People's Constitution 1947

7/28/2019 People's Constitution 1947

1/30

r{iI

1"7 During all this time. demonsrarions in support of the principles ofthe Putera and the A.N/l.c.J.A. and rejecting the proposals of the workingcommittee- showed very clearlv that tlre people of vlalava, as opposed to"influential" and privileged groups, gave their rvhole-hearted approval tothe sta.nd taken by these organisations to be the ,'representatives of thoservho regard Malaya as their real home and as the object of their loyalt-v.In April of this yezu, these trvo organisations appointed a commineeto draw up their positive constitutiorrar proposals. These proposals werenot drarv up in anv secret conclaves. but are the result ofconstant referenceto the various associations affiliated to the trvo organisations, and havereceived in their flnal state, the unanirnous acceptance of all tlrese associationsin the lull conference called on July 4 to 7 inclusive and on August 10.

His vlajesry's covenrrnent has now, by the publication of its whitePaper, entitled "SurnmAry of Revised constitutiorral proposals adopted byHis Ma-iesry's Government," indicated that the coutents of that Mrite paoerare final decision of Flis Majesty's Governnrent.This decisior, ho'ever is not the llnal decision of,the people ofN,IALAYA. who fully realise tlrat this wtiite paper incorporates all workingcommittees' Proposal. except a fbw n-rinor provisions. Tlre undernocraticdecision of His lVfajesty's Government must not be allowed to prevail overthe will oftlie people of lVlalava, r.vho will continue to oppose this constitutionfinnly and unceasingly until a constitution which meets with their approvalis provided for Malaya.only the people of lVlalaya have the right of final decision, and noConstitution imposed bv ar-rtocratic method rvill be accept by them.

PART TWOCONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSALS AND EXPSSITION

SectionTERRITORY

l...There shall be established a Federation, to be called the Federationof Malaya, or Persekutuan Tanah Melayu, consisting of the nineMalay States of Perak, Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, pahang,Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu arid Perlis and of Singapore,Penans and Malacca.

The name "Federation of Malaya, or Persekutuan Tanah Melayu"suggested by the Working Committee has been adopted by us.We adhere in principle to the policy advocated by the Working

committee, that a Federation should be formed on the basis of a partnershipbetween His Majesty and Their Highnesses the Malaya Rulers, as sovereigrconstitutional monarchs (see Report of the Working Committee, paragraphs14 ,22 and27).The Proposals of the Working Committee, howeveq do not, in ouropinion ,succeed in putting this policy into practice.

(i) The sovereignty of the Malay Rulers is shorn of all reality by therequirementthat they must acceptthe "Advice" of His Majesty's Governmentthrough the High Commissioner and the British Advisers, in the exercise oftheir entire legislative and executive authority, with the exception of mattersof Muslim religion and Malay custom. (See Section 4, Model StateAgreements, and section 8, Draft Federation Agreement).

The word "sovereigl" as applied to a state has the clear meaning thatthe state is not subject in the exercise of its jurisdiction to the interference orcontrol of any alien government. Any requirement that a ruler should

0


2/30

"undertake to accept the advice "of an alien government is clearly a thindisguise for the fact tllat such "advice" amounts to full control ,and is thereforeincompatible with sovereiqntv.whether such "advice" is given frequer-rtly or not, rvrretrrer it is acceptedwillingly or not, is beside the point, which is that the ruler must accept that"advice", whether he likes it or not .The ordinary meani'g ofthe word "advice" carries with it the nsaessaryimplication that the advice given may be rejected, at the discretion of theperson advised. An "undertaking to accept advice" is therefore a contradictionin terms.The "undertaking to accept advice" which was contained in the former

treaties with their Highnesses the Malay Rulers, and is now repeated in theModel StateAgreements of the working committee is legal fiction designedto conceal as far as possible the fact tlrat British rule in Malaya, whether inthe colony of S ingapore. or in the Settlernents of penang and Malacc4 or inthe Malay States, is absolute and untbttered.

The Proposals of the working committee preserve trre unfetteredpower of His Majesty's Government in Malaya, under the cloak of the samelegal fictions as may have deceived past generations, but which are now nolonger able to conceal f-rom the people of Malaya the naked fact that Malayais, from Perlis to Singapore, a British colony.

(ii) This failure to place the reality of sovereignty in the hands oftheMalay Rulers made it impossible for the working committee to place themin the position of constitutional monarchs.ln our view, and this is today the generally accepted view, aconstitutional monarch is a sovereign ruler who delegates his legislativeand executive authority to the elected representatives of his people. This,for instance, is clearly the meaning of the term "constitutional monarch,,asit is applied to His Majesty.

The requirement, therefore, that Their Highnesses should undertaketo "accept advice" precludes them from being either sovereign ort2

constitutional, since, once the sovereign power have been transferred bysuch an undertaking to an alien power they cannot be delegated to the electedrepresentatives of the people.

That full legislative and executive porver is vested, under the WorkingCommittee's Proposals, in His Majesty's Governrnent through the HighCommissioner and the British Advisers, is made verv clear by a reference tothe Draft Federation Agreement (Sections 8, 17, 55, 57, 58,91, 105 and106), and to the Model State Agreements (Section 4).

The effect of these provisions is as follows:(a) In the Federation:Full executive authority is, of course, entirely in the hands of the

High Commissioner under Section l7 of the Draft Federation Agreement.Full legislative authoriry also rests entirely in his lrands:(i) lte can veto any legislation passed by the Federal Legislative

Assembly ,by withholding his assent under Section 57. Section 57 (3) shorvsvery clearly that it was intended that this power to withhold assent should bea real veto power.fhat Malaya is to be, in practice, a Crown colony, is confirmed by thewords of this sub-Section: "When a Bill is presented to the HighCommissioner for his assent, he shall...subject to ...any instructions addressedto him...through a Secretary of State, declare that he assents or refuse toassents thereto..."

It would be almost impossible to state more clearly that lV{alaya is,under this proposed Constitution, to be ruled from Whitehall as a colony.The only effect of the Working Committee's Proposals is to drape a ftwmore valueless and transparent pretences over the nakedness ofcolonialdomination - pretences which are, however, no longer able to achieve theirpurpose of concealing this fact from the people of Malaya.

(ii) On the other hand, the High Commissioner can impose anyIJ


3/30

legislation His Vlajesty's Govemrnert rvi5[ss, under Section 105, if he"considers that it is exped.ient in the interest of ...good government.,, Thewords "good -government" are obviously all_embracing.With these two powers _ of veto on the one hand, and of impositionon the other, it will be seen tlrat the Federal Legislative Assernbly will bele-eislative onl.u- in name, and wiil, in fact, be as powerless as trre ,,AdvisorvCorrncils" rvlrich norv s5j51.(tr) In the Malav States:Section 4 of the State A-qreement, read in co'junction with Sections91. I05, a.d 106 (2) of the Federation Agreement, prace exactly the samepowers of vero and imposition of legislation into the hands of the BritishAdvisers in the Malay States as are herd by the High commissioner in theFederation.(c) In the Settlernents:Si'ce tlre Straits Settre'rents (Repear) Act r946 did 'ot in any wayalter the stertus of Penang and N{aracca as crown coronies, there is, of course.'o quesrio* but tlrat full legislative a'cl executive authorify remains in theha.ds of His Majesty's Government through trre High comrnissioner andthe Resident Contrnissioners.That full legisrative and executive autrrority is to be vested in theHigh commissioner is arso expressry stated in paragraph 20, page eight ofthe Report of the working cornrniftee "...authority in the internar affairs ofthe Federation, wlretlrer legisrative, executive, or adrninistrative, wilr bedelegated to tlre High cornmissioner by the joint action of His Majesty andYour Highnesses .This is merel-v a tactfirr way of saying that Trreir Highnesses deregateauthority to the British Government, and the effect, tlrerefore, is to make noreal alteration in the Marayan Union poricy of perpetuating the coronialstatus of Malaya.In our Proposals, however, we lrave sought to place Their Highnesses

l4 ll

in the position of truly sovereign and truly constitutional monarch.(iii) The tull implementation of the Federal policy would also

necessitate the assumption by His Majesty of the position of constitutionalmonarch, as we have defined it, in relation to the people of such territoriesfcrrmerly included in the Colony ofthe Straits Settlements as are to be broughtintc the Federation.

The fact that the Straits Settlements (Repeal) Act 1946 did not affectthe position of Penang and Malacca as colonies, easily escaped attention inthe Working Committee's Proposals, since the whole of Malaya was to bebrought, in fact, if not in legalistic theory, under the direct administration ofHis Majesty's Government as a colony.

The definition of constitutional monarch given above would not,however, include His Majesty in relation to the people of a colony, sinceHis Majesty's jurisdiction over such people is delegated, not to the electedrepresentatives of such people but to the elected representatives ofthe peopleof Great Britain and Northern lreland assembled in Phrliament.The full implementation, therefore, of the policy of creating aFederation based on the partnership of His Majesty and Their Highnesses assovereign constitutional monarch would involve the following fouressentials:

(i) The vesting in Their Highnesses of allthe ights, prerogativesand powers appropiate to the Ruler of a sovereign state.

