CITY councils cannot at their whims and fancies ban the sale of liquor and alcoholic drinks, even in majority Malay or Muslim areas, as it contravenes the Federal Constitution and specific federal laws.
There is already in existence a specific Excise Duty Act 1976 (governing liquor sales) under the federal law prohibiting the retail sales of any intoxicating liquor unless they have obtained approval or licensed under the said Act.
The local government by-laws or regulations cannot bypass, supersede, overrule or simply impose another condition on and above a federal licence approved under federal laws unless it is a matter not specifically governed and provided by another federal law.
In this case Section 32(1) of the Excise Act specifically provides that, “No person shall sell by retail or offer for sale by retail any intoxicating liquor whether for consumption on or off the premises of the vendor except under and by a license issued under this Part and in a place specified.”
This license would generally come with conditions including expressly prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors and Muslims.
Thus, restricting the sale of alcohol also impinges on the constitutional rights, freedoms and lifestyle choices of non-Muslims.
Local authorities mustn’t go overboard
No state law or local bylaws can trump the federal laws and the Federal Constitution. Legally speaking, such bans or additional restrictions by local councils are invalid or in contravention with established legal principles and practices.
This comment is in response to the plans by the Ipoh City Council to expand its ban on the sale of liquor and alcoholic drinks, particularly in areas that are majority Malay.
At present, there is a ban since 2021 only in Manjoi, a satellite town within Ipoh followed by demands for the ban to be extended to Ulu Chepor, Rapat Setia, and others.
I also recalled a similar experience in which I had challenged the confiscation of beer from the 7-Eleven convenience store in Pahang 20 years ago (in 2005).
The beverages were seized following complaints from Umno assemblymen in the state purely on grounds that it ought not to be sold in Malay majority areas.
I had argued that there are no laws that prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages in Malay majority areas, hence it is legal for a sundry shop in a 90% populated Malay kampung to sell alcoholic beverages below 2% alcoholic content in cans.
My arguments were accepted by the state legal adviser then religious affairs Exco having clarified in the state legislative assembly that under Islam, the prohibitions to deal, trade or consume alcoholic drinks are only confined to Muslims while non-Muslims have their liberty and choice to do otherwise. This statement is in the Hansard.
I am reiterating my arguments in 2005. There are already laws that forbid Muslims from purchasing or consuming such drinks.
We must not succumb to political arm-twisting by quoting demographics as a political authority.
Why confine only Malay majority areas to ban the sale of alcoholic drinks when the ban should apply to the whole country as Malays are the majority in this country? Why selectively pick and choose based on politics?
I call upon all elected representatives to uphold the rule of law and safeguard the constitutional rights guaranteed to all.
Thus, the license holder should not be further restricted or penalised. Instead, enforcement should be focused on and against the buyer and the particular outlet that sells such alcoholic drinks without a license.
However, there should not be any blanket ban or restriction on license holders based on areas or demographics. – Jan 19, 2025
Datuk Seri Ti Lian Ker is a former deputy youth & sports minister.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Vibes
