Page 24 - Mainstreamer e-Magazine 01 June 2022 - Final (4)

CRITICAL THOUGHTS
A Timely for a Holistic Review of the PWD Act 2008 in Malaysia

Nurhidayah
Abdullah

alaysia was among the first countries development and protection of the lives of
to ratify the Convention on the Rights persons with disabilities. This means that anyone,
Mof Persons with Disabilities, which was regardless of their form of legal entity, whether
adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. being a personal person or incorporation, who
The Person with Disabilities Act 2008 was enacted does not support the promotion of development
to promote development of the overall quality and protection of life of this group of people,
of life and wellbeing of persons with disabilities, is considered to be breaching the Persons with
guided by the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities Act 2008. Even if there is the National
Disabilities and the National Plan of Action for Council for Persons with Disabilities under the
Persons with Disabilities. After over a decade, Persons with Disabilities Act 2008, the Council
the Act was still insufficient to protect the rights does not have the power to penalise or prosecute
of persons with disabilities. Under this Act, a any person, bodies or agencies for failing to comply
person is defined as having a disability if they with the provisions of the Act. In 1991, the Uniform
‘.... have long-term physical, mental, intellectual Building By-Law 34A (hereinafter referred to as
or sensory impairments which, in interaction “UBBL 34A”) of the Street, Drainage and Building
with various barriers, may hinder their full and Act 1991 was enacted. It is required under the by-
effective participation in society.’ Furthermore, it laws that buildings constructed be accessible to
was classified into seven domains of impairment, persons with disabilities; that buildings existing
namely, hearing, sight, speech difficulties, physical, before UBBL 34A must be retrofitted with such
learning disabilities, psychosocial and multiple facilities within three years; and that these
impairment. The issue is: Why is this Act still facilities must comply with the Malaysia Standard
ineffective to offer protection to persons with MS 1184: Code of Practice on Access for Disabled
disabilities? Persons to Buildings. Apart from that, between
1990 to 1993, there were also three Standards
There are several obvious gaps in the statute. for creating facilities for persons with disabilities,
The non-remedial nature of the Act makes it non- which are SIRIM Code of Practice MS 1183:1990,
enforceable in certain conditions; Section 41 SIRIM Code of Practice MS 1184: 1991 and SIRIM
of the statute requires any plaintiff to legal suit Code of Practice MS 1331: 1993. In complying with
arising from the neglect of rights in Persons with these Standards, all building plans submitted to the
Disabilities Act 2008 to observe an additional local authority after the date the Code of Practice
ingredient of ‘good faith’; there is a shield is published in the State Gazette, and each State
protecting any civil servants and the government must comply with it. Existing buildings must do so
by virtue of Section 42 of the Act, and there is no within three years of that date (or any extension
development of such a statute, making any other of that grace period given), but may on application
statute enacted for protection of persons with be exempted from its requirements to such an
disabilities to be as ‘toothless’ as the Persons with extent as the local planning authority thinks fit.
Disabilities Act 2008. The scope of these SIRIM standards includes all

It is important to note that the Persons buildings other than private dwelling houses, and
with Disabilities Act 2008 aims to promote the it applies to every part of those buildings to which

23 Vol. 01, Issue 1 | June 2022