(ii) The detegation by Their Highnesses of full legislative andexecutive powers to the elected representatives of their people-(iii) The detegation by His Majesty of full legislative and executive

powers over such territories formerly included in the Colony of theSfrarTs Settlements as are to be included in the Federation, to theelected representatives of the people of such territories.


4/30

(iv) The further delegation, by the elected representafrves ofthe people of the various sfafes and setttements, of such powers aswould be necessary to ensure, a strong central government, to theFederal Government.We have incorporateC these four essen tials in our proposals.Very strong constitLrtional bonds will be established by the associationof His Majesty in a Federation of this type. Such an association of thesovereignfv of the British cror.r,n rvith that of Their Highnesses the MalayRulers would mean that the sovereignty of the Federation of Malayaincorporated the sovereignty of the British crown, and would thus establish

a closer association of the federation witli the British Crown than exists inthe case of the Dominions, whose sovereignr.v-' is more loosly associationwith that of the Britislr Crown.

Singapore should, we suggest, be included in the Federation, in theabsence of any adequate reasor.ls for its exclusion.

His Majes{'s Government has contented itself with the bare statementthat it is not its policy to include Singapore in the Federation at the presenttime, but has given no substantial reason to justifr this policy.His Majesty's Governrnent has clearly stated, however, that it is itspolicy to include Singapore in the Federation at some future time. No adequateexplanation, however, has been given of the circnmstances which militateagainst immediate inclusion.

There appears to be a tendency on the part of His Majesty'sGovemment to treat the inclusion of Singapore in the Federation as somenovel and unforeseen proposal, never previously considered or suggested,and which, though admined to have some possible advantages, is a step thatrequires a period or interval for deep deliberation and careful considerationbefore any further action is taken.

t6

This tendency cornpletely overlooks, in our view, the long and closehistorical association of Singapore with the mainland. This historicai unityhas forged a sense of unity which, before the war, over-rode and today stillover-rides, the merely, technical and legalistic differences of status. Thissense ofunity reached a new level ofconsciousness during the three lhnd-a-half years of Japanese Fascist occupation.

The present strength of this sense of unity can be shown for example,by the fact that the political parties of Malaya and the Pan-Malayan Federationof Trade Unions are organized on a Malaya-wide basis which includesSingapore.it has been suggested that it is for the "delnocratic" legislatures ofSingapore and the Federation to agree on the inclusion of Singapore. This,in our view, is a suggestion made only to delay the settlement ofthis question,since no account whatever was taken of the wishes of the people, either inthe inclusion of Penang and Malacca into the Federation or in the exclusionof Singapore; moreoven, tlle proposed legislatures referred to are notdemocratic.

The separation of Singapore from the mainland has. therefore, led toa deep and growing resentment among the peoples of Malaya at this arbitraryand autocratic action on the part of His Majesty's Government. Theoverwhelming weight of opinion, both in Singapore and on the mainland,has been, and still is demanding the inclusion of Singapore.

The demand has gathered added force from the experience of tl're pastone-and-a-half years, since the restoration or civil government, during whichtime it has been convincingly demonstrated that the separation of Singaporefrorn the rest of Malaya is uneconomic, and results in great adrninistrativediffi culties and anomalies.

This arbitrary decision, running counter to the whole historicaldevelopment or Malaya, and to the prgsent vital need of the people for aconstitutipnal focus in the form of a genuine citizenship baspd pn allegiance,cAnnpl buf lead to the impression that imperial interests continue to over-dethe irrterests and welfare of the people or Malaya.

t1


5/30

CITIZENSIIIPSection 2 .,. Thereshall be established acitizenship ofMalaya. This citi2enshipshall be a nationality, to be termed "Melayu", and shall carrywith it the duty of allegiance to the Federation of Malaya.Note: The term "Melayu" sha[ have no rerigious impricationswhatever

It is necessary. at the outset, that certain tenns should be carefullvanalysed and defined."citizenship" is the status of those who owe permanent allegiance toa state by reason of birth, naturalisation. or (in the case of women) marriage."Nationalit-v" is, in its political sense, synonymous with citizenship.The essential attribute of both citizensrrip and nationatity is the dutyof allegiance to the state:For instance, Sweet's "Dictionary of Englisrr Law " defines nationalityas "that quality or character which arises fiom the fact or a person's betongingto a nation or state. It determines the political status of the individual,especially rvith reference to allegiance."Again, the nationality larvs of the united States or American define"nationals" in general as those owing permanent allegiance to a state. Thisgeneral definition is followed by their defirrition of "American nationals" asbeing of two classes: (i) citizens, and (ii) those wrro, though not citizens,owe perrnanent allegiance to the United States.This example serves to show that, although it is possible for anyparticular state to distinguish arbitrarily between citizenship and nationality,by using these two words to distinguish between full nationals and nationalsof an inferior status, yet, even when this is done, the common basis ofpermanent al legiance remains.

18 t9

That citizenship and nationality are generally accepted as beingsynonymous, and that both these terms connote permanent allegiance, wasshown in the course of the hial of William Joyce. The Attomey-General, SirHartley Shawcross, for example, in his opening address, used "citizens" and"British subjects" interchangeably, and it was clearly accepted throughoutthe trial that the very basis of British nationalitv rvas allegiance to the Crown.

"Allegiance" is the general duty which embraces all the duties whichthe citizen owes to the state: it insludes for example, the duty to abide by theconstitution, to obey the laws, to defend the country, etc.A divided allegiance is, in our opinion, a contradiction in terms, andacquisition of citizenship under our Proposals therefore means therenunciation of all other allegiances.

It is to be noted, however, that this renunciation wi I I not mean, in thecase of British subjects, a transfer of allegiance from the Crown: theallegiance of such persons would, on acquiring Melayu citizenship, betransferred to His Majesty and Their Highnesses the Malay Rulers jointly.

The allegiance which is the common factor of both citizenship andnationality, is owed by the citizen in return for the protection which the stateaffords. The ancient definition of allegiance for instance, by Black-stone,which still holds good, is "the tie or ligament which binds the subject to theKing in return for that protection which the King affords the subject.

Such "protection" must today be widely interpreted to cover the generaladministrative function of promoting the welfare of the people, as well asmilitary and police protection.

"Loyalty" is, in its constitutional sense, the sentiment of devotion to astate on the part of those who give their willing allegiance to that state, andwho regard the territory of that state as their real home.

Loyalty cannot be adequately defined without reference to allegiance.The ordinary usage of words confirms that a man cannot be said to be "[oyal"to an alien country, a country to which he does not belong, to which he doesnot owe allegiance. He may live there, he may like living there (for various


6/30

rpersonal reasolls). Ite tnav therelbre live there for a long title. but that doesrlot mean that he will be "loval" to that country. His real loyalty wouldperhaps onlv be cruciallv tested if rhe staie in rvliich he resides soes to warrvith his orvn state. The Governrnent of his country of residence rvill doubt.and rightiv doubt. his loyalty to it. since he does not owe allegiance to it.thouch he could have transferred his allegiance to it by nanrralisation if hisreal loyalqv had been to the covernment of his countrv ol'residence. In theabsence of such a transfer of allegiance by natLrralisation, that Governmentr.vill rightly doubt anv transt-er of loyalr.v.'1-hat lovalty connotes duties is seerr in the ordinary course of humanrelationships. LoyaltS, benveen frierrds connotes the mutual acknorvledgementof certain duties (and rights). and it is Significant. as we slrallshow later inour explanation of Section 3 of our Proposals, that these duties becomeespecially important when one of the liiends is in trouble.

These duties between iiierrds are the basis of rnr-rtual trust. and are thecounterpart of the dury of allegiance r,vhich is connoted bv the rvord "loyalty"used in it constitutional sense.

This sentiment of loyaltv results from the recoqnitiorr by the citizensthat the state affords hinr protection and promotes his welfare. It is generallyaccepted today. however. that the state cannot protect its citizens effectivelynor eff-ectively pronrote their welfare, without their co-operation, and thatthis co-operation c:utnot be elicited rvithout the recognition ofcertain potiticalrights. and. in parlicular, without ohtaining the corrsent of the people to thelarvs by placing the administration of government into the hands ofthe people,through their elected represerrtatives.

This question of the necessity tbr co-operatit-rn on the part of citizensif the govemment is to be eflectivelv adrninistered is treated in greater detailin our explanation of the provisions of Section 23.The political rights rvhich nrust be recognised if'the co-operation and

colrsent of citizens is to be obtainecl must, lrorvever, be cornmensurate withthe duties which the state demands of its citizens. Rights without duties isauarchy: duties without rights is slavery. There must be rights and duties in

atlItttfttiIIiIItIiIIiIIitIiItIIIt|"

i:

equal rneasure.Rights and duties. r-noreover. ore not separate and distinct. The rights

of t;re individualcitizen implv corresponding duties on the part of all othercitizens (that is to sa,v. of the state). and vice versa.

Only on such a democratic give-and-take basis can the citizen feelloyalt"v to the state; only thus can citizenship be associated with lovalt.'-.

. It was, we suggest. for these reasous that Mr. Creech Jones. at thattime Urrder-Secretary of State for the Colonies, in dealing rvith the questionoFcitizenship for Malaya, laid dorvn the principle which. in our opirrion. isof the most central and vital importance, that "political rights.. should bee.rtended to those rvhcl rnake Malava tlreir real honre and the obiect of theirloyalt-v. "

This prirrciple expresses the inseparable clraracter of political right.loyaltv, and the country rvhich is the real honre.

We stand most firrnly and conrpletely b.v- this prirrciple. and seek 1ogive to it, in our Proposals, the real and valid expressiort wlrich lve f-eel rvasnot given to it by tlre Proposals of tlre Working Cornmittee.

This we have done:(i) by incorporating the demand for allegiance into the definition

of citizenship (Section 2 );(ii) by providing for a period of time during which potential citizenswould have full opportunity to consider all the implications of

citizenship, namely,(4 that it coty'brs aJull notionul stutus and thereft,tre excltreles the

retention ,f any olher ncttiortttlity:(b) thctt this national sttrttts is to be termed "Meluvlr":(c) lhat it ctsnnotesJilll allegiutce, ctnd therefire the renuncittlion oJ

ull other allegiance;2l


7/30

7

(cl1 thttt this allegicrnce connotes duties, in particular the duty tr,tdefend the countrv in the event oJ'attuck b1t an1, other country(Sections l9 to.2I inclusive).

(iii) by defining the political rights which are complementary tothe duties connoted by allegiance and without which loyalty can haveno meaning (Sections 6 to 18 inclusive).In our opinion, the fundamental problern which faces the framers of a

constinrtion which rvill fbrm a solid basis for the sound and stable progressof lVlalaya torvards a democratic self-goventment in the interests of theindigenous and dorniciled population, is the raisiug of the sense of mutualdependence and unity among the people of Malaya to the level of a nationalconsciousness based on loyalty.

In vierv of the tirct that lvlalaya's population consists of various races,and that a large proportion of tlris population have, at present, alienallegiances, we regard it as a condition precedent to such a development ofnational consciousness tJrat allegiance be demanded of all those who are tobecorne citizens.

This demand fbr ailegiance is the first and essential srep that must betaken to bind the people together into a national unit-v.

We visualise that His Majesty's Govenrment will have no dilliculty inaccepting this view, since the requirement of the allegiance of citizens wasembodied in the original constitutional seheme for Malaya, as enunciatedby the Secretary of State for the Clolonies in paragraph 10 of a white Paperent;tled: "Staternerrt of Policy on Future Constitution", presented toParliament in January 1946, as follows: "Those acquiring... citizenshipotherwise than by birth will be required to afllrm allegiance..."Only if such a demand tbr allegiance is made can the sentiment ofloyalty be properly developed. Loyalty must bave an object, and the onlyproper object of loyaltv is a state which extends its protection to its citizensby safe-guarding peace and order, atrd by protnoting their welfare.

As we have shown, this protection can only be given, and this welfarecan only be effectivelS, promoted. by eliciting the co-operation and consentof the citizens by the acknowledgement of political rights. Such anacknowledgement of rights must be accompanied by an acknowledgementon the part of citizens of those civic duties which, together, comprise thegeneral duty of allegiance.Loyalty cannot, therefore, be separated from allegiance. withoutallegiance there cannot be loyalty - there can only be, at best, a vague andunfocussed sentiment of attachment to the country because' for instance, orits climate, or because the individual concerned has become wealthy there,or hopes to become wealthy there, or for some other reason empty ofimplications of regard for the generalwelfare and unity of the people. Thissentiment of attachment would be associated with an alien allegiance, theexistence and consciousness of which would preclude the development ofloyalty to Malaya.

The Malay delegates at our Conference drew attention to the veryrdal fear among the Malays that, as a result of British imperial policy, theymight be submerged in their own country by aliens who owed no allegianceto the country, and who felt no sense of loyalty, dutv or obligation towardsits indigenous and domiciled people-

They therefore emphasised that citizenship must be equated withnationality and connote full allegiance. This was a view with which theConference unanimouslY agreed.

The Working Committee professed to be guided by the central principlethat "political rights...should be extended to those who regard Malaya astheir real home and as the object of their loyalty."

Paragraph 81 on page 23 of the Working Committee's Report states:-"Bdore proceet)ing lo the detailed consideration of the various

categories of persons who should be included as citizens, the Committeewished to have clearly before it the meaning of "citizenship" and itsimplications- It was explained that it was not a nationality, neither could it

23


8/30

develop into a nationctlity. It woulcl not alfect or impair in ctny respectwhatever the stctlus oJ'British subjects in rhe Seftlements, or the status ofsubjects of the Rulers in the Mcrlav States,'.The working committee did not add. afler the last sentence quoted,"...or the status of the reminder of the population as aliens owing perrnanentallegiance to countries outside Malaya".our conference \,vas readily able to understand the reason for theworking committee's failure to add these words (which w.e do not think itwill be disputed are a correct interpretation of the working Committee'sprovisions on citizenship), as such an addition would have made very clearthe emptv, futile, and dangerous character of this rnockery of citizenship.It will be observed that the "explanation" of citizenship accepted bythe working committee is in direct opposition to the definition we lravegiven. whereas rve have defined citizenship as being, in its generally acceptedsense, synonymous with nationality, the working committee accepted thatit was not a nationaliry, and tf'rat it would not ever develop into a nationality.Those who offered this "explanation" to the working committee wereverv well aware that the basis ofthe definition of nationality, in British law

as in the law of otlrer countries, is allegiance. Tlris, we suggest, is such aninherent f-eature of the meaning of the word "nationality" that it could nothave been absent from the minds of those who "explaiued" to the workingCommittee the meaning of citizenship.Paragraph 89 or the Working Committee's Report, on page 25, states

"Keeping in mind again the principle that citizenship is not a nationality,we concluded that oaths of allegiance would be out ofplace,,.If paragraphs 81 and 89 of the Report are read together, it becomesvery clear that the working Committee did in fact associate nationality withallegiance, and that they did not desire their so-called "citizenship" to connoteallegiance, nor, in fact, ever to connote allegiance.Paragraph 89 of the Reports reveals the real reason for the workingcommittee's definition of citizenship as not a nationality, It was a

1.4 25

circumlocution, the real meaning of which was that citizenship was nor toconnote allegiance.

By concocting a form of citizenship which is expresslv divorced fromallegiance, the Working Committee has, in our opinion, made it impossibleto develop loyalty, and therefore national consciousness and racial unity.By their "explanation", the Working Contrnittee threw into the waste-paperbasket the concept of allegiance to Malay4 and with it went loyal-ry-, nationalunify, and the whole future of Malaya as a stable and racially peacefuldemocracy.

Paragraph 81 of the Report also state that their type of "citizenship"..-could be a qualification for electoral rights, for membership of Councils andfor employment in Government service, and it could confer other privilegesand impose obligations..."but"...it was not possible at present to lay downprecisely what these privileges and obligations would be".

This admission by the Working Committee further confinns that thetype of "citizenship" evolved by them does not connote loyalty, since, if itdid, they would have been compelled, by their acceptance of the Under-Secretary of State's principle, to extend political rights to citizens.

We suggest that it was not by chance, however, that the WorkingCommittee accepted this negative definition of citizenship, which, as wehave shown reveals that they did not intend their citizenship to connoteallegiance.

They did not desire this allegiance, because they felt (in our view,correctly) that if allegiance was dernanded by the constitution, a real andvalid loyalty to Malaya would inevitably result.They feared the development of such a loyalty because, as the Under-Secretary of state had clearly indicated to them, such a loyalty would carrywith it a legitimate claim for the extension of political rights.

Such an extention of political rights would, however, have beeninconsistent with the autocratic structure which they envisaged, in which allpower would be concentrated in the hands of a High Commissioner onlyresponsible to His Majesty's Government.


9/30

They envisaged such a strucrllre because the members of the WorkingCommirtee were all concerned. directly or indirectly. to perpetuate theimperial control of Malaya. They consisted on the one hand of representativesof the Melayan Union Government, ressponsible to the imperial government,most of whom w.ere bureaucrats steeped in the reactionary traditions ofcolonial administration; and, on the other hand, of representative of the Malayaristocracy and its political organization, the United Malays NationalOrganisation, the maintenallce of whose privileged position depended onthe perpetuation or imperial contro[.

If the Federation should come into being on this basis, with citizenshiparbitrarily divorced from allegiance, and therefore from loyalty, and as longas this anomalous "citizenship", continued to exisl the Federation would beprevented from developing into a sovereign democratic state and wouldcontinue to exist as a real colony, subject to the dictates of an aliengovernment.

The struggle fbr a genuine citizenship, demanding allegiance andengendering loyalty, and for democratic self-government. are thereforeinseparable. They are two sides of the same coin.

The whole future well-being of Malaya would, in our opinion, bevery gravely endangered, to say the least, by the introduction of the type ofcitizenship proposed by the Working Committee.

There will be no allegiance. because allegiance is expressly divorcedfrom citizenship; there will be no loyalty and no national unity, becausethere is no allegiance; there will be no political rights and no civic duties,because there will be no loyalqv; there will be racial disharmony and classstrife, because there will be no national uniy; there will be no national unity,because there is no democracy.

Moreover, the Working Committee's citizenship would deliberatelyfoster and encourage in "citizens" of non-Malay race the retention of theirfeelings of attachment and al legiance to countries outside Malay4 and theirindifference to the welfare of the indigenous and domiciled population. Acitizenship which would make it possible for the Consul of a foreign state to

26 27

sit in the Federal Legislature as a "citizen", is nothing br"rt a tragic farce.Such "citizens" of Chinese race. for instance, would. in the event of awar in wirich the Federation was involved against China, be irrterned as

Chinese nationals. If this were not done, it rvould be the real national duty ofsuch citizens to do ever,vthing in their power to sabotage Malaya's war effort.

These f,acts reveal the dangerous and futile narure of this "citizenship"and expose it as a fraud on the indigenous and domiciled people of Mala-va.

No illusion could be more detrimental to the future of Malaya than tosuppose that "citizenship", encouraged in tlris way to retain their allegianceto countries outside Malaya, could be gradually persuaded to substitute forsuch alien allegiarrce, a genuine allegiance to Malaya on rvhich stable politicalprogress could be based. These fe',v words or the Working Committee wouldalways be there to bar the path to the development of loyalry to Malaya -"Citizenship is not a nationality. neither it develop iuto a nationaliry...keepingthis in mind...allegiance would be out of place".

We therefore consider it to be a matter of the most vital importancethat this mockery of citizenship should not be introduced. [t would be agross betrayal of the Labour Government's pledge to advance lvlalaya towardsself-government. Self-government would be absolutely precluded by thedeliberate rejection of allegiance. Loyalty would be still-born, and withoutloyalty, there could be no political rights.

It is absolutely essential and imperative that citizenship should connoteallegiance.The Working Committee themselves have adrnitted that theircitizenship could never develop into a nationality. Out of their own mouths,therefore, their citizenship is condemned, since there can be no reason forcreation of a citizenship other than that it should be the expression oi andcalculated to foster the development of, national consciousness and unif_v.


10/30

EFT+-T

*':'

t:

Sectiorr 3...The fbllowing shall obtain Mela.u''u citizenship by operation of law,i.e. automaticallv:-

(l) All persons born in Malaya,Provided that this sub-section shall not come into operation until

six months frorn the date of the commencement of the operation ofthis Constitution, during rvhich period an)' person born in Malayamay, having attained, or on attaining to the age of 18, make a sworndeclaration before a magistrate that:(a) he does not desire to accept lu[elctytt citizenship, and he shallnot thereafter acquire such citizenship by virtue of the

comn?encement of the operatitsn of this sub-section, or that(b) he does desire to accept such citizenship, ancl he shall thereuponhecomc a I,[elavu citizen.

And provided that any person born in Malaya whose father wasnot at the time of his birth a Melayu citizen, may, within one year ofattaining to the age of 18, make a swom declaration before a magistratethat he does not desire to retain Melayu citizenship and shall thereuponcease to be a Melayu citizen,

And provided that, if any person who acquires citizenship by virtueof the operation of this sub-section, and who shall not have been inMalaya for the whole of the above-named period of six rnonths, doesnot. within six months after his return, make a statutory declaration tothe affect that he desires to retain his Melayu citizenship, and deliversuch declaration to the Minister for Home Affairs. he shall cease tobe a Melayu citizen.

And provided that any person under the age of I 7 years and sixmonths at the date of the commencement of the operation of thisConstitution shall automatically acquire Melayu citizenship on suchdate.

28 29

(2) Any person born outside Malaya whose father was at thetime of his birth, a Melayu citizen, and:-(a) whose father was born in Maloya, or(b) whose father had become a Melayu citizen by nattralisation, or(c) who was registered as a Melayu citizen at the ffice of theMinisterfor Home Afairs within I yeor of his birth by deliveryto such ffice of a declarotion sigred by thefather and attestedby two responsible persons setting out the place and date ofbirth place ond date of marriage, the name ond sex of the child,and declaring that the father wishes his child to be registeredas a Melavu citizen.

(3) Any woman whose husband is a Melayu citizen.

Sub-section (l )We have provided in general terms that all persons born in Malaya

shall become citizens. This follows tlle generally accepted practice ofnationality laws.

Such nationality laws have, however, grown up in other countriesover a long period, whereas this Constitution introduces for the first timeprovision for the creation of a national status for Malaya based on allegiance.

In view of the special circumstances of Malaya, and in order that thelegitimate claim ofthe Federal Government for allegiance shall not be opento question, we have provided that all who acquire citizenship automaticallyunder this Constitution, should have the opportunity to refuse this citizenship,if they so desire.

This we have provided for by suspending the operation of this sub-section for a period of six months.This period would provide an opportunity for reflection andconsideration of all the implications of citizenship, namely:

iiriri:..t'Dl

i'i'


11/30

ry*-(at rhut it conJbrs a full ttcttiottdl status' and therefore excludesIhe retettlion of attl' other ttulionalin':(b) tlrctt this national statt'ts is to be termecl "Mela,r-tt";k) that it crtrtnotes -full allegiarzce, and therefore tlte renunciation ofall other allegiances:(cl) that this allegiance connotes duties, in particular the dutlt to defencl

the comttry in the ettent of attack by any other country.We feeI that we should make special reference to our proposal that

citizens should be termed "'Mela1/u". The Malay delegates at our firstConference emphasized that the term "Malayan" to designate citizens wascompletely unacceptable to the Malays. They f-elt that the term "Malayan"had always been used in contradistinction to tlrc rvord "Malay" to denote thenon'indigenous irrhabitants of the country, and that the Malays had thereforebecome accustomed to regarding themselves as excluded from the categoryof "Malayans". The Use of the term "Malayan" to designate the commoncitizenship would therefore involve the abandonment by the Malays, as theindigenous people of the couutry, of their proper title, and the acceptance bythem of a title which, in its accepted sense. included many who did notregards Malaya as their real home and as the object of their loyalty.

Our Conference realised moreover that, just as the Malays had becomeaccustomed to the distinction between "Malays" and "Malayans", so alsohad many non-Malays who nevertheless regarded Malaya as their real home,and that therefore such people might t-rnd some diff,rculry in accepting thedesignation "Melayu".Our Conference felt that, since the new common citizenship wculdrequire a name, it was inevitable, as between the Malays and the non-Malays,that one or these two groups would have to accept a designation to which itwas unaccustomed, and which it might therefore find a preliminary difiicultyin accepting.

Our Conference unzurimously agreed that it was only just and properthat the new common citizenship should be designated by the historic name

JU Jr- lAe-{r.art }-r,r

of the indi-eenous people, and that the acceptance of the new designationshould therefore fall on these of the non-indigenous people wlro. regardingMalaya as their home and as the object of their loyalty, accepted citizenship,leaving intact to the indigenous people their historic name.Our Conference unanirnously accepted the term "Melavu" inpreference to the tenn "Ma[ay" in view'of the fact that the historic name ofthe indigenous people is "Melayu" and not "Malay" wlrich is merely theanglicised version of the term "Melayu".

At the end of the given period those who, as a result of such reflectionand consideration, come to the conclusion that they are not prepared to acceptthis citizenship, are given ample time and simple facilities to declare thatthey do not wish to accept this citizenship.

Those who, at the end of the six-month period, have not made use ofthe facilities to reject citizenship will therefore not be able to complain tlratthey have had citizenship thrust upon them, and the allegiance which anynational government must require of its citizens mav then, with fulljustice,be demanded of them.

We have also thought it proper that those who wish to affirm theirloyalty to Malaya by a positive act of acceptance, may do so in the samesimple manner.lt should be noted that the age of majority adopted by us is l8 years.This is in confonnity with the practice of rnodern democratic constitutions.

In order to make perfectly clear the provisions of this sub-section, rveoffer the tbllowing examples of the courses open to those born in Malaya:-

l. "4" is over the age of lB at the date of the c'ommencement of theoperation of the Constitution (this date is referred to below as "the date ttfthe Constitution"). "A" cen, during the six-month periodfollotving, make ctdeclaration either accepting or rejecting citizenship. If he does nothing, hewill, qt the end of that period, automatically become a citizen, but will alwa,vsbe able to make a declaration of alienage under Section 5 (2) (d).

