A brief History on Malaysia Local Government.

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

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

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

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

1801 – The first elements of Local Government were established in Penang with the appointment
of a Committee of Assessors.

1857 – A more solid Local Government was established in Penang and Malacca. The Local
Government status of power was confirmed by Straits Settlement Municipal Ordinance
133/1913.

1893 – Ipoh City Council was established.

1897 - Seremban Municipal Council was established in 1897 as the Health Board providing only
basic amenities to the Seremban dwellers. After the Second World War, Seremban grew rapidly
and the Health Board was replaced by the Seremban Town Board until 1965

1907 – Sanitary Board was form in Kelantan. By the year 1914, Kota Bharu, Tumpat and Pasir
Mas was under the authority of the Sanitary Board.

1910 – Johor Bharu Town Board was established.

1929 – Local Government Act was established by the British in Malaya.

1931 – Local Government in Jesselton, Sandakan, Tawau and Labuan was formed. It was then
known as Sanitary Boards.

1938 – Municipal Enactment was formed and Kota Bahru Town Board was established.

1948 – Local Authorities Ordinance 1948 was formed under the British rule in Sarawak.
1950 – Local Government Election Ordinance 1950 that entrusted the local councils to organize
elections for the office of the councilors—the people that governs local area.

1952 – The Local Government Ordinance 1952 was established, which empowered local
residents to establish local councils in their area wherever necessary.

1957 – Independence for Malaya. All Local Government control was given to the State
Government to be administered.

1965 – The Malaysian Royal Commission was formed to investigate the Local Government
system. It was decided that all Local Government Elections to be abolished on 2nd March 1965.

1971 – The Royal Commission on Remuneration and Conditions of Service in Local Authorities
and Statutory Authorities, more conveniently described a the Harun Commission, was eventually
appointed on June 10, 1971 and submitted its report on local authorities in December 1972

1972 – By July, all local government elections had been entirely abolished in Malaysia.

1973 – A temporary provision of the Local Government Act was implemented.

1976 – The Local Government Act was finalized. The Local Government Act, 1976 empowers
state governments to integrate old local authorities and, thus, create a new local authority large
enough to make it an effective unit from both the administrative and financial perspective.

What is a Local Government?

Although not much official definition had been derived to associate the meaning of Local
Government, many scholars and researchers in the field of political science had been trying to
form a theory which hopes to sustain and define the system of local government.

One author in particular gave a basic definition and an interesting way to look at it. William
Hampton looks into the linguistic lexicons of the word ‘local government’ and from there he
elaborates the nature of local government in his book ‘Local Government and Urban Politics’.

The word ‘Local’ implies an area consecrated by long history and tradition, an environment that
construct our spatial-awareness. And it is from such awareness that build the socio-economic
knowledge of the local government which then is able to scale the need of its locality by
providing public services.

While for the word ‘government’, it indicates that the local government is the ‘creature’ of the
parliament, created with the characteristic and framework of the ruling government – be it the
state or the federal government. Although its authorities are much lesser than the State and
Federal government, it still retains a stronger meaning than the word ‘administration’ because
local authorities are expected to develop policies appropriate to their localities within the
framework of national legislation.

Local Government in Malaysia.

The Local government is part of the three tier government structure – the federal government, the
state government and the local government. According to Tennant (1973:348), Local government
in Malaysia is essentially an urban phenomenon, which comes to say that the existence and
functions of local government should be seen as an essential system of administration to govern
modern and diverse urban setting society.

Historical evidence had shown that the establishment of the local government is basically to
provide the necessities for the tax payers. To put in bluntly, Local Government has the
responsibility for numerous services related to housing, water supply, waste management,
taxation, land assessment, and other matters (Chin Abdullah, 2008:1).

Ministry of Housing and Local Government holds responsibility over the Local Government in
all states with the help of National Council for Local Government.

