SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION

A written consti is considered as the highest law

becox it comprises rulesthat are difficult to amend.
K.C. Wheare said that a consti has a legal authority
becox it was enacted by a body recognize as
competent to give the force of law.The body
Either external leghislative body,the people
themselves or a constituitonal assembly chose by
people.

Reason for The theory is only in theory and

Supremacy
Base on logic
The consti is supreme
over the institution it
creates.
It is not just an ordinary
law but functions to
regulate institution and so
it cannot be construed like
an ordinary law.
Marbury v Madison
Certainly all those who
framed written consti
contemlplate them as
forming the fundamental
and paramount law of the
nation….that an act of the
legislature repugnant to
the consti is void.
T/fore if a consti can limit
the power of inst it create
(Parliament) sure it must
be superior force.
Pre Requisite of Law.
Consti is a product of body
which has power to make
supreme law from which
ordinary law are made.
T/fore it command
obideince becox it is not
ordinary law but supreme
law.
Will of the People
It is the will of the
people there fore it is
binding upon evry
individual .This is way it
command obligation.
Art.4 Supremacy under FC
i.this consti is supreme law of Fed
ii.any law passed after merdeka
which is inconsistent with this consti
shall to the extent of the
inconsistency be void.
This prov. important for avoiding
conflict between state and federal
govt.It also covers law passed b4
merdeka.
Assa Singh MB of Johore
B Suvender Singh Kandar v
Govt of FMS
Inconsistency between state and
Federal Consti
DUN Kelantan & Anor v Nordin
b Salleh
Art 4 also provides principle of
severability ie a law may be good
in parts and so the bad part can
besevere living the good
parts.Hickling.
Method of amending
Art 4 must read together with
art 159.
4 method of amending consti.
l.By simple majority-admit a
state to fed,restrict freedom
of movement speech etc.
2.By 2/3 majority in both
Houses and consent fro
Conference of Rulers i.e. art
37 (4) prov. of sensitive
issues,previleges position
dignity
3.By 2/3 majority in both
Houses and consent from
Governor of Sabah and
Sarawak i.e matter relate to
that staes citizenship,resident
4.By 2/3 majorityy in both
Houses.Art 159 (3).Most
amendment are through this
way which is the ordinary
way.Sensitives issue and most
prov. of consti.
Although it can be amended
but it is still supreme becos
not like ordinary amenmend
And judiciary can strike down
if inconsistent with consti.
academic significant
Becox:
l.The domination of BN .Since 1965
the secure 2/3 majority and so they
can amend the consti at will
inaccordance with the
requirment.So less significant
Loh Kooi Choonv Govt. og M`sia
Phang Chin Hock @ Ah Tee v PP
2. The FC itself provides means
which could undermine its
supremacy.Like art 149 allow
Parliament to make law even it is
inconsistent with FC (DDA/ISA) and
art150 during emergency allows
govt to amend consti except on
certain issues.
The Supremacy of Consti still
relevant
Becox:
l.Although ruling party is dominant but
there is tendency it might break.At that
time supremacy of consti become reality
Political supramacy not permanent but
consti sup. Is permanent.

2.Once state of emergency revoke then

consti supremacy regain back.
Conclusion:
Federal Govt like M`sia needs art 4. 3.The govt and opposition still observe
Although consti can be amended but the need of 2/3 majority so the impact
the amendemend is not ordinary is still real.
amenmend.So it is still supreme law
of the country. 4.Law and Statute can be declared
unconsti.In many occasion the Judiary
had declared an act of parliament as
unconstitutional
Mamat b. Daud v Govt. of M`sia.