is very important , I think,speaking on this, one of the Honour-able Members just now seemed to havegiven the idea that revaluation auto-matically means an increase in the pay-ment of assessment by the owners, butthat is not quite so. Although a re-valuation has taken place it does notnecessarily mean that there will be anincrease , an automatic increase, in thepayment of assessment by the land-lord, for the every simple reason thateach Local Authority operates on acertain budget . If a Local Authorityoperates , say, on a budget of $ 1 million,and it has to collect a million dollarsrates from the owners , or 80 per centare rates and the other 20 per centcoming from some other form of in-come, as far as that Local Authorityis concerned , it is only interested incollecting that amount of rates from thelandlord . So, therefore , if the annualvalue say previously it is standing at$10 million-has gone up to $20 mil-lion, and if the amount of moneyrequired for running the. Local Autho-rity is exactly the same , instead ofcollecting 30 per cent when the totalvaluation of the Local Authority is

1414

10 million dollars , what it has to donow, the Local Authority will drop therate to 15 per cent , in order to collectthe same amount it requires for run-ning the Local Authority . But never-theless , the valuation will go up in thatLocal Authority , so that there will bea common value, a common standardof value for all the property through-out Malaya , in which case then wewill reach a stage whereby there willnot be this great disparity of valuebetween a similar house in one towncompared to another house of similarstructure in another town . I think thatis the correct position . So, in fact, whathas been stated just now that relatingrevaluation to the efficiency of theLocal Authority is not quite relevant.

Now, the Honourable Senator alsoraised a hypothetical case regarding onwhat basis would the increase be underthe present amendment, for instance,in the case of a rent controlled pre-mises, say of $200 at present and theannual value of which has already goneup far beyond $200. Now, I do notknow whether I got his point quitecorrectly. As far as I know althoughcontrolled rent may be $200 beforeand as a result of revaluation, say,from $200 to a $1,000 , making adifference of $800 , as far as I knowunder the old Rent Control Ordinance,the landlord on application to the re-levant legal body has been allowed tocollect the additional payment of rateswhich the landlord is paying over thedifference of the increase in the annualvalue. Some may not be 100 per cent,but by and large they do get a certainamount of increase allowed by the legalbody under the old Rent Control Ordi-nance ; and you have the same rent,the old rent of $200 , so for argument'ssake , you have the difference of $800;so, the annual value has been bumpedup from $200 to $800 by the recent1960 revaluation . Now, obviously, thelandlord will have to pay an additionalamount of assessment on the $800, thedifference between the original con-trolled rent and the new annual re-valuation , and therefore the additionalpayment of rates by the landlord willamount to 16 per cent-I mean justtaking the Kuala Lumpur example: 16

1415 11 MARCH 1967 1416

per cent of $800 which will be $144.In other words, I think, some of thelandlords have been allowed on appli-cation to the legal body under the oldRent Control Ordinance to collect thisadditional $144 from the tenant duringthe course of one year $144 dividedby 12 will be $12 per month ; in otherwords, he will be able to collect $212as the increased controlled rent fromthe tenant. Now, if that is the casethen the Honourable Senator askedwhich is the rental to be used as thebasis of computation under the newamendment. In my opinion -I say inmy opinion, because there is no finalityin law under the present formula,$212 will be the basis on which thisnew amendment will have to becalculated on. In other words, thecontrolled rent will be $212 and underthe amendment if the annual value is,whatever annual value is, the landlordwill not be able to charge more than$424 or 1/12th of the annual value,whichever is the lesser of the two. Ithink that as far as I can see is roughlythe answer to that hypothetical case.

Now, we can all be very wise afterthe event. I am afraid that it is quiteeasy for one to say, "Well, did not Itell you this, and did not I tell youthat", but I think in the matter of rentcontrol, it is not such a simple matter :after all rent control was first broughtin way back in 1939, when the warbroke out in this country and againthat was reintroduced after the war andthen brought back again, as a result ofwhich we know that this has been onfor nearly 30 years since its firstintroduction. Obviously, you cannotintroduce a piece of legislation whichwill be satisfactory to deal with some-thing which has been going on for thelast 30 years. Now, rent control wasgradually brought to an end in theUnited Kingdom about six or sevenyears ago and from then on there hasbeen masses of amendments to thedecontrolling Bill or Act, in the UnitedKingdom, and in almost every Parlia-ment, we find there has been amendingAct to change the original Act to bringabout a gradual decontrol of controlledpremises. So, therefore, I am afraid thatwe have to learn from other countries,

and we have to go along and find outhow the Act is affecting the peopleand particularly in this case, as we arepractising parliamentary democracysometimes we may not be logical butstill when we are practising parlia-mentary democracy, we have to accedeto the request of the electorate, wehave to accede to the request of Mem-bers of Parliament, who represent thepeople, and if the views are such as tojustify an amendment to an Act, I amafraid that sometimes irrespective oflogical thinking we have to bring in anamending Act. I think that is a simpleway of putting this. As we know theRent Control Act, 1966, in fact containsall the necessary provisions as to deter-mination of fair rent, but nevertheless,because of the human failings, as Ihave stated in the Lower House, and toa certain extent because of the illiteracyof the masses, they cannot understandtheir rights, despite the fact that wehave tried to make statements in thePress, we have put on a forum in theTelevision, things like that, so manypeople have not been able to under-stand the provisions in the Act itselfthat there is a considerable amount ofconfusion; and because of this we can-not afford to have thousands of casesgoing to the Rent Officer or to theTribunal, or the Appeal Board thatwe feel at this stage, we should bringsome remedial measure to impose acertain amount Of ceiling, so that atleast as a first stage we would see somesettlement to this confusion, but never-theless we bring in the first step to-wards final and ultimate decontrol ofrent controlled premises in this country.

In connection with one final pointraised, regarding the compensation aswell as also the period of grace of timefor the removal of a tenant oncerepossession is granted to the landlord,I would like to repeat my appeal here,in this House, that my Ministry is everready to receive memorandum, or pro-posal, as to the quantum of compen-sation to be paid to a tenant as wellas the period of grace for the removalof the tenant once repossession hasbeen granted to the landlord.

Now, I would like to stress parti-cularly this point. I have received a lot

1417 11 MARCH 1967 1418

of letters in fact, I have received alot of letters on this issue but unfor-tunately, most of the letters I havereceived merely say, "Well, we do notthink the compensation from two tofour years is fair enough. We want itto be from eight to ten years". Someput it this way, "We want it from tento fifteen years". But, these letters arecompletely devoid of any data, orreason as to why it should be so. Iwould like representations made to meto contain reasons why it should beeight years or ten years. You mustquote cases for instance, on shop pre-mises, you can quote, "I have paid$40,000 for repairs of the premises inStreet "A" and the rent is (so much)and I have used the premises only forfive years and that unless I am givenso much compensation which equateswith e^ght years . . . . ." Now, if Iget enough cases like this to give mea cross-section view of the arguementput forward, then, and only then, canI consider what would be right quantumof compensation to be paid to atenant, but not otherwise. I am afraidby just merely quoting eight years, orten years or fifteen years, will not helpme in any way to bring about anamendment in this House, because Ihave to justify the quatum, if we aregoing to amend at all. So, therefore, Iwould like to appeal to HonourableMembers of this House, as well as tothe general public, to submit to mea memorandum in respect of these twoitems, which are still pending foramendment -I mean, if there is goodreason for an amendment at all, to letme have all the reasons for it, and Iparticularly deprecate some type ofsuggestions. In fact, there was onewhich appeared, I think, last Sunday orlast Saturday by someone claiming torepresent tenants in Kuala Lumpur.He said something to this effect: "Wewant only 20 per cent of increase andnothing more. I would like to tell allthe tenants they should defy the lawand go to jail". That sort of representa-tion will not help us in anyway, andI would like to take this opportunityto tell : that kind of a leader that thatkind of representation will not receive

any attention at all, and it will certainlynot get us anywhere by telling thepeople to defy the law and completelydisregard the provisions of the law.After all, we are practising parlia-mentary democracy and it is for all thepeople to seek out their Senators, theirMembers of Parliament, their StateAssemblymen and, for that matter, thepolitical bodies such as the M.C.A.,the U.M.N.O., the M.I.C.-and also,for that matter, the Opposition Parties,and for them to submit a memorandumto me, so that this matter can betackled logically and reasonably, so thatthe wishes of the people can be com-plied with from time to time. Thankyou, Sir. (Applause).

