What did the 1988 Supreme Court ruling establish about Malaysian law?

Question

Accepted Answer

The 1988 Supreme Court Ruling Established Malaysian Law as Secular

A 1988 Supreme Court ruling unequivocally established that Malaysian law is secular law. This significant judicial pronouncement was made in the case of Che Omar Che Soh vs Public Prosecutor by a five-man bench. The decision directly addressed the nature of law within the country, asserting its secular foundation.
The Supreme Court's Stance in 1988

The Supreme Court, in its 1988 judgment concerning Che Omar Che Soh vs Public Prosecutor, clearly articulated that the legal system in Malaysia operates under secular law. This ruling was delivered by a panel of five justices, signifying a strong consensus on the matter at the time. The court's declaration aimed to define the character of Malaysian jurisprudence.
Government's Position Contrasted with the Ruling

Recent statements from the government, specifically from Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Dato Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, have asserted that Malaysia is not a secular state. This assertion appears to diverge from the definitive stance taken by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned 1988 case. The discrepancy highlights an ongoing debate regarding the legal and constitutional identity of Malaysia.
Call for Federal Court Clarification

Given the recurring nature of this issue and its profound implications for constitutional provisions, there is a call for further clarity. It is suggested that the matter be resolved by a full bench of the Federal Court. This would provide a definitive and authoritative interpretation of whether Malaysia is indeed a secular state.
Invoking Advisory Jurisdiction for Resolution

The mechanism proposed for resolving this constitutional question involves invoking the Federal Court's advisory jurisdiction under Article 130 of the Federal Constitution. This article empowers the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to refer questions concerning the effect of constitutional provisions to the Federal Court for its opinion. Such a referral would enable the Federal Court to pronounce its view in open court, potentially settling the debate.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What did the 1988 Supreme Court ruling establish about Malaysian law?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends