PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal’s decision that vernacular schools are constitutional means that these schools are subject to protection under Article 152 of the Federal Constitution, says Chan Quin Er (pic).
The MCA publicity bureau chairman also hopes that there will not be further challenges on the matter following the Court of Appeal’s decision on Thursday (Nov 23).
“Not only has the appellate court ruled that the use of Chinese and Tamil in vernacular schools is not unconstitutional, it also upholds that vernacular schools are subject to protection under Article 152 of the Constitution.
“This is a very resounding and clear judgment. We hope this puts a stop to any future challenges to the existence of vernacular schools,” said Chan when met by reporters at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya on Thursday (Nov 23).
Chan said vernacular schools had even existed before Malaya declared independence in 1957.
“When the Constitution was drafted, it had vernacular schools in mind and it was meant to protect the status of vernacular schools and their right to exist,” said Chan.
Chan also believes that the appellate court’s decision on Nov 23 underscores a very important feature of the Constitution, that any schools are not considered as a public or statutory authority.
“This means that language mediums should not be made compulsory, which also means schools have the freedom to use Mandarin, English or any other language to teach.
“Because, language should not be discriminatory and the people should have access and freedom to send their children to vernacular schools to receive mother tongue education,” said Chan.
Chan also hoped that the appellants will respect the Court of Appeal’s decision.
“We, at MCA, remain steadfast in upholding this constitutional right for vernacular schools to continue to exist and to assist the country in producing more quality nation builders,” added Chan.
Earlier, lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla said an appeal will be filed within 30 days against the court's decision ruling that vernacular schools are constitutional.
Meanwhile, the United Chinese School Teachers' Association (Jiao Zong) president Cheah Lek Aee, when met at the Palace of Justice, said the group felt relieved with the court decision.
“We hope this will put a stop to all allegations about the unconstitutionality of vernacular schools.”
He said much resources have been wasted since the case was mooted in December 2019 and the process had affected racial harmony and unity, which is detrimental to nation building.
“The court decision has clearly stated vernacular schools’ constitutional status and rights, which should be unquestionable.
“Chinese and Tamil education have long existed for over 200 years, way before we achieved Merdeka.
“After we achieved independence, Chinese and Tamil primary schools became part of the country's education system and were included in the Education Act.
“So any attempt to challenge the constitutionality of vernacular schools is in bad faith, aimed at causing racial discontent and spreading hate,” he said.
Cheah also called on the government to defend a multi-stream education system, which is in line with Malaysia's multiracial fabric, a national treasure.
Also present were United Chinese School Committees' Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong) president Tan Tai Kim and representatives from both educationist groups.
On Thursday (Nov 23), the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya ruled vernacular schools are constitutional, dismissing the appeal of four NGOs seeking to declare that the use of Chinese and Tamil languages as the medium of instruction in vernacular schools was against the Constitution.
The decision was handed down by a three-member panel comprising Justices Supang Lian, M. Gunalan and Azizul Azmi Adnan.
In the court’s decision, Justice Azizul said vernacular schools were not a public authority and as such, the use of Tamil and Chinese languages as the medium of instruction for teaching in those schools was constitutional.
Mappim, Gapena, Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) and Ikatan Guru-Guru Muslim Malaysia (I-Guru) were appealing against the decision of the Kuala Lumpur and Kota Baru High Courts that dismissed their suits in December 2021 and May 2022 respectively.