By the year 1965, Malaysia has 5 types of local authorities:

The responsibilities of a local government in Malaysia are basically:

• City planning

• Licensing and Control

• City beautification

• Health services

• Cleanliness

• Controlling contagious disease

• Construction and Regulating road system

• Managing traffic system and Public Transportation

• Regulating drainage system

• Providing and maintaining Public amenities.

(REHDA – presented by Ng Seing Liong on the matter of “Effective Service Delivery:
Expectations of the Private Sector for Good Governance”.)

The local government should be seen as a ground of grass roots bureaucracy, a place where
citizens takes an active participation in ensuring good governance. According to a ministerial
report, Local Government’s aim is “self-government through the medium popularly elected
councils with a large measure of freedom of action and financial independence” (Ministry of
Technology, Research, and Local Government, n.d.:2) - Malaysia, Ministry of Technology, Research, and

Local Government. n.d. Local government. Mimeo. This statement comes to prove that the existence system
of local government is a symbolic structure which indicates the trust of the federal government to
the citizens by giving them the freedom to self-govern.

By allowing the local government to be run solely by its citizens, it will not only edify the
understanding of Local Government by the nation’s grass roots but able to reflect the democratic
characteristic that Malaysia has been holding on. John Stuart Mill “Justifies Local Government
as political education.. as such it is the prime element in democracy, and has an intrinsic value
regardless of the functions it may carry out. (Hill 1974:23)

Why was the Local Government Election suspended?

Firstly the 1959 general election, in which the Alliance polled no more than 51% of the Votes,
showed that pre-independence popularity could not be presumed.

Secondly, the suppression by the surviving Communist in Malaya and threats by the Sukarno
government in Indonesia which led to the infamous ‘Confrontation’ causes insecurity for the
ruling party.

Thirdly, Opposition parties being very critical towards the ruling government’s decisions on
national policies was pressured tremendously. They (oppositions) successfully challenged its
control in Kelantan and Terengganu. Furthermore, the opposition party held a very dominant
influence in several local authorities.

Hence, the government has no choice but to act in favor to regain firm control of the grassroots
administration. The Malaysian Royal Commission was formed to justify the government’s
decision to abolish the Local Elections.
Tennant (1973) has examined various factors in the abolition of local authorities. They are:

1.) Political Party Factor

2.) The racial Factor

3.) The factor of local corruption

4.) The outlook and position of state officials

Tennant concluded that “the existence of corruption and inefficiency within the elective councils
paved the way for state officials to eliminate the nuisance of independent local decision makers,
and to expand the sphere of state influence by abolishing the major elective local governments.”
(1973:365)

In the words of the late Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak “We have considered… the subject of
local authorities, local councils, and we have watched the development of local government in
this country over the years, and we have found that most of them, nearly all of them, have not
worked well a all and many have been taken over by the State Governments”.

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

By doing so, the government had tarnished its record as well as taking away the democratic
rights of the citizens. Such act had invited many local and foreign criticisms about the
government’s decision in abolishing local elections. Strauch stated, “Local Government in
Malaysia is hardly true independent self-government in the sense once envisioned. Bodies
once intended to be elected are now tied instead to the appointive civil service bureaucracy,
sharing many responsibilities with it and frequently subordinate to it”. (Strauch 1981:130)
Posted in the Straits Times of 2nd March 1965, restoration of Local Government Election will
only proceed when “the very moment peace is declared and the emergency regulations are
withdrawn.”

However, there were a consideration and urge by the people and the opposition party to revive
the Local Government Election later. Nahappan Report proposed to restructure and revive the
local government to meet the interests of the people. On top of that, a proper restructuring of the
Local Government may reinforce national unity as well as creating a democratic space at a local
level.

Unfortunately, the Nahappan Report was brushed aside as how M. Veera Pandiyan describe in
her “Along the Watchtower” column of The Star (Saturday, March 29, 2008):
“Sadly, the Government did not accept the detailed proposals of the Nahappan Report when it
was submitted in January 1969. Instead, an alternate panel of seven senior government officials
was set up to re-examine it.

