Katalog Hansard

We tender thanks to God for the blessings He has bestowed upon US to address Hon'ble Members of both Houses of Parliament today. The opening of the First Session of the Third Parliament of Malaysia is of great significance to the national and more so to US after OUR Installation on 20th February. You will recall that, after the General Elections on 10th May, 1969, a tragic event occurred which necessitated the declaration of a State of Emergency in the country on 15th May, 1969, and the suspension of parliamentary rule until conditions had returned to normal. Tun Abdul Razak bin Dato' Hussein was appointed Director of Operations and was charged with the task of restoring peace, securing smooth administration and re-establishing harmonious relations among the various races in the country. In carrying out the tasks assigned to him, the Director of Operations has been assisted by a number of bodies such as the National Operations Council and National Consultative Council. We are thankful to God that, with Tun Abdul Razak's wisdom and firm action as Director of Operations, the country has returned to its present state of stability. The Police and the Armed Forces have rendered distinguished service in maintaining peace and order, while members of the public service have co-operated fully in restoring smooth administration. OUR people from all walks of life and all sections of the community, together with the National Goodwill Council, have contributed in restoring racial harmony in the country. To Tun Abdul Razak and to all those who have selflessly dedicated their time and efforts in their work, WE express OUR heartfelt thanks. The nation is indeed proud of them. With conditions in the country returning to their present state, We have approved the reconvening of Parliament. Nevertheless, we must still exercise vigilance so that the tragedy of May 13th, 1969 will not recur. We take this opportunity of expressing OUR sincere wishes to OUR beloved uncle, Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al Haj, on his retirement from the Office of Prime Minister. He had Ded this country's Government for the last 15 years and under his leadership, this country achieved freedom and became an independent and sovereign nation. Under his leadership also, this country achieved remarkable progress and stability. His services to the nation will always be remembered by the people of Malaysia and we wish him all the blessings of Allah in his retirement. In endeavouring to build a dynamic, just and progressive society, OUR Government, with the advice and co-operation of the National Consultative Council, has formulated a number of principles which will serve as a guide to our way of life. These principles were proclaimed as Rukunegara on 31st August last year. WE exhort all OUR people to understand and observe the principles embodied in the Rukunegara. One of the aims of our Government is to create a more just society. As one of the means to this end, Government has formulated a dynamic and practical economic policy. The main objectives of this policy are, firstly, to eradicate poverty among the have-nots irrespective of their racial origins and, secondly, to obtain and strengthen national unity. In order to achieve these objectives, the Government has drawn up development plans to be implemented under the Second Malaysia Plan. The problem of poverty of the people is the first consideration in the planning of development programmes. Programmes to eradicate poverty will concentrate on projects that will provide employment opportunities in the fields of agriculture and industry and also on those that will increase the earnings of the lower income groups in the urban and rural areas. The emphasis in the agricultural programmes will be on large-scale development of land as well as the planting of high-valued and quality crops. Government will give opportunities to more youths to take part in land and agricultural programmes. Through the agricultural programmes, Government hopes to create a group of progressive and modern farmers who are receptive to and are prepared to utilise modern techniques, like the farmers of developed nations. In the industrial sector, Government will encourage projects which are more labour intensive. Government will also encourage the location of industries in less-developed areas throughout the country, in particular, agro-based and forest-based industries using the available resources in the area. Government believes that such industrial programmes will also provide opportunities for the people in the rural areas to participate actively in industry and commerce. It is difficult to obtain national unity so long as the racial economic imbalance is not redressed. In view of this, the Government will implement plans to help create industrialists and businessmen among the Malays and other indigenous people. The aim of these programmes is to change the structure of that sector of our people at present largely dependent on agriculture, to that of a progressive and modern society active in all economic endeavours. The Government has been and is still giving various forms of incentives to the private sector to invest in industries in order to step up industrial development in our country. Nevertheless the Malays and other indigenous people are still lagging behind both in this field as well as in commerce. Participation in these fields at all levels has not reflected the racial composition of the country. In order to provide proper training and experience to all Malays and other indigenous people so that they can more actively participate in these spheres, Government has agreed to invest in industry and commerce, either in joint-ventures or on its own. In the implementation of these projects, Government will be fair towards all and has no intention of depriving or ignoring the rights of the other racial groups. Accordingly, Government hopes and believes, that the private sector will actively and sincerely co-operate in Government's efforts to encourage participation by all racial groups in industry and commerce. Thus, the private sector would also be assisting Government to create and strengthen national unity. Education is another important factor for ensuring national stability and unity. The Government is focussing its attention on this matter and will firmly implement the National Education Policy which has been agreed and accepted by all. Government will continue to implement the policy in regard to education in Bahasa Malaysia and will continue to intensify its efforts to make Bahasa Malaysia the National Language and the official language in the true sense of the word. At the same time, it will maintain the standard of education so that Malaysian children are equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary in this modern technological age. The Government is aware that industrial development not only depends on Government's encouragement and incentives but also on the availability of workers who are skilled and trained at various levels. The Government has therefore drawn up plans to train youths in activities which require particular skills. The raplid progress we have achieved in the industrial field so far has been due to the knowledge and skill of the workers. If the country desires a more rapid progress in industry, youths, who form about 60% of the population, have to be provided with proper training. It is, therefore, Government's policy in education to place emphasis on subjects in science and technology and also to provide vocational schools where students, who are unable to continue their studies in the academic field, can be given training in skills required by industries. The Government has recently revised the labour laws and it believes that the amendments will be of great benefit to the country and will help to promote good employer-employee relations. Co-operation between employers and amployees will bring industrial peace which will in turn ensure industrial progress and enhance the nation's prosperity. The Government continues to place importance on this matter so that industrial progress will be more rapid, and, to this end, Government will continue to review the labour laws from time to time to suit prevailing circumstances and needs of the country. As the largest employer, the Government also places importance on the welfare of its own employees who have given loyal and faithful service. Revisions of salary, conditions of service and various facilities for employees have been agreed upon and are being implemented. The Government believes that these revisions will satisfy all employees. Efforts have been made by the Government to train its officers and encourage them to take a more responsible and active role in their work. However, close contacts between Government and the private sector must exist because Government activities often affect the private sector and vice-versa. It is therefore important that each sector recognises and understands the aims and the activities of the other. The Government is presently considering a plan to enable officials of both sides to establish closer contacts and, possibly, even exchange suitably experienced officers. In this way, the Government hopes that each will be able to have a better understanding of the other's aims so that they can mutually reinforce each other's efforts in promoting the growth of the country's economy. With regard to internal security, the Government will continue to take firm and immediate action against subversive elements in this country. Operations against the terrorists in the border areas are being actively carried out with the close co-operation of the Governments of Thailand and Indonesia. In the field of defence, the Government has to expand further its Armed Forces in the interest of the country's security against internal and external threats. Although this step will be costly, as a free and sovereign nation, we should endeavour to defend ourselves within our means from any form of threat. In addition to expanding the Armed Forces, the Government has agreed in principle to co-operate with friendly countries in the matter of defence for mutual benefit. The accord on the Five Nations Defence Arrangements between Malaysia, Singapore, Britain, Australia and New Zealand is in the nature of a consultative arrangement among the five nations to take measures agreed upon for the security of Malaysia and Singapore. When this arrangement is formulated, the British-Malaysia Defence Agreement will be abrogated and Britain will no longer play a major part in the defence of Malaysia and Singapore but that Malaysia and Singapore will become the dominant partners in this arrangement. Consequently our Armed Forces must assume upon themselves the responsibility for the defence of the sovereignty and the integrity of our country with the aid of friendly countries, if necessary. Our country has adopted in the seventies, amidst the political, economic and social changes taking place in South-East Asia, a constructive and positive attitude regarding our relations with our neighbours and other countries. WE are pleased to state here that the Government will continue to practise an independent foreign policy consistent with the times and situation and compatible with our national interest as an independent, sovereign and developing country. Based on the principles of non- interference, peaceful co-existence and mutual respect for the national integrity and sovereignty of each other, the Government is actively extending its co-operation and friendship to all countries who are desirous of befriending us, irrespective of the pattern or system of their Governments. With this aim in mind, the Government has endeavoured to further strengthen co-operation in all fields among the countries in the South-East Asia Region, SO that, in their own self- interest, they will become stronger and more advanced and will not be influenced by the major powers. To ensure the future of the region, the Government has voiced its desire for a neutral South-East Asia with the major powers guaranteeing the peace and security. It is a source of satisfaction to Government that Malaysia's name and reputation are of a high standing in international sphere owing to our firm and independent foreign policy. Government hopes the major powers will respond positively to our desire to move forward and safeguard the security and peace of the countries in this region. WE are moved and grieved at the loss of lives and properties in several States in the country resulting from the recent floods. Although floods of such disastrous magnitude were unexpected, the machinery of the Central and State Governments moved efficiently and expeditiously to carry out relief operations to help the flood victims. Voluntary bodies as well as individuals assisted in the evacuation and relief operations that were essential during the disaster. Firms and individuals have also contributed money or helped in kind-assistance which was urgently needed to reduce the suffering of the flood victims. This disaster has demonstrated once again how the people from different walks of life, race and religion could spontaneously and instantaneously unite to assist the unfortunates. Government also expresses its deep appreciation for the various forms of aid given by friendly foreign countries and international organisations. Their timely and sincere assistance is indicative of the close relations existing between them and our country. The relief and rehabilitation work for flood victims must be carried out immediately to enable them to rehabilitate themselves. As a rehabilitation measure, Government has already agreed to provide various kinds of aid immediately. Government will also study and consider medium and long-term programmes to avoid and reduce the effects of floods in the country. In this session of Parliament, Hon'ble Members will have the opportunity to study and debate several important proposals by Government to ensure lasting peace and national harmony. WE hope you will give careful, thorough, responsible and sincere consideration to these proposals. Upon your decisions will depend the future of our beloved country. We should also examine what the future holds for this country. Government efforts in the sixties and earlier years have produced the many facilities and amenities that the people now enjoy. The objectives and programmes for the seventies emphasise the aim of Government to better the economic situation and secure peace and national harmony. Government is determined to implement these programmes as expeditiously as possible. WE earnestly urge our people to co-operate with the Government in its efforts to eradicate poverty and to obtain and strengthen national unity. With God's blessing and the co-operation of the people, we all can confidently look forward to a happier and brighter future for our country and our people.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mohon mencha- dangkan: Bahawa menurut peruntokan Peratoran Meshuarat 14 (2), bahawa pada Meshuarat Pertama ini Majlis ini hendak-lah menimbangkan dengan serta-merta melalu semua perengkat Rang Undang"2 (Pindaan) Perlembagaan (No. DR. 14/71) sa-belum menim- bangkan apa2 Butiran Urusan yang lain yang ada dalam Atoran Urusan Meshuarat. Dan saya menchadangkan juga: Bahawa walau apa pun peruntokan Peratoran Meshuarat 12 (1), Majlis ini hendak-lah bersidang daripada pukul 2.30 petang hingga pukul 6.30 petang (atau pukul 7.00 petang pada apa2 hari jika ada di-keluarkan usul hendak menanggohkan meshuarat menurut Peratoran Meshuarat 17) sa- panjang tempoh Meshuarat Pertama ini.