-1

Ff-l

z


12/30

2. "B" is over the age oJ'17 I/2 but under the age of Ig at thedctte of the constitution. "8" can make a declaration either acceptingor rejecting citizenship. If he does nothing, he will at the encl of thatperiod, divest himselJ'of citizenship by making a declctration uncler thesecond Proviso before his Igth birthdalt.At anlt time after that. however, he can divest hirnself of citizenship byntaking a cleclaration of alienage under Section 5(2) (ct).3. "c" i,s uncler the ttge of 17 I/2 on the dtte of the constitution. Hebecomes a cirizen automalically at once, since he woulel in any case beunable to pettbrm any valid act of acceptance or rejection before the expiryoJ'the 6-ntonth period. He can however, renounce his citizenship betweenhi.s I8th and I9th hirthdays under the second pro,-iso, and can also, at anytime after that, make a declaration of alienage under section s (2) (d).1. "D'is otttside fufalaya on the date of the constitntion. If he ttoesnot returns brfore the end of the 6-months period, or, having returned withinthat period. cloes not make a declaration of rejection in time to ovoidautomatic acquisition of citizenship, he u,ill lose citizenship automaticallytrnless he erpressly confrm his c:itizenship within 6-months ctfier his return.a'"Dtt is over the age rf'lB I/2 when he retxo.ns, he will have 6 monthsin v,hich to confirm citizenship. If he is uncrer the age of IB I/2 when herelut'tls, he mav, at any linte aJier his ISth birthday, and before his I9th,confirm his citizenship.He will, in any case, however. be able, at any time, to make a

declaratiott of alienage ttnder sectiort s (2) (d) after his Igth birthctav.5. "8" is horn after the date of the Constitulion. If hisfather hadbecome, beJbre his birth, a Melayu citizen, he u,ottld, of course, have norights of renmtciation under this Constitution.If his Jhthcr was nor, at the time oJ'his birth, o Melayu citizen, hewould hcne the right oJ'renunciation tntcler the seconcl proviso between his

)a

,:,'.{r.vt'

lBth and l9th birthdays, and would also be able to make a declarationof alienage after his lBth birthdav under section 5 (2) (d).The working committee professed to be guided by the principle that"citizenship" should only be extended to those who "regard Malaya as their

real home and as the object of their loyalty". (working committee Report,para. 80, page 23).They stressed (in our view, correctly) that this principle should bestrictly interpreted.They felt that this principle required qualifications for citizenshipwllich would satisfy two conditions, namely, that those who acquiredcitizenship should regard Malaya:(a) as their real home, and(b) as their object of their loyalty.The qual ification for citizenship which the working committee

thereupon proceeded to draw up, do not, howeveg in our opinions, serye totest either of these two conditions.Long end continuous residence is the essential feature of theirqr.ralifications. Such residence does not, in our opinion, provide any propertest that Malaya is regarded as the real home.Such residence is the result of an opinion formed by the individualthat residence in Malaya is, in general, to his best advantage. This opinion

is, in every ordinary case, based almost entirely on economic considerations.The essential feature, therefore of this motive for long residence isthat it is a self-regarding motive, pure and simple, and connotes no regardfor, or interest in, the welfare of the people as a whole whatever.lt is, moreover, a motive which ceases to have the effect of providinga reason for continued residence as soon as the economic attractions. onbalance. cease.such residence is in no way inconsistent with a sentiment of attachmentto some other country as the "real home", and with the feeling therefore,


13/30

that Malaya is merely. at best, a "second lrome".The vast rnajority of Europeans, for instance, resident in IVIalay4 evenfor l5 years and longer. do not regard Malava as their real home, but only as

their place of residence during their working years, or until they have amasseda suffjcient tbrtune to retire and "go home".

The condition of long residence does no more than ensure that thecitizens in question have, during that time. on the whole preferred to live inMalaya than elservhere.

Such a preference is. however, a very different matter from regardingMalaya as a "real home".

The validity of this objection to the long-residence qualification as atest of whether Malaya is made the real home has been admitted, byimplication, by Sir Edward Gent, Covemor of the Malayan Union, in answerto the statement of Colonel H.S. Lee in the Malayan Union Advisory Councilon the 25th August, 1947 that he failed to see what sane objection therecould be to person deciding to retire from Malaya, after spending the bestyears of their lives here, to spend the evening of their lives elsewhere, SirEdward Gent replied "Neither can I see any sane objection to his doing so,but such a decision does not support the view that their real homes were inMalaya".

We entirely concur with Sir Edward's view on this point, but wouldpoint out that the long residence qualification of tl-re Working Committee donot serve to test this aspect of future intentions, but only that of pastpreference.

To regard a country as a real home implies a considerable sentimentof attachment, involving a recognition of the essential identity of interest ofthe individual with the rest of the population, a consequent regards for thewelfare of the people as a whole, which is synonymous with the sentimentof loyalty, a consequent acknowledgement of the duties to the people as awhole (that is, to the government) which comprise the general duty ofallegiance, and lastly, an "animus manendi" a desire to remain permanentlyin the country- This "animus'manendi" is not the mere intention to remain in

34 J)

the country until economic circumstances pennit departure to some othercountry in which the individual would actually prefer to live, but means theintention to reside until death. This latter intention may be def'eated, as, tbrinstance, ill-health necessitating a deparfure to Switzerland, but that wouldnot affect the real intention of the individualto resides, if possible, in Malayqand is to be distinguished frorn the rype of intention referred to by col. H. S.Lee, rvhich implies residence in Malaya only until, if possible arrangemenrscan be made to depart from Malaya.

The country irr which a man would prefer to lay his bones, and whiclrhe is prepared to die to defend, is his real home.

Long residence has, however, in itself, no irnplications as to futureintentions. Substantially, long residence proves long residence and nothingelse which has an-v relevance in the present context.

The economic attractions which have motivated the long residencemay cease at any time, relative to other countries, and the reactions to sucha cessation of those, who although resident for many years in this countryduring its economic attractiveness, and although their fathers and grandfathermay have resided here for the same economic reasons, have not made Malayatheir real home, will soon be made apparent by their speedy departure. Theemigration of chinese fiom Dutch territorv on the introduction of income-ta.r in those territories is an example of the reaction of persons who, thoughthey themselves, and even their fathers and grandfather, may have residedin any given territory for years, are really only residing there for purelyeconomic reasons, and have no loyalty whatsoever to these countries.

The long residence qualification could be stretched frorn l5 years to50 years without altering its ineffectiveness to test whether the country ismade the real home or not. The residence qualifications required by thenahrralisation laws of sovereign states is in quite a different category sinceit precedes the performance of a positive act - the taking of an oath ofallegiance.

The man who lives in Malaya for 60 years, and feels throughout thattime that he would live elsewhere, if only be could afford ir, and whose last


14/30

wish it is, on lris death-bed, that his remains should be removed fiom Malaya,to be buried else"vhere, can hardly be said to make Malaya his "realhome".Yet such persolls would, by the Working Committee's proposals, beaccepted rvith open arrns as persons who lrad proved that Malaya was their"real home and the object of their loyalty".

In our opinion, the Working Cornmittee were incorrect in dividing theUnder-Secretary of State's principle into trvo separate parts.It was not by chance, lrowever, that they did so, siuce tliey rvere forcedto do so by their "explanation" or the meaning of citizenship.By divorcing citizenship, in effect, tiorn Ioyalty, it is obvious that

there could be no question of even attemptitlg to tesr loyalty.In order, lrowever. to lull the justifiable suspiciorrs of the Malays,who very naturally would regard the creation of a citizenship divorced fromloyalty rvith great alarm. the working committee were forced to go throughthe motions of testing sornething, so that the people of Malaya, andparlicularly tlre Malays, rnight be lroodrvinked into believing that they weresatisfting the requirements of the Under-Secretary of State's principle.This principle cannot, howeveq be dissected in this way. The keywords in the principle - "real home" and "loyalry" are not separate and distinct,but are inseparably bound together in meaning.

As we have shown under Section 2 of our Proposals, loyalty cannotbe adequately defined in its constitutional sense without reference to thefact that the object of that loyalty is the country which is regarded as the realhome.

In other words, there is one. and only one, test of rvlrether Malaya isregarded as the real home, and that is the test of whether Malaya is regardedas the real home, and tlrat is the test of wlrether Malaya is regarded as tlreobject of loyaltv. And there can be one, and only one, test of loyalty - thefree and rvilling acceptance of an al tegiance connoting full national status,and connoting the duty to defend the country against al I other countries, ifnecessary.

That is the acid test - to say, in effect, to the potential citizen ae forJO

#t:;r..+rr'.'..i], ti*-,s!.,rEi

example, clrinese race: " Are you prepared. if called upon to do so, to fieht inthe defence of Malaya against China? ,,.That, we claim, is the test provided by our proposals.The working cornmittee, by concocting a so-called "citizenship" thatis without meaning or substance. precluded themselves from providing

qualifications with any meaning or substance.The necessitv to formulate the rear test u'hich is implicit in the Under-secretary's principle, in terms of an allegiance, the essential feature of whichis the duty to deferrd the country in time of waq is the result of the fbct thatloyalty has its greatest significance in time of war.

Just as the duties which arise out of a relationship of loyalty betweenfriends become especially significant when one of those friends is in trouble.so the implications of allegiance and loyalty become especially signiticantin time of war.

The duty to fight, and, if necessaw, die in the defence of the country-will only be willingly undertaken if the country is regarded as the real home,and as the object of toyalty.our Proposals, we feel, meet tJre requirements of the under-Secretary,sprinciple in the only proper manner by dernanding allegiance, and acceptinginto citizenship only those who have, expressly or by clear implication, showntheir willingness to give this allegiance. onry such persons can be said, wefeel, to regard Malaya as their real home and as the object of their loyalty.since it is, in our opinion, inevitable that those who are, in this way, facedwith the free choice between one allegiance and another, between onenationality and another, will choose that allegiance and that nationality whichderives from the country which tlrey regard us their real home and as theobject of their loyalty.Sub-section (2):-

This sub-section follows closely the principre ofthe British Nationalityand Status of Aliens Act 1914.)t


15/30

This principle is based on the desirabilit_v ofexcludins from the automaticacquisition of citizenship. the second and subsequent generations born outsidethe country.In this way, only those bom in Malaya, or who have proclaimed theirIoyalqv by a positive act of naturalisation, can pass on citizenship to their

off-spring born outside Malaya, without the performance of a positive actrvhich serves to reaffinn loyalty to Malaya on the part of the father.

Sub-section O ):-This sub-section is merely the formal expression of the commonlyaccepted principle that a woman follows the nationality of her husband.

Section 4...(l) citizenship may be acquired by the granting of a certificate ofnaturalisation.(2) A certificate of naturalisation may be granted by the Minister for

Home Affaire on his being satisfied that that applicant:(i) has resided in Malaysia Jbr eight out of the ten yearspreceding the application,Provi


16/30

Provided that any person whose application for a certificate ofnaturalisation has been refused may petition the Federal LegislativeAssembly to review the decision of the Minister.

The provisions ofthis Section follow the normal practice of nationalitylaw; and are largely based on the British Nationalify and Status of AliensAct 1914.It will be observed that rve have provided the applicant fornaturalisation must pass a simple oral test in the Nlalay language only,whereas the working Committee provision permitted the alternative of theEnglish langrnge.Since Malav is the language ofthe indigenous people, and is, moreover,the "lingua franca" of the domiciled people, and will become so to an ever-increasing extent, we have thought it both proper and desirable to confinethis test to the Malay language.It will also be observed that, unlike tl-re working committee, we haveincorporated a full oath of Allegiance into our proposals; this, of course, isthe natural corollary of our definition of citizenship as a nationalitv connotingallegiance.our provisions diverge from Englislr practice only in that we haveprovided tbr the reference of applications for naturalisation refused by theMinister to the Federal Legislative Assen-rbly.This we have done because rve have co'sidered it desirable that theexercise of the Minister's powers in this irnportant respect should be subjectto the irnmediate corrtrol of the democratic Federal Legislative Assembly.Bitter experierrce of the arbitrary exercise of such powers by officials notsubject to dernocratic control have led to the provision of this safeguard inour Proposals.

40 4I

Section 5...(l) (a) If, in the opinion of the Minister for HomeAffairs. it isdesirable that any certificate of naturalisation granted by himshould be revoked, the Minister shall refer the case to the FederalCourt fbr enquiry, and slrall make a report in writing setting outthe reasons why he considers that such certificate should berevoked, and shall cause to be served on the person whosecertificate is to be enquired into a copy of such report.(b) The Federal Court, on receipt of the aforesaid report, shall

issue a summons to the person whose certit'icate is to be enquiredinto, to appear before the High Court on the hearing of theenquiry, and after reading the report of the Minster, and afterhearing the evidence, if any, of the person whose certificate beingenquired into, shall recommend to the Ministerthat the certificateshould or should not be revoked, as the case may be, and theMinister shall, in accordance with such recommendation, eitherrevoke the certificate or not, as the case may be.

(2) Any Melayu citizen slrall cease to be a Melayu citizen who:-(a) remains out of Malaya for more than two consecutive years

without making a formal declaration in writing attested by fwowitnesses to the effect that he desires to retain his Melayucitizenship, and delivering such declaration to the Minister forHome Affairs within such period of two years,

Provided that any period of absence from Malaya for thepurpose of education or otherwise consistent with essentialcontinuity of residence in Malaya, shall not be deemed toconstitute absence frorn Malaya for the purpose of this sub-section,


17/30

(b) when in anlr foreign state and not under a disability obtainsa certif-icate oI nahrraiisation as a citizen of such state, or by anyother voiuntary means becomes natttralised in that state, or doesarrv act inconsistent rvith the retention of lvtelayu citizenship,

or (c) being female, marries or is married to an alien,Provided that any lvlelayu cifizen whose husband ceasesduring the continuance of the marriage to be a Melayu citizen,may, rvithin six months from the date loss of Melalu citizenshipby such husband, make a declaration that she desires to retainher Melayu citizensltip, and shallthereupon be deemed to be aMelay'u citizen,

or (d) rnakes a declaration of alienage.Any Nlelayu citizen of the age of 18 and above, and not

under a disabilitv, may make a declaration of alienage:(i) whtt at his birth or at an.y other tinrc, becarne under the law of

anyJbreigt state, the subject of that state also, and is still such.subject:fti) wh


18/30

RIGHTS AND DUTIES CITTZENSA. RIGHTSSection 6... All citizens of Malaya enjoy equal, fundamental right

and opportunities in the political, economic, educationaland cultural spheres. regardless ofrace, creed, colour orSCX.

Section 7... All citizens of Malaya are equal befbre the law.Section 8... Women enjoy equal rights with men under the

constitution in every resDect.

Section 9... Citizens of Vlalaya are guaranteed freedom of personwhich shall include:-Freedom of speechFreedorn of publicationFreedorn of assembly and meetingFreedom of religion arrd conscienceFreedom of movement

Section l0...citizens of Malaya shall not suffer arrest or detention orsearch oftheir homes and correspondence except underdue process of tlre law. They are also guaranteed a speedyand fair trial in the event of amest.

Section I1... The rights of property of citizens of Malaya areguaranteed and shall not be endangered without dueprocess of law.

44 45

Section 12.,. A minimum wage level shall be t'ixed for all wage a'clsalary eanters. whether rnanual, clerical, professional orotherwise.

Section 13... Citizens of Malaya have the right to mainrenance in oldage and also in the case of sickness or loss of capacity torvork.

Section 14... Citizens of lvlalaya have the right to leisure.Section 15... Citizens of l\,lalaya have the right to education.Section I 6... Every worker has the right to at lease two weeks' vocation

leave rvith firll pay evely year; and women workers totrvo rnonths'maternity leave rvith f'ull pay.

Section 17... The right to strike is guaranreed by this constitution.Section 18... [t is a right, guarauteed by the constitution for any citizen

to petitiorr the Council of Races drawing the affention oftlre Council to tlre need for any measure which he feelsis necessarv for the advancement or protection or anysection of the people.

B. DUTIESSection l9-..lt is the duty of every citizen of Malaya to det-end the

country. Treason to the country will be punishable withall the severity of the law.


19/30

Section 20... It is the duty of every citizen to abide by the constitutionand observe the laws.

Section 21...rt shall be regarded us a fundamental duty of citizens,through theirelected institution, to direct special attentionto the advancement of any section of the people whoare, or who may be found to be, in a condition needingsuch advancement, be it economic, social. educationalor cultural.

The under-Secretary of State's principle states: "political rights...should be extended to those who regard Malaya as their real home and theobject of their loyalty." Having taken adequate steps to ensure that thosewho become citizens under our Proposals do so regard Malaya, we haveaccordingly extended to them those political rights which are today generallyaccepted as necessary.

Since, however, political rights cannot exist without civic duties, wehave laid down those civic duties which are vital for a democratic societv.

ALIENSSection 22... Aliens are guaranteed just and humane treatment, safetyof person and property, and freedom of action, within

the limits of the law.

46 47

F'EDERAL GOVf,RNMENTSection 23... There shall be a strong central Federal Government to

which the states and Singapore, Penang and Malacca willdelegate legislative authority on the subjects enumeratedin Schedule A.

The Sechedule referred to is identical with that drawn up by theWorking Committee, with the exception of certain amendments made witha view to strengthening the central government. These amendments are listedin Schedule B.

Section 24... Federal Leeislative Assemblv(1) There shall be a Federal Legislative Assembly (hereina-fter called

the Assembly), composed of representatives of the people directly electedby Melayu citizens of the age of l8 and above and not subject to legalincapacity, by secret vote.

(2) Each State and Singapore, Penang and Malacca shall be aconstituency for the purposes of elections to the Assembly.

(3) There shall be one representative in the Assembly for every 45,000 Melavu citizens.

J:lt!:5.

'ar:i'b,

----------r


20/30

('t) Each State and Sinuapore. Penang and fvlaracca srrail be entitledto return such nurnber of representatives to the Assembly as shafl be equal,to the nearest integer, to the total number of Melayu citizens within suchState, or Singapore, Penang or lVlalacca, divided by forry-five thousand.