But with the 1969 general election and the May 13 riots, the country soon came under another
declaration of Emergency. The committee only began its work in July and completed its findings
in January 1971. To their merit, the majority of those in the panel adopted most of the
recommendations in the Nahappan Report and ruled in favour of elections.

However, one from the Development Administrative Unit (DAU) and another from the Town and
Country Planning Department, held contradictory views. In its own memorandum, the DAU
claimed that local government elections would lead to over-democratised over-government and
that such a system would also make it easier for elites to dominate over the have-nots,
suggesting that in the wake of May 13, it may be against national interest to reintroduce
elections at the present time. The government subsequently did away with local government
elections.”

The Opposition’s promises before March 8 Political Tsunami – Local Government Election

R. Nadeswaran, a popular columnist for TheSun’s Citizen Nades wrote an article about the
unfulfilling promises by the newly elected state government of Pakatan Rakyat. One of their
promises was to revive the The Local Government Election; “Having campaigned and pushed
for election of councillors for a long, long time, such views may be wishful thinking, but it’s not
going to happen. No government – PR or BN – is going to opt for elected representation in local
councils.”

Nades describe the title of Local Councillors are like rewards to those who help them (Pakatan
Rakyat) to win the General Election. And due to that; “…the people became the victims of the
inter and intra-party squabbles and people’s representation had to be compromised to make way
for the interests of politicians and their parties.”
Nades then pointed out that the state could call for local government elections without amending
the federal constitution as suggested by Derek Fernandez. Derek John Fernandez, a lawyer
specializing in planning and local government law and who is also a fervent commenter on the
issue of local government elections and a PJ Councilor himself stated in his article “Why
political appointees will end up as a corrupting influence on local authorities” (a second part
article in the Sun newspaper) suggested Edward Lee’s proposal:

“Edward Lee, the state assemblyman for Bukit Gasing in Selangor, had publicly proposed the
888 formula which seems to have received good support from the ratepayers. This means that
about one-third of councilors should be from the ranges of NGOs, residents associations (RA),
community leaders or local business leaders in the area; one-third professionals from various
relevant professions and one-third qualified political appointees. There is much merit in this
proposal and in order to implement this proposal, the following method may be considered:

» All candidates must strictly meet the criteria of S10 of the Local Government Act 1976.

» All candidates must submit to the office of the Mentri Besar a detailed CV with supporting
statutory declaration that the contents of the CV are true and accurate and that the candidate is
not a bankrupt or convicted criminal or facing any action that could substantially affect his/her
ability to carry out his/her function as a councillor.

» The councillors shall be well balanced and the 888 proposal appears to be a fair interim
measure.

» The councillors should all ideally be ordinary residents in the area or at the very least a
majority should be. For the professionals who would serve as councillors, the professional
bodies can nominate the proposed candidates who have met the criteria. For the political
appointees the relevant political parties can propose (of course all these candidates must meet
the criteria of the S10 of the Local Government Act 1976 and the ordinary resident in the area of
the local authority).

» For the NGOs, RAs and others, an independent panel can interview the candidates and make
recommendations. The panel should ideally be made up of outstanding persons preferably from
another state. Alternatively the recommended candidates can be questioned by the public in
public forums conducted by the state government and their suitability established.

» The resumes of all candidates and their statutory declarations should be made public in the
local authority website. In the event information is false then the councillor should be removed.”

Wong Chin Huat a Lecturer from the School of Arts and Social Sciences at Monash University
Sunway Campus presented a paper on the positivity and the possibility of reviving the Local
election at the “Local Council Reforms”Forum organised by the Centre for Public Policy Studies
and Malaysia Think Tank London at the Royal Lake Club, Sunday 27 July 2008.

