Download Constitutional Supremacy v Parliamentary Supremacy PDF

TitleConstitutional Supremacy v Parliamentary Supremacy
TagsUnited States Constitution Constitution Sources Of Law Ethical Principles
File Size214.4 KB
Total Pages5
Document Text Contents
Page 2

Nelfi Amiera Mizan
Multimedia University


of the CPC violates Article 121(1) (before 1988) and thus unconstitutional. The

majority of held that, the Section 418A of CPC contravene the Article 121(1) of the

Federal Constitution as the power to transfer cases is falls under the jurisdiction of

judicial power. The Section 418A of CPC had obviously giving power to a non-

judicial authority (deputy public prosecutor) and by that it had violates Article 121(1)

of the Federal Constitution. Even though the case had involved both legislative and

executive power, the court still upheld the supreme Constitution.

To further strengthen, in the case of City Council of George Town v

Government of Penang, the subject argued that the laws made by the Government

of Penang, which are the City Council of George Town Order 1966 and Municipal

(Amendment) Enactment 1966 contravene to the Local Government Election Act

1960. Court held that, the laws were null and void as referred to Article 75 of the

Federal Constitution which states that any state law that is inconsistent with Federal

law shall be void up to its inconsistency and federal law shall prevail.

In contrast of the supremacy of constitution, sovereignty of the parliament had

different views on the highest law applied. States that apply the sovereignty of

Parliament placed legislative assemblies as the highest authority to make or repeal

law as they think fit and it is supreme over the judicial branch. For instance, the

highest source of authority in United Kingdom is the Parliament and the Acts of

Parliament.

The doctrine is usually referred to the description by Professor A.V Diecy,

which states – Parliament is legally competent to legislate upon any subject matter.

By his description, it reflects that parliament is very powerful where it may pass any

law as without restriction.

As referred to the His Majesty’s Declaration of Abdication Act 1936, it can be

seen that parliament had pass act to alter the succession of a throne. As King

Edward VIII desired to marry his lover, Wallis Simpson- a divorcee, he had faced

strong opposition from the Government of United Kingdom and the church as it may

cause constitutional crisis. Due to his marriage to Wallis Simpson, the Parliament

had passed the act to remove his throne and His Majesty shall be terminated to be

King, His Majesty’s descendants shall not have any rights, title or interest to the

succession.

Similer Documents