(5) candidates for seats in rhe Assembly shalr be Merayu citizens ofthe age of23 or ever.(6) The lifb of the Assembly shall be rlrree years.(7) There shall be no comrnunal electorates, ca'didatures,

representatives or allocation of seats whatever.Provided that for the f-irst three Assemblies onry. not ress than 55 per

cent of the seats in tlre Assembly shall be held by Me layu cirizens of Malayrace, to be effected by the follorving procedure:

(a1 iJ. ctJier the holding of the electio,s to the Assembly, it isfoundthat Iess than 55 per cenr of the representcttives are of trIalcry race,then such nwnber oJ-scctts shall he utldetl to the number ol'seats in theAssembly as woulcl, ( filled bv representtttives of the Malay race,bring the number of representarives of \utatay race up to 55 per centof the totel number oJ'representatives.(b) such seuts shall thereuprn be Jilled bv tho,se candidates of Matayrace who polled the largesl nuntber oJ'votes among those candidatesof Muluy roce nor retunted at lhe elections.(c) this proviso shall not, under any circumstcutces whateve4 be subjectIo an.v cunendment.

48 49

-- 3.i(8) Amendments to the Constitution shall be effected by a Wo+hirds

majoriry of all members of the Assembly.(9) Representatives shall receive, during the life of the Assembly, an

emolument of $600 per month, exclusive of traveling expellses, Such sumsto be chargeable on the funds of the Federal Government.

(10) The sessions of the Assembly shall be opetred by the HighCommissioner.

we have provided for a fully-elected Federal Legislative Assembly.The Report of the Working Comrnittee states, on page 17. paragraph

59: "The Committee were unanimous that the introduction of any form ofelections on a wide franchise would be premature. and could not be regardedas feasible in the early stages of the new Federation-"

No reasons were given for this decision, but we suggest that, if tfteWorking Committee had put forward a reason, it would have been that theright to government through elected representatives (or self-government), isa right which may only be claimed by a colonial people rvhen they havereached a certain educational standard.

Although this right is universally accepted in principle, and isfrequently invoked even by imperialist government when it is to their interestto do so, this reason is advanced, even by professedly progfessive elementsin imperialist countries, because it is said that the general right to self-government should be qualified in the case of colonial peoples who, it isclaimed, are not ready to face the complexities and difficulties of moderngovernment.[t is ctaimed that modern government can only be effectively


21/30

administered by experts with highly-specialised training and experience, andthat a colonial people should not be allowed, in their own interes! to governthemselves until they can produce on adequate number of such experts, anduntil the masses of such colonial people have reached the requisite educationalstandard.

For instance, in a pamphlet entitled "Labour's colonial policy",published by the Fabian society, the present Secretary of State for thecolonies, the Rt. Hon: Mr. Arthur creech Jones, says, on page I l: "It Is ntruism, which is particularly applicable to colonial societies that good healthand education are pre-requisites to the practice of democratic government-"

we are opposed to the whole of this line of argument for the followingreasons:

( l) Before we examine any reason that may be put fbrward in supportof this qualification of the right to self-government, it is necessary to enquire'whether or not those who make this qualificafion benefit from the colonialsystem r,vhich it seeks to justify.

If they do not, if they are totally disinterested in the sense that theirown interests are in no way involved, only then is there the assurance thatany reasons that may be put forward by them, are put forward in good faithand can, therefore, be judged on their merits, we never find, however, thatthis qualification is put forward by disinterested, and therefore unprejudicedpefsons.

If, however, such a qualification is advocated by those who benefitfrom the colonial system, it will be necessary to scrutinise any reason whichthey rnay put fbrward with grave suspicion, because it would be virtuallycertain that the "reasons" put forward by them would be rationalisation, andnot the real reasons.

we feel, tJrerefore, that since this qualification is always put forward

either by the spokesmen of imperial govemments in relation to the people oftheir colonies, or by those who are dependent, in one way of another, uponthe preservation of the colonial system, their reasons for making thisqualification must be treated with great suspicion, because such personshave a vested interest in the continued control of the colonies, and theapplication of the principle of self-government would mean the cessation ofthat control.

The Working Committee consisted of six representatives of theMalayan Union Government (which is responsible only to the ImperialGovernment), most of whom were bureaucrats steeped in the reactionarytraditions of colonial administration, and of six representatives of the Malayaristocracy and its political organisation (United Malaya NationalOrganisation), the maintenance of whose privileged position depended onthe continued control of the Imperial Government over Malaya.

The real reason for the Working Committee's decision ("...that theintroduction of any form of elections on awide franchise would be premature,and could not be regarded as feasible in the early stages of the newFederation") was therefore (we feel), that government through the electedrepresentatives of the people would be inconsistent with the autocraticstructure which they wished to erect in order to preserve their privilegedposition, and the imperial control on which that position depended.

(2) This line of argument requires that a certain educational standardshould be reached by the people of a colony before they can be allowed toexercise their right to self-govemment.

We have two criticisms to make of this standpoint:-(a) The lmperial Government reseryes to itself the right arbitrarily to

decide when the requisite educational standard has been reached, and bydoing so, usurps the right which belongs only to the people to decide for

.Til

I,l'lI

I

i

I

I'l

I:,1

,lJel##t50 5l


22/30

thernselves if and rvhen they'are ready to accept the responsibiliqv of self-government.

ShoLrld it be felt. for instance, b_y the people of a colonv that they arenot ,vef readv to accept anv one or rnore of the various responsibilities ofgovernment. it \\,ill be fortlrem alone to delegate their powers over suchfunctions to any alien govemnrent of their choice.

(b) The history of the movement for independence in colonialterritories proves that the question of whether anv particular educationalstandard has been reached, does not in practice arise. The recent politicaldevelopmenet in India is a case in point. The British cabinet did not, we feelsure, base its decision to grant Indian independence on India's standards ofliteracy or education. lf educational standards were really the touchstonefbr readiness for self--govemment, then it rnay justifiably be contended thatlvlalaya is just as ready fbr sslf:government as India is. since the percentageof literacy in India and lVlalava today is approxirnately the sarne.If good health is also to be used as a criterion, as the Rt. Ron: Mr.Arthur creech Jones has maintained to be a truism. then we f-eel that therecan be little doubt that Malaya's health is vastly superior to that of India.

This reveals that tlre argulnent - that the readiness of a colonial peoplefol seff-government is to be judged by reference to their educational standards- is onl,v a cloak to hide the naked fact that the imperialist power will prolongits control for as long as it considers that it is in its general interest to do so,such educational levels being in tbct totally irrelevant when it come to thepoint.

It has been shown that unified politicat pressure alone wiil win for acolonial people tlre freedom to exercise their right to self-govenrment.

There is, however, the saving, that "it is never too late to mend". Thepeople of Great Britain should realise that the love of fieedom is not confinedto themselves alone, but is also held by their subject peoples. They should

52 53

therefore see to it that their democratically-elected goventments understandthe wisdom of securing the lastirrg friendship of their colonial peoples bypermitting them to exercise their basic right to self-government, and thefolly of waiting until mounting political hostility has destroyed thefoundations of th is goodwi I l.

(3) This line of argument ignores the fact that the co-operation of thepeople is essential to good government. No matter how expert the personnelof the government may be, no matter how highly skilled or profound intechnical knowledge, if that government does not elicit the co-operation ofthe people, it will never be able to promote the welfare of the people. Thiswelfare cannot be promoted effectively except by the people themselvesthrough their elected representatives, who are responsible to them and tothemalone. Only on such a basis of responsibility can he people feelconfident that it is their welfare, and not the alien interest, that is beingpromoted.

A government ofalien "experts" can never understand the real needsof the people. It is characteristic of such "experts" to have dogmatic opinionsas to what the people ought to need, and to tend, at the same time, to beindifferent to what the masses of the people do in fact need. Such an attitudeon their part is inevitable, because they are not of the people and notresponsible to the people.

This is vividly illustrated by conditions in Malaya today: the twogovernments of Malaya, staffed by such alien "experts", are continuallycomplaining that they are not receiving the co-operation of the people, andplace the blame for all the deficiencies and blunders of their administrationon this lack of co-operation. They ignore the fact, however, that the co-operation of the people is unobtainable by a government that is separatefrom, and not responsible to, the people. If the people of Britain, for example,were ruled by such an alien govemment, we would be surprised if the people


23/30

of Britain gave it their co-operation.It is therefore very clear that what is far more important than that thegovernment should be composed of "experts" is that the government shouldbe composed of the representatives of the people, elected by the people, andresponsible to the people - in other words, experts in their knowledge of theneeds ofthe people.It is true thal undermodem conditions, governments do need, in certaindepartments, highly-skilled executives. Such executives can, however, alwaysbe recruited from other parts of the world and employed as advisers untilsuch time as the people are able to provide their own technical experts. Suchexpert advisers would then take their proper place as the servants of thepeople in place at their present position as the masters of the people.it will be noticed that we have not provided for any reserve or vetopowers to be placed in the hands of the High commissioner. This is becausewe have realised that there is no half-way house between colonial and self-government status. The experience of other colonial territories, where therepresentatives of His Majesty's Government retains reserve or veto powerover such matters as finance. defence and foreign proves that control ofsuch matters of vital significance by His Majesty's Government renders thecontrol of the local legislatures over other matters valueless and empry.we also think that it is most necessary to emphasise that if electionswere introduced on the basis of the citizenship proposed by the workingcommittee, they would be a gross betrayal of the indigenous and domiciledpeople of Malaya. we have already shown that the citizenship suggested bythe working committee, not being a nationality, does not demand loyaltvfrom the so-called citizen.

This "citizenship" will, as we have also shown, bring in as Federalcitizens many to will not owe loyalty to Malaya, but who will retain theirreal allegiance to their countries of origin. yet, if elections are introduced onthis basis, such "citizens" may become members of the Federal Leeislature


24/30

Section 25... Federal E.xecutive Courrcil( l) There shall be e a Federal Executive councir composed of rnembers -

elected b1, and responsible to the Assembl,v, from among its own mernbers..

(2)ThePrimeMirristerslrallbeelectedbytheAssenrb|y'. .'(3) The Prime Minister shall allocate the following Departments among I.

the members of the Council:Defence,ForeignAffairs'Firrance.HomeAffairs,Justice,Education,

Labour, Public Works, Agriculture, Fisheries, Transporl, Health, and suchotIrerDepartnlentSasmayfromtimetotinrebecreatedbytheAssenrbly.(a) The Frime Minisrer shall be President of the Counil.(5) Mernbers of the Courrcil slrall receive suclr ernoluments as may

from time to time be fixed by legislation, but suclr legislation shall not becomeeffective during the life of the Assenrbly by w.hjch it was passed.

We lrave adopted the principle at an execurive responsible to thelegislature, as being superior in our opinion, to the principle of separation ofpowers. The council is to be entirely elected by the Assembly, instead ofbeing selected by the Prime Minister, as in English practice.

Section 26... Council of Races( I ) There shall be a Council of Races (hereafter in

"the Council") of consisting of tlvo members of eachcommunities:

Mctlay, Chinese, Indian. Eurasian' Ceylonese,European, Jews and others-

this Section calledof the tbllowing

Aborigine, Arab,

(2) (4 Members oJ'the Couttcil shall be Melayu citizens over theage of 23, elected bY the AssemblY.

(b) No mernber oJ'the Assembly shall be a fuIember oJ'theCouncil.

(3) The life of the Courrcil shall be three years'(4) No amendment of the constitutiorr, or other legislature, shall have

the effect of abolishing the Council until after nirre years froin tlre date ofthis Constitution.

(5)TheCouncilshallhavethefbllorvingpowersandduties:(a) Every Bill passed by the Assentbly shall be setlt to the

Council, which shall therettpott consider whether or nolsuch Bill is discriminatory'

(b) A cliscrininatory Bi I I is any Bill which, either as a whole,or in any particular provision, is discriminatory on racialor religious grounds-

(c) If the council shall decide unanimousllt that any Bill is notdiscriminatory, such Bill shall thereupon' after formalassent has been given, become lcrw'(d)IftheCouncilshatldecidebyamajoritythatsuchBillis

l;

56 57


25/30

not discriminatory such Bill shall be returned to theAssembly together with a full and contplete statement,drawn up and signed by each and every objectingmember, showing clesrly the provision or provisions towhich objection was taken, and if such BilI on beingreconsidered by the Assembly, is again passed by theAssembly. it shqll, after formal assent has been given,thereupon become law.(e) (i) If the Council shail decide unanimously, or by a

majority, that such Bill is discriminatory, such Bill shallbe returned to theAssembly, together with the statementsof objecting members as in (d) above.(ii) If such Bill, after reconsideration by the Assembly,is again passed by the Assembly, it shall be returned tothe Council together with a full record of the proceeding. of the Assembly on such reconsideration.(iii) If the Council, afterreconsidering such Bill, againdecides that such Bill is discriminatory, it shall bereturned to the Assembly together with such furtherstatements as any objecting member may wish to make.(iv) If such Biil, after further reconsideration by theAssembly, is again passed by the Assembly, it shall bereturned to the Council, together with a full record ofthe proceedings on such further reconsideration.(v) If the Council, after further reconsideration of suchBill, again decides that such Bill is discrirninatory, suchBill shall not become law during the lifp pf fltpAssembly,but if such Fill shall be introduced in thp nextAgepmbly,and shall be passed by such next Assembly, it shall, afterformal assent has been given, thereupon become law.

0) If ot any time afier the council has decidedwhether or notany Bill is discriminatory under (d) or (e) above. andbefore such Bill become law, any amendment is passedin such BilI by the Assembly, such amendment shall betreated for the purposes of this sub_section, as if it werea provision in a Bill appearing for the first time beforethe Council, and the Council shalt accordingly havethree opportunities af recording its decision that suchamended provision is discriminatory before suchprovision becomes law.@ If the Council shall decide, under (e) (i) or (e) (iii) above,that any Biil is discriminatory, but due to the terminationof the life of the Assembry such Birt is not brought beforethe Council againfor lhe second or third time, srch Biil, ifbrought before the new Courtcil by the next electedAssembly, and if it is again decide to be discriminatory,shall be referred to the Assembryfor consideration, and ifit is, after such consideration, passed, shall, afierformal

assent hos been given, thereupon become law.(6xi) If at any time the council shail decide by a majority, but notunanimously, that any Bill is discriminatory, and a resolution is carried by atwo-thirds majority of the Assembly that such decision is unjustitiable, onthe ground that the reasons put forward by the council for its decision areunsatisfactory and inadequate, the matter shall thereupon be laid before theFederal Court.(ii) If the Federal court, after an examination of the minutes of theproceeding of the Assembly and of the council, and after hearing anymembers of the council or of the Assembly or of both the council and the

58 59

HT


26/30

i:lt,,!,i,

Assernbly as it shall think fit, is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that theBill is not discrirninatoty, such Bill shall, after formal assent has beetr given,thereuoon become law.

(7) The Council may recommend to the Assembly an)/ measure whichit decides by a majoriry or unanimously is necessary for the advancement orprotection of any section of the people,

Provided that, in the case of any such measure being introduced intothe Council and being det-eated, the proposer of such measure may demandthat the minutes of the discussion in the Council, together with a statementas to the desirabiliry of the measure proposed, drawn up and signed by theproposer, shall be tabled before the Assembly.

(8) All motions in the Couttcil shall be proposed by a mernber of onecommuniry and seconded by a member of another communiry.

(9) A quorum of the Council shall be fwo-thirds of the members.( 10) Each member shall have otre vote.(1 l) The Council shall elect a Chairman from among its own members.

Our Conf'erence faced the fact that this Constitution is the first stepthat has yet been taken to constrttct, out of Malaya's cosmopolitan peoples,a stable democratic nation, united on the basis of allegiance to Malaya.

We realised, therefore that there would be a transitional period inwhich it would be necessary to provide some means by which the FederalLegislative Assembly would be reminded of the necessary to refrain from

discriminatory legislatron.We have therefore created this institution called the "Council of Race",

which has the power, in cases where legislation that is discriminatory onracial or religious grounds is passed by the Assentbly, to delay suchlegislation. The purpose of this delay is to provided an opportunity for theCouncil of Races to place before the Assernbly all its reasons for decidingthat the proposed legislation is discriminatory.

The delay will be effected by requiring that all legislation should bereferred to the Councilof Races for its scrutiny, and should it decide thatany Bill is discriminatory in any particular, such Bill shall be sent back tothe Assembly for reconsideration before becoming i aw.

In order to ensure, moreover, that the Assembly shall pay seriousattention to the decision of the Council of Races, this procedure forreconsideration is required to be canied out three times.

[n the case of continuing objections by the Council of Races, provisionis rnade for the obtaining of a "second opinion"; where a Bill meets with theunyielding opposition of the Council of Races, it cantrot become law untilpassed by the next elected Assembly.

The Assernbly will, therefore, have good reason, if it desires legislationto be speedily brought into force, to remove from the proposed legislationany features which have been shown to be discriminatory in nature.

However, in order to protect the legislation against the possibility ofill-advised opposition on the part of the Councilof Races, provision is madefor the decision of the Council to be referred to the Federal Court.If the Federal Court is satisfied after proper enquiry that the Bill isbeyond reasonable doubt not discriminatory, the Bill becomes law withoutfurther delay.

The procedure set out in this Section ensures, we feel, that anylegislation finally placed on the Statute Book in the face of objections raisedby the Council of Races, will have been passed by the Assembly for very

60 6l


27/30

necessary and vital reasons, after the fullest consideration of the argumentsagainst such legislation.

we have given the council of Races a second function: to recommendto the Assembly any measure which it considers necessary for theadvancement or protection of any section of the people.This we have done in order to provide a lneans by which the Assemblvmay be constantly reminded that it is "inter alia" the instrument throughwhich the fundarnental duty at all citizens, as provided for in Section 21,namely, "...through their elected institutions to direct special attention to theadvancement of any section of the people who are, or may be tbund to be, in

a condition needing such advancement, be it economic, social educationalor cultural" is collectively carried out.The recomme'dations of the council of Races to the Assembly willbe assisted by the provision of section l g that all citizens shall have the

right to petition the council of Races, drawing the attention of the councilto the need for any measure which they feer is necessary for the advancementof, or protection of any section of the people.In this way, every citizen has the right to have his suggestions andcomplaints considered by an impartial body which has direct access to theAssernbly.

Section 27...Conference of Rulers(1) There shall be a conference of Rul

Documents

People's Constitution 1947