ABSTRACT
Introduction In their insightful discussion of the evolution of constitutional politics in Southeast Asia, Björn Dressel and Marco Bünte (2014: 1-22) identify four areas which they consider primary causes of uneven constitutional practice: constitutional drafting and design; individual and religious rights; the role of the military in constitutional politics; and the rule of law, courts, and justice. The aim of this chapter is to further that discussion with reference to Malaysia. Since the military has not yet played a major role in shaping constitutional politics there, I will center this discussion on the first, second, and fourth areas. Malaysian constitutional practice had been fairly steady until 1987 and 1988, when controversial events undermined certain state institutions, especially the judiciary, and left them vulnerable to political attack. The result was the vesting in the executive of a degree of power and control that surpassed the limits envisaged by the Federal Constitution, leaving the freedoms the constitution guaranteed vulnerable to situational politics. These freedoms have since not been given due recognition. This is particularly true of the freedom of religion, given the undue emphasis on matters of race and religion in Malaysian politics.
