[ad_1]
PETALIZING JAYA: Are states required to adhere to federal policy directives, such as the Conditional Movement Control Order (CMCO)?
There seems to be a very thin and fuzzy line regarding this, with as many as nine states failing to fully comply with the government’s decision to resume the economy starting May 4.
To complicate matters, even the cabinet ministers seemed to be on a different page.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob said Sunday that it was up to the respective states to decide whether to adopt the CMCO in its entirety, claiming that the federal directive simply serves as a general guide.
However, Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali said Monday that the decision not to implement CMCO was against the law and contrary to federal government policy, and that industry players could sue states for this.
This sentiment was shared by constitutional lawyer Prof Datuk Dr. Gurdial Singh Nijar, who said it was the states’ constitutional obligation to adhere to federal law, based on Article 81 of the Federal Constitution.
According to the article, state governments are required to ensure that they comply with any federal law, and that their action does not impede or harm the authority of the federal government.
“For example, federal law now allows certain companies to operate. A state government that says this cannot be done, that limits operations or that imposes stricter rules to the contrary, clearly goes against federal regulations, “he said. Sun.
Gurdial also questioned the arguments that local authorities are empowered under the Local Government Act of 1976 to regulate business premises.
“First, the health-related provisions under the Act are limited to requiring the cleaning of unsanitary premises, the cleaning of vermin, and the closure and demolition of unhealthy homes to protect against disease.
“Second, when there is a law that deals with a specific issue, then it supersedes any other law that deals with a related issue more generally. It is accepted by our courts, ”he said.
However, Hassan Abdul Karim, chairman of the Select Committee on Federal and Parliamentary Relations, said that according to the Simultaneous List of the Ninth List of the Federal Constitution, federal and state governments have joint powers in matters related to public health and disease. .
He also stated that the Concurrent List replaces the Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Law (Law 342), in which the CMCO is implemented.
“The federal government should not rely solely on Law 342 to compel states to adhere to the CMCO. I urge you to respect the powers of state governments, considering that Malaysia practices federalism, ”he said in a statement.
Dr. Muhammad Fathi Yusof, a researcher on the Law and Constitution at Teknologi University Malaysia (UTM), said that although health policies fall under federal jurisdiction, states have something to say on the implementation side.
For example, he said states could use the Local Government Law to order that companies remain closed, although they do not have the power to execute like the police.
“But personally, I think having uniform law and regulations is much better, considering that we are a small nation, compared to the United States. However, the important thing is communication and cooperation, “he said. Sun.
Meanwhile, political analyst Prof Datuk Dr. Shamsul Amri Baharuddin said he does not see the current disagreement between the federal government and states leading a total political crisis, despite being almost unprecedented.
“Malaysia’s strength lies in” negotiation, negotiation and mediation. “This is exactly why there were no clashes during the change of government in 2018.
“Similarly for the current situation, it will certainly be resolved very soon. There will be consultations and there will be compromises. For me, the situation is under control, ”he said.
[ad_2]
