No need to wait for local elections - Malaysiakini

Jan 6, 2015 By KJ John

Before 1969, we used to have local government elections. In fact, the first ever local elections may have been held in the early 1950s. My dad stood for the elections in Sungai Petani and won a seat against a Malayan Union candidate.
 
Therefore and correspondingly, from about five years of age, I used to hear “all things political” about the rights and wrongs of the local government administration in Sungai Petani.

In those days, representatives of the Indian community (my dad was one) and the Chinese community were even invited and appointed to sit on the citizenship board of a localised authority. 

One of my dad’s appointed tasks was to ensure that the candidates applying for citizenship of Malaya were able to converse in Bahasa Melayu - in the days before it became thelingua franca of Malaysia.

Most Malaysians today are probably also not aware that a vibrant local level democracy existed in Malaya in the 1950s and 1960s. We had 373 local authorities and well over 3,000 elected representatives, out of a total of some 4,223 local councillors.

This number excluded those of the Kuala Lumpur municipality, which came under a separate jurisdiction because it was part and parcel of the federal capital.

Today, KL’s City Hall still does not have elections - especially because all their local representatives are elected members of Parliament. But, why not for the sake of good and improved local governance?

The government was already intent on carrying out a study of the operations of local authorities in Malaya, and therefore in June 1965, it set up a "royal commission of inquiry on local authorities" headed by Senator Athi Nahappan.

Crystal clear recommendations

The Nahappan Commission held numerous sittings, hearings and received memoranda from far and wide, and completed an excellent and comprehensive study of the workings of West Malaysian local authorities. It completed its work in December 1968, coming out strongly in support of elected councils in Malaysia.

However, the then central government chose to completely ignore and set aside the findings and recommendations of the Nahappan Commission, for reasons better known to them.

The Nahappan recommendations were crystal clear. It urged the restoration of elected local government, but with a variety of administrative changes and a new set of rules. In hindsight, one could surmise that the commissioners were acting in good faith - although perhaps somewhat naively.

Some of the more important Nahappan recommendations were:

• Every state capital should be administered by a local authority and have elective representation;
   
• The same principle should also be extended to all local councils outside state capitals;
   
• There should be one single law applicable throughout the country relating to and governing local authorities, and every state should adopt and enforce the law within six months after it has been passed by Parliament;
   
• A local authority should be decentralised, and should be an autonomous body corporate consisting of fully elected members with financial and administrative autonomy - but subject to the control of the state government on matters of national importance and interest;
   
• Party politics should be allowed to continue despite its good and bad aspects, and those who wish to remain non-conformist should have the right to stand as 'Independents' as in the past; and
   
• A Local Government Tribunal should be constituted by the state authority of every local authority.

Despite the submission of the Nahappan Report and a set of very considered and reasoned recommendations for the revival of local democracy, the minions of state stepped in to snuff out the potential of elective local governance in complete contradiction to the spirit of those recommendations.

Today’s local governance in Malaya is a far cry from even the experience of the early days.  In fact the Athi Nahappan Report explicitly recommended that local elections were the right way to go for improved local governance of Malaysia. But, why is there still the reticence, by all state governments and the federal government?

One example in 1966 may explain the real intent of state authorities. Under the Transfer of Functions Order, the then functions of the George Town City Council were transferred to the Penang chief minister, to enable a commission of inquiry "into the acts of mal-administration and malpractices or breaches of law committed by the George Town City Council".

After the commission completed its work and filed its report, the chief minister of Penang continued to administer George Town. Why? Now though, Penang Island is soon to have its own city council status, as approved under the cabinet of the government.

Why not mayoral elections?

Only a city has a mayor. Except for one case of success in Kuala Lumpur, most appointed mayors in the past have failed to deliver exceptional results. And in the case of municipal council presidents, I can name only one exception in the Kuantan local authority, and about whom I have even written a case-study.

Therefore, it is timely that every mayor - across of every city jurisdiction - is elected, and that maybe it is as good a place as any to start with local governance elections, in the spirit of the Nahappan Report.

Petaling Jaya has an appointed mayor but rather unfortunately, very little has changed in the Selangor state local governance - even though it has been more than seven years under the opposition coalition in terms of governance. Why?

Unelected mayors are never fully accountable. Usually, they are what my good friend calls “nice, friendly and useless”. They remain useless because they do not have the moral courage in seeking good and right administration and development, where needed. They keep to the safe and sure path taken by the predecessors and internal advisors.

Petaling Jaya needs a whole new philosophy of development. For example, every factory lot in Section 13 cannot become the foundation for high rise condominiums or integrated mall structures, in the future. The road system in Petaling Jaya simply cannot accept such a population density, even if the one-way loop is improved and upgraded.

Therefore, it is time for Selangor Menteri Besar Azmin Ali (above) to seriously consider and push through the conduct of mayoral elections in Petaling Jaya. There is no need to wait. May God bless local governance in Selangor with better accountability.

KJ JOHN was in public service for 29 years. The views expressed here are his personal views and not those of any institution he is involved with. Write to him at kjjohn@ohmsi.net with any feedback or views.