Tuan Speaker, saya suka menchadangkan supaya Rang Undang"2 yang bertajok "Akta (Pindaan) Perlembagaan" di- bacha bagi kali yang kedua-nya. Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya suka mohon izin Tuan Yang di-Pertua ia-itu sambil menerang- kan Rang Undang"2 ini dalam Bahasa Malay- sia saya terpaksa berchakap tempat yang mustahak dalam Bahasa Inggeris untok hendak memberi pengertian yang jelas ter- utama sa-kali kapada Ahli yang datang dari Malaysia Timor. Tuan Speaker, saya merasa yakin dan per- chaya bahawa Ahli Yang Berhormat sa- kalian berada di-dalam Dewan ini dengan perasaan yang penoh gembira kerana dengan izin Allah kita telah dapat mengadakan sa- mula persidangan Parlimen. Saya juga per- chaya bahawa tuan sakalian mempunya penoh kesedaran betapa berat-nya tanggong- jawab tuan semua untok menjaminkan supaya demokrasi berparlimen berjalan de- ngan lichin dan sempurna di-dalam negara kita ini. Tatkala saya di-lantek menjadi Pengarah Gerakan kira 21 bulan dahulu ia-itu pada 17hb Mei, 1969, tugas saya yang utama ia- lah mengembalikan keamanan dan keten- teraman. Saya juga bertanggong-jawab untok memelihara supaya pentadbiran negara ber- jalan dengan lichin dan lanchar dan menim- bulkan balek perasaan harmoni dan perchaya memperchaya di-antara berbagai kaum di- negara kita ini. Dengan ada-nya bantuan dan kerjasama dari semua pehak, saya telah dapat menjalankan tugas saya ini dengan sempurna. Dalam pada itu, saya sentiasa-lah memikir dan menjalankan berbagai usaha untok mengembalikan balek keadaan dan suasana di-dalam negara ini saperti sediakala supaya dapat-lah di-adakan sa-mula per- sidangan Parlimen di-mana Ahli Yang Ber- hormat dapat melaksanakan tugas asing sa-bagai wakil ra'ayat. Sa-bagaimana yang tuan sedia ma'alum, kuasa sa-sabuah Kerajaan itu datang-nya daripada ra'ayat. Kita semua berada di- dalam Parlimen pada hari ini semat kerana kita telah mendapat keperchayaan daripada ra'ayat. Kedudokan kita tidak lebeh daripada menjadi pemegang amanah bagi pehak mereka itu. Harapan mereka yang utama sa- kali untok kita melaksanakan-nya ia-lah supaya kita menjalankan kewajipan itu dengan rasa penoh kesedaran dan bertang- gong-jawab sa-hingga dapat-lah sentiasa terpelihara perasaan harmoni di-antara kaum. Oleh yang demikian, kita mesti-lah menjalan- kan perbinchangan dan penyusunan dasar kita dengan chermat sambil mengingati dan menginsafi perasaan dan harapan ra'ayat di- negara kita ini. Tuan Speaker, masaalah yang terbentang di-hadapan kita sakalian bukan-lah dapat di-huraikan dengan sa-wenang-nya dengan tidak berpandukan kapada latar belakang sejarah perkembangan politik dan ekonomi Malaysia. Kita mesti menerima hakikat bahawa bangsa kita terdiri dari berbagai kaum yang maseh belum sempurna dan kuat perpaduan-nya. Berbanding dengan negara lain, negara kita maseh muda dan pengalaman kita dalam perjalanan sistem demokrasi ber- parlimen kurang dari 20 tahun. Sa-lain dari- pada itu, ekonomi negara kita bukan sahaja belum menchapai kemajuan yang sa-penoh- nya, tetapi juga mempunya kedudokan yang jelas tidak sa-imbang di-antara kaum yang ada di-sini. Sementara itu, kita juga mesti sedar bahawa tengah masharakat kita pada hari ini terdapat satu jenerasi baharu, terdiri dari- pada mereka yang telah menjadi dewasa sa- lepas kita menchapai kemerdekaan. Mereka tidak tahu latar belakang politik yang terda- pat ketika kita memperjuangkan kemerdekaan negara dan dengan sebab itu tidak faham kompromi yang telah di-persetujukan pada masa itu di-antara kaum bagi menjayakan perjuangan kita. Satu lagi puak yang mesti kita hadapi ia-lah orang yang tidak ber- tanggong-jawab yang bercherita hendak men- dapatkan kuasa dengan chara menghasut dan membangkitkan perasaan sentimen, menim- bulkan rasa bimbang dan churiga menchu- riga antara kaum. Ini-lah hakikat yang kita mesti jadikan panduan tatkala kita menyusun ranchangan bagi mengatasi berbagai rupa masaalah yang di-hadapi oleh bangsa dan negara kita semasa kita melangkah masok pada satu babak baharu dalam sejarah negara kita ini. Persidangan kita pada hari ini terlambat 20 bulan dari masa yang sa-patut-nya. Saya juga sama merasa kesal saperti Ahli Yang Berhormat sakalian tetapi kita semua tahu sebab-nya. Kekachauan bulan Mei 1969 merupakan satu detik hitam di-dalam sejarah negara kita, tetapi dengan izin Allah, kita telah dapat meranchangkan dasar dan meng- ambil tindakan yang tegas dan berkesan untok menyelamatkan bangsa dan negara kita dari terjerumus ka-dalam gaung yang dalam. Sunggoh pun pada hari ini keadaan dan suasana pada umum-nya telah puleh saperti sediakala, tetapi tidak-lah sayugia kita melu- pakan pengajaran dan pengalaman yang kita telah perolehi dari kejadian 13 Mei itu. Memang-lah mudah bagi kita membiarkan sahaja masaalah itu berlanjutan sambil mengharapkan bahawa satu masa nanti ia- nya akan hilang dengan sendiri-nya. Tetapi sa-sabuah negara itu tidak dapat di-perentah semat berasaskan kapada harapan dan jangkaan. Jika kita tidak bertindak untok mengambil langkah yang perlu sekarang ini, maka kita boleh di-kutok oleh ra'ayat kerana melakukan kesalahan tidak menyempurnakan tanggong-jawab yang telah di-amanahkan kapada kita. Saya yakin tiap sa-orang dari kita ingin mengelakkan dari berulang-nya lagi peristiwa 13 Mei itu di-negara kita ini kerana kesan yang lebeh dahshat dan meluas akan timbul kira-nya kejadian itu berlaku lagi. Kita telah menanggong kerugian yang besar dan mendapat pengalaman yang pahit dari perbuatan yang tidak bertanggong-jawab dan tidak sopan sa-kumpulan kechil orang yang berniat hendak menimbulkan keka- chauan dan huruhara. Sekarang kita mesti bertindak dengan tegas kerana apa yang kita pertarohkan ia-lah untong nasib bangsa dan negara kita. Mr Speaker, Sir, we meet today some 20 months late. I regret this as much as any Member of this House but we all know why this has had to be so. The disturbances of May 1969 mark the darkest period in our national history. By dint of purdent and ima- ginative policies, we have carefully moved ourselves away from the abyss which then confronted us. Today life has generally returned to normal. But we shall be extremely foolish and irresponsible if we forget the lessons of 13 May. It is easy for us to do nothing now and to hope that somehow things will turn out all right. But a country cannot be governed upon hopes. If we do not act, or if we do not take precautions now, we shall stand condemned before our people as failing in our duty. Surely, everyone wants to ensure that the tragedy of 13th May will never ever be repeated in this country. Such a calamity, if it should occur, would be more widespread and more catastrophic in its consequences. We have already paid a heavy price for the irresponsibility and indiscpline of a small group of people who were out to bring trouble and chaos. We cannot take chances now because what is at stake is the very survival of our nation. The lessons of the 13th May tragedy must never be forgotten. Let us not debate and dispute about what started it or how it happened, lest debating and disputing among ourselves, we shall lose sight of the common enemy: namely, those irresponsible elements who sought to sow mistrust and a sense of insecurity among the races and to exploit these sensitivities to their own advantage. The election campaign in April and May 1969 provided these irresponsible elements with the opportunity to arouse racial emotions to a pitch. These elements created fear and anger by questioning and ridiculing the provisions of the Constitution relating to Bahasa Malaysia and the special position of the Malays, which further exacerbated the growing sense of insecurity felt by the Malays when they see the widening gap between them and the non-Malays particularly in the economic and educational spheres. Some of these irresponsible elements created dissatis- faction by deliberately and exaggeratedly misrepresenting the implementation of these provisions and also by advocating their deletion from the Constitution. Yet others created fear and mistrust that the legitimate interests of the non-Malays as provided for in the Constitution would be eroded. Tuan Speaker, mari-lah kita sakalian semat- kan di-dalam hati dan ingatan kita penga- jaran yang kita telah perolehi dari peristiwa 13 Mei, dan jangan-lah kita binchang dan bahathkan lagi tentang apa yang menyebab- kan terchetus-nya peristiwa itu dan bagai- mana ia-nya bermula kerana ini mungkin akan melupakan kita kapada musoh kita yang sa-benar-nya, ia-itu nasir yang tidak ber- tanggong-jawab yang kerja-nya menanamkan beneh shak wasangka dan perasaan bimbang di-kalangan kaum serta menggunakan per- kara sensitif untok faedah diri mereka sendiri. Nasir yang tersebut telah mendapat kesempatan yang besar untok membangkitkan perasaan perkauman apabila kempen Pilehan- raya berjalan dalam bulan April dan Mei, 1969. Mereka sengaja menimbulkan perasaan takut dan marah dengan chara mempersoal dan mempersendakar sharat dalam Perlem- bagaan mengenali dengan Bahasa Malaysia dan kedudokan istimewa orang Melayu, sa- hingga memburokkan lagi perasaan tidak terjamin yang di-rasa oleh orang Melayu apakala mereka melihat bagaimana luas-nya jurang perbedzaan di-antara mereka dengan orang yang bukan Melayu terutama-nya sa- kali di-dalam lapangan ekonomi dan pela- jaran. Sa-tengah daripada nasir yang tidak bertanggong-jawab itu telah menchetuskan rasa tidak puas hati dengan chara sengaja memberi keterangan yang salah mengenali dengan perlaksanaan sharat Perlembagaan yang tersebut itu dan juga menghapuskan sharat tersebut dari Perlembagaan. Satu pehak lagi dari nasir itu telah menimbulkan rasa takut dan tidak perchaya dengan mengatakan bahawa kepentingan yang sah orang bukan Melayu sa-bagaimana yang ter- maktub di-dalam Perlembagaan itu hendak di-chabuli. Tuan Speaker, kita mesti-lah menginsafi hakikat yang sa-benar-nya sa-bagaimana yang terdapat di-Malaysia pada hari ini. Oleh kerana peristiwa 13 Mei itu maseh jelas di- dalam ingatan kita, maka perlu-lah kita ber- sikap tegas untok menunjokkan keazaman kita hendak mengekal dan memelihara kekuatan demokrasi bagi menentang gerakan tipu helah nasir yang tidak bertanggong- jawab itu. Kita mesti-lah menunjokkan bukti bahawa kita benar tegas di-dalam kata kita hendak menghapuskan segala peluang yang boleh di-gunakan oleh nasir itu untok merosakkan suasana atau susunan politik kita. Pendek kata, kita tidak akan membiarkan sa- kumpulan kechil menyalah-gunakan kebe- basan yang telah di-beri itu sa-hingga menjahanamkan hak kebebasan kita. Tuan Speaker, dengan bersidang-nya sa- mula Parlimen, maka kita semua hari ini sedar akan harapan besar hasrat kita dan hasrat hati ra'ayat negara ini. Saya menaroh harapan yang tinggi bahawa dengan tindakan kita meluluskan Rang Undang"2 yang sedang di-binchangkan di-dalam Dewan ini, maka akan terhapus-lah perasaan shak dan waham di-kalangan seluroh ra'ayat negara ini. Saya juga berharap sa-telah mendengar perbin- chadangan kita di-sini, mereka akan merasa yakin bahawa sa-kali pun kita mempunya pedagangan politik yang berlainan, tetapi kita bersatu di-dalam usaha hendak memelihara keamanan dan ketegohan negara dan per- paduan serta keharmonian ra'ayat. Maka dengan sebab yang saya sebutkan tadi, Kerajaan telah mengambil keputusan untok mengemukakan Rang Undang"2 yang ada di-hadapan tuan pada hari ini dengan tujuan hendak meminda beberapa peruntokan di-dalam Perlembagaan. Kita mempunya dua tujuan yang utama yang sangat penting. Pertama, pindaan itu bermaksud untok menyekat perbinchangan awam atas perkara yang sensitif supaya dengan itu dapat-lah demokrasi berparlimen berjalan dengan lichin di-negara kita ini. Kedua-nya ia-lah bertujuan untok membetulkan menerusi undang"2 bebe- rapa perkara yang tidak sa-imbang di- kalangan kaum. Kerajaan telah mengambil masa yang panjang untok memikir dengan teliti sa-belum daripada membuat keputusan hendak mengemukakan pindaan yang ter- sebut di-dalam Dewan ini. Kita telah men- dapat kesempatan untok mengadakan perbinchangan