Watanic Jurisprudence: Governing Principles in Legislative Powers Under the Federal Constitution
Watanic Jurisprudence: Governing Principles in Legislative Powers Under the Federal Constitution
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v2i.54Keywords:
The Maker of the Federal Constitution, Watanic Jurisprudence, Malay Customs, Article 181(1), The Rule of LawAbstract
Before 1948, all legislative powers were vested in Malay rulers in their respective states. The Malay Rulers were the makers of the Federal Constitution through a constitutional development process, even though many parties drafted it. This paper applies the legal methodology of watanic jurisprudence. The position of Malay rulers is essential because they were sovereign authorities that legitimized the Federation of Malaya Agreement, 1948, the Federation of Malaya Agreement, 1957, and the Federal Constitution of Malaya, 1957. Previous research on this subject had ignored the principle of sovereignty as stipulated in Article 181(1) when discussing the issue of legislative powers. As a result, many parties viewed parliamentary democracy as the Malaysian principle of sovereignty. Hence, this paper intends to explain the influence of Islam and Malay customs as the governing principles of legislative powers under the Federal Constitution. This paper is important because members of the legislative, executive, and judiciary take the oath under the Sixth Schedule before discharging their respective constitutional responsibilities. This paper would assist in understanding the essence of the oath under the Sixth Schedule vis-à-vis the duty to uphold the rule of law and the supremacy of our Constitution.
Downloads
References
‘Personal law’ Merriam-Webster Dictionary <https://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/personal%20law> accessed 25 November
‘Private law’ Merriam-Webster Dictionary <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/private%20law> accessed 25 November 2021.
‘Public law’ Merriam-Webster Dictionary <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public%20law> accessed 25 November 2021.
Allen J. de V., Stockwell A.J. & Wright L.R. (eds), A Collection of Treaties and Other Documents Affecting the States of Malaysia Vol. 2 (London, Oceana Publication, 1981).
Ash-Shuraa [42]: 13 <https://qurano.com/en/42-ash-shura/verse-13/> accessed 30 May 2022.
Bidin A., ‘The Historical and Tradition Features of the Malaysian Constitution’ (1993) 21 Jebat 3-20.
Brown C.C. (translated from MS Raffles), ‘Malay Annals’ (2010) Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society.
C.O 537/1530 No. 50823 Part III (Colonies, General: Supplementary and Secret Original Correspondence, 18 November 1946).
Che Omar bin Che Soh v Public Prosecutor [1988] 2 MLJ 55.
Civil Law Act 1956 (Revised 1972).
Constitutional Working Committee Report, dated 18 November, 1946.
Constitutions of The States of Malaysia (2nd edn, Kuala Lumpur, International Book Services, 1998).
Curzon L.B., Dictionary of Law (Sixth edn, Kuala Lumpur, International Law Book Services, 2007).
Faruqi S.S., Document of Destiny: The Constitution of the Federation of Malaysia (Petaling Jaya, Star Publications, 2007).
Federal Constitution of Malaysia.
Federation of Malaya Agreement, 1948.
Hashim M.Y., ‘Daulat dalam Tradisi Budaya dan Politik Kesultanan Melayu Abad ke-15 dan Awal Abad ke-16: Antara Mitos dan Realiti’ (1995) 3(3) SEJARAH: Journal of the Department of History.
Indira Gandhi A/P. Mutho v. Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Perak & Ors and other appeals [2018] MLJU 69.
Isa Y. (ed), Hukum Kanun Pahang (Pahang Museum Manuscript version, Kuala Lumpur, MacroCity Resources, 2003).
Lina Joy vs the Federal Islamic Religious Council & Ors [2004] 2 MLJ 119.
Lopez C., ‘The British Presence in the Malay World: A Meeting of Civilizational Traditions’ (2001) 19 SARI: Jurnal Alam dan Tamadun Melayu 3-33.
Maududi S.A.A., Islamic Law and Constitution (12th edn, Lahore, Islamic Publication Pvt. Ltd, 1997) 166.
Mustafa C.N., ‘The 1993 Royal Immunity Crisis: The Kerajaan, the Constitution and the dilemma of a new bangsa’ (PhD thesis, University of Kent 2000).
Pangkor Treaty 1874.
Philpott D., ‘Sovereignty: An Introduction and Brief History’ (1995) 48(2) Journal of International Affairs 353-368.
Ramah binti Taat v Laton binti Malim Sutan [1927] 6 FMSLR 128.
Re: Reference re Senate Reform (2014) 25-26.
Reid Commission, Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission 1957 (Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1957).
Smith S.C., British Relations with the Malay Rulers from Decentralisation to Malayan Independence 1930-1957 (Oxford University Press, 1995).
Venter F., Constitutional Comparison: Japan, Germany, Canada & South Africa as Constitutional States (South Africa, Kluwer Law International, 2000).
Wan Husain W.A.F., ‘Insight: The Conceptual Framework for Buiding The World-Class Good Governance Ethics’ (2020) 4(1) Journal of Governance and Integrity 1-5.
___ ‘Insight: The Interpretation of Islam Within the Legal Framework of the Indigenous Malaya’ (2021) 4(2) Journal of Governance and Integrity 64-72.
___ ‘Watanic Jurisprudence: Articulating the Legitimate Elements of the Basic Structure of the Federal Constitution’ (2021) 29(1) IIUM Law Journal 1-2.
___ Kedaulatan Malaysia Governan Utama Negara (Selangor, Abad Sinergi Sdn. Bhd. & Penerbit UMP, 2022).
___ Kedaulatan Raja-Raja Melayu: Jurisprudens, Governan & Prinsip Perlembagaan Persekutuan (Selangor, Abad Sinergi Sdn. Bhd., 2018).
___ Kenegaraan Malaysia: Sejarah, Kedaulatan dan Kebangsaan (Perlis, Penerbit Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 2020).
___ Yang di-Pertuan Agong: Kedaulatan, Prerogatif dan Amalan (Kuala Lumpur, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 2021).
Zaini M.A. (ed), Siri Titah Sultan Nazrin Muizzuddin Shah (Kuala Lumpur, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 2021).
Zaydan A.K., Al-wajiz fi usul al-fiqh (Kaherah, Dar al-TawziÊ wa al-Nasyr al-Islami, 1993).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of the Malaysian Parliament
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
