Tutorial Question 1
Tutorial Question 1
Introduction.
For me, I agree with this statement, our constitution is not solely a written document
but also includes unwritten or customary element that shape nation’s political and legal
framework. This concept is particularly relevant of some countries, and it relates to the
distinction between written and unwritten constitution. A written constitution is a formal
document or set of documents that outlines the fundamental laws, principles, and structures
of a nation's government. It serves as the supreme legal authority within a country and
typically includes key provisions related to the organization of the government, the
distribution of powers, and the protection of individual rights. Written constitutions are often
codified and can be found in a single document or a series of interconnected documents. An
unwritten constitution, also known as an "uncodified constitution," is a system of government
in which the fundamental laws and principles of a nation are not explicitly set forth in a
single, formal, written document. Instead, an unwritten constitution relies on a combination
of historical documents, legal precedents, customary practices, and statutes to establish and
govern the fundamental framework of government. It is characterized by its flexibility and
adaptability, as it can evolve over time without the need for a single, comprehensive written
document. The United Kingdom is one of the most well-known examples of a country with
an unwritten constitution. The UK's constitution is composed of various elements, including
historical documents (such as the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights), statutes (like the Acts
of Parliament), legal precedents, and conventions. The UK Parliament is considered the
supreme legislative authority, and it can make or change constitutional laws without
significant constraints. This flexibility allows for the gradual evolution of the constitution
over time.
Law
In Malaysia, the unwritten constitution refers to constitutional conventions, royal
prerogatives, customary practices, and Islamic law (Sharia), which are not explicitly detailed
in the written Federal Constitution but play a significant role in the country's constitutional
framework. For example, Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Tun Abang Haji Openg (1966), This
case arose from a political crisis in Sarawak, where the Governor dismissed the Chief
Minister, Stephen Kalong Ningkan. The court had to consider the constitutional conventions
and principles that governed the relationship between the head of state and the Chief
Minister. The court acknowledged the existence of conventions and emphasized the
importance of constitutional conventions in the smooth functioning of the constitutional
system. While not explicitly labelled as a case about the unwritten constitution, it highlighted
the unwritten principles that guide the conduct of constitutional actors and influence the
exercise of discretionary powers. In cases like this, the judiciary may implicitly recognize and
apply unwritten constitutional principles, contributing to the development and understanding
of the unwritten constitution in Malaysia.