SHARIAsource

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

The Sultan of Brunei enacted this document on March 31, 1908, with the approval of M.S.H. MacArthur, British Resident of Brunei. It establishes the structure and jurisdiction of Brunei's courts, the maximum penalties they can impose, and the codes that they are to follow. Most of these were codes already in force in the Straits Settlements or Federated Malay States.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of August 3, 1948, "provide[s] for the solemnization and registration of church and civil marriages." It deals with all marriages except those "contracted according to the usages of the Mohammedans, Hindus, Buddhists, Dayaks and other persons governed by their own laws or customs." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

The Sultan of Brunei enacted this document on December 10, 1911, with the approval of Harvey Chevallier, British Resident of Brunei. It defines and prescribes punishments for certain offenses committed by "persons professing the Muhammadan religion." Most of these pertain to marriage law.

This document was enacted on August 1, 1913. It prescribes certain measures for the registration of marriages and divorces between Muslims in Brunei, and shows the basic format of marriage and divorce certificates. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

The constitution of the State of Brunei was composed at the end of the British Residency (1906-1959) and recorded in Brunei Constitutional Documents, a collection of all of the constitutional documents that came into force between September 29, 1959, and July 1, 1960. It was enacted by proclamation of the Sultan of Brunei, Omar Ali Saifuddin Sa'adul Khairi Waddin Ibni Almarhum Mohamed Jamal-ul Alam. It has twelve parts: Part I, Preliminary; Part II, Religion; Part III, Executive Authority; Part IV, Privy Council; Part V, The Executive Council; Part VI, The Legislative Council; Part VII, Legislation and Procedure in the Legislative Council; Part VIII, Finance; Part IX, The Public Services; Part X, The State Seal; Part XI, Miscellaneous; Part XII, Amendment and Interpretation of the Constitution.

This enactment "consolidate[s] the law relating to the Religious Council and State Custom, the Kathis Courts, the constitution and organization of religious authorities and the regulation of religious affairs." It was enacted by the Sultan in Council and during the Residency of J.O. Gilbert, to take effect on February 1, 1956. It establishes a Religious Council (Majlis) and defines its composition, powers and responsibilities. It also establishes the jurisdiction and procedure of the Religious Courts in Brunei, and has sections on family law, criminal law, and laws of religious observance. Its provisions are divided into ten parts and 204 sections.

The Malaysian Supreme Court case of Che Omar bin Che Soh v. Public Prosecutor arose as an appeal of the mandatory death sentences issued to three men sentenced for either drug or firearms crimes under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 or the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, respectively. In their appeal, the men argued that their mandatory death sentences were unislamic and therefore unconstitutional under Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution which established Islam as the official religion of Malaysia. Following an analysis of the constitution’s text and the historical context in which the constitution was written, the Supreme Court found that its framers could not have intended Article 3 to mean that all laws contrary to Islam would be void. Thus, the Court rejected the appellants' argument.

English text of the 1979 Constitution of Malaysia (1957 Federal Constitution of Malaysia, as amended to 1979).

English text of Act A704 Constitution (Amendment) Act 1988, amending the Federal Constitution of Malaysia).

English text of Act A767 Federal Constitution (Amendment) Act 1990, amending the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

English text of Act A919 Federal Constitution (Amendment) Act 1995, amending the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

English text of Act A945 Federal Constitution (Amendment) Act 1996, amending the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

Malay text of Act A1138 Constitution (Amendment) Act (No. 2) 2001, amending the Federal Constitution of Malaysia

English translation of the 2007 Constitution of Malaysia (1957 Federal Constitution of Malaysia, as amended to 2007).

English translation of Act A1603 Constitution (Amendment) Act 2019, amending the 1957 Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

A nine-member panel at the Federal Court of Malaysia led by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun ruled in a unanimous decision that Section 66A of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment of 2003 was unconstitutional and void as the power of judicial review that it conferred was not a power that the Selangor state legislative assembly was authorized to give. The petition arose out of the High Court consideration of an application for judicial review wherein an organizational petitioner, the SIS Forum (of Malaysia), sought to challenge the validity of a fatwā [advisory Islamic law opinion].The Court stated that it is not concerned with the procedural or substantive validity of the fatwā, and was not asked to determine the courts are authorized to undertake such evaluations in the first place under clause (1A) of Article 121 of Malaysia’s Federal Constitution. The petition concerns only the question whether the Selangor State Legislative Assembly (SSLA) was authorized to enact section 66A of the ARIE 2003, conferring powers of judicial review on syariah (Islamic law) courts. The Court concluded that Selangor, a Malaysian state, cannot grant syariah courts the power to review the rulings of Islamic authorities, which is a power retained exclusively by civil courts. For further context on Islamic law in Malaysia, consult Tamir Moustafa's Constituting Religion: Islam, Liberal Rights, and the Malaysian State (Cambridge University Press, 2018).

On February 2, 2023, the Majlis Agama Islam Negeri Johor (MAINJ) announced that Sultan Ibrahim of Johor had approved a fatwā on the types of events hosted by non-Muslims that Muslims are permitted to attend. The fatwā states that Muslims are prohibited from participating in religious rituals of other faiths, but they are not precluded from attending celebrations of other faiths that do not involve ritual ceremonies. Along with the issuance of the fatwā, MAINJ also issued more general guidelines on non-Muslim festivals that Muslims are permitted to attend–including ceremonies not accompanied by rituals, non-Muslim religious symbols, and religious songs contrary to the Islamic faith.