In his conclusion, he stated:

•that the restoration of local elections constitutes an important step forward in reviving
democracy, improving the standard of governance, and checking the scourge of corruption,
excesses and mismanagement presently plaguing the urban population in Malaysia;

Similar with the statement by Derek Fernandez, he also believes that the State Government has
the authority to restore Local Elections:

•that the restoration of local elections lies clearly within the jurisdiction of the state government,
as provided for by the Article 113(4) and Item4, List II, Schedule 9 in the Federal Constitution.
State governments, especially the Pakatan Rakyat ones which have made election promises on
reviving local elections, should take immediate steps to formulate state laws to such effect;

The importance of nurturing the grassroots about clean, free, fair and representative may foster
understanding and cooperation to improve the democratic process:

•that at the same time, the Federal Government should initiate consultation with the general
public and hold negotiations with the state governments to formulate a comprehensive plan to
have local elections that are clean, free, fair and representative.
CONCLUSION

The importance of Local Government Election

The significance of a Local Government Election is massively justifiable as it is a system which

accommodates and totally reliable to the local residents. Gerry Stoker states that ‘The Local
Government and democracy is especially attractive because it involves a decentralization of
power and the opportunity to use local knowledge to meet local needs. (Prachett & Wilson
1996:188) It is logically better and effective in determining the needs of the people as well as a
very assuring thing by the local towards the elected councilor. In addition to that, as Colin
Rallings,Michael Temple & Michael Thrasher state in their essay “Participation in Local
Elections” state that ‘Without voters who could identify and recognize the community of interest
in the new administrative boundaries the idea of local democracy would be a sham.’ (Prachett &
Wilson 1996:62)

By having a Local Election, transparency is assured. In contrast with a appointed local councilor,
the appointed may be deem to so many negative speculations. Opposition party and also the
people cannot help but be skeptical in the appointed councilor. Therefore, Local Election
promises openness and diminishes corruptions. Gerry Stoker on the openness of Local
Governance: The crucial value of good governance is that the system is open, has low barriers
to the expression of dissent and limits the disadvantages of the poorly organized and resourced.
(Prachett & Wilson 1996:195)

Last but not least, a local election gives the local voters an upper and important hand in ensuring
the urban development and maintenance without any heavy responsibility or repercussion. Even
if there’s any, the local voters can change the councilor in the next local election. As how Anne
Phillips also stated; The great advantage of representative democracy is that elections put the
voters on a potential footing, for they make no excessive demands on the citizens’ energy time.
(Prachett & Wilson 1996:28)
 Democracy and Electoral System is Malaysia’s Administration Foundation.

On February 1952, the first election was held in Kuala Lumpur which marked the first step
towards Malaysia’s independence and Nation-building process. That important and historical
event confirms Malaysia’s establishment on a firm foundation of a democratic process since
from the very beginning. It comes to prove that Democracy and the electoral process are
inseparatable element in Malaysia. In support of this, Anne Philips suggests that: I have
suggested that the case for local democracy depends heavily on its role in extending and
enhancing democracy, and that this is the cornerstone on which to erect arguments for local
democracy. (Prachett & Wilson 1996:27)

Therefore in all areas of political authoritization which bears a certain degree of responsibility
and power towards the masses should be elected by the people and not appointed. It should at
least start at the lowest of the three tier government structure which is seen as the foundation of
the Nation.

Bibliography

1. Norris, M. W. 1980. Local Government in Peninsular Malaysia. Great Britain. Gower Publishing
Company Ltd.

2. Hampton, W. 1987. Local Government and Urban Politics. Singapore. Longman Inc.

3. Pratchett, L. (ed) & Wilson, D. (ed). 1996. Local Democracy and Local Government. Hong
Kong. Macmillan Press Ltd.

4. Rogers, M. L. 1992. Local Politics in Rural Malaysia: Patterns of Change in Sungai Raya. USA.
Westview Press.