Written by: Averroes
(1.0) Introduction
Malaysia is a multicultural country composing of the Malays, Chinese, Indians, the natives of Borneo whom are the Kadazandusun, Dayaks and other aboriginal communities. The Malaysian education system is reflected by the colonial system of education, whom are the British. Before British imperialism, the lands flourished in education at the pondok or other informal ways.
The existence of the British and the migration of Chinese and Indians, there many schools established to cater to these races. They followed the syllabus of their former lands. The education in these vernacular schools prepared the students to return and serve their former lands, but not for Malaya. The British implemented a change in the vernacular school syllabus to be more Malaya-oriented to reduce the racial friction.
Soon, the migrants became Malayan due to generational domicile and the political compromise among the racial political parties and the formation of the Federal Constitution through the 'Social Contract' and Reid Commission Report. Subsequently, Malayans became Malaysian after the formation of this new State with Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore.
(1.1) Purpose of Vernacular Schools
However, the purpose of the British to establish schools of different races were to benefit their economic exploitation and to produce workforces to improve the overall performance of colonial administration in Malaya. This was effectively to segregate the races based on geography and social backgrounds. There was no National Education Policy or standardized education measures during that time as well. This bred racism and cultural misunderstanding between the races.
The Malays who were from the rural areas went to school only in those areas, the Chinese in the urban areas while the Indians in the plantation area. For the Malays, only those in the aristocrats or the poor whom studied diligently enough, could further educate their children to the next level.
The British assisted in the formation of Malay schools, which were then transformed into 'national schools'. Later, the Fenn-Wu Report 1951 and the Razak Report 1956 was formulated as a settlement dispute among the races, as to establish Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction. However, the language of respective races can still be used and taught in 'national-type' schools or better known as vernacular schools as the medium of instruction.
However, upon entering Secondary Schools, the non-Malays have to use Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction there as per the Rahman Talib Report. Though, there are the Independent Chinese Schools which maintains Chinese as the medium of instruction.
(1.2) The Concerns
Fast-forward today, there are discussions on abolishing vernacular schools as it is difficult to integrate Malaysians of all races together. It is also a way for other races to interact with each and that everyone could cherish the national language, Bahasa Malaysia. Therefore, we are able to build a unified nation, not segregated and divided.
This would allow all races to fully understand the sensitivities of each races and their peculiarities. Therefore, a 'Sekolah Wawasan' or Visionary School was mooted, whereby national schools and vernacular schools could share the same grounds or area for students of all races could co-mingle and form friendships from an early age.
There are opponents who argue that this is a form of assimilation and may be a way to eliminate the language and cultures of other races. Also, many question the abolishment, since many Malays send their children to vernacular schools due to their quality. There were also claims that the non-Malays would be subjected to Islamic theologies. Added that, national schools would also be a ground for political propaganda and would provide less opportunities in employment.
Similar to that in Singapore, Hong Kong and Tanzania, they prefer English in their education as compared to Chinese and Kiswahili as it is thought that English would enable a social mobility or elevation in life.
(2.0) Legal Analysis
It is true that as per section section 17(1) of the Education Act 1996, the national language shall be the main medium of instruction in all educational institutions in the National Education System except a national-type school established under section 28.
However, subject to sub-section (2), national-type schools or vernacular schools still require Bahasa Malaysia as compulsory subject, and a segment non-Malays student study the language just to pass exams in order to enter Universities.
Furthermore, despite the medium of instruction enforced, all schools regardless if it is a vernacular school, would have to follow a National Curriculum as under section of 18(1) of the Education Act 1996.
It may be seditious to discuss on the abolishment of vernacular schools, as depicted in the Mark Koding v Public Prosecutor [1982] 2 MLJ 120 case that it goes against section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act 1948. This is because, article 152(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution (FC) does not prohibit languages such as Chinese and Tamil being constitutionally and legally applied in vernacular schools. On this basis, some may say that vernacular schools are valid and allowed.
However, there would be a High Court decision soon to declare whether vernacular schools are constitutional or not. This is not the first time as there are other cases that can be examined as below;
In the Federal Court case of Mohd Khairul Azam bin Abdul Aziz v Menteri Pendidikan Malaysia & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 398, they challenged sections 17 and 28 of the Education Act 1996 as going against article 152 of the FC. However, the court held that Parliament had powers to make laws for 'education'. Article 4(4) of the FC raised was misconceived as it is only to test legislative competency.
