Constitutionalism in Asia in the Early Twenty-First Century

(Greg DeLong) #1

practising their own religions, and shall not imply that the State is not a


secular State.’ This statement states unequivocally the original intentions


of UMNO and Alliance leaders. It was a compromise reached between


Alliance parties, hence there was no objection from the Malaysian Chi-


nese Association (MCA) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) to


the inclusion of this provision in their joint memorandum.^47


The proposed enactment of Article 3 declaring that Islam is the religion of the


federation was initially opposed by the rulers of the Malay states


because they were told by their constitutional advisers that if the Feder-


ation had an official religion, the proposed Head of the Federation would


logically become the Head of the official religion throughout the Feder-


ation and it was thought that this would be in conflict with the position of


each of the Rulers as Head of the official religion in his own State.^48


The Malay rulers were placated by the explanation of the Alliance Party


that it was not intended to interfere with the position of the Rulers as


Head of Islam in their own States and that the intention in making


Islam the official religion was primarily for ceremonial purposes, for


instance to enable prayers to be offered in the Islamic way on official


occasions such as the installation of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong,


Merdeka Day, and similar occasions.^49


The White Paper (Legislative Council Paper No 42 of 1957 ) dealing with the


constitutional proposals stated that the declaration of Islam as the official religion


‘will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular state’.
50


Within a year of independence, the first prime minister of Malaysia, Tunku Abdul


Rahman, firmly asserted that ‘this country is not an Islamic State as it is generally


understood, we merely provide that Islam shall be the official religion of the


State’.^51 In 1988 inChe Omarv.PP,^52 the federal constitution was characterised


by the Supreme Court as secular in nature.^53


(^47) Ibid., at 265 – 6. See also Kevin Y.L. Tan, ‘The Creation of Greater Malaysia: Law, Politics
and Religion’, keynote address delivered at the conference on Law and Society in
Malaysia: Pluralism, Islam and Development, University of Victoria, BC, 15 July 2011.
(^48) Ahmad Ibrahim, ‘The position of Islam in the Constitution of Malaysia’, pp. 41 , 49
(^49) Ibid.See Mohamed Suffian Hashim, ‘The relationship between Islam and the State in
Malaya’.
(^50) Malaya,Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals (Kuala Lumpur: Govt Printer,
1957 ), pp. 18 – 19.
(^51) Malaya,Official Report of Legislative Council Debates, 1 May 1958 , cols. 4631 and 4671 – 2
(Tunku Abdul Rahman).
(^52) [ 1988 ] 2 MLJ 55.
(^53) Li-ann Thio, ‘Jurisdictional imbroglio: civil and religious courts, turf wars and Article 121
( 1 A) of the Federal Constitution’, in Harding and Lee,Constitutional Landmarks in
Malaysia,p. 221.


Constitutional developments in Malaysia 263

Free download pdf