The Malaysian Bar - Coffeetable Talk on the Constitution: What the Constitution means to me

Home

Coffeetable Talk on the Constitution: What the Constitution means to me

Contributed by Lee Shih

Thursday, 01 November 2007 12:03pm

KUALA LUMPUR, Wed: A highly engaging session, moderated by Dato’ VC George, saw a distinguished panel of speakers speaking on what the constitution meant to them. The panel generally was in agreement that the present day Constitution was very much different from the original social contract that was entered into 50 years ago.

Raja Aziz Addruse explained that the Constitution is a proclamation that envisaged the protection of fundamental liberties. He said in very stark terms stated that the Constitution of present day is not the same proclamation made in 1957. Since 1957, the built-in checks and balances and the fundamental rights no longer existed.

The reasons for the change in vision are the failure of the courts to uphold the fundamental rights of the Constitution, and the interference by the Executive.

“To me, the constitution now means nothing because it can be changed at any time.”

Haji Sulaiman Abdullah started his speech by stating said that if Tun Mahathir does not like to play games, for if he does, the former prime minister would have known the importance of rules (in the form of the constitution) and the need for impartial referees (in the form of judges).

Sulaiman did not share the pessimism of Raja Aziz and called the Constitution a vibrant document but only if the judges lived up to their jobs. He was of the view that there was no real age where the judges interpreted the Constitution to serve the people rather than to serve the government.

Datuk JC Fong spoke on his view that the Constitution was not just the supreme law of the land, but it also offers him protection of his fundamental liberties. The Constitution helps to create the institutions to ensure the protection of these liberties. The problem lies with those with the duty to interpret the provisions of the Constitution.

Tan Sri Thomas Jayasuriya provided a brief account of the formation of Malaysia, with the entry of Sabah and Sarawak. Tan Sri Thomas was a former negotiator for Sabah’s entry into Malaysia.

He stated that all of us had no choice but to make the Constitution work. It was not perfect but it was workable.

Edmund Bon argued that the judiciary had watered down the rights and intent of the Constitution. He bluntly set out the examples of how the judiciary has agreed to its own castration by Parliament and the Executive.

He then called for a review of the Constitution. We had to examine the original contract that was struck and how to then best reconstitute the Constitution.

Nizam Bashir spoke on the gap between what is in the Constitution and what the reality is. He explained that the root causes of this gap was the control of information given to the public and the censorship by the relevant ministries.

The final speaker, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, lamented that in the comfort our economic growth, people don’t seem to care too much about the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers. People just don’t get upset and we have become comfortably numb.

He issued a call for us to go back to the original spirit of the Constitution. You cannot change the original agreement just because a certain party is more powerful now.