A doctor's split-second decision saves one life; but costs another. When does error of judgement become medical negligence? The answer will reshape healthcare itself. And the courts are struggling with it.
Read More
No: only Parliament wields the power to amend the Constitution:(Article 159). Yet deeper currents flow beneath: MA63 protects East Malaysian rights. Any constitutional amendment requires their consent. And it is an international Treaty lodged with the UN. And timeless wisdom echoes: "Why fix what isn't broken?"
Read More
The PM, the CJ, and other constitutional appointees are all guardians of the Constitution. If one falters, what happens? When a Prime Minister faces a suit in court, yet it is he who must pick the senior judges who will head the judiciary— he is immediately placed in an irreconcilable position of conflict. Three constitutional paths emerge from Malaysia’s deepest democratic paradox. What are they? There is no point in ...
Read More
Can a judge speak truth about justice without facing negative consequences? Chief Justice Tengku Maimun’s Malta Speech exposed the deepest fractures. It revealed a constitutional cross-road by asking this question: "Will Malaysians choose constitutional rule, or arbitrary power?" What is your answer? It matters.
Read More
The Ambalat dispute exposes Malaysia's constitutional fault lines: can the federal government negotiate away Sabah's territory without state consent or parliamentary approval?
Read More
Private cars on the road outnumber the entire population. Malaysia's Federal Court made a landmark decision in AmGeneral v Sa'Amran. That decision changed motor insurance law completely. The court ruled that protecting accident victims matters more than business interests. Millions of road users now have better protection. This is a manifestation that Malaysia's Federal Court has returned to the highest Commonwealth legal standards.
Read More
Malaysia's judiciary teeters on the brink. An institutional crisis looms—potentially as devastating as 1988's judicial catastrophe—threatening constitutional governance and the rule of law itself. Nine Federal Court judges departing within two years represents far more than administrative upheaval: it's a catastrophic haemorrhaging of judicial wisdom, precisely when institutional memory matters most. We should never have come to this pass. Left unchecked, this depletion spells disaster for the nation. Which path will Malaysia ...
Read More
In 1988, a tremor rent Malaysia’s halls of justice: an institutional earthquake that cleaved its very bedrock. Constitutional pillars crumbled; and the Beacon that once burned bright for Justice flickered, and then, died. Sacred robes, woven with centuries of honour, lay torn in the rubble. The Unthinkable carved its wound into the very beating heart of the Constitution. Here sleep the lasting memories of those who fell, shields raised against the ...
Read More
Whilst preserving the dignity of the Royal Houses, the amendments established the unequivocal supremacy of constitutional law over traditional royal prerogatives:
Read More
Do you remember an essay I wrote in 2018? The one that argued that a former PM enjoyed no immunity from criminal prosecution? Stand that principle on its head. Is a prime minister immune from a civil suit, [e.g. a suit for breach of contract to buy a property]? What if she did enjoy such an immunity? What would happen?
Read More