OVERHAUL LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, NGOS URGE
Group highlights concerns over A-GC’s role as sole, final decision-maker for draft legislation
AGROUP of civil society organisations have called for a comprehensive overhaul of the legislative process, highlighting concerns about transparency in the drafting and amending of laws.
In a joint statement signed by 40 representatives, the group emphasised that the Attorney-General’s Chambers (A-GC) should not serve as the sole and final decision-maker for any draft legislation.
While acknowledging the A-GC’s significant role, the statement underscored the necessity for a more inclusive, efficient and responsive approach to the legislative process.
“The A-GC must recognise that we need to revise our laws to be in line with the aspirations of international conventions that Malaysia has ratified,” read the statement.
Furthermore, the group stated that numerous CSOs and concerned parties were often excluded or uninformed about dialogue sessions initiated by the cabinet to introduce or revise legislation.
This, it said, occurred despite the availability of civil society organisations (CSOs), lawyers who have expertise in the relevant issues and individuals with lived experiences.
While only the relevant ministry or government agency was working as a group to draft legislation, the group questioned the lack of representation from persons with lived experience and key advocates, which weakens public confidence.
“The legislation is then sent to the A-GC for review.
“Even if we have good draft legislation put together with the help of CSOs, at the A-GC, the draft is heavily revised, at times without consideration of the background issues.
“Neither the working group or special project team that drafted the legislation nor the general public are allowed to view the final draft until it is tabled in Parliament,” the group said, adding that there was often a public outcry as the final product would bear no resemblance to what was originally envisaged.
Drawing attention to Taiwan’s digital democracy and India’s online citizen engagement practices, the group suggested adopting similar approaches in Malaysia.
It said the process of Taiwan’s digital democracy had broad citizen participation and was fast and fair.
“The government has an online platform where anyone can file a petition.
“Petitions that gather at least 5,000 signatures are attended to by dialogue with relevant ministries to explore ways to incorporate them into policymaking.”
As for India, the country practises digital democracy by enabling online submission of comments to draft legislation, it said.
Citing that country’s Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 as example, the group said the bill was posted online and comments were welcomed, in addition to many other means of seeking nationwide views at all levels, including at the grassroots and village level.
It further suggested that the government here have an ongoing, transparent and comprehensive feedback mechanism — an all-of-society approach — to gather input for any proposed legislation or amendments to legislation.
It emphasised the importance of providing the final bill to lawmakers at least two weeks before parliamentary discussions for thorough review and consultation.
“This feedback process should not be limited to a few courses, but offer numerous opportunities and avenues, including multiple online town halls to enable nationwide participation.
“The feedback mechanism may include, but not be limited to, the following easy access for persons with diverse disabilities in languages and formats that diverse disability groups can access and understand.
“Feedback opportunities and timelines should be widely disseminated via social media,” the group said.
It was important to make the drafting process accessible to the public, as the group stated, to learn from India about how it has benefited from open citizen engagement, with provision for feedback at every stage.
Highlighting India’s citizencentric platform, the group described it as an approach that enhanced societal maturity, offered ownership, and enabled wide voter support for adopted legislation, policies and implementing rules and regulations.
Furthermore, the statement proposed the need to fully embrace the principle of “Nothing about Us, without Us.” following the United Nations’ standard of “Open calls for expressions of interest” (EOIs) to involve CSOs, advocates and the general public in working groups or task forces for drafting legislation or amendments.
“Finally, we need to develop and implement a new approach to decision-making that places children’s needs, wishes and outcomes at its heart and involves children and young people every step of the way, including in the legal reform process.
“The same applies to women and the disabled,” the statement added.
Signatories to the statement are:
1. Paediatrician consultant, child-disability rights activist, adviser, National Early Childhood Intervention Council (NECIC); The OKU Rights Matter Project member, Datuk Dr AmarSingh HSS
2. The OKU Rights Matter Project member, San Yuenwah
3. Child Rights Innovation and Betterment Foundation co-chairperson Srividhya Ganapathy
4. Disability Rights Advocate, Boleh Space co-founder and Person with Dynamic Disabilities Yana Karim
5. Parent advocate; Harapan OKU Law Reform Group member; The OKU Rights Matter Project member, Anit Kaur Randhawa
6. Care partner and National Early Childhood Intervention Council project lead, The OKU Rights Matter Project member, Ng Lai-Thin
7. Vanguards4Change founder, Cathryn Anila
8. Native blind person and disabled human rights activist, Kaveinthran
9. Women’s Centre for Change, Penang (WCC)
10. Child Protection and Wellbeing advocate, Sharmila Sekaran
11. Play Unlimited, Jeannie Low
12. Former Senator representing Persons with Disabilities at Dewan Negara (2013-2019), Bathmavathi Krishnan
13. Malaysian Association of Sign Language Interpreters (MyASLI)
14. Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) human rights officer Sahanah Kathirvelu
15. Family Frontiers
16. Boleh Space, Disabled-led Disability Rights Advocacy Movement
17. Disabled Disability Advocate, SIUMAN Collective, Hasbeemasputra Abu Bakar
18. Deafblind advocate, Harapan OKU member Vicky Chan
19. Deaf Advocate and Wellbeing National Organisation cofounder and secretary and deaf person, Anthony Chong
20. Association of Women Lawyers (AWL) and Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO) former president; AWL executive committee member; Harapan OKU Law Reform Group member; Parent Advocate, Disability & Gender Activist, Meera Samanther
21. Malaysian Association of Social Workers
22. Kemban Kolektif
23. Association of Women Lawyers (AWL)
24. Malaysian Women’s Action for Tobacco Control and Health (MyWATCH)
25. Pertubuhan Kebajikan Vivekananda Rembau NS
26. Persatuan Sindrom Down Malaysia, Hanizan Hussin
27. Childline Foundation
28. Association of Toy Libraries Malaysia
29. Parent of a total blind child; National Family Support Group for Children advisor; and People with Special Needs, Alvin Teoh
30. Deaf advocate and National Organisation of Bahasa Isyarat Malaysia Instructors (NowBIM) president, Annie Omg Hwei Ling
31. Reproductive Health Association of Kelantan (ReHAK) president
32. Persatuan Siswazah Wanita Malaysia
33. Persatuan WeCareJourney
34. Blind person; former Majlis Kebangsaan Orang Kurang Upaya (MBOKU) member 2016-2021; independent consultant on ICT for Blind persons and persons with Low Vision, Moses Choo
35. Care partner; advocate, Teepa Snow Positive Approach to Care certified independent consultant; trainer and mentor; founder of UMI-UniquelyMeInitiatives, Sharifah Tahir
36. Sisters in Islam
37. Sarawak Women for Women Society
38. Lawyer, Azira Aziz
39. ENGENDER
40. Pertubuhan Orang Cacat Sarawak adviser and Suhakam former commissioner, April 2013 — April 2019, Francis Johen Ak Adam