An argument is going round that Malaysia is a constitutional democracy, that the monarch cannot issue decrees ‘which legislate all aspects of our lives’, and that the monarch’s domain is strictly the Malay customs, Islam and a few ‘constitutional roles’. This is an argument raising the supremacy of political theory, alone - that the Constitution is supreme.
But, a Constitution is founded on a particular history and associated with a founding society. The Malayan Constitution rolled out in 1957 (which later founded the Malaysian Constitution) was a gift of the Malay Rulers to their people, whereby the Rulers consented to reign as constitutional monarchs, giving up their hitherto position as ‘absolute’ rulers. In other words, the Constitution was ‘created’ by the Malay Rulers; the Constitution did not create the Malay Rulers. Thus, while we proclaim ‘supremacy of the Constitution’, we should not disengage from the whole society and its history.
The founding (Malay) society reveres the Rulers as payung, whose presence completes the Malay society as a sovereign entity, apart from being protective, inspiring unity, and providing guidance. Thus, the domain of the Rulers is beyond the Constitution, not being above it. Thus, teguran of the Rulers are not infringement of the Constitution. The Constitution is part of the founding society, not apart from it. The Malaysian Constitution is shaped by the society, and its history. The Malaysian Constitution is sui generis. Our Constitution is not libertarian individualism, as that is not the form of our society, which is collectivist; nor is it a Westminster one either, where parliament created the constitution and the monarchy.
There is reverence for the Malaysian Constitution, just as there is also for the founding society. One cannot have reverence for the Malaysian Constitution by rejecting the nature and essence of the founding Malay society.
The Rukun Negara, often cited alongside the Constitution, is that expression of the founding society too, in a simpler form. The fifth and concluding principle of the Rukun Negara (kesopanan dan kesusilaan) is in fact the ruling principle, as it guides to the understanding and practice of the four preceding principles. Thus, the third principle of keluhuran perlembagaan wherein the position and powers of the monarchy is appreciated, requires an appreciation that is sopan and bersusila, not sheer written legalism. Harshly questioning the position, rights and privileges of the Rulers, and in public, is the worst possible un-sopan (a biadab) scenario, an assault on the founding Malay culture itself.
Constitutionalism without decorum is hardly noble.
Arof Ishak
29 May 2026
NOTE - Arof is a friend who does not have Socmed accounts. So, I am sharing his thoughts on the subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment