Implementing Islamic Law Within a Modern Constitutional Framework: Challenges and Problems in Contemporary Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the Federal Constitution of Malaysia readily proclaims Islam to be Malaysia’s official religion, opinions have fiercely diverged among legal scholars and practitioners as to how substantive should the relevant clause on this be interpreted. Such vagueness is typical of the document, whose drafting took place amidst intense negotiations among Malaysia’s multi-racial communities, resulting in an informal bargain or ‘social contract’ which until today has become a subject of bitter dispute amidst rising polarisation along ‘Muslim versus non-Muslim’ lines. Locating origins of contemporaneous legal conflict to divergent understandings of constitutional clauses, this article proceeds to discuss contemporary controversies which shed light on Malaysia’s struggle to identify itself as a nation-state which integrates the best of both modern and Islamic civilisations. It is argued that this delicate balance has been recently threatened by the increasing penetration of a form of orthodox Islamist legalism which antagonises non-Muslim minorities and unduly homogenises its Malay-Muslim population. The cut-off point for this article is Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s tenure as Prime Minister of Malaysia, which drew to a close in April 2009 under embattled circumstances.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".