Terengganu hasn't always had the best of reputations when it comes to entertainment and sports (other than the Pocket Rocket Man, Dato' Azizulhasni Awang, who hails from the Turtle State 🚴♂️).
Back in 2019, the Terengganu State Government announced a ban on female gymnasts representing the state for SUKMA 2024 (Malaysian Games), the same sporting event which recently concluded with Terengganu earning two bronze medals from female diving.
Interestingly, the State Government said that they would have banned the female divers from competing too, had they known about their participation. They have now expressed their shock that these athletes did not obtain their green light before competing.
What a weird world we live in.
Why the fuss? The attire of these female athletes in these sports are deemed not modest enough by the State Government according to their own guideline.
State Guideline on Entertainment & Sports
In 2020, the Terengganu State Government issued a Garis Panduan Hiburan, Persembahan Kebudayaan, Pelancongan dan Sukan (Guideline on Entertainment, Cultural Performances, Tourism and Sports) outlining specifically how some aspects of these activities ought to be carried out within the state.
For sports, the restrictions include the following:
Muslim athletes must dress according to Islamic law, covering their aurat (modesty), modestly, and appropriate to their sport.
Non-Muslim athletes are recommended to dress modestly, which means not too tight, short, or revealing.
Coaches and athletes are expected to be of the same gender. Where interactions between coaches and athletes of different genders are unavoidable, they must adhere strictly to the guidelines of Islamic law.
Female aerobics instructors are not allowed to perform demonstrations in front of males.
Organisers are recommended to prepare separate venues for male and female spectators and spectators who come as a family.
The Guideline explicitly excludes its application to sports at the national and international levels, although it is unclear what this means as it appears to apply just as well to aspiring and current SUKMA athletes (a national level sporting event).
Restrictions on entertainment are equally rigorous, which include the following:
Muslim performers must dress to cover their aurat.
Non-Muslim performers must dress modestly.
Female performers are only allowed to perform before female audiences.
Cross-dressing is prohibited.
Anyone related to controversies involving LGBT activities are prohibited from performing.
Recording and/or live streaming of female dancers are prohibited.
Cinemas must prepare different seating areas for male and female moviegoers and moviegoers who come as a family.
Moviegoers are also subjected to the same dress code mentioned above.
Makeup artists should be of the same gender as the performers, and are subjected to the same dress code.
The free mixing of male and female audiences must be controlled by event organisers.
These guidelines have drawn much flak from different organisations, especially the restrictions on female performers enforced to a non-Muslim event at a Chinese temple. Despite the backlash, failure to comply with these regulations consistently results in the denial of permits from local authorities — as the guidelines are now integrated into local laws.
Last year, a viral video showing male and female students dancing together in a concert organised by a university in Terengganu landed the university a big fine for failing to obtain a permit prior.
Federal Intervention 101
The Federal Government's response has been relatively muted. To date, the only thing the Federal Government has done is an expression of concern from the Minister of Youth and Sports, Hannah Yeoh, and the placement of the two female divers under the Malaysian Sports School programme which comes under the Federal Government's purview.
But — is this all the Federal Government can do?
In contrast to the current measured, or rather muted, approach, former Minister of Youth and Sports Syed Saddiq advocated for a more assertive stance back in 2019 — suggesting that the Federal Ministry could potentially take over the Terengganu Sports Council (the body handling SUKMA participation) if the state went ahead with its plans to ban female gymnasts from competing in SUKMA.
This raises an important question: What exactly are the powers of the Federal Government in such situations? Can it truly intervene and take control, or is it limited to offering advice and expressing disapproval?
Although the Federal Constitution demarcates Federal and State powers into the Federal List and State List respectively, "culture and sports" fall under the Concurrent List where both the Federal and State Government have power over. This shared jurisdiction theoretically allows both levels of government to legislate and regulate these areas.
Nevertheless, Federal executive authority does not automatically extend into the Concurrent List unless prescribed by Federal or State law, as per article 80(2) of the Federal Constitution. In other words, unless there is any written law which allows the Federal Government to interfere with the State Sports Council, there can be no Federal interference with the Terengganu Sports Council.
So, does such law exist?
As it turns out, it does.
National Sports Council Act 1971
State Sports Councils (Majis-Majlis Sukan Negeri) are established under the National Sports Council Act 1971 [NSCA] as the main promoter, coordinator, and fund manager for all things related to sports and sports associations in their respective states.
To "take over" a State Sports Council, the Federal Government would need to replace the council's members with officials aligned with federal interests. However, this is far easier said than done.
Under the NSCA, each State Sports Council can have up to 14 members, but the Minister of Youth and Sports is only empowered to appoint the Chairperson — and even that requires consultation with the state's Chief Minister. The appointed Chairperson can then select up to six additional members, while the remaining seven members are designated representatives of the state — leaving a significant portion of the council beyond federal control.
