POWER OF COURTS V CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Food for thought…

A 1988 amendment to Article 121(1) of the Federal Constitution to remove judicial power from judges[1] did not have the desired effect, Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said.[2]

Constitution must be interpreted in light of its historical and philosophical context, underlying fundamental principles[3]; as in the Westminster’s model, a separation of power among the ‘branches of government’[4]; inherent within, the judiciary role as the ultimate-arbiter corollary to the ‘rules of law’[5]; in no-way inimical to democratic government[6]; but also to interpret statutes[7], as on par with the ‘sovereignty of Parliament’[8]; thus this ‘basic structure’ cannot be abrogated or removed by a constitutional amendment[9]; thus a feature intrinsic to the constitution itself as the supreme-law[10]; vesting upon the judicial power to review against unconstitutional legislation[11], whether or not it is expressly stated[12]; bringing about the significance that judicial-power cannot be removed from civil-courts[13].

Any other courts, i.e. the Syariah Courts, a creature of State Legislative creation, cannot be vested with judicial power as it is unequal to the ‘superior court’ in accordance to the constitutional provisions[14]; repugnant even if the Parliament attempt to amend the constitution to give power to the Syariah Courts[15].

----------------------------------------------
[1] <https://m.aliran.com/towering-msians/mahathirs-1988-showdown-with-salleh-abas/>
[2] <https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2021/01/15/judicial-power-still-with-courts-despite-1988-constitution-amendment-says-cj/>
[3] Canadian Supreme Court on Reference re Senate Reform 2014 SCC 32
[4] Mohd Faizal bin Sabtu v Public Prosecutor [2012] SGHC 163
[5] Pengarah Tanah dan Galian WP v Sri Lempah Enterprise [1979] 1 MLJ 135; and R(Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU [2017] UKSC 5
[6] Canadian Supreme Court on Reference re Secession of Quebec(supra)
[7] R(application of Jackson and Ors) v Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56
[8] Tan Seet Eng v Attorney General & Ors [2015] SGCA 59
[9] Kesavananda Bharti v State of Kerela AIR 1973 SC 1461
[10] Art.4 Singapore Constitution; Attorney General v Taylor [2017] NZ CA 215; Semenyih Jaya v Pentadbir Tanah Hulu Langat [2017] 3 MLJ 36: judicial power vested in the High Courts by virtue of Art.121(1) Malaysian Constitution
[11] Lim Kit Siang v Dato Seri Dr Mahathir Mohd [1987] 1 MLJ 383
[12] Hinds v The Queen [1997] AC 195
[13] Public Prosecutor v Dato Yap Peng [1987] 2 MLJ 311
[14] Art 121 Malaysia Constitution
[15] Abdul Kahar b. Ahmad v Kerajaan Malaysia and Ors [2008] 2 MLJ 617: purport of Art121(1A); Dalip Kaur v Pegawai Polis Bukit Mertajam Anor [1992] 1 MLJ 1