Education is within Parliament's power as under article 74(1) and Item 13, List I, 9th Schedule of the FC. Therefore, the parties should have taken action under article 4(1) for being void and inconsistent to to the Supreme Law in the High Court and not articles 4(3), 4(4) and 128(1) of the FC at the Federal Court.
(2.1) Legal Action
On 29th December, the High Court will determine the suit against the existence of vernacular schools in Malaysia. The Suit was instituted by the Federation of Peninsular Malay Students (GPMS), the Islamic Education Development Council (Mappim) and the Confederation of Malaysian Writers Association (Gapena) in December 2019. High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali is presiding.
They are arguing that that vernacular schools counter article 152(1) of the FC that Malay is the national language. Haniff who was one of the counsels submitted that vernacular schools were detrimental to non-Malays.
The parties also contend that the schools restricts non-Malays from employment and understanding of the Bahasa Malaysia language conversely. Vernacular schools were also said to transgress article 5(1) of the FC as many jobs prefer Bahasa Malaysia in speech and writing, while it is also difficult to communicate with other races in Malaysia.
The parties defending the Chinese and Tamil schools were from several NGOs such as Dong Zong and political parties from MIC and MCA, Gerakan and Parti Bumiputera Perkasa Malaysia. The senior federal counsel, Narkunavathy Sundareson said that vernacular schools are part of our Malaysian education system.
According to senior counsel Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram representing the Malaysian Chinese Language Council (MCLC) states that the plaintiffs do not have any locus standi, as they failed to show that they suffered from any constitutional violations.
Will the suit succeed? We will never know until court declares as such. The approach taken is different from the Khairul case, as it seems that they are challenging vernacular schools via article 4(1) of the FC and its constitutionality under articles 5(1) and 152 FC directly, and not challenging the Parliament's competency to create such laws.
(3.0) References;
Sivapalan Selvadurai, Liu, O., Marsitah Mohd Radzi, et. al., (2015) Debating education for nation building in Malaysia: National school persistence or vernacular school resistance? Malaysian Journal of Society and Space. 11(13), 14-23. Retrieved from, http://journalarticle.ukm.my/9767/1/2x.geografia-dec15-siva-bi-edam1.pdf
Wen, O., & Chibundu, I., (2018) Debating vernacular school system in Malaysia: a comparative analysis of multi-lingual local newspapers. The Journal of the South East Asia Research Centre for Communication and Humanities. 10(2), 87-114. Retrieved from, https://fslmjournals.taylors.edu.my/wp-content/uploads/SEARCH/SEARCH-2018-10-2/SEARCH-2018-P4-10-2.pdf
Khairi Ariffin, Nadarajan Thambu & Zulkufli Mahayudin (2020) Development of British Colonial Education in Malaya, 1816-1957. Shanlax International Journal of Education. 8(2), 10-15, Retrieved from, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1256079.pdf
Saran Kaur Gill, Keong, Y., Beng, C., & et.al., (2013) Impact of Chinese Vernacular Medium of Instruction on Unity in Multi-Ethnic Malaysia. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. 21(3), 1039-1064. Retrieved from, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285703113_Impact_of_Chinese_vernacular_medium_of_instruction_on_unity_in_multi-ethnic_Malaysia
Lee, D., Ting, S., & Lo, M., (2017) Chinese or Malay-medium schools? A study of factors influencing Chinese parents' choice of primary schools in Sarawak, Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia. 35(1), 41-67. Retrieved from, http://web.usm.my/km/35(1)2017/km35012017_3.pdf
Rahmat Khairulrijal. (November, 2021) Dec 29 decision on vernacular schools issue. Retrieved from, https://www.nst.com.my/news/crime-courts/2021/11/748362/dec-29-decision-vernacular-schools-issue
Rahmat Khairulrijal. (November, 2021) Lawyer calls for closure of vernacular schools. Retrieved from, https://www.nst.com.my/news/crime-courts/2021/11/748083/lawyer-calls-closure-vernacular-schools
Comments
Post a Comment