yang berfaedah sa-chara berterus-terang di-dalam Majlis Perundingan Negara atau National Consultative Council. Kita yakin dan perchaya bahawa pindaan itu ada-lah mustahak memandang kapada keadaan dan suasana yang terdapat pada masa ini dan tidak shak lagi bahawa pindaan itu di-persetujukan oleh sa-bilangan besar ra'ayat yang suka melihat supaya keharmonian di- antara kaum tidak terjejas. Sekarang saya suka menjelaskan pindaan yang di-chadangkan satu persatu. Pindaan yang pertama yang terkandong di- dalam Fasal 2 Rang Undang"2 ini ia-lah mengenali dengan Article 10 dalam Perlem- bagaan. Pindaan ini ia-lah bertujuan untok menchegah sa-siapa jua pun membuat kenya- taan yang boleh menyentoh perasaan sensitif kaum yang ada di-negara kita ini. Chara- nya ia-lah dengan memberi kuasa kapada Parlimen untok meluluskan undang"2 yang menchegah perbuatan mempersoalkan seba- rang perkara, hak, kedudokan, taraf, keis- timewaan, kedaulatan atau hak mutlak yang di-tentukan atau di-lindongi oleh peruntokan dalam Bahagian III (yang mengandongi per- untokan berkaitan dengan kera'ayatan); Article 152 (mengenali dengan Bahasa Kebang- saan dan bahasa kaum lain); Article 153 (mengenali dengan kedudokan istimewa orang Melayu dan kepentingan sah kaum lain), dan Article 181 (mengenali dengan kedau- latan Raja). Sa-bagaimana Ahli Yang Berhormat sedia ma'alum, hak kebebasan berchakap dan mengeluarkan fikiran di-bawah Article 10 Fasal 1 (a) dalam Perlembagaan telah pun terta'alok kapada peruntokan di-bawah fasal 2 (a) kapada Article itu yang memberi kuasa kapada Parlimen membuat undang"2 untok mengenakan "sekatan2 yang di-dapati perlu atau mustahak demi kepentingan keselamatan Persekutuan atau mana bahagian-nya, per- hubongan persahabatan dengan negara lain, ketenteraman awam atau akhlak dan sekatan2 yang di-maksudkan untok melindongi keisti- mewaan Parlimen atau mana Dewan Negeri atau untok mengelakkan penghinaan ter- hadap Mahkamah, fitnah atau pun perbuatan mengapikan supaya di-lakukan sa-suatu kesalahan." Jika sekatan2 yang tersebut dalam Fasal 2 (a) itu di-terima dan di-fikirkan perlu, maka tentu-lah lebeh perlu lagi di-kenakan sekatan2 ka-atas perbuatan mempersoalkan peruntokan yang penting dan asasi yang terkandong di-dalam Perlembagaan itu memandang kapada pengalaman yang baharu kita per- olehi, kerana di-atas asas ini-lah bangsa kita telah di-bena dan dengan sebab itu-lah satu Fasal baharu hendak di-masokkan di-bawah Article 10 yang menghurai dan menjelaskan kuasa Parlimen di-bawah Fasal 2 (a). Tuan Speaker, saya rasa tidak-lah perlu saya menghuraikan satu persatu di-dalam Dewan ini untok menunjokkan bagaimana adil-nya Perlembagaan Negara kita itu ter- hadap semua pehak dan ia-nya telah di-gubal hasil dari persetujuan yang telah di-chapai oleh kaum yang besar di-Malaysia sa-telah perundingan sa-chara berterus-terang dan mendalam di-adakan di-antara kita sa-sama sendiri sa-belum daripada kita menchapai kemerdekaan. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is hardly necessary for me in this House to expound upon the care- ful and balanced character of the Constitution which was so painstakingly negotiated and agreed upon by the major races in Malaysia before we attained independence. Part III of the Constitution relates to the provisions regarding citizenship. Let those who are citizens of Malaysia under its provisions be ensured clearly that their rights shall not be challenged. This is surely important to them so that whatever fears may have been aroused will now be set at rest. Now, the basic provisions relating to the acquisition of citizenship represented a fair and balanced compromise. The same careful and balanced approach runs through the other provisions of the Constitution protecting the legitimate rights of all races in Malaysia. Thus the provisions relating to the special position of the Malays are balanced by the guaranteed protection of the legitimate inte- rests of the other communities and by the citizenship provisions to which I have referred. The provisions relating to the position of Bahasa Malaysia as the sole official and National Language is balanced by the gua- rantee for the use of the languages of other races other than for official purposes. As regards the provision relating to the sove- reignty of the Rulers, surely no one will disagree that their position should never be open to attack or challenge. Any self- respecting people will surely want to ensure that the position of its Rulers should not be subject to debate in the political arena. These are the main provisions of our Constitution relating to issues which may be regarded as sensitive. These must be removed from the realm of public discussion which could lead to the exploitation of these issues by irresponsible elements to the detriment of all our people. The careful and balanced provisions of our Constitution guaranteeing legitimate interests of all races in Malaysia are the very foundation upon which this nation exists. To challenge them is to challenge the very principle upon which the nation rests. Tragically, they have been challenged. The consequences are only too well-known to all of us. It is not only in the interest of all of us that they should be protected. It is also surely right that the very foundation of the nation should not be the subject of divisive and dangerous debate. Tuan Speaker, saperti saya telah terangkan Perlembagaan kita telah meletakkan sharat yang adil kapada semua pehak mengenali dengan kewarganegaraan. Bagitu-lah juga peruntokan yang lain di-dalam Perlembagaan itu mengenali dengan perlindongan ka-atas hak yang sah bagi semua kaum di-Malaysia. Mithal-nya, peruntokan berhubong dengan kedudokan istimewa orang Melayu ada-lah di-saimbangkan dengan jaminan yang di-beri untok melindongi kepentingan yang sah bagi kaum lain dan juga peruntokan kewarga- negaraan yang telah pun saya sebutkan tadi. Peruntokan berhubong dengan kedudokan Bahasa Malaysia sa-bagai bahasa rasmi dan Bahasa Kebangsaan yang tunggal ada-lah di-saimbangkan dengan jaminan bahawa bahasa kaum lain boleh di-gunakan sa-lain daripada untok tujuan rasmi. Berhubong dengan peruntokan mengenali dengan kedau- latan Raja, saya perchaya tidak sa-siapa pun hendak menchabar kedudokan Raja itu. Saya yakin bahawa tidak sa-orang pun ra'ayat yang ta'at setia suka melihat bahawa perkara kedudokan Raja itu menjadi bahan perba- hathan dalam gelanggang politik. Ini-lah perkara yang termaktub di-dalam Perlembagaan kita yang boleh di-sifatkan sa- bagai soal yang sensitif yang mesti di-larang siapa jua pun mengadakan perbinchangan awam mengenali dengan-nya ia-itu perkara yang boleh di-gunakan oleh nasir yang tidak bertanggong-jawab untok merosakkan perpaduan ra'ayat. Saya suka menegaskan di-sini bahawa peruntokan yang menjadi asas negara kita ini patut-lah di-pelihara bukan sahaja kerana menjaga kepentingan kita bahkan kerana ia-nya terlampau suchi untok di-jadikan bahan perbahathan yang mer- bahaya. Tuan Speaker, sekarang suka-lah saya men- jelaskan pula bahawa kuasa hendak di- berikan kapada Parlimen untok mengenakan lapangan mengadakan perbinchangan awam di-atas peruntokan sensitif itu tidak-lah ter- masok perbinchangan tentang perlaksanaan peruntokan itu. Tuan tentu-lah bersetuju bahawa perun- tokan sensitif itu tidak-lah patut menjadi bahan untok perbinchangan awam, tetapi tidak-lah di-dapati adil kira-nya chara pelak- sanaan peruntokan yang tersebut di-sekat daripada di-bahath ia-itu setakat yang me- ngena dengan perbuatan menyalah gunakan kuasa untok melaksanakan peruntokan Per- lembagaan itu oleh Kerajaan atau mana pehak yang berkuasa. Ada-lah di-chadangkan ia-itu perkara yang boleh di-persoalkan itu akan di-tentukan di-dalam sa-buah undangan yang akan di-kemukakan ka-Parlimen tidak berapa lama lagi. Tidak siapa pun dapat men- dakwa bahawa ia-nya mempunya kebijak- sanaan dan tidak melakukan kesalahan, dan kami dalam Kerajaan sentiasa sanggup menerima sa-barang pandangan dan shor tentang chara bagaimana peruntokan itu dapat di-laksanakan. Kita telah mengaku bahawa ada-lah untok kepentingan kita ber- sama bahawa peruntokan itu di-beri perlin- dongan, dan kita juga mengaku bahawa ada-lah bagi faedah kita semua untok men- jamin supaya peruntokan itu di-laksanakan dengan adil dan saksama supaya terchapai-lah tujuan dan maksud di-adakan peruntokan tersebut. Tuan Speaker, sekarang saya beraleh pula kapada pindaan yang kedua ia-itu Fasal 3 dalam Rang Undang"2 itu yang bermaksud hendak meminda Article 63 dalam Perlem- bagaan berhubong dengan keistimewaan Ahli Parlimen yang menjamin bahawa mereka tidak akan di-bawa ka-pengadilan mahkamah di-atas sebarang perkara yang mereka uchap- kan dalam perbinchangan dalam salah satu Dewan atau dalam mana Jawatan-kuasa Dewan. Kita berchadang hendak memasok- kan satu Fasal baharu dalam Article 63 yang bertujuan bahawa sa-saorang Ahli Parlimen yang di-tudoh melakukan kesalahan di-bawah mana Undang"2 yang di-luluskan oleh Par- limen menurut di-bawah Article 10 (4) sa- bagaimana yang di-pinda dengan Fasal 2 Rang Undang"2 ini, maka Ahli itu tidak ber- hak mendapat perlindongan di-bawah Article 63 (2). Sa-hingga Parlimen dapat meluluskan undang"2 di-bawah Fasal 4 Article 10, maka Akta Asutan, 1948 atau Sedition Act, 1948 saperti yang di-pinda di-bawah Ordinan (Kuasa Perlu) Dharurat 45, 1970, ada-lah berjalan kuat-kuasa-nya. Pindaan yang ketiga ia-lah Fasal 4, dalam Rang Undang"2 itu memberi kesan yang sama kapada Article 72 kapada Perlembagaan berhubong dengan keistimewaan yang sama bagi sa-orang Ahli Dewan Undangan bagi mana negeri di- Malaysia. Tuan Speaker, saya memang-lah sedar bahawa Ahli2 Parlimen dan Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri ada-lah terdiri dari mereka yang bertanggong-jawab. Tetapi kita semua tahu bahawa apa yang kita katakan di-sini ada-lah di-rakamkan dalam Peringatan Me- shuarat Dewan dan terus di-laporkan oleh alat sebaran 'am. Jika kita hendak melarang perkara sensitif itu di-binchang dengan sa- chara awam dengan memberi kuasa kapada Parlimen meluluskan undang"2 bagi menghad- kan kebebasan berchakap mengenali dengan hal itu, dan membolehkan di-ambil tindakan undang"2 keatas mereka yang di-tudoh me- lakukan kesalahan melanggar undang"2 yang tersebut itu, maka tentu-lah patut dan adil bahawa Ahli Parlimen, atau mana Ahli Dewan Negeri juga terta'alok kapada dakwaan itu kira-nya kita sendiri melanggar undang"2 yang tersebut. Kita patut-lah sedar bahawa Ahli"2 Parlimen dan Ahli Dewan Negeri sentiasa-lah men- dapat perhatian istimewa dari orang ramai dan uchapan2 mereka di-dalam Dewan ada- lah menarek perhatian ra'ayat. Jika Ahli Yang Berhormat di-benarkan menimbul dan membangkitkan soal sensitif dalam Dewan dengan tidak terta'alok kapada kuatkuasa undang"2, maka tidak-lah berarti pindaan yang di-chadangkan dalam Fasal 2 Rang Undang"2 ini. Dewan ini telah pun bersetuju bahawa kebebasan beruchap dalam Dewan ini tidak berarti sa-saorang Ahli itu boleh menyentoh perkara yang boleh membangkitkan perasaan kaum dan mengancham kedudokan kaum di-negara ini. Tegahan ini telah di-tetapkan dalam Peratoran 36 kapada Peratoran Majlis Meshuarat Dewan Ra'ayat yang menentukan bahawa ada-lah salah pada peratoran meng- gunakan perkataan yang harus membangkit- kan perasaan bersakit hati atau bermusohan di-antara satu kaum dengan satu kaum lain dalam negara ini. Saya perchaya Ahli Yang Berhormat semua bersetuju bahawa Per- atoran ini tidak memada untok tujuan yang di-maksudkan memandang kapada suasana yang terdapat pada hari ini. Saya rasa tidak- lah memada dengan kuasa yang ada pada Speaker untok memerentah Ahli Dewan menarek balek kata-nya setiap kali mereka melanggar Peratoran 36 itu. Ini bukan sahaja memberatkan tanggong-jawab Tuan Speaker yang mesti memberi keputusan dalam sekelip mata pada tiap kali kejadian itu berlaku, tetapi yang penting-nya kata merbahaya telah terhambor dan tidak dapat di-padam- kan lagi. Oleh yang demikian, Ahli2 Yang Berhormat mesti-lah juga terta'alok kapada tindakan undang"2 di-atas kata mereka yang merbahaya itu saperti orang awam. Ada-lah di-chadangkan bahawa Ahli2 Dewan Par- limen dan Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri yang di-dapati melanggar Undang"2 ini hanya akan di-bicharakan oleh Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi, Akta Asutan, 1948 akan di-pinda sewajar-nya untok mengadakan peruntokan itu. Tuan Speaker, sekarang saya berpaling pula kapada Fasal 5 dalam Rang Undang"2 itu yang bermaksud hendak meminda Article 152 kapada Perlembagaan berhubong dengan Bahasa Kebangsaan dengan menentukan pengertian perkataan "tujuan2 rasmi" atau official purpose dalam Article itu. Perlem- bagaan telah menentukan bahawa Bahasa Malaysia hendak-lah menjadi Bahasa Ke- bangsaan dengan tidak menghalang atau menchegah penggunaan bahasa lain ter- kechuali untok tujuan rasmi. Sa-bagaimana yang Ahli2 Yang Berhormat sedia ma'alum, perkataan "tujuan" rasmi" dalam Article itu tidak di-huraikan pengertian-nya. Oleh yang demikian, ada-lah di-chadangkan supaya per- katakan itu di-beri pengertian yang jelas dengan chara di-tambah satu Fasal yang baharu yang menentukan bahawa perkataan itu berma'ana sa-barang tujuan Kerajaan, sama ada Kerajaan Persekutuan atau Negeri, termasok-lah mana tujuan untok pehak ber- kuasa awam. Saya rasa pengertian ini sangat- lah berguna dan perlu untok menjelaskan lagi tujuan yang telah pun sedia di-fahamkan. Tuan Speaker, saya suka memberi jaminan kapada Ahli2 Yang Berhormat dari Sabah dan Sarawak bahawa pindaan kapada Fasal ini sa-bagaimana yang telah saya terangkan tadi tidak-lah sa-kali akan menchachatkan Article 161 yang menentukan bahawa bahasa Inggeris boleh di-gunakan dalam kedua buah Negeri yang tersebut untok sa-lama masa 10 tahun sa-lepas daripada Hari Malaysia. Sir, I would like to assure Honourable Members from Sabah and Sarawak that the amendments to this Clause as stated above, would not in any way affect Article 161 which provides for the use of English in these two States for the period of 10 years after Malaysia Day. Tuan Speaker, berpaling kapada Fasal 6 dalam Rang Undang"2 ini, yang terbahagi kapada tiga bahagian, yang tujuan-nya untok membuat beberapa pindaan kapada Article 153, saya berchadang hendak menjelaskan terlebeh dahulu Fasal 6 (a) dan 6 (c) bersekali. Fasal 6 (a) dalam Rang Undang"2 ini ber- tujuan hendak meminda Article 153 dengan memasokkan sa-lepas sahaja perkataan "Melayu" di-mana yang tersebut dalam Article itu, perkataan "dan bumiputera mana Negeri Borneo". Fasal 6 (c) dalam Rang Undang"2 itu chuma merupakan satu penghuraian sahaja dan ber- tujuan supaya di-masokkan satu Fasal baharu (9A) kapada Article 153 yang meng- huraikan pengertian perkataan "bumiputera Negeri Borneo" sa-bagai mempunya arti yang sama dengan pengertian yang telah di- chatet dalam Article 161A kapada Perlem- bagaan. Saya rasa tidak-lah perlu saya menerangkan tujuan pindaan ini. Turning next to Clause 6 of the Bill, which is in three parts and which seeks to make amendments to Article 153, I propose to deal first with Clauses 6 (a) and 6 (c) together. Clause 6 (a) of the Bill seeks to amend Article 153 by inserting immediately after the word "Malays" whenever it appears in the Article, the words "and natives of any of the Borneo States". Clause 6 (c) of the Bill is merely explanatory and seeks to insert a new Clause (9A) to Article 153 which defines the expression "natives of the Borneo States" as having the meaning which it already has in Article 161A of the Constitution. I do not think that this will require any comment. Tuan Speaker, mengenali dengan pindaan yang terkandong dalam Fasal 6 (a) kapada Rang Undang"2 itu, saya juga perchaya bahawa pindaan dapat di-terima oleh semua pehak. Tujuan asas bagi Article 153 itu ia-lah untok memberi kesempatan kapada orang Melayu maju dengan lebeh pesat supaya dapat pada satu masa kelak mereka bertanding dengan orang bukan Melayu dengan mempunya sharat kelayakan dan kebolehan yang sama, kerana pada masa ini ada-lah di-aku bahawa orang Melayu belum menchapai kemajuan yang sama pesat dengan orang yang bukan Melayu. Hakikat yang sama saperti ini terdapat juga di-kalangan bumiputera Negeri Malaysia Timor. Oleh yang demikian, pindaan yang di-chadangkan itu memang-lah lojik. Saya patut-lah menge- mukakan bersekali Fasal 8 kapada Rang Undang"2 itu yang bertujuan untok meminda Article 161 (A) Perlembagaan. Pindaan ini ia-lah untok menyelaraskan dengan pindaan dalam Fasal 6 Rang Undang"2 ini dan saya fikir tidak perlu-lah saya menerangkan dengan lebeh lanjut. Tuan Speaker, saya suka menjelaskan bahawa chadangan membuangkan Fasal (1), (2) dan (3) dalam Article 161A telah di- buat dengan permintaan Kerajaan Sabah dan Sarawak menurut sa-bagaimana Laporan Jawatan-kuasa Antara Kerajaan atau Inter- Governmental Committee Report. Dengan terhapus-nya Fasal (1) dalam Article 161A, kedudokan bumiputera dalam kedua buah Negeri ini tidak-lah sekali akan terchachat kerana mereka akan terus mendapat keisti- mewaan yang sama di-bawah pindaan yang di-chadangkan itu. Maka dengan terhapus- nya Fasal (2), bumiputera dalam kedua buah Negeri itu akan mendapat kedudokan yang lebeh baik kerana mereka akan dapat keisti- mewaan yang di-beri oleh Article 153 bukan sahaja di-Sabah dan Sarawak tetapi juga di-Malaysia Barat. Oleh kerana tujuan meminda Article 161A itu untok meletakkan bumiputera di-Sabah dan Sarawak sama taraf dengan orang Melayu di-negeri Malaysia Barat, maka perlu-lah Fasal (3) itu di-buang, kerana jika tidak maka sharat itu akan berchanggah. Keistimewaan yang boleh di-beri oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong menurut Article 153 kapada bumiputera Sabah dan Sarawak ia-lah mengenali dengan perkara Federal sahaja, ia-itu perkara yang di-bawah kekuasaan Kerajaan Pusat. Pindaan ini tidak-lah sekali akan menchachatkan kuasa Negeri untok memberi keistimewaan kapada bumiputera di-dalam kedua buah Negeri yang tersebut dalam perkara yang terletak di-dalam ke- kuasaan Negeri itu. Dengan pindaan ini, maka jelas-lah bahawa bumiputera Sabah dan Sarawak ada-lah di-letak kapada satu kedu- dokan yang sama dengan orang Melayu dalam Negeri di-Malaysia Barat. Sir, I would like to explain that the proposal to delete Clauses (1), (2) and (3) of Article 161A was made at the request of Sabah and Sarawak Governments in accordance with the Inter-Governmental Committee Report. By the deletion of Clause (1) of Article 161A, the position of the natives in these two States will not be adversely affected in any way as they will continue to enjoy the same privileges under the proposed amendments. Now, the deletion of Clause (2) will enhance the position of the natives of the two States in that they will now be able to enjoy the privileges accorded by Article 153 not only in Sabah and Sarawak but also in West Malaysia. As the intention of amending Article 161A is to place the natives in Sabah and Sarawak on the same status as the Malays in the States of West Malaysia, it is necessary that Clause (3) should be deleted, as otherwise there will be anomalies. The privileges that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can give under Article 153 to the natives of Sabah and Sarawak will only be in respect of Federal matters, i.e., matters under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. These amendments will not in any way affect the powers of the State to provide privileges to the natives in the two States in matters which are under their juris- diction. By these amendments, it can now be clearly seen that the natives of Sabah and Sarawak are placed exactly in the same position as the Malays in the States of West Malaysia. Tuan Speaker, sekarang saya beraleh pula kapada Fasal 6 (b) dalam Rang Undang"2 ini yang memberi kuasa kapada Yang di-Pertuan Agong selaras dengan kewajipan Baginda sa- bagaimana yang telah di-tentukan di-bawah Article 153 dalam Perlembagaan ,untok men- jamin perezapan bagi orang Melayu dan bumiputera Negeri Borneo tempat yang ber- patutan banyak-nya dalam universiti, maktab dan lain pusat pelajaran yang lebeh tinggi dari perengkat menengah di-mana di- dapati lebeh banyak chalun yang berke- layakan daripada tempat yang di-sediakan. Saya rasa perlu menjelaskan tujuan Fasal 6 (b) ini. Saya telah pun menarek perhatian Dewan ini bahawa salah satu sebab yang membawa kapada terchetus-nya kekachauan dalam bulan Mei, 1969 itu ia-lah bertambah- nya perasaan tidak terjamin di-kalangan orang Melayu di-sebabkan jurang perbe- dzaan yang mereka dapati di-antara mereka dengan orang yang bukan Melayu terutama sa-kali dalam bidang pelajaran dan ekonomi. Saya juga telah menerangkan bahawa salah satu daripada tujuan besar kenapa kita menchadangkan pindaan kapada Perlem- bagaan ini ia-lah untok membetulkan mene- rusi undang"2 keadaan tidak sa-imbang di-dalam beberapa lapangan kehidupan ra'ayat. Chara dan langkah yang lain yang perlu juga di-ambil untok membetulkan keadan yang tidak sa-imbang dalam lapangan pelajaran dan ekonomi. Dalam bidang eko- nomi, Kerajaan telah mengadakan satu Ranchangan Ekonomi Baharu yang bertujuan untok menyusun balek ekonomi negara dengan maksud supaya dapat-lah tiap kaum mengambil bahagian yang sama di-dalam lapangan perniagaan dan perusahaan negara. Satu lagi perkara yang belum sa-imbang ia- lah pelajaran yang ada hubongan rapat dengan kemajuan ekonomi dan sosial. Hari ini bilangan menuntut dari semua kaum yang mempunya kelayakan untok melanjutkan pelajaran tinggi telah bertambah dengan banyak-nya. Namun bagitu, di-sebab- kan oleh latar belakang sosio-ekonomi yang serba kurang dan kemudahan pelajaran yang tidak menchukupi di-kawasan luar bandar, maka kemajuan akademi menuntut Melayu pada banding-nya tidak-lah bagitu baik saperti yang di-kehendaki. Keadaan ini telah meng- akibatkan tidak ada-nya imbangan antara kaum dalam beberapa kursus pengajian di- universiti. Sa-bagai chontoh-nya, di-Univer- siti Malaya terdapat jurang bilangan yang luas antara menuntut Melayu dengan bukan Melayu dalam sa-tengah kursus. Jangka untok membuktikan kedudokan yang tidak sa-imbang itu ada tersiar dalam Kertas Puteh yang bertajok "Ka-arah Keharmonian Negara", yang telah pun di-ishtiharkan. Sa- bagaimana yang tuan dapat saksikan, sunggoh pun keadaan itu telah mula bertam- bah baik, tetapi kepesatan-nya tidak-lah chukup memuaskan dan belum dapat meme- nohi kehendak yang ada pada hari ini. Keadaan tidak sa-imbang di-antara kaum itu akan menimbulkan berbagai akibah yang merbahaya kapada bangsa kita dan mesti- lah di-atasi dengan sa-berapa segara yang boleh. Statistik jangka yang tersebut itu menunjokkan dengan jelas keadaan yang sa- benar-nya. Banyak lagi faktor dan jangka yang lain yang boleh mengesahkan keadaan yang merunsingkan itu. Jangka itu dapat menunjokkan dengan jelas-nya bahawa orang Melayu maseh jauh tinggal ka-belakang dalam beberapa jurusan pelajaran. Mithal- nya, dalam jurusan sains, bilangan siswazah bagi tahun 1970 ia-lah 22 orang Melayu daripada jumlah 493 dalam Fakulti Sains, sa-orang Melayu dari jumlah 71 orang dalam Fakulti Kejuruteraan atau Engineering, 15 orang Melayu dari jumlah 49 orang dalam Fakulti Pertanian dan 4 orang Melayu dari jumlah 67 orang dalam Fakulti Perubatan. Nyata-lah bahawa keadaan ini sangat-lah tidak adil dan tidak di-ingini untok kepen- tingan negara. Kerajaan sedang mengator langkah jangka panjang bagi memperbaiki kemudahan pelajaran dan memperbaiki lagi latar belakang sosio-ekonomi yang mundor bagi menuntut di-luar bandar. Sunggoh pun bagitu, satu penyelesaian yang segera perlu di-buat bagi mengatasi keadaan yang ter- dapat sekarang ini. Tuan Speaker, pada waktu ini Perlemba- gaan Universiti menetapkan bahawa Uni- versiti itu di-kehendaki mengambil masok kesemua menuntut yang di-beri biasiswa Kerajaan dengan sharat mereka mempunya kelayakan yang di-perlukan. Oleh yang demikian, mungkin dapat kita memudahkan menuntut Melayu masok ka-Universiti dengan chara memberi biasiswa kapada mereka dengan tidak kira tentang latar belakang kewangan mereka. Sunggoh pun bagitu, tentu- lah chara yang saperti ini tidak adil kerana biasiswa kapada menuntut Melayu yang ber- kelayakan mesti-lah di-beri berasaskan kapada kebolehan mereka dan kedudokan kewangan mereka. Mungkin juga tujuan membetulkan kedudokan yang tidak sa- imbang dalam fakulti itu boleh terchapai dengan chara mengeluarkan arahan pentad- biran. Tetapi chara yang saperti itu harus menimbulkan silap faham dan salah penger- tian. Oleh itu, perlu-lah kita mengkaji dan memperbetulkan soal ini dengan chara terus terang kerana ia-nya bukan sahaja mengenali dengan orang Melayu bahkan satu masaalah yang berkait dengan kepentingan kita semua. Oleh yang demikian, kita patut menerangkan masaalah ini kapada seluroh ra'ayat supaya dapat mereka faham tujuan dan sebab-nya kita mengambil tindakan yang tersebut itu. Di-atas asas ini-lah maka pindaan kapada Article 153 itu di-chadangkan. Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya suka mengambil kesempatan ini juga untok memberi jaminan bahawa kuasa yang di-beri kapada Yang di- Pertuan Agong untok memberi arahan kapada mana Universiti, Maktab atau Pusat Pelajaran yang lebeh tinggi daripada Tingkatan Menengah supaya merizabkan untok orang Melayu dan bumiputera bagi Negeri Borneo tempat yang berpatutan banyak-nya akan di-laksanakan dengan cher- mat dan teliti. Tujuan pindaan ini ia-lah untok merizabkan tempat bagi kursus pela- jaran yang tertentu di-mana menuntut Melayu dan bumiputera bagi Negeri Borneo yang terlampau kechil bilangan-nya. Dengan chara ini-lah keadan yang tidak sa-imbang itu akan dapat di-atasi dalam usaha hendak meme- lihara perpaduan negara. Saya suka men- jelaskan bahawa pindaan yang di-chadangkan kapada Article 153 dengan menambahkan satu Fasal baharu (8A) yang terta'alok kapada Fasal (1) dalam Article itu. I would like to make it clear that the pro- posed amendment to Article 153 by adding a new Clause (8A) will be subject to Clause (1) of that Article which places the respon- sibility on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard not only the special position of the Malays but also the legitimate interests of the other communities. Tuan Speaker, akhir-nya saya suka mene- rangkan Fasal 7 dalam Rang Undang"2 itu yang bertujuan hendak meminda Article 159 (5) dalam Perlembagaan dengan mengadakan peruntokan bahawa sa-lain daripada Article yang telah pun sedia terchatet di-dalam-nya, maka pindaan kapada peruntokan yang ter- kandong dalam Article 10 (4) Perlembagaan atau mana undang"2 yang di-luluskan menurut Article ini, Bahagian III Perlembagaan, Article 63 (4), Article 72 (4) dan Fasal 5 kapada Article 159 tidak-lah boleh di-buat dengan tidak mendapat persetujuan Majlis Raja. Sa-bagaimana Ahli Yang Berhormat sedia ma'alum, Article 159 (5) telah pun menetap- kan bahawa pindaan kapada Article 38, 70, 71 (1) dan 153 tidak boleh di-luluskan me- lainkan dengan persetujuan Majlis Raja. Sir, I now turn, finally, to Clause 7 of the Bill, which seeks to amend Article 159 (5) of the Constitution by providing that in addition to the Articles of the Constitution enumerated therein, no amendment be made to the provisions contained in Article 10 (4) of the Constitution or any law passed there- under, to Part III of the Constitution, to Article 63 (4), Article 72 (4) and to Clause (5) of Article 159 itself without the consent of the Conference of Rulers. As Honourable Members are aware, Article 159 (5) already provides that no amendment to Articles 38, 70, 71 (1) and 153 shall be passed without the consent of the Conference of Rulers. I believe that the proposal to entrench further the sen- sitive provisions of the Constitution in this manner and to entrench Article 159 (5) itself will be generally welcomed as providing further assurances that these constitutional provisions safeguarding the legitimate interests of all races in this country would not be eroded. Tuan Speaker, bagi penutup-nya, saya suka menyatakan bahawa negara kita telah melalu krisis yang amat merbahaya dalam sejarah- nya. Perasaan takut dan benchi, marah dan churiga telah di-bangkit-kan. Mari-lah kita merenongkan dengan mendalam dan teliti sekarang mana-kah arah haluan yang kita hendak tuju. Mari-lah kita sama mengingat- kan bahawa perjalanan sistem demokrasi di- negara kita ini mesti-lah memperhitongkan keadaan masharakat berbilang kaum yang ada di-sini. Negara kita belum pernah ber- tentang dengan chabaran yang kita hadapi sekarang ini. Saya suka bertanya kapada Ahli Yang Berhormat sakalian ada-kah bijak bagi kita berbalek kapada chara yang lama ia-itu di-atas nama demokrasi dan kebebasan ber- uchap, maka ada-lah patut kita membiarkan nasir yang tidak bertanggong-jawab bebas menjalankan tipu helah mereka untok mem- bangkitkan perasaan perkauman sa-hingga membawa bangsa dan negara kapada jurang kehanchoran, atau pun kita bertindak se- karang ini juga untok menarek kebebasan itu dari mereka supaya dapat kita dan demokrasi berparlimen berjalan dengan lanchar-nya. Saya yakin dan tidak ragu lagi apa yang kita mesti buat sekarang, bagitu juga saya yakin apa yang di-ingini oleh seluroh ra'ayat negara kita di-atas segala-nya ia-lah supaya suasana harmoni antara kaum kekal terpelihara dan juga supaya negara kita mara terus ka- hadapan untok memenohi hasrat menchapai perpaduan dan kema'amoran dalam suasana aman dan damai. Tuan Speaker, sa-kira-nya maseh ada keraguan atau perasaan bimbang di-hati sa- tengah Ahli Yang Berhormat di-sini mengenali pindaan Perlembagaan yang ada di-hadapan kita, saya berharap sa-telah di- nyatakan dengan terang-nya tujuan serta kehendak Rang Undang"2 ini dan sa-telah mendengar menjelaskan yang di-fikirkan perlu keraguan dan rasa bimbang mereka itu sudah pun terhapus hendak-nya. Dengan itu saya meminta supaya Dewan yang mulia ini melu- luskan pindaan Perlembagaan ini dan menunjokan dengan nyata kapada seluroh ra'ayat bahawa kita sakalian di-sini berazam hendak menjaminkan jaminan sistem Kera- jaan berparlimen yang sesuai dengan ke- adakan di-negara kita. Mari-lah kita semua yang chintakan serta ta'at setia kapada Negara ini berdiri tegoh dan bersatu hati demi kepentingan utama menjamin bagi memelihara harmoni dan perpaduan untok mengekalkan tujuan bangsa dan Negara supaya mara terus menchapai kemajuan dan kema'amoran. Sir, in conclusion, I have no doubt in my own mind what we should do. I have no doubt also what the broad mass of our people, who wish above all that multi-racial harmony should prevail, and that our nation should develop peacefully towards greater unity and prosperity, want to do. If there are doubts or misgivings in the minds of some Members of the House on the various constitutional amendments now before us, it is my hope that, having stated and explained the objects and the intention of the Bill and after having listened to any clarification that may be necessary, these doubts or misgivings will have been cleared. I, therefore, ask this House to approve these Constitutional amendments and show clearly to our people that we are determined to ensure the working of the parliamentary system of Government suited to our present conditions. Let all of us who have the love and loyalty of our country at heart stand united in the larger interest of ensuring national harmony and unity for the survival and for the continued progress and prosperity of our country. Sir, I beg to move. (Tepok).

Malaysians are aware of the many provocative statements and speeches made in particular in the recent UMNO General Assembly, but which seemed to carry immunity. I refer in particular to the demand by a Selangor State Assemblyman who wanted the Government to remove the citizenship of a M.T.U.C. leader who had criticised the Government for failing to with- draw all the restrictive anti-labour measures; Fourthly, the ban is seen purely as a political move to bolster the fortunes of the ruling Alliance Party and its component parties which suffered serious reverses in the last General Elections. This is admitted by none other than the Deputy Prime Minister in his "M.C.A.-Neither dead nor alive" speech to Johore State Alliance leaders in Johore Bahru on January 15, when he said, and I quote: "In the 1969 General Elections, sensitive issues-the National Language and the special rights of the Malays-were the issues which generally brought about the setbacks of the Alliance. The issues must, therefore, be entrenched in the Constitution, so that in the forthcoming elections, sensitive issues cannot be questioned by the Opposition. And with the entrenchment of sensitive issues, our partners, the M.C.A. and the M.I.C. will not be at a disadvantage." The only argument for banning the so- called sensitive issues from public discussion and debate and entrenching them in the Malaysian Constitution is to promote national unity and lessen racial mistrust in the country. This result can only be achieved if the overwhelming majority of Malaysians support such an entrenchment. But if large sections of the Malaysian public regard such a move as a political move by the ruling party to stifle the expression of their legitimate fears and grievances, then such entrenchment will not be a cementing force for the diverse races. It will instead become the focal point of widespread discontent and the subject of national division, disunity and discord. The Government can put any law on the Statute Book or amend the Constitution any- how they like provided they have the neces- sary votes in Parliament. But when Parliament is used to block or frustrate the popular will, then the laws it pass will cease to command the respect and observance of the people, leading to a general undermining of public respect for law and order. Mr Speaker, Sir, let us be realistic and practical. Although Parliament can ban the discussion of the so-called sensitive issues, and entrench this ban in the Malaysian Constitution, there is no way to enforce this law. The Government can ban the discussion of these issues in public forums and meetings, over radio and television, even in Parliament and the State Assemblies. But it will not be able to stop people from discussing and debating these very issues in coffee shops, street corners, the privacy of their homes and wherever people meet and congregate unless it intends to turn Malaysia into a Police State and employ half the population as Police informers to eavesdrop and report on private conversations and feelings of the other half. When we come to this stage, whatever may be achieved, it is certainly and definitely not national unity and the lessening of racial mistrust and suspicion. Before I touch on the long-term conse- quences of this Constitution (Amendment) Bill, I propose to discuss separately the four issues which the Government seeks to entrench and place beyond the pale of public debate and discussion.

1. Sovereignty of Rulers-We in the D.A.P. do not and have not questioned the sove- reignty of Rulers. As far as I know, there is not a single Member of Parliament in this House, or a single party represented in this House, which has questioned or seeks to question this provision. I am aware there is one political party in this country which does question this provision. We are told that the reason why the Government wants to entrench the so-called sensitive issues is because it wants to prevent these issues from being exploited by racialist politicians and thus create racial mistrust and illwill, leading to racial bloodshed. As the leaders of the Opposition Party, which questions this provision, are Malaysians of Malay origin, I do not see the logic of this argument. Is the Government seriously suggesting that if Malays themselves question the provision of sovereignty of Rulers, there will be a racial conflict and bloodshed between the Malays and the Chinese? However, as I had said, we do not question this provision. This is not an issue which creates racial mistrust. I shall come back to this subject later, when I touch on the principle of entrenchment of provisions in the Constitution.

