Should Malay replace English as the authoritative Federal Constitution text?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Attorney-General's Proposal to Make the Malay Translation the Authoritative Federal Constitution Text

Attorney-General Tan Sri Idrus Harun has proposed that the Malay translation of the Federal Constitution be designated as the authoritative text, thereby replacing the original English version. This significant proposal is contingent upon the approval of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, as stipulated by Article 160B of the Federal Constitution. Currently, the English text is recognised as the authoritative version of the nation's supreme law.
The Legal Framework for Authoritative Texts

Article 160B of the Federal Constitution provides the mechanism for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to prescribe a national language text as authoritative. Should such a prescription occur, and in instances of conflict or discrepancy between the national language text and the English language text, the national language text would prevail. This provision, along with Article 160A which allows for the reprinting of the Federal Constitution to include amendments, came into force on September 28, 2001. The Malay translation of the Federal Constitution was officially launched on September 29, 2003.
Current Status and Historical Context

As of October 2020, the Malay translation of the Federal Constitution, available on the Attorney-General's Chambers' Federal Legislation portal, was explicitly noted as being "only a translation" and not legally binding unless officially prescribed as authoritative under Article 160B. This means that without the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's formal decree, the English version remains the prevailing legal text. The Attorney-General's Chambers' review of the translated text was completed in 2002, following the initial translation produced in 1972.
Precedents and Legal Challenges

The question of which text holds authoritative status has arisen in significant legal cases, particularly those concerning the unilateral conversion of children. In the landmark M. Indira Gandhi case in 2018, the Federal Court affirmed the English text as authoritative, as there was no evidence that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong had prescribed the Malay translation as such. More recently, in January 2022, a lawyer representing the Selangor Islamic Religious Council attempted to argue for the Malay translation's official status before the Court of Appeal. However, the court did not rule on this point, as the argument was raised anew and required further examination regarding the existence and validity of such a prescribed Malay translation.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Should Malay replace English as the authoritative Federal Constitution text?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends