No ex gratia payment

1. My father, Mohamed Ismail Merican, wrote a letter dated 21^st May, 1946 to his boss the Legal Officer applying “for four months’ vacation leave prior to his retirement again.” The letter conveyed his hope that the Government would take into account his additional service of over four years during war-time (Japanese occupation) for the purpose of computing his increased pension and additional gratuity by reason of his re-employment.

2. My father retired on pension in 1937 at the age of 55 after 27 years in the KCS (Kedah Civil Service). He spent the last 14 years of service mostly in the office of the Legal Adviser. At first he held the post of Office Assistant and finally as Assistant to the Legal Adviser, an appointment in Class II of the KCS, on a salary scale of $450 - $875 a month.

3. He was recalled to duty by the Kedah State Council during the Japanese Occupation. He assumed duty on 10^th February, 1942 as Legal Adviser and Public Prosecutor. He was also appointed a member of the State Council. He was 60 years old then.

4. My father held the appointment until the British reoccupation upon which the British Military Administration (BMA) appointed him as Secretary to the Legal Officer. He was attached to the Office of the Legal Adviser until the cessation of the BMA and subsequently under the Civil Administration (Malayan Union).

5. In the letter he wrote that during the Japanese occupation he “had had to encounter serious difficulties in preserving the pre-war laws of the States for the continuance of their operation to secure the maintenance of peace and order in the State including Perlis.” He further stated that he had been successful in his work as “evidenced by the good order of the Legal Department” when it was taken over by the Legal Officer during the BMA.

6. However his application for “increased pension and additional gratuity” got through a lot of red tape. Many exchanges of letters between departments took place and the process dragged on for more than a year.

7. In the beginning it seemed promising. His boss, Lieut. Col. L. A. Massie, conveyed a favourable message to the Resident Commissioner, Kedah and recommended that he be granted the vacation leave, and that his additional service during war time be taken into consideration for the purpose of computing his increased pension and additional gratuity.

8. In a letter from the Secretariat, Government of the Malayan Union, dated 14th August, 1946, the Resident Commissioner, Kedah, was informed that it was “under consideration whether Che Ismail Merican’s case would not he met by an ex gratia payment equal to two months’ salary.” It was also enquired “whether he has received $550/- less or in addition to his pension”. In response the Secretariat was informed that “Che Ismail Merican received since B.M.A. a salary of $475.71”, and that there was “ample saving in Kedah Civil Service vote to meet ex gratia payment of two months’ salary”.

9. In December, 1946, my father wrote a formal letter to the Secretary to Government, Kedah, to request for an additional gratuity and an increased pension for his service from 10th February, 1942 to 31st August, 1946 during his re-employment citing Rule 13 of the Pensions Rules under Enactment No.73 (Pensions).

10. In a lengthy letter, he asserted that Kedah was governed by the State Council presided over by the Regent who was appointed by the British High Commissioner. Hence, the administration and the judiciary were functioning under the laws of Kedah. For that reason, he stressed that the British should recognize the State Council’s act in recalling him as a legitimate act though the state was under enemy occupation. Citing equity and justice, he hoped that his services during re-employment were counted for the purpose of granting the additional gratuity and increased pension.

11. Regarding his services during the period of re-employment, my father wrote:

“With all modesty I may say that no other pensioner in the state has rendered such valuable services to the state with so much self-sacrifice, devotion to duty and loyalty in the face of great hardship and old age.”

12. He concluded the letter with the hope that his petition would be forwarded to the Malayan Union Government in a favourable manner “with a view to the approval of my request.”

13. In reply to his letter, my father was informed by the State Secretariat in a letter dated 5th January, 1947 that under the ruling then in force, “the occupation period cannot be taken into account for the purpose of pension,” and that he should renew his application if, and when, there were legislation regarding the matter.  

14. In March 1947, when legislation had been passed to the effect that service during the period of the occupation should count for pension purposes, my father decided to renew his application for additional gratuity and increased pension in a letter dated 21st March, 1947 addressed to the Under Secretary to Government. Citing the Pensions (Special Provisions) Ordinance, 1947, he requested that his application be submitted to the Malayan Union Government for consideration.

15. For a while the focus of communications between departments was “Rule 13 of the Pensions Rules.” Opinions were sought to determine whether or not my father’s case came within the scope of the pension rules. For example, the Auditor General, Kedah was of the opinion that “Che’ Ismail … may … be considered to have qualified for an increased pension under Rule 13 of the Pension Rules.” But in the final analysis, it was the opinion of the Legal Adviser that carried weight: “In my opinion Che Ismail Merican is not entitled to any pension at all, in respect of his services since 1942 … I do not see how his services come within the Pensions Enactment and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder.”

16. In his memo dated October 6, 1947 addressed to the Resident Commissioner, the Secretary of Government, Kedah, noted:

            “I have explained the position to Che Ismail Merican and he is much obliged to you. I know that he has been most helpful during the occupation period. I recommend that he be granted an ex gratia gratuity at the rate of 1/12 of a month’s salary for each completed month of service for the period he was re-engaged and that this payment be made of an early date.”

17. Consequently the Resident Commissioner forwarded my father’s case to the Chief Secretary,

Malayan Union in a letter dated 15th October, 1947 pointing out that the subject had asked for the grant of an additional pension but “his case, however, does not come within the scope of the pension rules relating to the grant of an additional pension to re-employed pensioners … and he is not entitled to an increase of pension.”

18. The Resident Commissioner had written favourably of my father:

“Both His Highness the Sultan and Haji Mohamed Sheriff (Secretary to Government) have on several occasions spoken to me appreciatively of the valuable services which he rendered during the occupation period and are anxious that his work should receive due recognition. There is no doubt that his services were of great value during that period and it was fortunate that the State had available an officer with his long experience on the legal side.

“I recommend that he be given an ex-gratia payment of (say) $2,000/- for his services during the period of occupation. The salary which he drew during this period was a mere pittance.”

19. About seven months later, the Kedah State Secretary wrote a letter dated 6th June, 1948 to the Federal Secretariat citing the Resident Commissioner’s letter of 15th October, 1947 and requesting “for the favour of a reply thereto”.

20. There being no decision from the government regarding his request, my father wrote another letter dated 16^th August 1948 to the State Secretary inquiring about the matter.  Pressing for a decision to be taken, he stated that more than a year had passed since he submitted the petition on 11th December, 1946 but no decision had been taken on it. In the letter he reiterated that “there is no question of the valuable services rendered by me during difficult times, which have won the approbation of His Highness the Sultan.”

21. For those reasons, he hoped that his reminder would be brought to the notice of the Mentri Besar “for such action as he may think fit to take to arrive at a decision.” Consequently the Kedah State Secretariat made a follow-up through a letter to the Federal Secretariat dated 25th August, 1948 to inquire about the status of the matter.

22. At long last a decision was finally arrived at, but oddly enough not in his favour. A brief letter dated 7^th September, 1948 from the Kedah State Secretary conveyed the decision from the Deputy Chief Secretary, Kuala Lumpur stating that “the ex gratia payment in respect of the services of Che Mohamed Ismail Merican during the Japanese Occupation is not approved.”

M. I. Merican in KCS uniform