2. Citizenship-What I want to say on this is that, although it is now a crime to question the citizenship of Malaysians, we have a clear instance, as I said just now, of an UMNO leader calling with immunity for the depriva- tion of citizenship of a trade union leader for speaking out against the Government. How will the entrenchment of this question in the Malaysian Constitution change matters? It will also not escape notice that, even though citizenship is now a sensitive issue, which is now not being enforced any- way, it will not prevent extremists from building up pressure for the removal of citizenship of outspoken critics of the Govern- ment and the extremists themselves. 3. National Language-The D.A.P. has always unconditionally accepted Malay as the National Language, as a vital factor for uni- fication in a multi-racial society. What the D.A.P. opposes and what the people at large fear is the use of the National Language as an instrument for the eventual annihilation of other languages and cultures in Malaysia. Clause 152 of the Malaysian Constitution states "(1) The National Language shall be the Malay Language and shall be in such script as Parliament may by law provide: Provided that- (a) no person shall be prohibited or pre- vented from using (otherwise than for official purposes), or from teaching or learning, any other language; and (b) nothing in this Clause shall prejudice the right of the Federal Government or of any State Government to preserve and sustain the use and study of the language of any other community in the Federation." We submit that in this Clause, the Malaysian Constitution guarantees the preservation and sustenance of other languages in the country. It means that no linguistic group in this country need fear the decline in use or extinction of its language. The spirit and intention, I submit, of the Constitutional safeguard is to build a multi- lingual Malaysia with a common National Language for all Malaysians. It is from this interpretation that we had contended that the fact that the National Language, by virtue of its status, is bound to become the chief language of administra- tion in this country need not, and should not, mean that the other major languages in the country, namely Chinese, Tamil and English, are not accorded even a subsidiary official status and use in the country. We stress that the other languages, namely Chinese, Tamil and English have become Malaysian languages by virtue of the fact that considerable number of Malaysian citi- zens speak these languages and that the Malaysian Constitution safeguards the pre- servation and sustenance of their use and study. This is clearly in direct contradiction to UMNO's concept of "one nation, one language" for Malaysia. Malaysia is a multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-religious and multi-cultural nation. Any attempt to suppress other languages can only lead to opposition from the language groups so affected, leading to national disunity and discord. The nation as a whole in the last fourteen years since Merdeka has dissipated too much energies on this language question. Let us defuse this language problem, so that all Malaysians can concentrate on the problem of economic upliftment of the have-nots. This can easily take place if all Malaysians will (i) accept Malay as the national language; (ii) accept the constitutional safeguard to pre- serve and sustain the use and study of other languages by giving freedom to all other languages in their use, growth and develop- ment. The D.A.P. has been accused of attacking Malay as the National language in the last general elections campaign. I challenge the Government, which has taped all Opposition rally speeches at great public expense, to produce a single instance where we have done so. What we raised were the unhappi- ness and frustration of the people at the failure of the Government to "preserve and sustain the use and study" of other languages as enshrined in the Constitution, because of the extreme demands by influential UMNO circles for the immediate implementation of the UMNO policy of "one nation, one language". The most extreme call was one which laid down a seven-point programme to build a Malaysian nation, namely the banning of non-Malay languages, non-Malay schools, non-Malay signboards, non-Malay news- papers, non-Malay symbols, non-Malay buildings and non-Malay costumes. There were leading Malay intellectuals who demanded that Malay shall be the only recog- nised Malaysian language, and that Malaysian literature should only be written in the Malay Language. There was a Minister who described Chinese as "Mao Tse Tung's language". For speaking out against these excesses and infringement of the spirit and letter of the Constitutional guarantee to "preserve and sustain the use and study of other languages", I was detained for 17 months under the Internal Security Act. Did the Government arrest the advocate of the 7-point programme to eliminate everything non-Malay in this country? The message is clear. Those who seek to uphold the Constitutional guarantee that other languages be preserved and sustained are regarded as enemies of the National Language. A paradoxical situation has been reached. When the Constitutional Amend- ment Bill is passed, which includes the entrenchment of Article 152 (1) (b) with its Constitutional guarantee to "preserve and sus- tain the use and study of other languages", the public will see it as in actual fact a further hardening of the Government attitude against giving other languages their rightful place in the country. The people have lost confidence in the Government, and the Constitution it is charged to protect and uphold, because of the abuse of its wide-ranging powers of detention without trial. The people have good cause to be cynical. The Government's attitude towards the pro- posed Merdeka University is a case in point. The Merdeka University project was proposed to give university education opportunities to Chinese school-leavers. The sponsors of the Merdeka University announced that the project will be a multi-racial one and will use multi-lingual media of instruction and examination system. The Government put all manner of obstacles and threats in the way of the sponsors and supporters of the project. Although the M.C.A. denounced the project consistently, two days before the polling day, on 8th May 1969 it changed its stand and supported the project and even helped to secure its registration. When N.O.C. Emer- gency rule was proclaimed, the Merdeka University project was clamped down. I would like here to ask either the Honourable the Prime Minister or the Honourable the Minister of Education whether he agrees that the Merdeka Uni- versity project comes within the ambit of the Constitutional guarantee "to preserve and sustain the use and study of other languages" in Article 152 (1) (b) and whether it is not its bounden duty, therefore, to support instead of opposing this project. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is no questioning by any Malaysian of Malay as the National Language. What is unclear and the source of great anxiety and resentment is the formless guarantee to "sustain and preserve the use and study of other languages." What is important is not so much to entrench the provision of Malay as the National Language, because that is not being questioned, but to spell out in clear, unambi- guous terms the meaning of "preserving and sustaining the use and study of the other languages." In this connection, it will be more useful for a Parliamentary Commission to be formed to define the extent and meaning of the Constitutional guarantee to "preserve and sustain the use and study of other languages." Once this guarantee is spelt out and accepted by all Malaysians, then language will cease to be a divisive force in Malaysia.

3. Special provisions for Malays-The D.A.P. has also been accused of opposing special rights for Malays. We again invite the Government to produce a single instance from our speeches and statements to show that we have opposed efforts to raise the economic standards of living of Malays. As democratic socialists, we are dedicated to the abolition of poverty and economic back- wardness regardles of race. We want to create a classless community of Malaysians based on fellowship, co-operation and service, where there is no exploitation of man by man, class by class or race by race. We support any measure which will help better the lot of the Malay poor. But we are strongly opposed to the use of Malay special provision to enrich the new Malay rich to make them richer, while the mass of Malay poor remain as poor and exploited as ever. There is gross social injustice and grave unequal distribution of wealth and income in Malaysia. Over the years, the feudal- compradore and tycoon class have become richer and richer, while the mass of peasantry and workers have become more and more down-trodden. The problem in Malaysia is complicated by an ostensible double coinci- dence. Firstly, the class divisions in our country appear very often to coincide with communal divisions; secondly, the disparity in incomes and productivity between urban and rural areas appears also to coincide along racial lines as towns are predominantly non- Malay while the mass of Malays live in rural areas. Such urban-rural economic disparity and imbalance, however, is not a phenomenon peculiar to Malaysia. Similar social, economic and cultural disparities as between rural and urban areas also confront other developing countries. This is indeed a universal problem, reflecting the slower pace of socio-economic process in the rural as compared to the urban areas. The key to bridging this urban-rural imbalance is to promote greater and faster economic growth in the rural areas, and not by embracing and implementing an evil, pernicious and racialist doctrine, equating economic disparity and imbalance with the racial division in the country. Any attempt to impose racial theories and solutions to basically economic problems of the have-nots is dangerous as it will pit one race against another, which must culminate in a racial holocaust. It will also be founded on the monstrous falsehood that all the "haves" in Malaysia are non-Malays, while the Malays are all the "have-nots." The basic problem in Malaysia is an economic and class one, and not a racial one. The only effective way to uplift the living standards of the "have-nots" of all races is to execute meaningful socialist policies untinged by racialism, as in carrying out radical land reforms, beginning with the aboli- tion of absentee landlordism in the padi sector and distribution of land to the tenant farmers; the creation of a comprehensive and efficient rural credit, co-operative and marketing infrastructure to free the peasants from the triple curses of fragmentation, land- lordism and credit indebtedness; greater diversification of agriculture and the eco- nomy; a modern and science-oriented educa- tion system to bring the peasants abreast with the techniques and know-how of twentieth- century and a greater rate of industrialisation. Every Malaysian will support special rights to help the poor Malays, just as every citizen will support any special assistance to non- Malay poor, on the basis of need, and not on the basis of colour or race. The greatest objection to the entrenchment of this provi- sion in the Constitution and its removal from public discussion and debate is that the whole provision will cease to be answerable to the electorate. The Government will be supreme in deciding what it wants to do in this field. We were earlier told that the Constitution Amendment Bill will not affect the right of any person to raise any matter relating to the implementation of entrenched provisions. But the latest revisions to the Constitution Amendment Bill which came to us only three days ago have considerably narrowed and restricted even the right to question implemention. It is virtually impossible to draw the line between questioning the prin- ciple and the implemention of the provision. The price of making a mistake is to get a Sedition charge, which is liable on conviction to a fine of five thousand dollars or an imprisonment of three years, or both, and the disqualification to hold elected office or even to vote at elections for five years. Such punitive provisions will only stifle and sup- press open criticims, though it cannot stamp out mounting frustration and discontent with the matter. To understand how some quarters of the population see this provision, it may be necessary to recall past assurances by Government leaders that Malay special pro- visions is a temporary expedient to enable the Malay community to catch up with the other communities. Last year, however, a Cabinet Minister said that Malay special rights will continue to be a permanent feature in the country for "hundreds of years to come." It may be useful to recall what the Reid Constitutional Commission Report of 1957, which recommended the form of Constitution we should have, had to say about special provisions for Malays. The majority report of the Reid Commission listed the four matters with regard to which the special position of the Malays is recognised and safeguarded: Malay land reservations, quotas for admis- sion to the public services; quotas in respect of the issuing of permits of licences for the operation of certain businesses, chiefly road haulage and passenger vehicle for hire; and preferential scholarship, bursaries and other forms of aid for educational purposes. It reported that it found little opposition in any quarter to the continuance of the system for a time, but there was great opposi- tion in some quarters to any increase of the preferences and to their being continued for any prolonged period. The Commission re- commended that the preference be continued, but that in due course they should be reduced and should ultimately cease so that there should then be no discrimination between races or communities. The Commission recommended that there should be no further Malay reservation, and that no new quota or other preference could be created unless specifically authorised by the Constitution. It also recommended that after 15 years there should be a review of the whole matter and that the procedure should be that the appropriate Government should cause a report to be made and laid before the appropriate Legislature: and that the Legislature should then determine either to retain or to reduce any quota or to dis- continue it entirely. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are now coming to 15 years of operation of special provision to Malays. Again, the question is not so much to entrench this provision, as to inquire as to how well this provision has helped uplift the standards of living of the mass peasantry. apart from creating a new class of Malay rich, and why these 15 years later the vast peasantry are still so poor, bakward and downtrodden. The present Constitution Amendment Bill also seeks to empower the Government to reserve places for Malay students in institu- tions of higher learning, even if it means denying non-Malay students with better qualifications in such places. We regret that 14 years after the imple- mentation of the Alliance education policy, it is necessary to introduce such a highly divisive policy because non-Malay students who are denied places and their parents and relatives will resent such discrimination. It is also an invidious system to the Malay students themselves. Are Malay students bio- logically and intellectually inferior to non- Malay students that they need such preferences? We in the DAP do not subscribe to any such theory. We believe that given the right environment, education and oppor- tunity, all races can compete with each other on an equal footing. The fault must lie squarely on the shoulders of the Alliance Government for its failure to build up a modern and science-oriented education system aimed at modernising the nation, particularly in the rural sector of our country. Fifteen years after the Alliance national education policy, six out of every ten Malay students entering the University of Malaya still take up Malay or Islamic studies when what is needed most are more Malay scientists, engineers and technologists. An entire university, the University Kebang- saan, has been formed to produce even more religious and language experts. The Alliance can no longer blame the British colonialists for this legacy, for if the Alliance Government had been far-sighted enough, and had begun revolutionising the education system on the achievement of Merdeka to bring the countryside into the modern age, we will today be reaping the harvests of Malay sixth-formers taking their rightful and equal places in science, techno- logy, engineering and medical streams in institutions of higher learning without pre- ferential reservation of places. It is because of such failure in foresight and vision by the Alliance Government in its last decade of rule that our present problems of nation building

have been made even more complicated, intractable and explosive. The above subjects are now sensitive issues. This will be the last time and the final forum where we can openly discuss this, for after this debate, the sinister Sedition Amendment Act will be lying in wait for its victims. We submit that these issues are not sensi- tive in the sense that any open discussion and debate will cause a racial conflict and mistrust. The Government has been dishonest, insincere and unfair in the handling of these issues, and have made them more sensitive than they should be. I have said large sections of the Malaysian public reject the Government's arguments for the necessity for this Constitutional Amend- ment Bill for the simple reason that they reject the basic premise that the May 13 racial riots stemmed from discussion of these sensitive issues. Mr Speaker, Sir, May 13 racial riots started because there were people who were not prepared to accept the verdict of the people at the polls on May 10, 1969, which returned an unprecedented number of Opposition candidates in both State and Parliamentary elections. May 10, 1969 was the highwater mark of democracy in Malaysia. Never had the people's hopes and expectations of the demo- cratic process to peacefully bring about the political, economic and social changes they want, been so high. This affirmation of faith in the ballot box and democracy is all the more remarkable considering the active campaign of those who wanted the voters to boycott the polls to discredit the Parliamentary process as "democracy is a mockery and elections a farce." Even before the 1969 General Elections, voices had been raised questioning the meaning and relevance of Parliamentary democracy in Malaysia. During the general elections campaign, there was a sustained movement to discredit the Parliamentary process by urging the voters to boycott the polls. The turnout and the results of May 10, 1969 general elections was a major, but very short-lived defeat for the forces of boycott and rejection of the democratic process. In three day's time, the victory of the democra- tic Opposition turned to ashes, and the stocks of the advocates of rejection of the democratic process rose from the nadir to unparalleled heights. May 13, 1969 was also a victory for those who disliked the people's verdict and started riots in the Federal capital to vent their anger and to frustrate the people's will. Malaysians were murdered, mutilated and maimed. Chaos and carnage ruled the day. Emergency was proclaimed. N.O.C. military rule replaced Parliamentary rule. The newly-elected Parliament was sus- pended, and new Opposition Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen arrested, silenced or intimidated. The Government's handling of the May 13 racial riots and the 21 months of N.O.C. rule have not inspired a return of public confidence in the relevance and credibility of the demo- cratic process to fulfill their legitimate aspirations. Mr Speaker, Sir, let us not delude ourselves into thinking that once the Constitution Amendment Bill is passed, the country is firmly set on the road back to democracy, national unity and solidarity. Today, the whole concept and relevance of Parliamentary democracy is being questioned. This is why there is no nation-wide elation and joy at the reconvening of Parliament, for they see as Parliament's first function self-castration of its role as the highest legislative and deliber- ative Chamber in the Country. Mr Speaker, let us be frank with ourselves. After May 13, 1969 and the 21 months of N.O.C. rule, more and more Malaysians of all races are thinking horrible thoughts. The greatest task today is to turn them away from these horrible thoughts which, if unchecked, will set the stage for the confrontation of violence cutting across race lines. This can only be done if the people of all races in this country are assured that they will have an equal place under the Malay- sian sun, that the objective the nation is heading towards is not a Malaysia which is dominated by any one racial group, whether in politics, or in economics, but where every- one will have equality of opportunity to advance to the best of his ability, in a multi- racial Malaysia.

