Identify the various sources of Malaysian Law
The sources of law consist of written law and unwritten law.In written law,it have federal constitution,state constitution,legislation and subsidiary legislation. Federal Constitution
Malaysia is a federation of 13 states with a written federal constitution . Article 4 of the federal constitution of Malaysia provides that the federal constitution is the supreme law of the country . The constitution is a unique expression of the country’s varied culture and history . Unlike the United Kingdom which has an unwritten constitution, Malaysia has a written constitution . It is the fundamental law from which the validity of all other law derives . If any law is in conflict with the Federal Constitution, the law is void to the extent of its inconsistency with the constitution . The Federal Constitution establishes a constitutional monarchy and a federal system of government . The mechanism of the government as laid down by the Federal Constitution consists of : Legislature
Te Constitution gives the legislative and executive powers to the States . Further, an independent Judiciary headed by the Federal Court, is responsible for interpreting the Constitution (as well as other enacted legislations) and exercising judicial powers . Each State has its own elected Legislative Assembly, Head of State and Executive Council (Cabinet), headed by the Menteri Besar or Chief Minister . The Federal Head of State is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) who is elected by the Rulers of the 9 Malay States from their own member in such a way that the office rotates among them, changing hands once in every 5 years . The YDPA is the constitutional head who acts on government advice and have no power to refuse the assent to bills passed by the Parliament . The 9 Rulers meet in a unique body known as the Conference of Rulers which enjoys certain constitutional powers . The Rulers are Heads of Islam in their States but are required to act on the device of the State Government and have no power to refuse assent to Bills passed by the State Legislative Assembly . Article 73 of the Federal Constitution confers legislative power to the Federal Parliament and the State Legislatures whereby Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the Federation and laws having effect outside as well as within the Federation and the State Legislature may make laws for the whole or any part of that State . The Parliament may make laws in matters listed in the Federal List as well as the Concurrent List . On the other hand, the State LegislativeAssembly or the State Legislature may make laws concerning matters laid down in the State List and Concurrent List .
Matters listed in the Federal List are for instance those concerning external affairs, national defence, internal security, civil & criminal law, federal citizenship, the machinery of the government, finance, education, medicine & health, communication & transport, shipping, navigation & fisheries, federal works & power, labour & social security, welfare of the aborigines, etc . Matters listed in the State List are those concerning Islamic Law, Syariah Courts, Malay Customs, offences by Muslims, land, agriculture & forestry, local government, local services, State works & waters, State holidays, machineries of the State Government, offences against the State, turtles & riverine fishing, etc . Matters listed in the Concurrent List are : scolarsip, social welfare, social services, protection of women/children/young persons, protection of wild animals & wild birds/National Parks, drainage & irrigation, public healt/sanitation/prevention of diseases, fire safety measures, etc . Article 3 of the Constitution provides that Islam is the religion of te federation but guarantees the freedom of religion . The basic or fundamental rights of the individual in our country are enshrined in the Constitution and they are :...
References: Tan Kui Lim v. Lai Sin Fah (1980)1 MLJ 222
The applicant in this case applied for an order declaring the adoption of her mother’s grandson to be null and void because it did not comply with the Hakka community ruling
The court had also recognized polygamous marriages of Hindu customary marriages and other Indian customs as decided in the case of Potoo v. Valee Uta Taven (1883).
Please join StudyMode to read the full document