CONTROVERSIES ought not to be taken lightly, especially, when its implications to the country's legal structure is such that it changes the country's character. Of course, under some circumstances legitimate structural adjustments have to be undertaken to streamline the Constitution to contemporary dictates so that all laws and institutions reflect a realignment to, say, international law. Or, as so hotly debated, would the hudud, if it is to be implemented, require a constitutional amendment to reconstruct the secular state into a theocratic realm? Naturally, therefore, when proposed laws look set to undermine the integrity of the Constitution, then every cautionary voice must be raised. And, when it threatens to involve the monarchy, whether at federal or state level, then obviously even greater care is needed.
These last few days have witnessed the heated debate in the media relating to the proposed tabling in the Johor State Assembly today of a bill to set up the Johor Housing and Property Board, reportedly intending to involve the sultan in the state's administration. Given Malaysia's constitutional monarchy and the nature of its democratic system, if true, this bill would give rise to what can be seen as a regression to feudalism. If though, it is not that, then the bill, once law, threatens to put at risk the monarchy's unimpeachable dignity and stature. So intolerable is the prospect of fundamental problems arising from the bill that the prime minister was wont to make his position public, insisting that while it must indeed protect the people's interests it must, at the same time, not contravene the Federal Constitution and the democratic system upon which the sovereignty of this nation rests.
Adamantly insistent that the bill be tabled according to schedule, the menteri besar of Johor defends it with the argument that it is to be read in tandem with the Johor State Constitution. There it clearly states that the ruler -- except for very rare instances and only as a check and balance mechanism to the executive -- acts upon the advice of the menteri besar. In the eleventh hour, the menteri besar also announced changes to the bill. Nevertheless, in the opinion of some legal experts, the bill in mentioning the "ruler" as a separate entity creates a loophole for the monarch to act capriciously, ignoring executive advice. A senior Johor Umno leader also insists that the state government owes Johor citizens an explanation. Assurances have been given that the sultan was not involved in the drawing up of the bill. Indeed, many questions have been raised by the proposed bill, and the possible implications it would have, not just to the state, but also the country and constitution. Perhaps the sensible step would be to postpone the bill until these questions and concerns are fully addressed.
