
Govt has no plans for single REE entity to regulate industry
The acting natural resources and environmental sustainability minister said that during past discussions and stakeholder engagements, several states expressed objections to such a move.
"They viewed the proposal as an attempt at the nationalisation of mineral resources that belong to the states.
"As is well known, the management of petroleum resources beyond state waters is different from the management of land matters, which falls under state jurisdiction.
"This is clearly stated in the Federal Constitution, Ninth Schedule, List II (State List), which provides that the states have jurisdiction over permits and licences for prospecting, mining leases, mining, and mining certificates," he said in his winding-up speech for the 13th Malaysia Plan.
This comes after proposals by several members of parliament for the government to establish a regulatory agency, similar to Petronas, through the enactment of an REE Act to drive the development of the REE industry.
Johari assured that the Federal Government fully respects state jurisdiction over land and mineral matters, as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.
Accordingly, he said the government has formulated a clear long-term plan to develop the rare earth elements industry holistically, in line with the direction endorsed by the National Economic Action Council.
"Any policies or mechanisms on REE revenue distribution will be formulated and decided inclusively through the National Mineral Council, which serves as the main platform for engagement and coordination between the federal and producing state governments.
"This planning is based on the principle of close cooperation between the federal and state governments, to ensure that every initiative for the development of the REE industry takes into account state rights and jurisdiction as provided under the Constitution," he said.
Malaysia, he said, is also still in discussions with China on technology transfer of REE to Malaysia.
"We want to first see what they are doing. We will also conduct our own research, and only then sit down to decide what technologies we want to adopt.
"We cannot depend solely on China, as Russia also has expertise, although they have not approached us. China, on the other hand, has offered, and they want to prove themselves to us. We will assess the outcomes and then discuss further," he said.
When asked why the proof-of-concept phase in Kenering, Perak is taking up to five years, Johari clarified that big-scale mining usually takes more time to assess, especially on its impact towards the environment.
He said he would visit the site soon to get updates from the scientists.
He also clarified that Malaysia has never offered the export of raw REE as a concession or condition for tariff reduction in trade tariff negotiations with the United States.
This also comes after several queries from MPs to the government about negotiations with the United States involving REE, given that the raw export ban is still in force.
"NRES wishes to stress that, in trade tariff negotiations with the US government, Malaysia has never offered the export of raw REE as a concession or condition for tariff reduction.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The Star
36 minutes ago
- The Star
Words ‘offensive' and ‘annoy' crossed out from online law
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has struck down a part of Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 that consisted of the words 'offensive' and 'annoy'. A three-judge panel, chaired by Federal Court judge Justice Lee Swee Seng, held that the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in Section 233 were unconstitutional. 'We find the impugned words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in Section 233 constituting an offence to be inconsistent with Article 10(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution read with Article 8, and hence unconstitutional and void. 'It is not a permissible restriction to freedom of expression under our Federal Constitution. 'The appeal is allowed and the order of the High Court is set aside,' Justice Lee said. The court did not make any order as to costs. 'Being a constitutional matter, we make no order as to costs as no one is the winner but the Malaysian public where freedom of expression is concerned. 'We declare this decision to have prospective effect so as not to resurrect the past which is better left interned,' Justice Lee said. Other judges on the Bench were Court of Appeal judges Justices Hashim Hamzah and Azman Abdullah. The Court of Appeal's judgment arose from an appeal by activist Heidy Quah, who filed an originating summons to declare the words in the law provision as null and void as it is inconsistent with Article 10 of the Federal Constitution read with Article 8. Section 233(1)(a) states that it is an offence for a person to make, create or solicit, and initiate the transmission of any online comment which is 'obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive' with 'intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person. However, under an amendment effective February this year, the word 'offensive' was replaced with 'grossly offensive'. In this respect, the appellate court found that the amendment did not affect Quah's legal challenge. On July 27, 2021, Quah, who is the founder of Refuge for the Refugees, claimed trial at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court to a charge of sharing offensive content over a Facebook post that alleged mistreatment of refugees at an Immigration detention centre. She was accused of making the post through her Facebook page under the name 'Heidy Quah' with intent to insult others at about 5.30am on June 5, 2020. On April 25, 2022, she was granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal after the Sessions Court allowed her preliminary objection. At the same time when her case at the Sessions Court began, Quah filed an originating summons at the Shah Alam High Court on Aug 30, 2021, to challenge the provision of Section 233 that was used against her. On Sept 12, 2023, the High Court dismissed her application without order as to costs. Quah then appealed the matter at the Court of Appeal, which resulted in yesterday's judgment.

The Star
36 minutes ago
- The Star
Dissent is not interference, says ex-CJ
Sharing wisdom: Tengku Maimun preparing to deliver her keynote address at the ACG forum in Kuala Lumpur. — AZLINA ABDULLAH/The Star KUALA LUMPUR: Judicial deliberations, which may involve disagreements and persuasive discussions, should not be confused with internal judicial interference, says an ex-chief justice. Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said that the process of discussion and deliberation which is required under the law and which inevitably will involve disagreements and persuasions, should not be confused or equated with internal judicial interference. 'What then happens is the judge who cannot agree is encouraged to write physical judgment ... if a judge disagrees with the outcome of their appeal, then he or she delivers a dissenting judgment or a separate judgment if he or she agrees with the outcome but for separate reasons,' Tengku Maimun said in her speech at the Allianz Centre for Governance (ACG) yesterday. 'In a system of constitutional supremacy, the judiciary, like the other branches of government, is itself subject to the constraints of the Federal Constitution at all times. 'It is the Constitution that is supreme,' she said. Tengku Maimun was the distinguished speaker at the ACG forum titled 'The Sanctity of Malaysia's Federal Constitution: Threats, Solutions and Impact on National Governance'. Tengku Maimun explained that internal judicial independence is essential for judges to make decisions independently, free from undue influence by other judges, regardless of their rank. 'Internal judicial independence refers to a judge's freedom to decide cases independently by applying one's mind free from undue influence or control of other judges, particularly higher ranking or senior judges.' Collegiality, she said, plays a central role in appellate courts, where panels of judges deliberate on cases. This process ensures that diverse perspectives are considered, particularly when reviewing lower court judgments. 'Collegiality and conferral among judicial panel members is a central panel of the law and accountability as it ensures that every possible aspect of the case is considered,' she said. Later during a question and answer session, she said politicians were the biggest threat to the judiciary. 'I'm sorry ... but personally I would think that the biggest threat (to the judiciary) would be the politicians,' she said adding however, that during her tenure as judge in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court, she had never encountered any political interference. However, she acknowledged that there was a semblance of attempted interference towards the end of her tenure as the country's top judge. 'But then again, it all depends on the judges. There may be interference left, right, centre, but if you ignore them, nothing will happen and the judiciary will remain intact and judicial independence will be upheld,' she said.

The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
13MP addresses realities of a rapidly ageing society
Planning for an ageing population: Customers watching Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim tabling the 13th Malaysia Plan on July 31. One of the landmark features of the 13MP is the introduction of the National Ageing Blueprint, which adopts a life-course approach to ageing. — AZMAN GHANI/The Star