Question put, and agreed to.Bill accordingly read a second time

and committed to a Committee of thewhole House.

House immediately resolved itselfinto a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.(Mr (Deputy) President in the Chair)Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand

part of the Bill.Bill reported without amendment:

read the third time and passed.

MOTION

FORMATION OF THE MALAYSIAGROUP OF THE INTER-

PARLIAMENTARY UNION

Tan Sri T. H. Tan : Mr President,Sir, I beg to move,

That this Senate resolves that necessarysteps be taken to form the Malaysia Groupof the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Sir, for the past seventy-eight yearsthere has been in existence an inter-national body whose aims are :

"To promote personal contacts betweenMembers of all Parliaments constitued intonational groups;

To unite them in common action;To secure and maintain the full participa-

tion of their respective States in the firmestablishment and development of democraticinstitutions and in the advancement of thework of international. peace and co-operation, particularly by means of auniversal organisation of nations;

To study and seek solutions to allquestions of international character suitablefor settlement by parliamentary action;

1419 11 MARCH 1967

To make suggestions for the developmentof parliamentary institutions with a view toimproving the working of those institutionsand increasing their prestige".

Sir, this is the Inter-ParliamentaryUnion, which consists of nationalgroups made up of members of thelegislatures of sixty-seven countries,including countries in the westernbloc, such as America and the UnitedKingdom, countries in the eastern bloc,such* as Russia and Poland, and un-committed nations like the UnitedArab Republic and India. Our ownneighbours Thailand, Philippines andIndonesia are members of the Union.

Honourable Members should havereceived.. last September from theSecretary of the CommonwealthParlianentary Association (MalaysiaBranch), copies of various documentsrelating to the Inter-ParliamentaryUnion, _ including its Constitution, a

k' `tatdmen ._ of. __it structure, aims andactivities, `and;, so on. No doubt,Honourable,. Senators interested shouldhave studied these papers by now.There is, therefore, no need at this stageto elaborate on the Inter-ParliamentaryUnion in detail.

Honourable Senators who arefamiliar with the activities c( theCommonwealth Parliamentary Associa-tion of which we have been a membersince 1950, the Commonwealth Parlia-mentary Association (Malaysia Branch)and the Malaysia Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union will now existside by side. Both the C.P.A. and theI.P.U. are similar in organisation andhave similar aims, but the formeroperates essentially within countries inthe Commonwealth whilst the latter isa truly world-wide body.

Our membership . of the I.P.U. willnow afford Honourable Senators addi-tional opportunities to participate ininternational conferences overseas andmeet their fellow parliamentarians,The I.P.U. annual conferences heldin the various capital cities of theworld provide: a forum for the freediscussion of world affairs and pro-blems of the day by the legislatorsfrom various parts of the world and,

1420

as such, these conferences may beregarded as constituting an informalInternational Parliament. These con-ferences will provide valuable educa-tion for members and an insight intothe problems of their respective coun-tries.

Sir, apart from the annual con-ferences, the I.P.U. also issues anumber of publications, such as theInter-Parliamentary Bulletin andConstitutional and ParliamentaryInformation containing questions re-lating to parliament, its organisationsand procedure and other relatedmatters. Its interest in the subject ledit to establish in 1965, a new sectionknown as the International Centre forParliamentary Documentation for thepurpose of collecting information conthe organisation and functioning ofr presentative institutions in countriesthroughout the world. In November,1965, this Centre organised an inter-national symposium on the subject ofpresent-day problems of parliament,and subsequently in July 1966 theCentre issued a book called "Parlia-ments" which contains valuable in-formation on the various parliamentsof the world. Honourable Membersinterested may refer to this book whichis available from our Library ofParliament.

I sincerely hope, Sir, that ourSenators will support this motion.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir, I beg tosecond the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,That this Senate resolves that necessary

steps be taken to form the Malaysia Groupof the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

ADJOURNMENT(MOTION)

Tan Sri T . H. Tan: Mr President,Sir, I now beg to move that the Senateshall now adjourn.

Dato' Y. T. Lee: Sir, I beg tosecond the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned at 4.43 p.m.

15186-441-14-8-68