This structural arrangement inherently restricts the Federal Government's influence. It could, at best, control only half of any State Sports Council, making a complete "takeover" practically impossible without state cooperation.
But, it's not quite game over yet.
Dictatorial Trump Card
The Federal Government still holds a trump card up its sleeve — a potential game-changer in this standoff. Enter section 7A(2) of the NSCA — the nuclear button that could blow the status quo wide open!
This powerful provision grants the Minister the authority to unilaterally rewrite the rules governing State Sports Councils with a single order, allowing the Federal Government to sweep aside (or, to "blow up") the existing membership structure and firmly impose its will over the state.
In theory, Syed Saddiq's takeover proposal could work, but at what cost? The Federal Government would be branded as even more authoritarian than status quo.
Hannah Yeoh, for one, is unlikely to pursue such a heavy-handed approach, especially given the growing public criticism over the current government being labelled as the "most dictatorial" government due to recent social media licensing requirements. The last thing she would want is to reinforce the narrative of a government that governs with an iron fist. ✊
Violation of Gender Equality?
Shifting our focus back to the core issue — does the ban on female athletes violate the fundamental right to equality guaranteed by Article 8 of the Federal Constitution or any international human rights provisions, particularly those under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women [CEDAW]?
CEDAW, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979 and in force since 1981, was ratified by Malaysia in 1995, albeit with reservations. Following this ratification, Article 8 of the Federal Constitution was specifically amended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of "gender"; to reinforce our nation's commitment to gender equality.
Sports & Gender Equality
Sports is addressed in CEDAW in two different articles.
Article 10(h) of CEDAW states that countries must take all appropriate measures to guarantee women and men have equal opportunities to participate actively in sports and physical education.
Article 13(c) ensures women’s “right to participate in recreational activities, sports and all aspects of cultural life” are on the same terms as men.
These provisions reflect the universal recognition that there exist considerable gender inequalities in sports, and the collective intent to address them. They are not platitudes to be taken lightly.
International human rights law has historically played a pivotal role in promoting the inclusion of women from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds in sports. This is evident two notable occasions:
In 2021, the Norwegian women’s beach handball team was fined for wearing shorts instead of bikini bottoms; and
Zahra Lari was penalised for wearing a hijab when competing in figure skating in the 2012 European Cup.
In both cases, active lobbying based on international human rights standards led to significant changes in the sports' rules to prevent future discrimination.
Terengganu's Case
Terengganu's ban, however, is not a step forward. Being a violation of article 13(c) of CEDAW and article 8 of the Federal Constitution, it has disenfranchised an entire generation of women, denying them the same opportunities and access as men to a sport. This is simply unacceptable.
The courts may provide an avenue of relief. Affected athletes, such as the gymnasts who were banned, may institute judicial review proceedings so that the courts can examine the constitutionality of the State Government's decision and quash it ultimately. But things are silent on that front.
If the Federal Government truly wanted to address this, CEDAW actually provides two key mechanisms to protect the rights of women athletes:
State Reporting Procedure
The Federal Government can use this mechanism to report Terengganu's ban as a breach of international human rights standards. Article 18 of CEDAW requires countries to submit regular reports to the CEDAW Committee on their progress in implementing the Convention. In cases of serious or systematic violations, the CEDAW Committee can launch an inquiry under the Optional Protocol if the state agrees to it.
Individual Complaint Procedure
Established under the Optional Protocol in 1999, this procedure allows individuals to bring complaints to the CEDAW Committee about alleged violations of their rights under the Convention.
These mechanisms enable both the Federal Government and affected athletes to hold the State Sports Council accountable and push for greater adherence to international human rights standards, especially in promoting gender equality.
For the Love of Sports & Human Rights
Perhaps this could have been the moment for the Federal Government to finally bare its fangs and take a stand! Instead, it is no more than just a missed opportunity.
In the words of former U.S. President. Lyndon B. Johnson during the Civil Rights era:
There is no issue of States' rights or National rights. There is only the struggle for human rights.
A government does not become dictatorial by exercising its powers, but when it uses those powers to curtail individual freedoms. The question here is not whether the Federal Government should intervene but whether it has a duty to act when state policies outright infringe upon constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights.
Terengganu's ban on female athletes isn’t just a matter of sports regulation — it's a broader issue of equality and women's rights in Malaysia. If we don't put a stop this now, what may happen is that the consequences of allowing discriminatory state policies to exist may trickle down to other sports. We must safeguard women's access to all sports.
Alas, the Federal Government has already chosen to let sleeping dogs lie. Further interference in the near future seems unlikely, as the female divers have already been transferred to the Malaysian Sports School programme and have been guaranteed their winning incentives by the state government, after a gentle nudge from Hannah Yeoh.
The next SUKMA could prove to be a defining moment. Will the Federal Government continue to be a passive observer, or will it take a stand for a more inclusive Malaysia? In four years, it will face a crucial decision — will it be bold, principled action or cautious inaction?
We shall see.
_JPG.jpg)
Comments