The prerequisite for a multi-racial Malaysia, however, is the existence of a meaningful democratic system, where the interests and viewpoints of all Malaysians are represented by their elected spokesmen. The proposal to ban so-called sensitive issues from public discussion, and what is more, to remove the privilege of Parliamentary immunity of free speech of Members of Parliament, highlights the growing meaning- lessness and irrelevence of Parliamentary democracy in Malaysia. I do not see how any M.P. can agree to this proposal to cut his own tongue, and break his pledge to the electorate that he will be their champion and will fearlessly, responsibly and conscientiously voice their legitimate hopes, fears, grievances and dis- contents in Parliament for remedy and relief. The basic principle of Parliamentary demo- cracy is the supremacy of Parliament, as the body elected and entrusted by the people to defend, protect and advance the people's interests and welfare. It is imcompatible with the principle of the sovereignty of Parliament that M.Ps should be stripped of the privilege of Parliamentary immunity of free speech to discuss and articulate issues which closely touch the hearts and minds of Malaysians, or that another non-elected unrepresentatives organ should have such power to discuss these so-called sensitive issues. There can be no more effective step than this to undermine public confidence in democracy and strengthen the voice and forces of the enemies of democracy. If there are issues which the Government thinks best discussed without the presence of publicity because of the feelings and emo- tions that might be aroused, the public gallery can be cleared, and Parliament adjourned into closed session. Under no circumstances, however, can M.Ps agree to losing their privilege of free speech and the right to take up and voice the people's legitimate dis- contents and grievances curtailed. It is now also proposed to entrench the so-called sensitive issues in the Constitution, so that they cannot be amended by two- thirds majority in Parliament alone, but must get the consent of the Rulers in Council. This is clearly a retrograde step and another body blow at the principle of the sovereignty of the people in a democratic system. Do we, Mr Speaker, Sir, have the right to tie the hands of the next Parliament, presuming there is one, on such an important Constitu- tional principle? I submit that this involves so fundamental an issue that the people should have the chance to express their wishes. This matter was never raised in the last General Elec- tions, and no mandate was ever given. If the Government insists on introducing the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, then it should first hold a referendum on it so that the people can give their views. If the Government really claims that the Constitution (Amendment) Bill will have the support of the majority of Malaysians, then a referendum will bear this out. On the other hand, if the Government is reluctant to hold a referendum, either because it will be rejected or because it is uncertain of the reactions from the public, then this is supporting evidence of our argument that the Bill does not have majority support of the people. This should deserve serious consideration. The great tasks in post-May 13 Malaysia, Mr Speaker, Sir, are two: (1) To restore national unity and arrest the racial polarisation in this country by assuring all Malaysians, regardless of their race, that they will have an equal deal in Malaysia, and that by removing all the imbalances in the diffe- rent fields of Malaysian life which cause alienation and antagonism among the races. (2) Restore the people's confidence in the Parliamentary democratic process by genuinely operating a meaningful Par- liamentary democracy, for without such a process there cannot be a genuine multi-racial Malaysian nation where all will have an equal place under the Malaysian sun. We have come to the conclusion, after serious consideration, that the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, which was framed with- out due regard to the actual factors sparking off the May 13 riots, will not serve these twin objectives. We are also convinced from our contact with the feelings on the ground, that the Constitution (Amendment) Bill will divide, rather than unite, Malaysians, and will acce- lerate rather than arrest the advanced racial polarisation in the country. We have therefore decided, with a heavy sense of responsibility, to oppose the Consti- tution (Amendment) Bill. In the interest of national unity of Malaysia, we propose, Mr Speaker, Sir, that this Constitution (Amendment) Bill be sent to an all-party Parliamentary Commission which should be set up to learn the lessons of May 13 racial riots and the 21 months of N.O.C. rule, and point the solutions to a united, multi-racial, just and equal Malaysia.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya berbesar hati di-beri peluang mengambil bahagian dalam per- bahathan pada hari ini. Tujuan saya ia-lah menyokong dengan sa-penoh-nya atas soal Pindaan Perlembagaan bagaimana yang di- chadangkan dalam persidangan kita pada masa sekarang. Oleh sebab-nya saya maseh belum chukup fluent dalam bahasa Malaysia, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan segala hormat- nya saya minta izin memberi uchapan saya dalam bahasa Inggeris. (Dengan izin) Mr Speaker, Sir, this Parlia- ment, the third in the history of Malaysia, marks a brave new attempt to make a go of representative government in this country. Appropriately therefore, we begin with the first step-to put beyond further question by anyone whatever what is essentially that portion of the Constitution which is the result of an agreement, reached before Merdeka, among the major communities. To say that this agreement is a binding agreement solemnly entered into by all the races, would be to put it too simply. This agreement is the foundation of modern Malaya and of modern Malaysia. Here is the heart, the crux of the whole matter-the give and take, then the understanding, later to be spelled out into the terms of agreement, freely arrived at and solemnly entered into on behalf of all of us, between two great and worthy and honour- able gentlemen, between the Tengku as the father of independence and the late Tun Tan Cheng Lock-you give us citizenship as the British did, we recognise that you have a special position with special privileges as you already had under the British, together as brothers beneath the skin we accept that Malay be our National Language and eventually our sole official language, while you accept that we shall continue to use other languages for other than official purposes. Why is it that there are some people amongst us who cannot be as fair-minded or as worthy or as honourable-the agitators, the rabble rousers, the race-baiters? It is precisely because of this, that we have been weighed in the balance and found wanting, that today our Prime Minister, Y.A.B. Tun Razak, in proposing these amendments, has to put the seal as it were on these solemn undertakings between all the races. Thereafter the agitators, rabble rousers, race-baiters, and others shall no longer have a field day. Sir, we in the M.C.A. and in the Alliance are determined to see these amendments through. Malays and Chinese, Malays and non-Malays, we cannot be at each others' throats every day and every night. Why should we be and for no reason at all? Is there unemployment or land hunger? Is there poverty and backwardness? Let us look for the real causes of these ills of present-day society, not blame them on the agreements between the races, and let us come up with real solutions to real and pressing problems. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Malaysian Chinese community is today a much more united community. United we shall do our duty and honour all the agreements we have made with our Malay brothers. I emphasise that in the beginning we have had some misgivings about these amendments. The exercise to recall citizenship certificates issued under Article 30 of the Constitution had caused a wave of apprehension and anxiety. How can the proposed amendments be said to be fair if they are going to first take away citizenship from some 277,000 of our citizens? Sir, we have sought clarification on this point. We have obtained the clarifica- tion we need and our fears have now been allayed. Sir, with your indulgence, I quote more or less in full Part III of a special Paper released by no less than the Honourable the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs. Part III of this Paper is so vitally important that I express the hope that all Malaysians will come to know of its contents. I begin to quote: "The re-examination of certificates issued under Article 30 has been undertaken because it has been discovered that a large number of these certificates are not in order in the sense that they were issued to people who were, to begin with, not entitled to be considered under this Article. The certificates subject to re-examination are those issued before 4th November 1964. Up to that date 277,848 certificates have been issued, of which 9,092 certi- ficates had already been verified before the present exercise was undertaken leaving a total of 268,756 to be checked. The laminated certificates issued after 4 Novem- ber 1964 need not be returned for checking. If an Article 30 certificate is issued to anyone it implies that he is a citizen by operation of law but that he has some doubt which is clarified by the issue of such a certificate. The Government however dis- covered that there are persons who should have been citizens under some other Articles of the Constitution but who have been given certificates under Article 30. The re-examination has been confined to the following cases: (1) Where there is real doubt that persons to whom the certificates are issued, are citizens by operation of law; (2) Where there is no doubt at all that such persons are citizens by operation of law; (3) Where certificates are issued as a result of fraud or misrepresentation or con- cealment of material fact such as is dis- closed in the application forms or by subsequent evidence; (4) Where certificates purporting to be issued under Article 30 are wrongly issued in the following four instances- (a) Persons who should be citizens by registration; (b) Persons who should be citizens by naturalisation; (c) Persons already citizens by virtue of the fact that they have been included in the citizenship certificates of their parents; (d) Persons who are already citizens by registration or naturalisation who have lost their citizenship certificates and therefore require a replacement. Article 30 certificates were issued to these people merely because there was no provision to issue extracts or certified true copies of their certifi- cates or the certificates of their parents, in which their names were included. There are also those who hold certificates under the Federation of Malaya Agreement of 1948 and who have lost them but there was no provision for the issue of a duplicate copy. Now that there is provision to issue duplicate copies, Article 30 certificates issued on this account have to be withdrawn. It must be pointed out that the exercise to recall and re-examine these certificates is not aimed at depriving the holders of their citizenship. It is a matter of rationalising the System, of making sure that they hold a certi- ficate under the proper Article of the Constitution. If the Article 30 Certificate now held by any person is not in order he should take steps to obtain a certificate under the proper Article. The applications received from all such persons are given priority and their blue identity cards need not be changed to red identity cards nor are they required to take out work permits for employment purposes. Out of 277,000 certificates issued under Article 30 before 4 November 1964 only 45,078 certificates have so far been returned. If the certificates are found in order they will be returned to the holder with the following endorsement- (a) Checked and found to be in order on prima facie evidence contained in the application form; or (b) There is no doubt as to the holder's citizenship by operation of law. Of the 45,078 certificates returned to-date, 35,317 have been checked and found to be in order. 7,424 were found not in order, leaving a balance of only 2,337 still to be verified or decided upon. Here I end the quotation. Mr Speaker, Sir, of the 45,078 certificates returned to-date, 35,317 have been checked and found to be in order-in other words, 80%. It is sometimes said that government must not only be fair, government must be seen to be fair. Sir, I congratulate the Govern- ment. Credit to whom credit is due. On this issue the government has been seen to be fair. Our Chinese people and all other holders of Article 30 certificates would be well advised to hand in their certificates as quickly as possible for examination and verification. I expect the rush will be on before long. This issue having been clarified, there can be no valid objection now to the passing of the Constitution (Amendment) Bill. We are not overly concerned about the niceties, the trimmings of democracy. Parliament remains supreme and we in the Alliance are committed as much as ever to democratic institutions and to the elective process. Sir, we are not a one-race party or a one- race government. Only the other day at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Con- ference in Singapore our Prime Minister put his signature for and on behalf of all Malaysia to the Zambian Declaration of Principle which states, among other things, that "we recognise racial discrimination in all its forms as an unmitigated social evil and we uphold the belief that racial prejudice, wherever it may be found, seriously hampers the healthy deve- lopment of all nations and all peoples". Through all the vicissitudes of these past years, the Alliance remains a multi-racial Malaysian party

