Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz claimed that the federal legislature had no power to enact Section 28 and Section 17 of the Education Act 1996.

Khairul, who filed an application through Messrs Azam Aziz Shaharudinali & Co at the Federal Court Registry here this afternoon, has named the education ministry and Putrajaya as respondents.

However, for the apex court to hear his case, Khairul has to first obtain leave before a single judge of the Federal Court, as provided under Article 4 (4) of the Federal Constitution.

“We will extract the sealed copy from the court as soon as possible and serve it on the respondents,” he told FMT.

The Education Act 1996 was passed that year to replace the Education Ordinance of 1956 and the Education Act of 1961.

Section 17 of the Education Act states the national language as the main medium of instruction.

It states:

17 (1) The national language shall be the main medium of instruction in all educational institutions in the national education system except a national-type school established under Section 28 or any other educational institution exempted by the minister from this subsection.

(2) Where the main medium of instruction in an educational institution is other than the national language, the national language shall be taught as a compulsory subject in the educational institution.

Meanwhile, Section 28 of the Education Act covers the establishment and maintenance of national and national-type schools.

It states that subject to the provisions of this Act, the minister may establish national schools and national-type schools and shall maintain such schools.

Khairul’s lawyer Shahrudin Ali explained Parliament did not have the authority to empower the education minister with the discretion to establish Chinese and Tamil primary schools.

He said this is because Article 152 of the constitution declares Malay as the national language.