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya ada- lah menyokong dengan sa-penoh-nya di-atas pindaan Rang Undang"2 yang di-bawa oleh Yang Amat Berhormat Perdana Menteri kita. Saya menyokong oleh kerana saya tidak hendak berchakap di-atas perkara berkenaan dengan 13 Mei, oleh sebab jikalau saya ber- chakap dengan perkara 13 Mei, kalau dia korek lobang itu, makin lama makin dalam (Ketawa). Jikalau makin lama makin dalam, ta'kan dapat kesimpulan apa, melainkan pergadohan dan perkauman lebeh tebal nanti. Dengan sebab itu, hendak di-salahkan siapa, tidak dapat kita salahkan. Tadi, pehak Pembangkang menyatakan Pindaan Undang"2 ini jikalau di-luluskan kata- nya ada-lah satu threat, intimidated dan threat kapada pehak Pembangkang, tetapi pehak Parti PAS menyatakan, ada-lah nampak-nya menyokong penoh di-atas Pin- daan Perlembagaan ini. Ini satu daripada perkara yang saya bawa terutama sa-kali ia- itu Bahasa Kebangsaan, dalam Article 152. Bagaimana pehak PAS mengatakan ia-itu Bahasa Kebangsaan, bahasa Melayu. Kita telah bertolak ansor sa-belum kita menchapai kemerdekaan dahulu. Lebeh baik saya ber- chakap terus-terang, daripada di-sorokkan, di-sorokkan lama perkara ini akan timbul lagi. Jikalau pada masa itu orang Melayu terutama sa-kali, tidak bertolak ansor, tidak mahu ber- tolak ansor berkenaan dengan Bahasa Ke- bangsaan dan warganegara pada masa itu, lepas sahaja kita menchapai kemerdekaan, chuma ada 300,000 sahaja bangsa asing yang telah menjadi warganegara di-Tanah Melayu. Pada masa itu jikalau bangsa asing takut, boleh jadi, oleh kerana 300,000 dengan 3,000,000 orang Melayu, tetapi kerana kita longgarkan citizenship tadi, maka bersatu ribu telah menjadi warganegara di-negeri ini, oleh kerana kami sa-bagai orang Melayu memberi tolak-ansor dengan sa-jujor-nya kapada saudara kita bangsa asing di-negeri ini. Jadi apabila satu perkara, satu agreement yang telah di-buat di-antara pehak orang China, orang Melayu dan orang India, pada masa itu belum ada D.A.P. dan lain parti, maka agreement atau perjanjian itu saperti kita sa-orang manusia, maka perjanjian itu mesti-lah kita patohi dan tidak boleh di- ungkit lagi. Jikalau orang China mengungkit, orang India mengungkit, orang Melayu pun boleh mengungkit juga. Dengan sebab itu- lah saya fikir Mei 13 telah terjadi. Berkenaan dengan bahasa tadi, di-dalam Perlembagaan kita ada menyatakan, Yang Amat Berhormat Tun Abdul Razak telah menyatakan bahawa bahasa China tidak akan habis di-dunia ini, bahasa Tamil tidak akan habis di-dunia ini, bahasa Tamil akan terus- menerus di-pakai di-dunia ini, bahasa China juga terus-menerus di-pakai di-negeri ini. Tidak boleh siapa yang menyekat, atau menahan bahasa China, atau bahasa Tamil di-larang di-pakai di-negeri ini, ada di-tulis di-dalam Perlembagaan. Hari orang China dengan orang China berchakap China, hari orang India dengan orang India berchakap India, hari orang Melayu dengan orang China berchakap orang puteh; tidak siapa yang menyekat. Jikalau ada di-negeri kita, ada orang menyekat, orang itu barangkali kepala-nya sudah pusing sadikit. Jadi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya dahulu belajar di-Universiti China. Di-negeri China sendiri ada orang Hokkien, ada orang Can- tonese, ada orang Shanghai, ada orang Kwongsi, tetapi di-Universiti di-negeri China, bahasa lain tidak boleh di-gunakan, melain- kan Mandarin, National Language dia, Official Language dia, tetapi di-negeri ini, saya sayang, ia-itu mengatakan higher learning hendak-lah di-gunakan bermacham bahasa. Tujuan kita, saya perchaya, Bahasa Kebangsaan ini pasti di-pakai oleh tiap orang yang menjadi warganegara, juga yang tidak menjadi warganegara di-negeri kita ini ia-itu untok menyatu-padukan, menyatu- padukan bukan dalam satu hari, bukan dalam sa-puloh hari, tetapi dalam sa-puloh tahun, lima belas tahun yang akan datang. Orang kita, apa bangsa sa-kali pun dapat bertutor dengan baik dalam Bahasa Kebangsaan. Jadi itu-lah sebab-nya mustahak-lah sa-kali Bahasa Kebangsaan ini menjadi bahasa rasmi yang tunggal di-negeri ini. Sa-balek-nya tidak pula di-larang siapa berchakap bahasa lain. Jadi dengan sebab itu saya perchaya saudara saya orang China, orang India, orang puteh ta' payah takut, ia-itu bahasa mereka akan hapus daripada tanah ayer kita ini. Tadi juga ada saudara saya daripada Sarawak menyata- kan London Agreement dan sa-bagai-nya. London Agreement ada-lah di-sain di-antara orang puteh dengan orang Malaysia. Di- antara orang puteh dengan kita; orang puteh sudah chabut, orang puteh sudah ta' ada, agreement itu boleh di-tukar. Jadi itu ta' payah kita takut kerana orang puteh sudah ta' ada, dan orang puteh tidak boleh menang- kap kita lagi. Tuan Yang di-Pertua, berkenaan dengan hak istimewa orang Melayu sampai sekarang empat belas tahun kita telah merdeka, kita tahu bagaimana keadaan orang Melayu. Pe- patah Inggeris mengatakan: "Let the Sleeping Dog Lie"-biar-lah anjing itu tidor jangan di-usek, kalau di-usek, dia terkejut, dia menggigit. Jadi berkenaan dengan hak isti- mewa orang Melayu jangan-lah di-usek, kerana kita pun tak usek hak bangsa asing yang menjadi warganegara, atau tidak menjadi warganegara di-negeri ini, di-Malaysia ini. Orang Melayu bukan bangsa penyamun, orang Melayu bukan bangsa perumpak; kita tahu hak orang-hak orang; hak awak, hak awak. Kita juga mempunya ugama, ugama Islam menyatakan ta' boleh merampas hak orang; ugama Islam menyatakan tidak boleh menchuri harta orang, kalau churi, kalau ram- pas hak orang, kita ada neraka yang lain. Jadi akhir-nya esok ka-neraka pergi-nya. Jadi orang Melayu yang menganut ugama Islam ta' mahu merampas hak orang, jadi saya per- chaya kapada bangsa asing, saudara saya bangsa asing, ia-itu orang China dan orang India, saya jamin-lah, sebab orang Melayu ini penoh dengan sopan santun, baik hati serta tidak mahu membuat perkara yang tidak betul-perkara menchuri dan merampas dan sa-bagai-nya. Empat belas tahun lama-nya kita telah menchapai kemerdekaan ta' ada siapa orang Melayu yang telah merampas hak bangsa asing di-negeri ini. Jadi ta' usah-lah takut kapada saudara saya yang lain termasok orang China dan orang India; ta' usah-lah takut di-atas perkara ini, kami juga ada mempunya pelajaran, kami juga ada mempunya kesopanan, kami juga ada menganut ugama dan kami tahu di- atas perkara salah dan benar-nya. Berkenaan dengan guided democracy yang telah di- katakan oleh Freedom of Speech-jikalau sa-kira-nya pindaan ini di-luluskan ber- ma'ana-lah demokrasi habis di-negeri ini, tidak boleh kita berchakap lagi, ta' dapat kita berchakap dan akan di-sekat Ahli Parlimen berchakap dalam Parlimen ini. Saya fikir lebeh baik-lah kita adakan guided demo- cracy daripada bertumpah darah sa-bagai- mana yang telah terjadi pada 13 Mei. Jadi guided democracy yang ada, kalau di-kata- kan guided democracy, biar-lah guided demo- cracy asalkan ra'ayat di-luar selamat nanti. Jadi biar-lah kita berchakap dengan sa-chara yang lain, yang boleh menaikkan atau mening- gikan hidup bangsa yang dudok di-negeri ini. Jadi saya tidak mengatakan sa-kira-nya pindaan ini di-luluskan, maka cripple-lah atau pun habis-lah, atau lemah-lah atau patah-lah Parlimen ini. Parlimen akan terus berjalan dan kita boleh berchakap di-atas perkara, mithal-nya hak asasi orang Melayu, hak ra'ayat lain daripada orang Melayu boleh di-chakapkan bagaimana untok membena- nya, bagaimana untok meninggikan taraf hidup orang kita di-Malaysia ini, baik pun daripada bangsa India, mahu pun daripada bangsa China atau orang Melayu, jadi tidak- lah kita memikirkan, ia-itu orang India yang telah menjadi warganegara di-negeri ini atau orang China yang telah menjadi warganegara ini akan kita buang ka-laut, kita hendak negeri ini orang Melayu sahaja yang meme- rentah-nya. Saya perchaya, perkara ini tidak ada-lah tertanam di-dalam kepala kita asing, sebab orang China telah ramai di- sini, dudok di-sini dan telah membena negeri ini bersama dengan kita bertungkus-lumus, juga dengan sebab itu kita ada bertimbang rasa kapada mereka ini. Jadi, saya harap kapada saudara saya daripada orang China dan orang India yang telah menjadi warga- negara di-negeri ini, ta' usah-lah takut, kerana terjamin ada di-dalam Perlembagaan kita, sudah ada terjamin hak mereka. Jadi bukan- lah, berma'ana yang pindaan Perlembagaan ini akan menutup mulut bagi Ahli Dewan, sa-balek-nya perkara ini ada-lah untok menyekat kita supaya jikalau kita berbin- chang berkenaan dengan perkara, orang China di-luar, orang Melayu di-luar, orang India di-luar akan mendengar menerusi akhbar, menerusi radio dan talivishen. Apa- bila perkara sensitif ini di-ulangkan, maka saya perchaya burok padah-nya kelak. Bukan kapada kita, tetapi kapada orang yang di- luar, dengan sebab itu saya perchaya Yang Amat Berhormat Tun Abdul Razak telah membawa pindaan ini untok kebaikan bukan sahaja kapada orang Melayu, bukan sahaja kapada orang India, bukan sahaja kapada orang puteh, tetapi pada keselurohan pen- dudok di-Malaysia ini. Chuma saya harap ia-itu apabila pindaan Perlembagaan ini di- jalankan, mesti-lah di-jalankan dengan sa- benar-nya. Jadi macham mana di-katakan oleh pehak Pembangkang tadi orang boleh berbisek di-luar, mengatakan itu dan ini, orang boleh berchakap di-kedai kopi, orang boleh berchakap di-rumah, jadi kita ta' boleh larang suami isteri hendak berbisek, kita ta' boleh larang di-antara kawan dengan kawan hendak berbisek. Kita bukan hendak menga- dakan Mata Gelap di-seluroh Malaysia ini, itu kita tidak dapat lakukan, tetapi yang mana boleh Kerajaan kita akan melarang orang berchakap berkenaan dengan perkara yang sensitif ini. Jadi saya tidak-lah hendak ber- chakap lebeh banyak daripada itu, oleh kerana saya perchaya dengan ada-nya pin- daan daripada Undang"2 tadi, maka kita sa- bagai orang Malaysia baik orang Melayu, baik orang China, baik orang India, akan hidup saperti satu bangsa dan dengan ada- nya tembok tadi saperti yang saya katakan tadi orang Melayu, orang Islam tidak boleh makan babi, tidak boleh di-persoalkan apa sebab-nya mereka tidak boleh makan babi. Orang India tidak boleh makan lembu, orang Hindu tidak boleh di-persoal-kan. Kalau di-persoalkan, apa fasal tidak boleh makan babi, maka di-katakan oleh kerana Nabi Muhammad dahulu isteri-nya terlupa- terlupa isteri-nya, dia beri orang lain makan, mithal-nya kuah daging babi, ini kemudian- saya ini bukan pandai sangat fasal ugama, tidak pandai-habis orang makan. Apabila Nabi Muhammad kita datang, dia kata daging itu tidak ada lagi haram, rupa-nya ada karat sadikit dalam belanga. Jadi dengan sebab itu, haram-lah daging babi pada umat- nya. Jadi kalau hendak di-katakan sa-chara bagini, tidak dapat di-buat. Kalau di-katakan tidak boleh makan babi, tidak boleh. Kalau siapa orang Islam mengatakan boleh makan babi, munafiq dia. Bagitu juga tidak boleh minum beer, brandy ada orang Islam minum, pergi neraka yang dalam pada-nya. Jadi, dengan sebab itu tidak boleh-lah di- di-persoal-kan atas perkara ini. Ini ada-lah menjadi tebu (halangang) kapada kita semua. Sekian, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.